This is so relevant today. Its enemies hate Israel when it is strong and proves that its way of life is superior to medieval backward hate. Beware of weak allies and friends who are afraid to be strong in the face of evil.
I don't really care if the line is insulting moreso that it just sounds stupid as hell. Just say she looks hot or pretty or something. Imagine that being the hill you die on. Embarrassing.
Charlie Young - you cannot walk! Nope. Not on ice. Me I mean. I am lousy walking on ice. But hope I am not too lousy. A thing called Cadence. Steal more from Camelot. Why don't you? Allegedly.
I wonder if she would have the same world view nowadays. This character states she felt the 14th amendment made the ERA amendment unnecessary because it mentions Equal protection under law. Twenty five years ago, I was her. (without the full throated 2nd amendment support Ainsley has). Nowadays, I've found myself becoming more Center/Right/Center in my governing/social/economic/environmental world view. I've always wondered if this character would've done the same.
In many ways, the culture is set up so that sexist and demeaning comments and actions are MEANT to be derogatory. The difference between the person making an innocent statement and making a demeaning comment for the purpose of being demeaning is entirely invisible. The point with making the rules very restrictive in regards to what is said and done is that it changes the culture. The person who is thinking it learns that it is NOT appropriate in all situations, and that a comment of that nature can be harmful to others. The rules ALSO make those comments harmful to ones own self, because some people only learn through personal pain. In your group of friends, everyone can understand that your actions and words are meant in jest, and that you are not actually sexist/racist. There's a level of subtext created by those relationships where the rules of polite society may not be as strictly enforced. The converse is that you may, actually be sexist/racist, but you don't face any consequences from your friends, so "it's okay"/"it's just boys being boys"/fill in your favorite excuse here. We're watching a political movement today that has decided that the rules that were fought over regarding racial and sexual discrimination can be thrown out. We're ALSO watching overt attempts to strip women and minorities of their rights as a direct consequence. Why? Because it's OKAY to say it. Rather, there's no penalty/punishment for saying it. The rules of communication you have in your team and among your friends are not the same rules you have for every stranger. Nor should they. Don't let those two sets of rules mix.
I liked her character...she left way too soon before someone could get her straight on the history of the 14th amendment and how it wouldn't protect her (or a lot of people).
These days men are so afraid of actually engaging in a conversation that could lead to a actual date,that they give up all together.It’s amazing how many men in their 20s would rather be alone than having a steady girlfriend.I couldn’t even imagine that when I was in my 20s or my 30s.Everyone is so sensitive about being offended,that they don’t even realize the importance of human connections.Now there’s this whole situation of people living alone without a partner and the sadness that comes with it.
I agree with Ainsley's argument, but it seems unlikely coming from someone who is canonically a member of the Federalist Society. I can't believe she would actually support such an expansive interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The West Wing was an idealized representation of the Presidency. Trump destroyed all that. Nothing you see on the show is at all relevant to Trump in the past or today.
Ainsley was so right. All women don't have to think alike. Call it Lipstick Feminism. I prefer the term honesty. Let's be brutally honest here ... women can be just as crude and harassing in the workplace as men. Alpha personalities aren't exclusive to males. And these gals are as disgusting to work with as any crude male. If you have to abandon class, dignity, humor, your values, preferences, etc. in the name of feminism, you haven't really gained a damn thing! You've given up part of who you are to be liked and/or accepted by a specific group. That's sad as hell.
"I know you're down in the dumps, but let's talk about me." omfg its the No Look Pass of dialogue. fuck you sorkin fuck me for choking on my chicken nugget hear Rob Lowe deliver it perfectly
I think all the people dissing on sorkin for writing this forget to notice that Sam, when told that he was inappropriate got properly worried that he was creating a hostile environment and asked the persons involved whether they felt uncomfortable... He didnt get rude and problematic, just introspective...
I found his defense to be pretty problematic. The "Charlie says I'm fine" bit was completely unnecessary. Those women DGAF what Charlie thinks. Real introspection wouldn't seek a second opinion to prove he was in the clear
Real introspection always seeks a second opinion because no one who is being introspective is going to get the most right answer from the first person they speak to
I used to think that west wing was one of the better informed shows back then, but 2 episodes made me gave up the show. In one ep, there was discussion about providing anti-viral Aids drugs to Africa and one of the bombshell argument against it was that African's couldn't tell the time cause they had no watches..... And another was the claim the Pakistan president would be insulted to meet a women politician because of their religious beliefs...
As a dude? For the record? I think what Sam said was well-intended. But went a little too far in a workplace. Though If he was talking to a friend outside of work? Fine. Though it makes him sound like he is not very experienced/subtle at complimenting women to their faces. But I still love Ainsley's speech on the matter. ☮
Your comment represents ACTUAL sexism. Who cares what gender the author of the dialog is? You either agree with the sentiments or you don't. The gender of the author is irrelevant. In other words; YOU'RE far more sexist than the person you are accusing of being one. Calm the hell down. What you are doing is the equivalent of accusing a man who says, "I like football" of being a sexist because he is a man. It's patently absurd. You said NOTHING about the substance of what was portrayed; you merely implied that since the sentiments were portrayed by a man, it was sexist. The sheer irony is that THAT is what is actually sexist. Good God, the irony......
@@s1lm4r1l6 Far more than you. A pro Israel Jew in the terror worshipping DNC? He would have resigned in disgust rather than share a platform with Rashida Tlaib.
IMHO, the important thing is that he acknowledged what she was saying. That Ainsley, as a person in a quite similar position, said she shouldn't get her knickers in a twist helped, too. By the way, what would be a better turn of phrase for "getting her knickers in a twist," here? I could only think of "grow a pair" but that seems worse.
