all about the menz are these guys 12 years old? creepy misogyny on the tv pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles rape jokes unsolicited penis updates

Seth MacFarlane was the real boob on Oscar night


I find the Oscars tedious, and only watched a few minutes last night — I bailed shortly after Captain Kirk made his appearance — but apparently I should have stuck around, if only to watch the insufferable Seth MacFarlane’s award-winning performance as Unfunny Misogynist Asshole Host.

What, you say, he didn’t actually win an award for that? Well, yes he did: Having read a number of accounts of the whole sorry spectacle, I’m awarding MacFarlane the non-coveted Man Boobz Boob of the Day Award (Oscar Edition). In the wake of MacFarlane’s performance at the Oscars, in which he devoted a whole song to actresses’ breasts, I should note that I am using the word “boob” to mean “nincompoop.” Which, to be honest, is an undeservedly mild epithet for a guy who punctuated his comments with repeated jokes about rape.

A few of the highlights of MacFarlane’s night:

That song-and-dance number about how great it is to see so many boobs in films  – including, specifically, in The Accused, and Monster, and Boys Don’t Cry. You know, during the rape scenes in those quie serious films.

MacFarlane’s animatronic teddy bear (from his movie Ted) joking about attending an orgy at Jack Nicholson’s house – you know, the place where Roman Polanski raped a 13-year old girl.

Oh, and then there was MacFarlane joking about how 9-year-old Quvenzhané Wallis would be too old to date George Clooney in about 16 years. (What, is Heartiste writing MacFarlane’s jokes?) And his bizarre domestic violence joke about Chris Brown and Rihanna. And on and on. (See here for many more examples.)

Getting into the spirit of the evening, whoever was doing The Onion’s twitter account decided it would be hilarious to refer to the aforementioned 9-year-old Quvenzhané Wallis as a “cunt.” The Onion later deleted the tweet and offered an apology for it.

Somehow I doubt we’re going to get an apology from MacFarlane.

Here are a couple more takes on the whole unfortunate evening.

Why Seth MacFarlane’s Misogyny Matters (Vulture)

Seth MacFarlane and the Oscars’ Hostile, Ugly, Sexist Night (The New Yorker)

Oscar Watch: Was That Awful or What? (NY Post)

EDITED TO ADD: Oh, joy! The Men’s Rights subreddit weighs in on the issue, in a thread sort-of-responding to that New Yorker piece.

EDITED TO ADD AGAIN: Actually, r/mensrights has two threads on the subject; here’s the other one.

395 replies on “Seth MacFarlane was the real boob on Oscar night”

To elaborate: The torturers I’ve known weren’t, in the main, sadists (I think there were a couple who enjoyed the power and “pain” was the coin they used to prove they had it). They saw it as part of a job they had to do.

Doesn’t mean there aren’t people who get off on the pain, qua pain, but they aren’t in the lines of work I was in. I suspect that being a professional torturer (of the make them suffer, just to suffer, variety) is sort of draining, and would weed out the sexual sadists.

So they have to compartmenatalise it, “this is just what I do, not who I am; it’s just a job”, is a tool to keep the rest of one’s life from being too strongly affected.

The banality of evil.

*shakes fist at wordpress* stop being borked damnit!

As for the definition of torture, I figured I had to just be misreading you, as yep, you’re the expert on the matter. And the compartmentalization makes sense, though, strangely, I’ve never met a textbook sadist — people who enjoy causing pain for their partner’s pleasure sure, but not pain for the sake of pain. Maybe they’re just like MRAs and know that expressing that is bound to make enemies (then again, the narcissist ex might’ve been fond of pain for pain’s sake, but now I’m seriously digressing!)

I’ll see if I can find a definition for specific intent, I got distracted from the UN document.

First, I’m citing from the UN link in that news article. Second, what I can find regarding the meaning of intent in this context —

17. At least four essential elements are reflected in the definition of torture provided in article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention against Torture: an act inflicting severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental; the element of intent; the specific purpose; and the involvement of a State official, at least by acquiescence (A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, para. 30). Acts falling short of this definition may constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under article 16 of the Convention (A/63/175, para. 46). The previous Special Rapporteurs have covered in great detail the main components of the definition of torture. Nevertheless, there are a few salient points worth elaborating for the purpose of the present report.
18. The jurisprudence and authoritative interpretations of international human rights bodies provide useful guidance on how the four criteria of the definition of torture apply in the context of health-care settings. ECHR has noted that a violation of article 3 may occur where the purpose or intention of the State‟s action or inaction was not to degrade, humiliate or punish the victim, but where this nevertheless was the result.3
20. The mandate has stated previously that intent, required in article 1 of the Convention, can be effectively implied where a person has been discriminated against on the basis of disability. This is particularly relevant in the context of medical treatment, where serious violations and discrimination against persons with disabilities may be defended as “well intended” on the part of health-care professionals. Purely negligent conduct lacks the intent required under article 1, but may constitute ill-treatment if it leads to severe pain and suffering (A/63/175, para. 49).
21. Furthermore, article 1 explicitly names several purposes for which torture can be inflicted: extraction of a confession; obtaining information from a victim or a third person; punishment, intimidation and coercion; and discrimination. However, there is a general acceptance that these stated purposes are only of an indicative nature and not exhaustive. At the same time, only purposes which have “something in common with the purposes expressly listed” are sufficient (A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, para. 35).

