Margaret Cho's hate mail

After Drudge Report posted an incomplete and edited "transcript" of a small portion of her 20 minute stand-up set from the MoveOn awards, Margaret Cho received lots of racist, misogynistic, homophobic hate mail. Her co-producer Karen Taussig says, "Although people were offended by and commented on different parts of the 'transcript,' it seems that Margaret's biggest crimes are being fat, Asian-American, GLBT supportive, and female."

She's posted just a few of them, complete and unedited, on her site: http://margaretcho.com/attacks_from_the_right.htm

Wow. I am sickened, although not really surprised. Of course, I have read posts here that were written with similar venom, but still, wow.

Besides the racial and misogynistic slurs directed at Margaret, the anti-gay remarks that were posted should remind us, "safe" in Hooville, that a significant number of Americans truly hate gay people and wish us dead. Not just dead, but a painful death, simply because we are gay.

Unfortunately, personally knowing someone who is gay does not necessarily change their minds. These are the same folks who are actively trying to introduce access to sexual re-orientation programs into the public schools, even in the RELATIVELY gay-friendly (or at least gay-neutral) northeastern megalopolis. These sexual re-orientation programs are horrible places for anyone gay, especially a gay teen. Remember, while some gay persons have had coming out experiences that are positive and supportive (immediately or eventually), there are many others who have had coming out experiences with very sad, painful, or tragic endings. Just some sobering food for thought.

AS YOU CONDEM

SO YOU BECOME!

:7

I am also disgusted by what these emails contain. I'm constantly amazed at the pure unadulterated hatred that people will spew through the "anonymity" of email. It's really too bad they deleted their real email addresses. It would be nice for them to get a little taste of their own medicine from others. I'm not saying that we stoop to their level, but you can use strong words to condemn someone without crossing the line like they did.

I just sickens me that people will link some defense of Christianity or being pro-life or any other viewpoint they think is moral while at the same time being so utterly hateful. It just shows that the world is full of people who have no common sense to understand the ridiculous inconsistency of their thoughts and actions. Or I don't know, maybe they just aren't smart enough to understand how stupid and hateful it makes them look.

It's really depressing. That's specifically why I generally avoid most chat rooms and other message boards (other than this one of course:) )

RE: Margaret Cho's hate !

Too many drugs destroys the brain cells and other vital reasoning parts!

}(

nice, short and right to whatever point you have... what are you talking about? Especially in relation to Gentle Guy's post.

Gio in Denver

"Never Argue with a Fool---Those around you may not notice the Difference"

RE: Margaret Cho's hate !

The Email is no where as vile as her utterings made with great emotional feeling from the deep recesses of her large colon!

:7

Here are some of her comments from that evening (go to http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2004/01/13/20040113_231203_mattmo3.htm to see others)

MARGARET CHO (Comedian) --

* "Despite all of this stupid bullsh-- that the Republican National Committee, or whatever the f--- they call them, that they were saying that they're all angry about how two of these ads were comparing Bush to Hitler? I mean, out of thousands of submissions, they find two. They're like fu--ing looking for Hitler in a hawstack. You now? I mean, George Bush is not Hitler. He would be if he fu--ing applied himself." big, extended applause) "I mean he just isn't."

* "I think this last year has just proven how stupid Republicans are." (big applause -- leads into next bullet)

* "For example, Judge Roy Moore, or Jay Moore or whatever, in Alabama. [inaudible] ... Ten Commandments statue stay in the lobby of a courthouse. 'You can't move the Word of God! You cannot remove the Franklin Mint edition of the Word of God!' [said in Southern accent] People are protesting there and like, I think it could have been solved so much easier if they had just placed a golden calf next to the statue and then people would have started worshipping that. And then they could have moved the Ten Commandments to Bush's office -- which he needs them, desperately. Or maybe he needs a new version of the Ten Commandments -- George W. Bush's Ten Commandments: Thou shalt not steal...votes. (big applause) Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's...country. (big applause) Thou shalt not kill...for oil. (big applause) Thou shalt not take grammar...in vain. (big applause) I mean, whatever fu--ing happened to separation of church and state? I mean, you can't like, impose your god on my god. God has many names. God is God, God is Jehovah, God is Allah, God is Buddah, God is Beyonce. (laughter) You know, you cannot impose your God on other people. And ah, George W. Bush is coming out with the weirdest stance on same-sex marriage as well. What he says about it is, well, 'well, we're all sinners.' No we're not! Just because somebody ate an apple one time does not make us all sinners. And if it was from the tree of knowledge, I think she should have eaten more than one. (laughter) Possibly even baked a pie." (applause) "I don't understand the whole same-sex marriage thing. He was quoted by saying, 'well, you you uh, just gotta take the speck out of your own eye before you take the co-- out of your neighbor's.'" [in Southern accent] (laughter)

