MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Roseanne Barr calls #MeToo accusers 'hoe...

Roseanne Barr calls #MeToo accusers 'hoes,' slams Sen. Kamala Harris


https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/roseanne-barr-calls-supernumbermetoo-accusers-hoes-slams-sen-kamala-harris-christine-blasey-ford/ar-BBUk7r4?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=U452DHP

USA TODAY
Roseanne Barr didn't hold back on the #MeToo movement in a new off-the-rails interview, launching a verbal attack on Sen. Kamala Harris and other women in the process.

The 66-year-old comedian – who was axed from the hit "Roseanne" reboot in May following a racist tweet – sat down with conservative commentator Candace Owens, where she mocked sexual assault accusers and the #MeToo movement "witch hunt."

"If you don't run out the room … but you stayed around because you're like, 'I thought maybe he was going to give me a writing job,' well, you ain't nothing but a ho," Barr said during an episode Sunday of "The Candace Owens Show," after asking why women were in men's hotel rooms late at night.

Barr and Owens compared the feminist movement to white supremacy, while Barr added that #MeToo accusers are "pretending that they didn’t go to trade sexual favors for money."
"I know a ho when I see one," Barr exclaimed. "They need to be called out …That's privilege, too – ho privilege."

The outspoken comedian then lashed out against Sen. Kamala Harris, nicknaming her "Kama Sutra Harris."

"We all know what she did … she slept her way to the bottom," Barr said, referring to the senator's former relationship with ex-San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown.

Barr also took shots at Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who tearfully testified against now-Supreme Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh after accusing him of sexual misconduct.

"She should be in prison," Barr said, adding that Ford used her "white woman privilege" to avoid time behind bars. She claimed that "nothing happened" to Ford.

"Women are encouraged to be conniving," Barr said.

"Conniving little wimps," Owens agreed.

Slide 1 of 18: Laurie Metcalf, left, and Roseanne Barr participate in the "Roseanne" panel during the Disney/ABC Television Critics Association Winter Press Tour on Jan. 8, 2018, in Pasadena, Calif. Slide 2 of 18: Michael Fishman, Roseanne Barr, and Alicia Goranson arrive at the Comedy Central Roast of Roseanne Barr at Hollywood Palladium on August 4, 2012 in Hollywood, Calif. Slide 3

reply

[deleted]

Roseanne may have been put into a sexually compromising position when she was much younger, and handled it differently.

In short, you do not go to a man's hotel room to conduct business as he showers while pretending not to look, and hoping he will change his demeanor so she can still land the job that she entered the hotel room for. It's naive and unrealistic, like putting your hand over a flame and expecting it not to hurt.
Or when a woman flirts with a man to gain something, only for her to later say "I never promised I'd sleep with you", after she receives the benefit from him. She can't possibly think he's being so giving and charitable due to her "mind", or because he's such a sweet chap.
If a man was cornered and exploited by a woman who did the same, it would be whimsical to people. (being blacklisted is different)

reply

Even if you’re remotely right, absolutely none of that excuses rape, sexual assault and sexual harassment.

You and Roseanne are basically victim blaming instead of taking the position that no matter how naive or misguided a person may, in your opinion, be, no-one should be subjected to sexual abuse.

And the truth is, when you're soliciting legitimate work, you do sometimes do as you’re advised. You do visit hotel rooms. And even if you think it’s weird that the person conducting the interview is showering, it's like a rabbit caught in the headlights: you can't simply leave. You're already committed to that meeting and it takes time for your brain to register that perhaps this might be a potentially dangerous situation.

No-one should be punished with sexual abuse simply for being naive!

reply

The terms "victim blaming/ sexual assault/ and sexual harassment.are too broadly used and tossed around, which only shows how self-entitled and arrogant the given woman is. And yes, you can leave if a person is showering--she just doesn't wish to sacrifice her potential benefits after exiting. Too bad. Nobody promised women (or men) that all goes smooth, and demand that life's pitfalls be corrected just for their sake. Rosanne is not the first famous woman to express what she did in the article.

You are not a victim for stepping into a lion's den, and then causing turmoil after you took chances because you didn't like the result. Yes, so-called "victims" are too blame for putting their nose where it should not be, like a game of Russian-Roulette. Harassment, by definition, is a continued act, not a one-time occurrence. And rape is forced-sex/intercourse against the person's will. (as if this needs to be explained).

Putting your hand on a person's shoulder, or saying she is pretty, or asking for a date is not sexual harassment. If the roles were reversed, it would be considered charming and innocent. This is how women get to have it both ways due how "special" they were taught to be in our age of self-entitlement.

reply

You have issues...

But the point is, NO woman asks to be raped. NO woman asks for a man to force himself on her. It doesn't matter what the context is, or how misguided the she may be, NO woman deserves to suffer such abuse.

It may indeed be naive and foolish to go to a studio exec's hotel room alone, and, worse, to remain if he is in the shower when you arrive. But until all the stuff concerning Weinstein recently emerged, few of us would have expected or have been prepared for the type of sociopathic behaviour Weinstein displayed in private to countless women. And even if it is still naive and foolish, I once again stress that the villain here is always the man who perpetrates the abuse.

Lambasting the unfortunate victims of assault for the illegal act committed against them makes no logical sense.

reply

What do you think about women who wear skimpy clothes and tease men?

reply

Sorry to cut in
I like ladies in skimpy clothes and ladies that 'tease' are really fun...I've been lucky enough to know a few

Doesn't mean they deserve to get raped:/

Is there something wrong with you?
You cannot be serious...
Going out on a limb here and assuming you are making 'jokes' but striking out terribly

Pro tip dummy...if you want to troll and be a douche find another site...this is not that sort of place
Piss off or act normal you weirdo

Having said that, You really could fit in here and make friends
Just stop acting like an angry ass

reply

I like ladies in skimpy clothes and ladies that 'tease' are really fun...I've been lucky enough to know a few
Same here.

And I like it when a woman feels comfortable enough with her own sexuality and sensuality, with the knowledge that she's safe, and can flirt and flaunt herself without ever fearing that some entitled, over-horny guy is going to gets handsy with her, or worse.

reply

I never had a problem with it.

reply

I'm sorry, but I should be able to walk around in what ever the hell I want and not get raped. I could be topless because I want a tan and I don't deserve to be raped. The idea that a person dressing in an appealing manner and perhaps being flirty does not give any individual the right to force sex. The fact that men (and I say men here because I rarely hear clothing being the reason that men are raped) feel entitled to force sex upon someone because the looked a certain way is part of the reason that we still need the #metoo movement.

reply

sslssg
You're the problem with the metoomovement.
Don't complain later after you take your chances when you live in a culture that includes the crime of rape. It should not have to be explained to you that nobody is "entitled" to commit rape.
(by the way, you are NOT entitled to go topless to get your wrinkle-inducing tan , since other women, men and children are being imposed on.)

reply

I really don't see how I am the problem? I have lived in many places where it is legal for women to be topless and they do go topless, and rape statistics aren't any higher than in places that I have lived where it's not legal. I think that it's really, really sad that in this western society there is such shame around breasts.

Regardless, using clothes as a way to blame the victim does not fly with me in any. That's like saying anyone who has a car, deserves to get it stolen. Or that by having a great credit, you deserve to get your identity stolen.

reply

Why are you the problem? Because it's really really sad that you're stuck in gear with the constant blaming-the-victim-cliche and using the word "deserves". Nobody is blaming the victim. You car/credit analogy is what does not fly, and your black & white thought- process. Leaving your car unlocked and your credit-card lying around would be a better analogy to describe an act of foolishness and risk-taking.
And Western women are not ashamed of their breasts because they choose to not walk around half-naked. If they were ashamed, they would not wear tops with scant plunging necklines to gain attention. Women's breasts are a sexual/ erogenous body part (and it doesn't matter why).

reply

Please explain to me how it does not fly? To say that someone shouldn't have been wearing something or dressing in a certain way is most certainly laying blame. I was responding to a comment that said

What do you think about women who wear skimpy clothes and tease men?


