western mainstream comedy is shocking for the simple fact that it is so unfunny. the dancing bears propped up to entertain seem to base their entire acts on their entitlement alone. take for instance Amy Schumer’s appearance on Conan O’Brien’s show in April:

Schumer’s entire routine here revolves around being naked on the cover of a trash celeb rag covered in empty booze bottles, extra-super-awkward puberty highlighted by utterly boring animated self-deprecation, vague discussion of hosting an awards show, and of course making fun of other women who haven’t figured out how to sit, apparently, while wearing whatever the hell they feel like wearing. it is supremely unfunny, and the lack of anything resembling substance throughout juxtaposes her as one of the chicks not like all the other girls who is almost cool enough to be a guy with the guys, but with expertly styled blond locks and boobs (can’t forget the boobs that will probably sag soon by her own admission! har har), next to O’Brien and whatshisname — the real funny men after all. rather than an appearance where she demonstrates her talent, she is presented as nothing more than ornament for well-established male showmen.

Schumer has been pushed upon us as more than just “genius” comedian; she’s also branded as feminist making her humor, of course, inherently politically challenging and feminist, so the story goes. this is simply an idea, perhaps more of a phantom of one, a narrative faux feminist rag and pop culture site bloggers push as though they have been paid to do her PR, and i would not be surprised if that was their role exactly. take for instance this Daily Beast writeup — it’s an advertisement that doesn’t really give us any idea of why this is feminist nor does it offer any criticism. “Schumer isn’t scolding us or punishing us or even venting.” this gives away the true intentions of this marketing and what Schumer is to represent, funfeminism because the thing we all think of as feminism is full of shrill harpies who don’t find humor in self-deprecation or equality in degrading intimacy as much as macho patriarchal culture does.

Fallon posits this in observation of the following video “skit”, which is what made me aware of Schumer in the first place via twitter.

this is made to appeal to the lowest of the lowest common denominator, something people may have chanted in grade school. thankfully the children i have known as students and by familial connection are smarter than that and would roll their eyes if not for the simple fact of their easier access to understanding the media’s portrayal of sexuality and bodily functions in 2015, but according to Fallon and her fans, that’s precisely why we adults should find it humorous. Schumer’s image, though she is conventionally attractive, white, and always expertly groomed whenever she is in the public spotlight, is one of an outcast nice girl with a “potty mouth” and habits that only men are supposed to boast, such as heavy drinking and actually enjoying sex. yes, quite novel in 2015 for privileged white women to do.

she is promoted as being transgressive for enjoying these things, and this video in part has been marketed as mocking the standards women are judged by, notably “pussy and boobs” for their rudimentary, “gross” functions. however i find it more insulting to psychosis-inducing body image issues women deal with as the ideal forms are shoved down our throats while they try to grasp their own sexuality outside of these nearly omnipresent standards. she does this as one hard-staring white funnywoman we had better care about, surrounded by black women and their parts used as props. it has been touted as “satire” of other conventionally attractive white female artists using the same racist themes, such as Taylor Swift and Lily Allen, whose “sassy”, profoundly racist video for “Hard Out Here” is particularly appalling, but was also promoted as “satiric”.

in reality, both Allen’s and Schumer’s videos reiterate ideas of black women in particular having sexual advantage over perennially molested and naturally modest white women while keeping them under the boot of their privilege. black women are at once always sexually open (unrapeable) and brainless for their ass shaking, exaggerations crafted by white supremacist culture creators. being a far cry from effective satire, it appeals to an audience secure in the false notion of their enlightenment for simply being consumers of “free” western media who demonstrably argue back in comments sections all over the web that they get it, it’s just comedy, get over yourself. it would be nice to imagine that all the rebuttals to criticism are coming from manufactured socks to promote Schumer and the rest, and i’m sure they exist as well, but i’m assuming people who have actually challenged their own thinking and programming in this regard can recall numerous times they have tried to speak out on more personalized platforms such as Facebook and getting similar results.

