Started By
Message

re: Mike Richards Out as ‘Jeopardy!’ Host Amid Cascade of Scandals (updated)

Posted on 8/20/21 at 11:03 am to
Posted by SCLSUMuddogs
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2010
6904 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 11:03 am to
quote:

In what way is this controversial at all?


Well, if a dude said it you know some people would interpret it as "the other ones were asking for it by how they dressed"
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71135 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 11:07 am to
quote:

Well, if a dude said it you know some people would interpret it as "the other ones were asking for it by how they dressed"


Meh. It comes off to me as more self aware. I don't see the victim blaming angle necessarily. And just in general, while saying "they were asking for it" is a bit much, it's not really any secret that an attractive girl who dresses immodestly is going to make herself more of a target for the type of dirtbags that are looking for such targets.
Posted by Diseasefreeforall
Member since Oct 2012
5630 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 11:16 am to
quote:

it's not really any secret that an attractive girl who dresses immodestly is going to make herself more of a target for the type of dirtbags that are looking for such targets.

Yeah but that's what we want from TV and movies. Sexy chicks in sexy outfits entertaining us. Hollywood ain't gonna make the money with plain janes in button up blouses. So if that's what's required from the profession, it doesn't seem like too much to ask to keep it at least somewhat professional.
Posted by ProjectP2294
South St. Louis city
Member since May 2007
71135 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 11:25 am to
I don't disagree. Any additional thoughts I have on this topic can wait for a thread specifically about it.

Back to Jeopardy hosts, there seems to be some cabal of media people that want to see Lavar Burton and only Lavar Burton host the show, qualifications be damned. So there are going to be hit pieces on every potential host that isn't him.
Posted by molsusports
Member since Jul 2004
36181 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 12:13 pm to
quote:

Where does the luck come in?


Everywhere. Not as the sole determining factor. But as a gigantic variable.

We're generally lucky to be born in this era, not earlier eras when more children died before adulthood, more men died on the job (or in wars out of their control), and more women died in childbirth. We're lucky to have safe water to drink, air-conditioning, and abundant food.

Many of us are lucky enough to have an absence of major illness, disabilities, largely intact family structures. More lucky individuals come from families where parents read to their children from a young age, nurturing their intellectual development, tutoring them, and pushing for their academic achievement and social development.

Talent is far from the determining factor in any field - especially not for something as capricious as acting. Talented actors and cute kids (and she was a cute kid) are in essentially limitless supply. Even the opportunity for a major role in one (let alone multiple) network shows is so unlikely that most responsible parents should refuse to submit their children to the disappointment, even when the children are outstanding actors with good maturity.

Intelligence (which is also heavily influenced by luck since we do not determine our genes, do not determine our health status, and do not determine our environment - all of which heavily affect intelligence) is also only one of multiple variables determining whether a student will have the opportunity to begin or finish a PhD after being both good enough and lucky enough to graduate from college. Projects can be derailed by funding, mentor failures, technical obstacles which prove insurmountable, or being scooped by a competing research group.

We're talking about a person who has every rational reason to understand her enormous good fortune.
Posted by molsusports
Member since Jul 2004
36181 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 12:32 pm to
quote:

quote:
In what way is this controversial at all?


Well, if a dude said it you know some people would interpret it as "the other ones were asking for it by how they dressed"


You're right that some people would respond with that thought. Even though victims of violence (as well as perpetrators) are statistically likely to have done something that put them at risk.

A woman has every right to ride a public bus in a thong and transparent t-shirt - but she does elevate her risk of sexual assault. A guy wearing a Rolex can also choose to visit Baltimore projects alone, but he may return home with a concussion and no watch. Just drinking to excess is a huge risk factor for perpetrating or becoming the victim of a murder (something like 50% of murder victims and people committing a murder are intoxicated at the time).

I doubt MB meant to imply victims of sexual assault in Hollywood deserve to be assaulted, that predators like Weinstein shouldn't be prosecuted, or that sexually attractive people are obligated to change their dress to reduce their risk. The riskier truth that I think she omitted was that some of the Weinstein actresses were in control of the interaction and made a trade of sex for additional fame and success (others like Annabella Sciora clearly were not willing and remain traumatized).


Posted by saintsfan22
baton rouge
Member since May 2006
71979 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 1:02 pm to
Wonder if Simmons addresses this. He's been complaining about cancel culture ever since his "open mic night" comment went over terribly.
Posted by kywildcatfanone
Wildcat Country!
Member since Oct 2012
120065 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 1:23 pm to
quote:

You'd think companies would start hiring people to dig this stuff up before actually announcing stuff


Cancel culture keeps it in the holster till needed.
Posted by mizzoubuckeyeiowa
Member since Nov 2015
35836 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 1:36 pm to
And people who watch the show could give zero fricks about what he said a decade ago and would've never hear about it nor will ever hear it. What a clown show Jeopardy has become.