* "I mean, I'm afraid of terrorists, but I'm more afraid of the Patriot Act." (big applause)

Thanks for posting these excerpts. This ridiculous bitch got exactly what she deserved, which I believe was the point made earlier that Gio pretended not to comprehend.

It's really fascinating how she gets to spew the most vile, hateful assaults imaginable - Bush would be Hitler if he tried harder, Republicans are stupid, Al Qaeda is bad but the Justice Department is worse and more dangerous - and that's all perfectly fine and great and funny.

But then people who are disgusted by this bile write back to her with equally hateful bile and suddenly this is awful and terrible and we should all condemn what they wrote in response.

Shouldn't people at least try to pretend that they apply behavioral standards consistently, rather than so nakedly condemning the behavior of political opponents while praising exactly the same behavior from political allies?

>After Drudge Report posted an incomplete and edited

>"transcript" of a small portion of her 20 minute stand-up set

>from the MoveOn awards, Margaret Cho received lots of racist,

>misogynistic, homophobic hate mail.

Good - she gives Asians, women, and gay people a bad name by spewing her hateful stupidity.

Her co-producer Karen

>Taussig says, "Although people were offended by and commented

>on different parts of the 'transcript,' it seems that

>Margaret's biggest crimes are being fat, Asian-American, GLBT

>supportive, and female."

No - plenty of fat people, Asians, gay people and women speak in public without provoking these responses. I fucking hate when people blame reactions to their sickening behavior on their gender, race, whatever.

She made extremely hateful, vile and disgusting comments, and she shouldn't be surprised when that's exactly what she gets in return.

This is a perfect example of

BECOMING or Being, what you are condemning.

As she is accusing Bush and Republicians of being hateful and evil, she is the PERFECT EXAMPLE of that including stupidity, etc.

Only much worse, then they could ever be!

Fortunately, middle American is not relating to this kind of stinking behavoir. She should really lay off the drugs, it makes your judgement poor to say the least!

}(

>Thanks for posting these excerpts. This ridiculous bitch got

>exactly what she deserved,

That's exactly what they were: excerpts. That was part of a twenty-minute STAND-UP COMEDY routine. A lot of comedy today is over-the-top or politically incorrect. Would you also call Dennis Miller a "ridiculous bitch"? If you haven't seen the entire routine, you shouldn't criticize it. Drudge Report, which you seem to trust as a credible "news" source, knew exactly what he was doing when he pulled out those fragments of a routine. Lenny Bruce's act was dissected and taken out of context in court, and the prosecutors knew what they were doing, too.

>That's exactly what they were: excerpts.

Valley Dweller posted some pretty long excerpts. And certain sentences are impossible to take out of context. I'd love to hear how what he posted distorted what she really said. I really doubt it did. My guess is, if one posted the entire thing, it would be worse.

That was part of a

>twenty-minute STAND-UP COMEDY routine. A lot of comedy today

>is over-the-top or politically incorrect.

I'm aware of this. But disgusting comments don't be come less disgusting simply because you stick them into a stand-up routine. Saying "I'm just joking" isn't an excuse for saying hateful, disgusting things.

Would you also call

>Dennis Miller a "ridiculous bitch"?

I haven't really heard him on politics (although I did recall reading some trite article he wrote awhile ago on Iraq), but if he said the things that Margeret Cho seems to have said, I would call him that.

In general, I find it amazingly annoying when people start using frivolous entertainers as their political leaders - like people here who quote Bette Midler to make a political point.

If you haven't seen the

>entire routine, you shouldn't criticize it.

That's just ridiculous. Like I said, I just read some pretty long excerpts and some comments stand on their own. You shouldn't claim that the meaning of comments are taking out of context if you're not prepared to demonstrate how that is the case.

And did you read ALL of the "hate mail" which Margaret Cho claims to have gotten, or are you criticizing it based on excerpts?

The only real point is if some "comedian" is going to stand up and spew material that is - as you say - "politically incorrent" and which they know will offend and anger a lot of people, don't come playing the victim and fucking whining and complaining when the people you deliberately offend react with anger and the same level of contempt.

>In general, I find it amazingly annoying when people start

>using frivolous entertainers as their political leaders - like

...Arnold Schwarzenegger? :+

>Like I said, I just read some pretty

>long excerpts and some comments stand on their own. You

>shouldn't claim that the meaning of comments are taking out of

>context if you're not prepared to demonstrate how that is the

>case.

I never said Margaret's jokes were taken out of context, Doug. I said you shouldn't critique a performer's standup comedy routine when you have never seen that person perform the entire routine, or even perform the parts you've read. That's like somebody reading a script for an "I Love Lucy" episode and determining that Lucille Ball isn't funny. Part of the performance is the...performance. If you think it's fair to form an opinion based on a "transcript," then I won't argue with you.

>And did you read ALL of the "hate mail" which Margaret Cho

>claims to have gotten, or are you criticizing it based on

>excerpts?

Where did I ever criticize the emails? And she did post them in their entirety, but she has since removed the real names and email addresses of the senders.

>In general, I find it amazingly annoying when people start

>using frivolous entertainers as their political leaders - like

...Arnold Schwarzenegger? :+

>Like I said, I just read some pretty

>long excerpts and some comments stand on their own. You

>shouldn't claim that the meaning of comments are taking out of

>context if you're not prepared to demonstrate how that is the

>case.

I never said Margaret's jokes were taken out of context, Doug. I said you shouldn't critique a performer's standup comedy routine when you have never seen that person perform the entire routine, or even perform the parts you've read. That's like somebody reading a script for an "I Love Lucy" episode and determining that Lucille Ball isn't funny. Part of the performance is the...performance. If you think it's fair to form an opinion based on a "transcript," then I won't argue with you.

>And did you read ALL of the "hate mail" which Margaret Cho

>claims to have gotten, or are you criticizing it based on

>excerpts?

Where did I ever criticize the emails? And she did post them in their entirety, but she has since removed the real names and email addresses of the senders.

>Valley Dweller posted some pretty long excerpts. And certain

>sentences are impossible to take out of context. I'd love to

>hear how what he posted distorted what she really said. I

>really doubt it did. My guess is, if one posted the entire

>thing, it would be worse.

Doug and others, go here to see the source:

http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2004/01/13/20040113_231203_mattmo3.htm

>Valley Dweller posted some pretty long excerpts. And certain

>sentences are impossible to take out of context. I'd love to

>hear how what he posted distorted what she really said. I

>really doubt it did. My guess is, if one posted the entire

>thing, it would be worse.

Doug and others, go here to see the source:

http://www.drudgereportarchives.com/data/2004/01/13/20040113_231203_mattmo3.htm

The link you just posted contains no more of Margaret's material than what you previously posted. But the point you make below (#6505) is excellent.

The link you just posted contains no more of Margaret's material than what you previously posted. But the point you make below (#6505) is excellent.

>It's really fascinating how she gets to spew the most vile,

>hateful assaults imaginable - Bush would be Hitler if he tried

>harder, Republicans are stupid, Al Qaeda is bad but the

>Justice Department is worse and more dangerous - and that's

>all perfectly fine and great and funny.

She is a performer/comedian and she could say and do whatever she wants. The audience present knew what they were in for. They chose to hear her. This is the reason Gay Porn is not on NBC. We have a right to view it but we have to seek it out at stores like "Porn Bin" or "Sticky Rewind". She was not performing for a mainstream audience. Freedom of speech takes charge here. AND she wasn't screaming "fire" in a crowded movie theater when there wasn't a fire. She was in a venue where people wanted to be.