Please tell me what gear I should be in? I don't think that it's a cliche that victims are constantly asked what they were wearing. Cops will ask, lawyers will bring it up in court. They aren't above asking a 10 year old what they were wearing. So please tell me how that is not victim blaming.

reply

I edited/added to my previous comment, see above

reply

Thrillhouse, who posed that question, was a troll who ran away crying after it was revealed that his White Nationalist hero Donald Trump was cozy with AIPAC. Now he only posts with obvious socks.

reply

Because you dont' walk around in a risky environment like a dumb f-ck with a tube-top and mini-skirt when you already know that you are enticing possible rapists in your vicinity. I am not speaking about walking around the supermarket.or sitting poolside. It's called using your head, and not acting like you're living where everything is ideal.
It's why people do not stroll in Harlem at 3AM wearing their expensive jewelry and designer clothing, or walk through Harlem at all--much less a woman doing it who is more vulnerable than a man. Learn what the word "blame" means.

reply

What do I think of them?

Nothing much, either way.

I certainly don't think that the fact they're wearing skimpy clothes means that they're inviting people to assault or harass them.

People are entitled to flaunt their own bodies as they see fit. That doesn't mean they're encouraging others to manhandle them. It doesn't even mean they're necessarily 'teasing men'.

If you find them so sexy you feel you can't control your sexual urges, here's a tip: go home, find a private place, and give yourself a hand shandy. But don't hold these women accountable for your own feelings.

reply

[deleted]

Exactly. Knowing that some men do rape (and worse) is enough reason why women should use prevention. Of course a woman does not deserve to be raped, but wearing provocative clothing is not exactly insuring her safety. People seem to act, and expect, that it be a fair world where we can engage in any behavior and not accept the risks.
They can wear any type of clothes they wish--and even go topless--but don't feel beyond reproach when it lands them in hot water.

I should have not have to treated differently for wearing a motorcycle jacket with jeans , while the man in a suit and tie receives more respectful treatment from people, but I made the choice

reply

[deleted]

I understand what you're saying, but it's matter of "is it more likely than not". Old women in cardigans and sweatsuits are less desirable than hot women in skimpy clothing. ( Rape can be both an act of sex and violence, not just violence) I have not done a study on rapists, but if a rapist is literally deciding between targeting a nun or a young attractive woman, I've a feeling the percentages would indicate the later.

You're right, knowing that rapists exist is not a reason why women should dress modestly, but it can still a mitigating factor if she's at the wrong place at the wrong time. Nobody should ever be raped, and though bad acts of human nature will always occur, I am saying err to the side of caution..

The reason why rapists "get off the hook" is only due to the difficulty in proving the crime. There cannot be a reasonable doubt. The fact that so many men have spent decades in jail and later released because they were innocent is very sobering. And the fact that some women do lie only complicates the justice-system further..

reply

That can include the elderly, children, men, etc. These are not once-offs. Everyone is a potential victim whatever they are wearing. But here's the thing - it's not about you.
---------------------------------------------------------
In just as many cases, "it is about you".

How do you know the minds of all rapists? You are phasing things in a matter-of-fact way, since not all rapists will rape anybody with a pulse, as if they are schizophrenic and in a hurry. It's also a generalization that the victims are always vulnerable. Since rape is about control and power, I could easily say that rapists pursue strong, self-confident (non-vulnerable) victims as their targets. Yet, with just as many rapists, it's not about control and power. You, and others, make it sound like rapists do not discriminate like non-rapists.


reply

[deleted]

Color alone has a profound effect on the way people feel and act. Women don't wear red just to support communism you know.

reply

You evidently have the issues since I am not defending rape. I am not speaking about rape, nor is Rosanne. That's the point.

You have the same misunderstanding as on the other board which you created:
"WHY DO SOME MEN LIKE SEEING WOMEN BEING ABUSED". (and endlessly posting about what makes you sad on the boards)

Your selective-reasoning over who is an unfortunate "victim" is hypocritical. Women who stay with in a hotel man with a lewd naked man , when she has plenty of time to leave, is her OWN victim. She is not chained down to her seat, but hoping the man will change so she can take advantage of what he has to offer because she wants to get ahead in business.

That is being lazy and expecting what you want, when you want it (a symptom of new-age self-entitlement) If you would not accept this lewd behavior anyplace else and for any other reason, then you are encouraging the man by doing it in his hotel room. You then look elsewhere for employment, like an independent strong woman.

Again, if the roles were reversed, you wouldn't care less due to this inherent specialness you think women possess, which many women have been indoctrinated to believe. Women who use their femininity to obtain favors from men are jeopardizing their own safety, and think they are owed something by expecting what they want in life (and business), when they want it.

I don't know if you're very young, influenced by having been raped (sorry if have been), resent men in general, or baiting. But in case you are rational and serious, you're being narcissistic by monopolizing others' time on the boards over a serious subject.


reply

I'm a man. Why would I resent men? I'm not a self-hater.

I just want to see a world where women no longer have any reason to fear being exploited and abused by rapists and predators.

reply

I'm a man. Why would I resent men? I'm not a self-hater.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
You're a fraud, who I foolishly engaged..

DO NOT put your hands on men, kiss a man on the cheek, hug a man, call him handsome or whisper in a man's ear then--since that is a sexual-assault and being a predator. Women have no hesitation to get handsy with men, but that's OK due to society's hypocrisy. You are obsessed with the word "rape", but do not even understand what it means. Yet, you get a free pass to use the term due to your gender. If you want the world to be a better place, start by not taking advantage of men by compromising your-self, then blaming men for it.

You're not doing the MeTooMovement justice, but the opposite. You haven't the right to manipulate because you can avail yourself to it. By doing that, you're only provoking the man. But, you're too wrapped up in your obsession regarding rape and how exceptional and mistreated you think women are-- and even other women who strive for equality dislike what you represent.


reply

I've been sexually assaulted by men and women. I make no defence for either. It is wrong under all circumstances.

Still, the overwhelming number of rapes and sexual assaults committed, outside of prison, involve male on female violence. That's the 'exceptional' part. Not the idea that sexual violence towards women is worse than that towards men, but that it is way more prolific, and generally committed by men.

reply


“....you can't simply leave. You're already committed to that meeting...” Hogwash! You don’t go in the first place! If you follow that train of thought, you need to get a backbone and grow up!

In no circumstances, ever, should a woman go alone to a man’s hotel room to conduct business. It’s common sense! Don’t let anyone feed the line “when you're soliciting legitimate work, you do sometimes do as you’re advised.” In all likelihood it’s legitimate, but that’s what conference rooms are for. Also, if seen going in/out, tongues wag! A woman should never put herself into a possible compromising situation. As I wrote “It’s common sense”. And this isn’t blaming the woman!

reply

You are blaming the woman.

Instead of stating that under no circumstances should a man ever take advantage of a woman, you're focusing on why the woman is partly responsible for her own victimisation.

reply

No, I am not blaming the woman, but I do agree with your statement “under no circumstances should a man ever take advantage of a woman,“. I have been on this earth for many decades and believe what we women have been taught through the ages...use common sense. Don’t put yourself where a possible confrontation could occur. I wouldn’t walk down a dark street at night. It’s not fair, but it is what it is. We live with it daily.

You completely ignored my other reason for not being in a hotel room alone with a man. Many a woman’s reputation has been ruined and so have a few men’s.

reply

[deleted]

"Teasing" and flirting are not long-term contracts that demand to be paid.
------ ----- ---- ------- ----
Since women KNOW (or should know) that Teasing and flirting may result in negative consequences, then it stands to reason that you do not Teasing and flirt and expect the man to know, and respect, the barriers. This makes the women choosing to be with the suspicious naked boss in the hotel room as narcissistic as him. Interesting how women routinely embrace and gets touchy-feely with men, but nobody gives a damn (aw.. they are just being freindly)

Before the MeTooMovment, our society was not built on this self-entitlement and delusion that there is no risk or chance involved. And if the so-called victim has not be debilitated and traumatized for life, then "get over it" (and no, they do not deserve millions because someone disrespected them). People had a tougher skin then and did not expect whatever they idealize because mom and dad filled their presumptuous heads.

Men also have been victimized in one form or another--it can be something as being scarred for life, but it's not turned into this mass-outrage. Everything these days revolves around sexuality being the most upmost catalyst for being "victimized". So, let's see: a given women takes the risk because she has grandiose ambition for a career, then does anything without giving thought to the consequences. Then every other woman jumps on the bandwagon to "find" something to feel self-pity about. You can arrest and punish and preying men until doomsday, but it will always exist.

reply

Be careful what you're implying about Roseanne and Mayam Bialik please.

I don't agree with them, but in singling them out as women who were never caught in a compromising position, you're potentially falling into a rather nasty and untruthful narrative.

reply

[deleted]

I think the implication is that some women are victims of sexual assault, and others aren't.

The implication, which I don't wish to articulate because of its unpleasant nature, and the fact that I am in fact calling it out and thus do not want to propagate it, suggests that certain types of men prey on certain types of women, but wouldn't think of assaulting other types of women, possibly for their physical appearance, possibly for their background (and once again I don't wish to articulate what I mean by 'background' for fear of propagating the very nasty tropes and bigotries I'm actually warning against).

Let's just say this, the Nazis used the same pernicious tropes during the 1930s, of the blonde, blue-eyes, rosy-cheeked, fair-skinned, supposedly pure and innocent girls, and in some cases boys, being preyed on by 'deviant outsiders' like the usual suspects (i.e. Weinstein, Polanski and Allen, or Cosby, Jackson and R Kelly, or Spacey). Please, let's not say anything that furthers such hateful myths even accidentally. Specifically singling out women like Roseanne Barr and Mayan Bialik does not help.

reply

[deleted]

I'll make it explicitly clear, since the message doesn't seem to have filtered through yet, and that includes the commentators on this site who are also attacking Philip Green and his daughter, and Jared Kushner: anti-Semitism is very real, and the more we keep playing up anti-Semitic tropes, either intentionally or accidentally, the more we push a very toxic narrative that will be seized upon by bigots.

Please let's call a suspension on the explicit criticism of Jews, or at least balance it out with more equivalent criticism of gentiles.

And the whole 'But I'm not singling these people put because they're Jews' argument doesn't really wash, because people can't keep attacking members of a specific minority group again and again and think it won't have any negative consequences. Sadly, it does.

reply

She does have a point about some of the prominent representitives of the movement, but the way she phrases it is just 🤦‍♀️.

reply

Rosanne is likely coming from the mindset of working your way to achieve your goals, as she had to do-- not have it indirectly handed to you by relying on your gender as a shortcut.

When she says "ho's", it's comparing it to certain women who use their femininity to get ahead--and expecting the MeTooMovement will grant them an excuse for being careless. It's taking the easy way by seeing how far they can play along with a potentially toxic male boss and hope they luck out. Basically, you cannot have it both ways--only to then cite sexism when the odds did not pan out.

reply

She called them garden tools?

#itshonothoe

reply

The dictionary seems to accept the plural form "hoes". I guess the idea is that it works the same as "tomatoes".

reply

It's hos.

reply

The dictionary accepts both forms, so 🤷‍♀️.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ho

reply

Ho is a common Chinese surename.

reply

It's a bit harsh for a 66 year old woman with a lifetime of experience to bash inexperienced younger women. Some people haven't come across warning signs, red flags and such.

Also, if Ford maintains that she is not lying, then there are no charges. She would have to admit under oath that she lied.

reply