Paragraph 19 was about state involvement.

And the compartmentalization makes sense, though, strangely, I’ve never met a textbook sadist — people who enjoy causing pain for their partner’s pleasure sure, but not pain for the sake of pain. Maybe they’re just like MRAs and know that expressing that is bound to make enemies (then again, the narcissist ex might’ve been fond of pain for pain’s sake, but now I’m seriously digressing!)

I have. Got told that I was being narrow minded and persecuting kinksters because it made me uncomfortable, too. I almost feel like we need two separate kink movements, one for people who get a kick out of (whatever) only if their partner is digging it too and another for those for whom their partner’s enjoyment is either irrelevant or actively offputting.

Being honest here, the reason I’d like that to happen is so that it would be easy for me to avoid people who fall into the latter category. Don’t like that? Too bad.

Lol, clarification there is good, because I was initially thinking that yeah, that second group isn’t kink, just asshole. But yes, a neon “avoid me if you want safe words” sign would be nice. Idfk how not being cool with people who don’t respect that could be persecuting kinksters (and this comes from someone who’d rather not get any than be stuck with vanilla sexytimes, nothing against people who like vanilla sexytimes [oh gods I’m incel because I can’t easily get what I want and the gov’n is murdering me if they won’t set me up with similarly inclined partners!!!])


I usually get more like “but I’m afraid I’ll actually hurt you”, which is rather endearing (doubly so when they actually listen and doing whimp out being getting anywhere near hurting me)

It was a “pack your bags, we’re going on a guilt trip” moment. What I’d said made me really uncomfortable was a statement about wanting to stick knives in people’s orifices. Not that the person was actually going to, nor did I think she would, but the genuine desire to do so still freaked me out.

Experience with the kink scene has left me feeling like any dom who gets off on pain without needing their partner to be enjoying it is potentially very dangerous, and people get to prioritize their own safety, or even their own emotional comfort.

Can you imagine how complicated it would get if the government had to match you not just with a partner, but with a really sexually compatible partner? There would be enough paperwork to sink the QE2.

So much to catch up on!

First, relieved (sorta) that it’s not my Firefox or whatever having a shitfit and losing the Recent Comments. Of all the bits on the sidebar to lose …

Speaking of WordPress borking, does anyone else get that “Whoops! That didn’t go well” page all. the. fucking. time? I get it even when I haven’t clicked a link.

Agreeing with everyone re: the gender assignment surgery – it doesn’t fit my definition of torture but sure as hell is unethical and disgraceful.

On the subject of sadism, before I started reading here and a few sites like The Pervocracy, I had no idea that any sadists would be interested in consent. I thought no sadist would want to be involved with a masochist, because the other person’s reluctance/distress/fear were as much part of the sadist’s pleasure as the physical pain, and someone enjoying the experience in any way would defeat the purpose. BDSM and its ethics is a whole new area to learn about (though it’s purely theoretical and will remain that way, obvs).

Which just goes to show how out of date my information was … Encyclopaedia Britannica, c. 1980!

See, Brandon? If you have to do a ME derail, at least make it 1) more or less relevant to the conversation and 2) not hostile to everyone. 😛

Also 3), not so dull that everyone else starts falling asleep in the middle.

I think boring the crap out of unwilling audiences might be his kink, actually.

If the US government needs a new form of torture maybe they could recruit him. After listening to him drone on in the face of his audience’s boredom and increasing frustration for a few days the prisoners would tell you just about anything to make it stop.

I’m not sure he enjoys it without some form of engaging with him. Note how quickly he vanishes when ignored.

And yeah, the world of difference between wanting to stick knives in people and wanting to pretend a dildo, or similar, is a knife. Giving a shit about your partner, it be important!

And yes, trying to match me with a compatible partner by survey might sink multiple ships. Let’s just say I’m complicated (big surprise, I’m sure!) — I mean, I figure heterosexual, cis, vanilla, monogamy desiring folks would need many pages of questions, and I’m not exactly any of those things.

Idk if BDSM sadists would be DSM sadists…diagnosable sadism does, in theory, require an unwilling partner, or distress, so maybe under that option? Idk, getting off on your partner’s pain induced pleasure =/= getting off on your partner’s pain.

Semi-related: I was just on the receiving end of a pick up line based on my phenotype’s mating potential. Oh yeah baby, talk ev-psych to me! I’m cracking up! This was *after* I commented on how saying I’m an attractive [gender based term] isn’t really helping while I’m complaining about being obviously [gender]…epic PUA fail is epic (this is someone I know, and thus I’m sure this is a combination of PUA and ev-psych failure)

How to do ME! derails (in no particular order):
Option 1) related to the current topic
Option 2) serious requests for advice, condolences, etc
Option 3a) standard derails such as cats and recipes
Option 3b) sloths, dogs, fish, etc; knitting, embroidery, arts and crafts; zombies and related topics; cats; music, either listening to it or creating it; hair, clothing, bras, other such “womanly” topics (note: this doesn’t work if you’re a troll as it’s troll repellant); cats; kings, French or otherwise; fashion, also French, modern or otherwise
Option 3c) all other topics that are of general interest, as determined by popularity when brought up
Option 4) anything humorous
Option 5) things related to common topics, but not a current topic
Option 6) anything more interesting than the current derail
Option 7) TBD

I think part of what I was trying to get at above is that not all (maybe not even most?) BSDM sadists are DSM sadists, and I wish there was a quick and easy way to separate the two groups upfront, because I don’t think conflating the two is good for anyone.

I need to go fight with an obstinate fish tank light, and then go to bed, so I’m going to limit this to:

Cassandra = agreed

Idk, getting off on your partner’s pain induced pleasure =/= getting off on your partner’s pain.

That is an excellent way to explain the difference. Also pithy!

That derail list ought to be in the glossary or FAQ or how-to section for the site. 😀


I think part of what I was trying to get at above is that not all (maybe not even most?) BSDM sadists are DSM sadists, and I wish there was a quick and easy way to separate the two groups upfront, because I don’t think conflating the two is good for anyone.

I think that’s another extremely important distinction I hadn’t got my head around. One’s … well, Argenti’s distinction works for me. The second I don’t think I was really aware of, and it’s so different.

Interesting to see that DSM has dropped sadism as a personality disorder descriptor and goes for the somewhat clunky “personality disorder not otherwise specified”.

They need to have one for Wannabe Sadist Troll Personality Bypass Disorder. Loads of material to be studied there, if one didn’t die of boredom doing so.

Aww, did baby drop his binky?

It’s funny when comedians get huffy about the reception of their jokes. Comedy is supposed to be a hard gig! It goes to show how much leeway he’s expecting to get for being a white dude.

But, hellkell, that would make NNY wrong! I, for one, am sure that this will cause the world to end. How could such a thing have happened?


Rush Limbaugh, though, why? I don’t think it is exactly helping Seth MacFarlane’s liberal cred (that I believed NNY mentioned he had) to be buddying up to Limbaugh.

Oh, look, Seth is feeling put upon.

Looks like he does give a rat’s ass what people think. And he knows the crowd who support him is narrow-minded; or he’d have been trying to get on Colbert, or the Daily Show, or Maddow, or Today, or Good Morning America, or Oprah.

Instead he gives Limbaugh fodder.

I don’t think that’s going to cause the reaction to ease up.

Ah, yes. Because saying ”You know what? I kind of understand how you conservatives feel about the media now.” is such an emotional, whiny response. I bet he is crying himself to sleep every night.

Hell, the commenters here have done more whining here than Seth has in his entire life.

Oh and hellkell, that doesn’t prove that he gives a rats ass about what people are saying. He probably is just tired of hearing it. I would get real bored about whiny people whining about irrelevant things all the time.

How can I live without the recent comments widget?

Anyway Martyn is back in the ice cream thread, for anyone who wants to try explaining to him why he should stop talking like a pedophile.

NNY: It is actually possible to have fun conversations, even funny ones, without giving offense. Hell, I’ve seen stand up comedians go entire routines without offending. Eddie Izzard springs to mind.

I would hold a viewing party if they get Eddie to host the Oscars, and I haven’t watched since LOTR won everything.

Brandon, if you don’t like our “whining,” there’s a simple solution–stop coming here. It’s not like you’re wanted in the first place.

Gah, Brandon is still here? He must lead an awfully boring, humdrum existence if spending all this time online at a place where everyone finds him tedious is better than his other alternatives.

Thanks for your blog and your post. 🙂 Too bad they didn’t get Poehler and Fey.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.