>But then people who are disgusted by this bile write back to

>her with equally hateful bile and suddenly this is awful and

>terrible and we should all condemn what they wrote in

>response.

Though some of her stuff even shocked me she was never racial. She was extremely political and hateful but not racial. People who sent her e-mails went to the lowest common denominator and couldn't respond back without attacking her ethnicity. That is racism.

>Shouldn't people at least try to pretend that they apply

>behavioral standards consistently, rather than so nakedly

>condemning the behavior of political opponents while praising

>exactly the same behavior from political allies?

Is your request possible in a free speech society? She is a comedian. She is doing what comedians have done for years: use politicians, and their politics, as their stage fodder.

>It's really fascinating how she gets to spew the most vile,

>hateful assaults imaginable - Bush would be Hitler if he tried

>harder, Republicans are stupid, Al Qaeda is bad but the

>Justice Department is worse and more dangerous - and that's

>all perfectly fine and great and funny.

She is a performer/comedian and she could say and do whatever she wants. The audience present knew what they were in for. They chose to hear her. This is the reason Gay Porn is not on NBC. We have a right to view it but we have to seek it out at stores like "Porn Bin" or "Sticky Rewind". She was not performing for a mainstream audience. Freedom of speech takes charge here. AND she wasn't screaming "fire" in a crowded movie theater when there wasn't a fire. She was in a venue where people wanted to be.

>But then people who are disgusted by this bile write back to

>her with equally hateful bile and suddenly this is awful and

>terrible and we should all condemn what they wrote in

>response.

Though some of her stuff even shocked me she was never racial. She was extremely political and hateful but not racial. People who sent her e-mails went to the lowest common denominator and couldn't respond back without attacking her ethnicity. That is racism.

>Shouldn't people at least try to pretend that they apply

>behavioral standards consistently, rather than so nakedly

>condemning the behavior of political opponents while praising

>exactly the same behavior from political allies?

Is your request possible in a free speech society? She is a comedian. She is doing what comedians have done for years: use politicians, and their politics, as their stage fodder.

>Good - she gives Asians, women, and gay people a bad name by

>spewing her hateful stupidity

HOW THE HELL does she get to be the official representative of all these people, and give them a supposed "bad name" ... because she is Asian and gay-friendly?

This is a very worn out adage. Since Clinton allowed himself to get sucked in the OVUM office while on our tax dollars during the work day does he give all southern whites and receivers of oral sex a bad name?

>Good - she gives Asians, women, and gay people a bad name by

>spewing her hateful stupidity

HOW THE HELL does she get to be the official representative of all these people, and give them a supposed "bad name" ... because she is Asian and gay-friendly?

This is a very worn out adage. Since Clinton allowed himself to get sucked in the OVUM office while on our tax dollars during the work day does he give all southern whites and receivers of oral sex a bad name?

>She is a performer/comedian and she could say and do whatever

>she wants. The audience present knew what they were in for.

>They chose to hear her. This is the reason Gay Porn is not on

>NBC. We have a right to view it but we have to seek it out at

>stores like "Porn Bin" or "Sticky Rewind". She was not

>performing for a mainstream audience. Freedom of speech takes

>charge here. AND she wasn't screaming "fire" in a crowded

>movie theater when there wasn't a fire. She was in a venue

>where people wanted to be.

Ahh...that's the point I should have made. You're exactly right, VDN.

>She is a performer/comedian and she could say and do whatever

>she wants. The audience present knew what they were in for.

>They chose to hear her. This is the reason Gay Porn is not on

>NBC. We have a right to view it but we have to seek it out at

>stores like "Porn Bin" or "Sticky Rewind". She was not

>performing for a mainstream audience. Freedom of speech takes

>charge here. AND she wasn't screaming "fire" in a crowded

>movie theater when there wasn't a fire. She was in a venue

>where people wanted to be.

Ahh...that's the point I should have made. You're exactly right, VDN.