Schumer has fully demonstrated her commitment to the ideal of the continually victimized white woman of certain class standing during her 2014 speech at the Gloria Awards Gala, eponymously named for the queen spook herself. Schumer’s recollection of a (half) drunken one morning stand which she viewed as validating for her apparently lowly status of barely human impresses upon young women a certain strain of odious faux feminism that reaffirms an imperialist, patriarchal mindset that the world is inherently dangerous for them, and scenarios in which they are perfectly capable of exercising consent but don’t are presented as a weird initiation rite to understanding the real scope of women’s oppression. this toxic speech is laced with false ideas of equality in the guise of eternal victimhood. Schumer was sober and yet knowingly entered into sexual relations with a barely conscious man according to her own account. he was only able to grind against her thigh with his soft penis and failed at the hard penetration women should apparently expect from all sexual encounters. she told the audience she was forced to disassociate, since a woman should accept nothing less to save her from herself, but remained in a present enough state of mind to demand more enticing ambiance from an obviously incapacitated man.

there are no doubts in my mind that this praxis far removed from feminism via avatars such as Schumer is part of the continuing project of intel sponsored, controlled opposition of women’s liberation movements. whatever her actual pawn status is, there is much that we can gather as to why she was chosen for this role. she is just a terrible person having a lot of fun in her privileged position while fans do the work of defending her because they are told she is an acceptable feminist spokeswoman. her racist remarks are not aberrations; she is reliant upon this to contribute to the culture creators’ oppressive reproduction of these standards. in this piece, she is cited for her racist depiction of certain men standing out as rapists from multiple cultural and racial backgrounds under throwback Nixonian terminology:

• Amy Schumer is a racist. This is from her stand up: “I used to date Hispanic guys, but now I prefer consensual!” Are you serious? Schumer gets a lot of cred for a sketch she did on a political-correctness training program for octogenarians, but that’s exactly it. Your white grandma calling people “colored” is kind of not as problematic as your narrative that Latinos are rapists.

consent is a blurred line for her usage only under the mantle of anything being allowable in the guise of comedy. she should simply be allowed to whine herself out of any routine she might be asked to take some accountability for more in line with Andrew Dice Clay’s shtick than any number of genuinely funny women she owes so much to, some of whom were also white, and who also didn’t rely on such tired stereotypes to secure their fame.

raping underage boys, such a needed departure from what is expected of privileged white female comedians.

even this following skit that has been credited with challenging what is deemed as rape culture by liberal feminists, red flags are still everywhere, which to my mind demonstrates the lack of analytical framework of “rape culture”. it functions as vague catchall western feminists can point to without consideration of structural imperialist violence, working from the single axiom of flattened notions of sexism so prominent in liberal feminist discourse.

the constantly drunk football coach’s wife works to signal some frustration being taken out on young male football players naturally inclined to rape with such a “hard line” only spoken to by the single white man in charge, as if such problems don’t emanate from their roles. anyone who has a problem with not committing rape is asked to leave, punctuated by the careless line of making sure to “not get raped by the doorknob” on their way out. the one player in need of being held back is of course black — these are all symptomatic of how unhelpful the fake analyses of “rape culture” actually are.

and Schumer and whoever is behind her know how to make all these cultural cues profitable. where is the incisive humor in any of this? Schumer herself states “I enjoy playing the girl who time to time says the dumbest thing possible and playing with race is a thing we are not supposed to do, which is what makes it so fun for comics.” i am also of the opinion that in this faux apology from late last month, she hits on another media creation, that being the “transracial” term a la Rachel Dolezal meant to replace true interrogation of how white supremacy operates — she signs her mindless rant “Sincerely Amy (a dirty half Jew)”. half Jew? what does this even mean apart from Hitlerian legacy, reified again and again in american pop culture, of Jewishness itself signifying race? there are Jewish people from multiple ethnic and racial backgrounds, and certainly from said praxis of antisemitism, there remains in the popular imagination what characteristics make it easy for “Jew spotting”. Schumer isn’t fooling any thinking person though; she does so well in her role because of her participation in whiteness and its reproduction is her meal ticket.

my god, there is so much more to pick apart here: her reiteration of bodily autonomy being shameful, her giggling about “making out” with another objectified starlet that was nothing more than a peck which demeans, yet again, women’s love for each other as commodity for male pleasure, her brainless routines that are thought to be liberating but do nothing more than repeat actual caricatures of women that have been used against us for ages, among many examples. so i must say i’m thoroughly sick of thinking about this woman at this point, but i did want to get this all down about yet another product we are told to think about using specific parameters.