All they did was bring light to some obscure podcast.
This post was edited on 8/20/21 at 1:39 pm
Posted by Jack Ruby
Member since Apr 2014
23038 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 2:25 pm to
I'd go after Neil Degrasse Tyson. He's got a phenomenal speaking and presentation voice, brings the intelligence factor, and truly respects classical Western science and philosophy, which is what much of the show's content is really based on.

Oh,
This post was edited on 9/10/21 at 4:12 am
Posted by imjustafatkid
Alabama
Member since Dec 2011
51161 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 2:59 pm to
It's unfortunate that they're getting rid of the best choice over something that stupid.
Posted by drexyl
Mingovia
Member since Sep 2005
23087 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 4:07 pm to
quote:

Where does the luck come in?


Everywhere. Not as the sole determining factor. But as a gigantic variable.
yes - at the end of the day aren’t we all lucky to some extent? She’s lucky she wasn’t still born, lucky she wasn’t born in a time when television didn’t exist, lucky to not have been sucked into a black hole, lucky she didn’t die in her sleep last night, lucky Mike Richards said “booby” on a podcast 10 years ago, and on and on. Not the sole determining factor as im sure there was some hard work and determination somewhere along the way (though arguably she was lucky to have parents that instilled those values in her). Just super lucky.
Posted by beauchristopher
new orleans
Member since Jan 2008
66601 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 4:13 pm to
quote:

Whatever it takes to get that self-serving douche out of that position. Maybe now they'll bring in someone fans actually wanted


Um, he was the best guest host by a mile.
Posted by Fewer Kilometers
Baton Rouge
Member since Dec 2007
36204 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 4:14 pm to
quote:

Everywhere. Not as the sole determining factor. But as a gigantic variable.

We're generally lucky to be born in this era, not earlier eras when more children died before adulthood, more men died on the job (or in wars out of their control), and more women died in childbirth. We're lucky to have safe water to drink, air-conditioning, and abundant food.

Many of us are lucky enough to have an absence of major illness, disabilities, largely intact family structures. More lucky individuals come from families where parents read to their children from a young age, nurturing their intellectual development, tutoring them, and pushing for their academic achievement and social development.

Talent is far from the determining factor in any field - especially not for something as capricious as acting. Talented actors and cute kids (and she was a cute kid) are in essentially limitless supply. Even the opportunity for a major role in one (let alone multiple) network shows is so unlikely that most responsible parents should refuse to submit their children to the disappointment, even when the children are outstanding actors with good maturity.

Intelligence (which is also heavily influenced by luck since we do not determine our genes, do not determine our health status, and do not determine our environment - all of which heavily affect intelligence) is also only one of multiple variables determining whether a student will have the opportunity to begin or finish a PhD after being both good enough and lucky enough to graduate from college. Projects can be derailed by funding, mentor failures, technical obstacles which prove insurmountable, or being scooped by a competing research group.

We're talking about a person who has every rational reason to understand her enormous good fortune.


You haven't explained how she is "One of the luckiest people to ever walk the face of the earth". By your standards any successful actor is there because of luck. Since you discount talent, intelligence, and appearance, how is every successful actor not "One of the luckiest people to ever walk the face of the earth"?
Posted by Jay Quest
Once removed from Massachusetts
Member since Nov 2009
9821 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 4:42 pm to
quote:


Imagine being the miserable frick whose job it is to scour through hundreds of hours of a decade old podcast in order to cancel this guy.

For the cancel culture, it's not a job, it's a life choice.

The more offense and outrage a person or group feels over spoken words is directly proportional to their lack of intelligence.



Posted by AURaptor
South
Member since Aug 2018
11958 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 7:10 pm to

What happened to Blossom ? Last I heard, she was a co-host, right ?
Posted by LordSaintly
Member since Dec 2005
39081 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 7:12 pm to
quote:

Whatever it takes to get that self-serving douche out of that position. Maybe now they'll bring in someone fans actually wanted


I don't understand people who were against Richards from the beginning. He was absolutely fantastic as the host.
Posted by Kirk Herbstreit
in the outhouse
Member since Jan 2005
5835 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 8:10 pm to
What about Austin Rogers or James Holzhauer?
Posted by jatilen
Member since May 2020
13608 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 8:21 pm to
quote:

What happened to Blossom ? Last I heard, she was a co-host, right ?


She's white. The new replacement will not be white. Bet on it. The producers have already taken the knee before the woke mob.
Posted by molsusports
Member since Jul 2004
36181 posts
Posted on 8/20/21 at 8:29 pm to
quote:

arguably she was lucky to have parents that instilled those values in her



In what sense is that arguable? It's obviously true that children born to intact families have gigantic advantages. If someone doesn't know that they don't understand the effects on almost every aspect of our lives.

That's setting aside the issues of being massively more lucky when you get cast in and subsequently enriched by being in one, let alone multiple, sitcoms.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram