People who should not exist

Guy Fieri

Guy Fieri. I mean, anyone who wears his Oakley sunglasses wrapped around the back of his head is clearly a waste of space (see also: his hair and his bowling shirts and ohmygod that goatee and basically everything about him). But he’s also an anti-Semite, a misogynist and a homophobe to boot. So yeah, fuck that guy.

About Jill

Jill began blogging for Feministe in 2005. She has since written as a weekly columnist for the Guardian newspaper and in April 2014 she was appointed as senior political writer for Cosmopolitan magazine.
This entry was posted in Celebrity, Food and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

146 Responses to People who should not exist

  1. Andie says:

    Never heard of him.

    From reading the first two pages of that article, I’ve not been missing much.

  2. Ladeeda says:

    Huh. I’ve actually defended him before because I found him sort of jolly and harmless. Guess I was wrong.

  3. Florence says:

    You know those people who get stuck in a fashion rut, typically from whatever era where they hit their late teens and early twenties? Guy Fieri was clearly of the late Swingers era. He may also listen to Limp Bizkit and/or Squirrel Nut Zippers.

  4. Jadey says:

    Well, fuck, I loved DDD – shameless food celebration on TV has been a balm to my tired, fat-shamed soul. And I love his fashion style as it quite resembles my own, so going to have to disagree with you there about the waste of space thing. But it wouldn’t be the first time a TV personality turned out to be a bigoted asshole behind the scenes.

    I’m torn about this reporting though. I mean, one guy, Page (who comes off as kind of an asshole himself), describes Fiere’s behaviour, but he’s on the other side of a legal battle and there’s no verification from anyone else, an official denial from Fiere, and what sounds like a newspaper trading on sensationalism (big surprise). I honestly don’t feel like I can trust any of these players.

    And what the fuck was up with that article and all the “rotund producer”, “pudgy prodigy” BS? Irrelevant physical descriptors, much.

  5. FashionablyEvil says:

    Ugh, I’m with Ladeeda. It’s also too bad because I made his fried German potato salad recently and it was delicious.

  6. Sheelzebub says:

    Eh. Both he and Page sound like real sweethearts. And by sweethearts, I mean, screaming douchebag assholes.

  7. PrettyAmiable says:

    Was anyone shocked when they heard? I love Food Network. He was never my favorite, but man, never would I peg him for a bigot. Till, you know, he soundly proved his bigotry.

  8. Fat Steve says:

    Sheelzebub:
    Eh.Both he and Page sound like real sweethearts.And by sweethearts, I mean, screaming douchebag assholes.

    BINGO!

    And I agree with Jadey’s apprehension about this sort of one-sided hatchet job, especially since the article said he declined to comment, and he clearly denies it on Jadey’s link. So, Sheelzebub, may I add the author of the article to your sweetheart list?

  9. Hershele Ostropoler says:

    Well … um … Page seems to attack individuals with, at least according to the reporter, non-categorist remarks. “You’re a stupid shithead and I hope you fucking die” is different in kind from homophobic remarks.

    (I missed the specific examples of misogyny, although he certainly comes off that way on television.)

    • Jill says:

      Oh and for the record Page does sound like a jerk. But I’ve never heard of him before and don’t really care about him. Guy Fieri, on the other hand, I have a long-standing hatred towards.

  10. Fat Steve says:

    AT the risk of sounding like a dumbass, I don’t get the comment about his sunglasses (also mentioned in the article linked above.) They look perfectly fine to me. The shirt is hideous, the pose is ridiculous and the hair looks like a toilet brush, but the sunglasses look to me like they are worn in the correct way.

    ????????…very confused…

    • Jill says:

      The sunglasses are worn in the correct way in the photo (they are still ugly). He often chooses to wear them on the back of his head.

  11. Fat Steve says:

    Aaaahhh…got it.

  12. Hershele Ostropoler says:

    Hershele Ostropoler: (I missed the specific examples of misogyny, although he certainly comes off that way on television.)

    Right after I commented I spotted the part about him ogling female-presenting interviewees.

  13. Erica says:

    Florence:
    You know those people who get stuck in a fashion rut, typically from whatever era where they hit their late teens and early twenties? Guy Fieri was clearly of the late Swingers era. He may also listen to Limp Bizkit and/or Squirrel Nut Zippers.

    For some reason, he reminds me of the singer from Smash Mouth. Do Not Want.

  14. TripleMused says:

    Describe and document your allegations Jill. Otherwise, I have no reason to think you are anything just a propagandist. I am not a Guy Fieri fan, but you are not actually making any sort of an argument besides: “that guy is a jackass!” who looks like a jerk, and I (Jill the Feministe) said so.

  15. Saurs says:

    (He and the dude from Smash Mouth are BFFs, or at least appear so in public. At the behest and bidding of Something Awful, dude-from-Smash-Mouth decided to stage this egg-eating contest for “charity,” or summat, and apparently Fieri begged to get in on the action by cooking the dude’s eggs. Not a euphemism, unfortunately.)

  16. Kathy says:

    Ugh. I’ve never been a fan of his (mostly because I found him supremely annoying), now I feel validated. Actually, this doesn’t surprise me at all, as I’ve always thought he was a little disrespectful and smug while piling on the charm and “chumminess.”

  17. Kathy says:

    Ugh. I’ve never been a fan of his (mostly because I found him supremely annoying), now I feel validated. Actually, this doesn’t surprise me at all, as I’ve always thought he was a little disrespectful and smug while piling on the charm and “chumminess.”

  18. Well, I’ll admit I loved the show — I’m good with bas cuisine. I loved that he got back into the kitchen and got elbow-deep in the bacon grease. But if he’s a misogynist, or an antisemite, or a homophobe, he’s a shitbag.

  19. konkonsn says:

    Awww…and I was rooting for him back when he was in the contest to become a star. Because at the time, I wanted more shows with science-y, cool type stuff rather than down-home cooking.

    *sigh* Oh well.

  20. Kara says:

    Just tell me that Alton Brown isn’t a closet asshole.

    No, wait… even if he is a closet asshole, don’t tell me. “Good Eats” is my favorite Food Network show.

    (Also, Squirrel Nut Zippers is a great band. How many other groups have a song about how everyone wants to ride the Zamboni?)

  21. zuzu says:

    Quick Guy Fieri anecdote:

    He apparently has a son in the same T-ball league as my nephew. My brother reports that Guy Fieri arrived to the T-ball game in a screaming yellow Hummer, accompanied by a guy who wore a black satin jacket that read, “CULINARY GANGSTA” on the back.

  22. Lara Emily Foley says:

    La Lubu:
    Well, not everybody can be a href=”http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1994875,00.html”>Anthony Bourdain.

    I’ve never watched his show, even though one of my city’s diners was featured. From what little I’ve seen of him, I thought he was a refreshing change of pace from the average holier-than-thou foodie types featured on the Food Network; I also figured his schtick was contrived—a mix between frathouse and I’m-not-gonna-use-the-term-in-mixed-company—totally calculated to contrast his persona with that of the snootier chefs (since there was no way he was going to carry off any version of “down-home”).

    Anyway….yes, he’s an asshole—but it’s still goddamn classist to call out his fucking hair and bowling shirts, FFS. If Ina Garten was saying the same bigoted shit, her wardrobe wouldn’t have been brought in, ykwim?

    Wait what how is it classist?

  23. I actually love his shirt.

  24. La Lubu says:

    Well, not everybody can be a href=”http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1994875,00.html”>Anthony Bourdain.

    I’ve never watched his show, even though one of my city’s diners was featured. From what little I’ve seen of him, I thought he was a refreshing change of pace from the average holier-than-thou foodie types featured on the Food Network; I also figured his schtick was contrived—a mix between frathouse and I’m-not-gonna-use-the-term-in-mixed-company—totally calculated to contrast his persona with that of the snootier chefs (since there was no way he was going to carry off any version of “down-home”).

    Anyway….yes, he’s an asshole—but it’s still goddamn classist to call out his fucking hair and bowling shirts, FFS. If Ina Garten was saying the same bigoted shit, her wardrobe wouldn’t have been brought in, ykwim?

  25. La Lubu says:

    ahh shit. fucked up the tag. can you fix that, plz?

  26. La Lubu says:

    black satin jacket that read, “CULINARY GANGSTA” on the back

    IIRC, that’s in his latest cookbook.

  27. Anonymouse says:

    There are no words to adequately describe my hatred of this dude. No words. But, up until now it was all based on a) those shirts b) sunglasses on the back of head and c) that jokey dudebro demeanor. I’m sort of relieved that I finally have a Valid Feminist Reason to hate him.

  28. zuzu says:

    La Lubu:
    black satin jacket that read, “CULINARY GANGSTA” on the back

    IIRC, that’s in his latest cookbook.

    Still douchey.

    Anthony Bourdain? Also douchey. In a completely different way, of course.

  29. This bums me out, as his cooking show–Guy’s Big Bites–is actually excellent from the standpoint of actually showing people how to really cook and explaining the technical reasons behind how things are done. He also really does the prep work and cooking and shows the real food as he prepared it, not just waving his hands around and then bringing out fully prepared stuff someone else made (like Emeril Lagasse).

  30. Greg says:

    A friend of mine from college was a contestant on the show he won. So I’m two degrees away from him.

    Yes, I would like a cookie. Why do you ask?

  31. Jadey says:

    Anonymouse:
    There are no words to adequately describe my hatred of this dude. No words. But, up until now it was all based on a) those shirts b) sunglasses on the back of head and c) that jokey dudebro demeanor. I’m sort of relieved that I finally have a Valid Feminist Reason to hate him.

    Okay, so this is what I’m having some trouble with (sorry to use you as an example, Anonymouse, but this said it the most clearly!): is the certainty about Fiere’s bigotry based solely on the fact that he was already perceived as a tasteless asshole? Because other than this article, which I reiterate comes off as a very unreliable bit of journalism, I haven’t seen any other reference to reports of bigoted behaviour by him. It makes me uncomfortable that easy acceptance of a fairly serious charge against a person would be so closely tied to people disliking something as irrelevant as his fashion sense and his annoying demeanour* – it seems reflective of people denying a fairly serious charge against someone on the basis of his likeability and clean personal presentation (e.g., “Oh, he wouldn’t do that – he’s such a nice boy!”). I mean, no one has to like Fiere, but his sunglasses don’t make him more likely to be a sexist, anti-semitic homophobe.

    *Personally, I don’t find him annoying, but I can understand people who would. But I can also understand people who would find me annoying and my fashion sense horrifying to behold, and it’s bothersome that this could be used as evidence of my bigotry. If someone it to be held accountable, it should be for things they have done, not their style of dress.

  32. One of the sources for the claim that Fieri is homophobic was contacted again and reiterated in no uncertain terms the basis for the claim:

    “As for the specific allegations about Fieri, ace fact-checker Gregory Pratt called back our second source for the anecdote about gay guests, Kari Kloster. She offered more details about what it was like to break the news of a guest’s gayness to Fieri:”

    http://blogs.citypages.com/food/2011/10/guy_fieri_jesse_derris_city_pages.php

  33. Hershele Ostropoler says:

    Thomas MacAulay Millar: Well, I’ll admit I loved the show — I’m good with bas cuisine.

    Bas cuisine is great. Guy Fieri either is an obnoxious douche or unaccountably feels the need to portray one on television, and this article leads me to suspect the former.

  34. Jadey says:

    Comrade PhysioProf:
    One of the sources for the claim that Fieri is homophobic was contacted again and reiterated in no uncertain terms the basis for the claim:

    “As for the specific allegations about Fieri, ace fact-checker Gregory Pratt called back our second source for the anecdote about gay guests, Kari Kloster. She offered more details about what it was like to break the news of a guest’s gayness to Fieri:”

    http://blogs.citypages.com/food/2011/10/guy_fieri_jesse_derris_city_pages.php

    Thanks for the additional source.

    • Jill says:

      Describe and document your allegations Jill. Otherwise, I have no reason to think you are anything just a propagandist. I am not a Guy Fieri fan, but you are not actually making any sort of an argument besides: “that guy is a jackass!” who looks like a jerk, and I (Jill the Feministe) said so.

      Do you understand the concept of a “hyperlink”? Click it.

    • Jill says:

      Anyway….yes, he’s an asshole—but it’s still goddamn classist to call out his fucking hair and bowling shirts, FFS.

      …why is it classist? I’m not trying to be intentionally ignorant here. Where I grew up (Seattle, very mixed-class high school, upper-middle-class neighborhood) that aesthetic isn’t at all tied to being lower-class (or any particular class that I can think of?). It’s more of a cultural thing — listening to Smashmouth and whatnot, and being a Dudebro with cool-guy hair.

      If I’m missing something, I apologize. I hadn’t realized there were negative class connotations there. To me, it just reflects really bad taste in music.

  35. cookies says:

    This thread isn’t nearly as entertaining as the little meltdown at Shakesville. Please rectify that. The charges of classism are a nice touch.

  36. zuzu says:

    cookies:
    This thread isn’t nearly as entertaining as the little meltdown at Shakesville.Please rectify that.The charges of classism are a nice touch.

    THIS BLOG IS NOT A SAFE SPACE!!!!!!!!!!

  37. Jackie says:

    Ladeeda:
    Huh. I’ve actually defended him before because I found him sort of jolly and harmless. Guess I was wrong.

    Don’t worry I thought the same thing. Seems they do a really good job of reigning him in for Drivers Diners and Dives.

  38. Fat Steve says:

    Describe and document your allegations Jill. Otherwise, I have no reason to think you are anything just a propagandist. I am not a Guy Fieri fan, but you are not actually making any sort of an argument besides: “that guy is a jackass!” who looks like a jerk, and I (Jill the Feministe) said so.

    Jill: Do you understand the concept of a “hyperlink”? Click it.

    Amazed you dignified this with an answer.

  39. Fat Steve says:

    Jill: …why is it classist? I’m not trying to be intentionally ignorant here. Where I grew up (Seattle, very mixed-class high school, upper-middle-class neighborhood) that aesthetic isn’t at all tied to being lower-class (or any particular class that I can think of?). It’s more of a cultural thing — listening to Smashmouth and whatnot, and being a Dudebro with cool-guy hair.

    If I’m missing something, I apologize. I hadn’t realized there were negative class connotations there. To me, it just reflects really bad taste in music.

    Will you please stop being so classist to multi-millionaire Guy Fieri?

  40. Bridget says:

    Hmm, I’ve never seen his show but once I went out to breakfast with a friend and they were filming it at the restaurant. They asked if we agreed to be filmed, and I opted out because a)the only vegan option they would let me order was oatmeal, and whatever, I can make that at home*, and b)I’d just come from the gym and was a bit embarrassed about my appearance.

    They filmed at the table next to us and the waitress had to bring the poor folks their food like 5 times so they could get the shot right…I’m sure it was cold by the time they ate it.

    *This restaurant has a few vegan options but for some reason oatmeal was the only one they wanted shown on TV. Yeah, I have no idea.

  41. tinfoil hattie says:

    Aaah, Shakesville. Criticizing a misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semite by saying, “Fieri also can’t keep his eyes off any tits in the room … ” (emphasis mine)

    As for Fieri, I wish I could say I am shocked when I find out that privileged white dudebros are also complete jerks, but I never am.

  42. Skateaway says:

    Fat Steve: Will you please stop being so classist to multi-millionaire Guy Fieri?

    While I believe Jill when she says her criticisms of Guy Fieri aren’t classist, class is based on a lot more than current income. One could easily, for example, spout a lot of classist bullshit about wealthy country singers or NASCAR drivers or hip-hop artists (mixed with racism, yay!) or what-have-you. Income is only one class marker.

  43. FashionablyEvil says:

    Aaah, Shakesville. Criticizing a misogynist, homophobic, anti-Semite by saying, “Fieri also can’t keep his eyes off any tits in the room … ” (emphasis mine)

    In fairness to Shakesville (and it pains me to write that), in the article, Page says, “Anytime any woman mentioned ‘cream,’ Guy went into a sexual riff. When cutting the show, you had to tell the editors to watch Guy’s eye line, because it’s always on breasts.”

  44. Lara Emily Foley says:

    Still trying to understand how saying anything bad about Guy’s shirt and hair is classist.

  45. Hershele Ostropoler says:

    As a Jew, I really don’t see his antisemitism as documented in the article as being any worse than what I assume to be society’s baseline (I’m a lifelong New Yorker, I figure there’s slightly less here than in parts of the country where it’s easier to go through your day without encountering any actual Jews).

    Not that “no worse than other people” makes it okay, but it’s the difference between believing in the Four Humours theory of disease when everyone else does too, and being the lone germ theory denialist in the vicinity.

    Jadey: is the certainty about Fiere’s bigotry based solely on the fact that he was already perceived as a tasteless asshole?

    For me it’s a particular variety of tasteless assholery that tends to occur in people with sexist-homophobic views. It’s not really about his clothes per se, he comes off as having a Thing about masculinity.

    Fat Steve: Will you please stop being so classist to multi-millionaire Guy Fieri?

    Money demonstrates class, I’m not sure it determines or defines it.

  46. Donna L says:

    FashionablyEvil: In fairness to Shakesville (and it pains me to write that),

    I didn’t know it was a competition. You and Hattie are being ridiculous.

    • Jill says:

      So let’s direct the conversation away from Shakesville. I know we all have our own preferences when it comes to comment sections and blog cultures (and I will admit that while I read the posts at Shakesville I don’t engage in the comments), but the writers at Shakesville do great work, and insulting them here isn’t appropriate.

  47. Miriam says:

    One of my good friends once described this guy as “Bleachblonde McChinpubes.”

  48. Azeylea M. says:

    Not to speak for La Lubu, but it’s my understanding that in many parts of the U.S., Fieri’s manner of dressing and styling himself are (working)class signifiers.

  49. TripleMused says:

    I clicked. Judgment is deciding about who is telling the truth. One bitter guy’s stories? Without even the “it was all a misunderstanding” from the Food Network PR dipwads? Thanks for the education on the internet, though.

  50. tinfoil hattie says:

    I object to a feminist blog referring to breasts as “tits.”

    I also can’t stand men who a) contintinually “sneak” looks at women’s breasts (as though the breasts will suddenly, magically pop out from underneath their covering); and b) pretend we don’t know they’re doing it.

  51. Fat Steve says:

    Azeylea M.:
    Not to speak for La Lubu, but it’s my understanding that in many parts of the U.S., Fieri’s manner of dressing and styling himself are (working)class signifiers.

    Oakley sunglasses, designer shirts, Rolex watch, salon haircut. What that guy is wearing costs more than both my parents made in a month.

  52. EG says:

    I object to a feminist blog referring to breasts as “tits.”

    Why?

  53. Lara Emily Foley says:

    Azeylea M.:
    Not to speak for La Lubu, but it’s my understanding that in many parts of the U.S., Fieri’s manner of dressing and styling himself are (working)class signifiers.

    His expensive clothes, sunglasses and immaculately spiked hair are working class signifiers? Really? On what planet?

  54. Lara Emily Foley says:

    Not to mention expensive watches and jewelery

  55. Fat Steve says:

    tinfoil hattie:
    I object to a feminist blog referring to breasts as “tits.”

    I also can’t stand men who a) contintinually “sneak” looks at women’s breasts (as though the breasts will suddenly, magically pop out from underneath their covering); and b) pretend we don’t know they’re doing it.

    What do you think the sunglasses are for?

  56. igglanova says:

    What’s wrong with ‘tits’? I love ‘tits’! So much more appropriately casual than ‘breasts’ in general conversation and with none of the childish silliness of saying ‘boobs’ all the time.

  57. DonnaL says:

    That post was by Deeky, right? I took it as his deliberately speaking crudely from Fieri’s apparent viewpoint, since Deeky isn’t really a “tits” kind of guy.

  58. Fat Steve says:

    igglanova:
    What’s wrong with ‘tits’? I love ‘tits’!So much more appropriately casual than ‘breasts’ in general conversation and with none of the childish silliness of saying ‘boobs’ all the time.

    I love the word boobs. It’s the only word that looks like the thing it means.

  59. Fat Steve says:

    Hershele Ostropoler: Money demonstrates class, I’m not sure it determines or defines it.

    If you live in the US, you have that 100% wrong. Money does not demonstrate class, it determines and defines it. The middle class is solely based on income, hence the term ‘middle class tax cuts.’

  60. tinfoil hattie says:

    “Tits” is a casually used, gendered term used to reduce women to our body parts, as usual. “Breasts” is as appropriate a term for casual conversation as “fingers” or “elbow.”

    @ Fat Steve, good point & LOL about the sunglasses!

  61. igglanova says:

    Aw come on, I don’t mean ‘appropriate’ as in ‘acceptable in public and ABSOLUTELY not scandalous.’ Just that ‘breasts’ sounds overly formal / clinical when you’re just shootin’ the shit with a bunch of your friends. Must be a cultural thing. If I made an effort to never refer to my tits as tits anymore it would feel affected and silly.

    How can the word ‘tits’ reduce women to their body parts when you are specifically referencing these body parts? The words ‘breasts’ and ‘boobs’, etc., do this to the exact same degree.

  62. whatsername says:

    Oh wow…. OK… Well, I’ll just go for it I guess?

    I worked for Guy Fieri before he was famous. My husband has worked for him on and off before and after he was famous for something like 6 years all together.

    He was always a good boss. He acts exactly like he does on TV. Don’t change anything. The big rings, the hair, the sunglasses… The year before I was working for him it was a mullet until he got sick of being known as “the guy with the mullet” (“the guy with the blonde spiked hair” is apparently better)… His restaurants were some of the best to work at in my hubs’ career. Johnny Garlic’s more than Tex Wasabi’s.

    Anyway… In the years between us that we worked for him none of the things mentioned in the article ever showed themselves. The hubs was a manager for him too and even knows his parents and all that, and there was never any of that stuff going on that either of us saw. Doesn’t mean it’s not possible. But it certainly comes as a surprise to me to read all that (except maybe the inappropriate jokes, I could see that).

    Fame can change people obviously but hubs has worked for him since he “hit it big” and he was still exactly the same then. Doesn’t mean he has to be now I guess but that’s our experience…

    Guy is not a “nice guy” he can be vindictive and a jerk sometimes. So don’t get me wrong I’m really uncomfortable with being some sort of apologist for him but the whole article rubbed me wrong. I agree with Jadey that it stinks of tabloid journalism simply in the way it’s written and I think Page sounds like the exact sort of dude who would try and ruin someone’s career over a falling out. I mean, you’ll notice Guy isn’t writing angry emails because of adjective choices…

    I’m not here to change anyone’s minds or anything but I thought some might be interested in at least weighing my experiences with all the rest of this info.

  63. whatsername says:

    Not that I find the NYP to be exactly reputable but since this appears to be the level of journalism we’re going to look too this story seemed worth sharing: http://www.nypost.com/p/entertainment/tv/ex_coworker_calls_fieri_lewd_and_cPz9yxO9WoCkwxLUHc9WlL

    Also wanted to agree to zuzu’s comment, yep, I’ve seen that hummer parked outside work when picking the husband up many times. THAT story right there is Guy all over.

  64. ellid says:

    What I find fascinating is how the original thread over on the City Pages basically turned into a gunfight between two sets of sockpuppets.

  65. FashionablyEvil says:

    Not to speak for La Lubu, but it’s my understanding that in many parts of the U.S., Fieri’s manner of dressing and styling himself are (working)class signifiers.

    I see the complaints about classism as more about the fact that he’s nouveau riche (or is perceived as such). His conspicuous consumption (expensive sunglasses, watch, ostentatious car, somewhat ridiculous embroidered satin jacket) indicates that he’s not old money. Not really any different than the 1920s folks claiming that the “undesirables are penetrating everywhere.”

  66. La Lubu says:

    …why is it classist?

    Bowling shirts, the wraparound sunglasses, baggy short pants, lots of product in the hair (for those who have a lot of hair; shaving the head if a guy is balding)….those are strictly coded working class where I come from. The rich kids simply don’t dress like this where I’m from (also; class is heavily ethnicized as well as racialized around here; Italian last names automatically mark a person as working class even if their family has been nouveau riche for a generation or two….you wouldn’t see a dude like Guy Fieri on the country-club golf courses around here, even if he could afford it…he wouldn’t be welcome as a member no matter how he “cleaned up”). That Guy Fieri can afford a Rolex now doesn’t erase his class background. And that bowling shirt with the flames isn’t “expensive”—it’s off-the-rack at Target and Pennys (at least, I’ve seen shirts that look just like that one at plain old department stores).

    I’d also like to remind folks that “working class” and “poor” are not synonymous. Class discussions on the Internet are really weird. “Middle class” is reified into suburban McMansion, European car in the driveway (in the US, that is…here, European cars cost as much as the average rust belt house)……and “working class” is morphed into can’t afford to eat on a daily basis. It’s like Internetland doesn’t have carpenters, teachers, electricians, firefighters….WTF?

    And look, when your last name is Fieri, folks are going to make mob jokes. It comes with the territory. Being who I am and where I come from (yep, heard mob jokes all my life too), I figured he was having some fun with it—taking anger at the ignorance and defusing it with humor (“culinary gangster”). I do this too—-all day, everyday. My jobsite has at least as much ballbusting as Fieri’s. It’s a way of saying, “fuck you” to people who deserve it.

    Yes. It’s classist. The same way it’s classist when people (Nice White People™) look at me and make certain assumptions (oh, like being at one of my daughter’s IEP meetings…I used the word “pathologize” and one young teacher stage-whispered to another, “My, that’s a big word.” I set my eyes, looked at her, and said evenly, “yes, that is a big word” and kept it moving. figured that would make my point).

    Jadey said it better above: “It makes me uncomfortable that easy acceptance of a fairly serious charge against a person would be so closely tied to people disliking something as irrelevant as his fashion sense and his annoying demeanour* – it seems reflective of people denying a fairly serious charge against someone on the basis of his likeability and clean personal presentation (e.g., “Oh, he wouldn’t do that – he’s such a nice boy!”). I mean, no one has to like Fiere, but his sunglasses don’t make him more likely to be a sexist, anti-semitic homophobe.”

    Last part bolded for the truth. His fashion is irrelevant. His actions aren’t. It’s that simple.

  67. William says:

    “Tits” is a casually used, gendered term used to reduce women to our body parts, as usual. “Breasts” is as appropriate a term for casual conversation as “fingers” or “elbow.”

    I think a pretty good argument could be made that a guy who wears sunglasses because he cannot avoid staring at any breasts in his field of view isn’t looking at women’s breasts so much as looking at an object (both in the feminist and psychoanalytic sense). That kind of compulsive staring does reduce women to body parts, you’re absolutely right. Phrasing that staring as “Fieri also can’t keep his eyes off any tits in the room…” connotes the specific kind of gaze involved with a clarity that a more clinical or critical description would lack for a broader audience.

  68. Jadey says:

    La Lubu: And look, when your last name is Fieri, folks are going to make mob jokes.

    It should probably be noted that “Fieri” isn’t his given name – according to Wikipedia, he changed it from “Ferry”. I’m not sure if he made it up or it was an old family name that got Anglicized, or whathaveyou.

    (I also do not know why my brain insisted on misspelling it all yesterday!)

  69. Hershele Ostropoler says:

    FashionablyEvil: I see the complaints about classism as more about the fact that he’s nouveau riche (or is perceived as such).

    La Lubu: Bowling shirts, the wraparound sunglasses, baggy short pants, lots of product in the hair (for those who have a lot of hair; shaving the head if a guy is balding)….those are strictly coded working class where I come from. The rich kids simply don’t dress like this where I’m from (also; class is heavily ethnicized as well as racialized around here; Italian last names automatically mark a person as working class even if their family has been nouveau riche for a generation or two….you wouldn’t see a dude like Guy Fieri on the country-club golf courses around here, even if he could afford it…he wouldn’t be welcome as a member no matter how he “cleaned up”). That Guy Fieri can afford a Rolex now doesn’t erase his class background.

    Fat Steve, this is what I was trying to get at, though obviously lacking in vocabulary. Having lots of money — and certainly wearing expensive clothes — doesn’t automatically bring class privilege along with it in all areas.

    Jadey: It makes me uncomfortable that easy acceptance of a fairly serious charge against a person would be so closely tied to people disliking something as irrelevant as his fashion sense and his annoying demeanour

    I agree with you on fashion sense, but annoying demeanor is totally if not automatically relevant. There’s a certain personality type that expresses itself in a particular type of annoyingness and also homophobia-misogyny (or, if you prefer, a particular type of annoyingness that includes homophobia-misogyny).

  70. What La Lubu said. If we’re interested in social justice, the issues are the allegations of homophobia, antisemitism and sexism. The rest is style critique, class-laden and subjective.

  71. EG says:

    “Tits” is a casually used, gendered term used to reduce women to our body parts, as usual.

    Meh. I don’t see it. It is casually used, of course, because it’s slang. I don’t see how it reduces us to our body parts.

    Stylistically, he looks like kind of a douchey frat boy to me.

  72. igglanova says:

    Are we really going to make the argument that it is oppressive to hate someone’s fashion sense because it is, in one part of the US, associated with a working class aesthetic? Not every ugly thing comes out of the privileged classes.

    For what it’s worth, the only people I remember wearing that kind of crap were middle-class high school douchebags.

  73. Meh says:

    Reads like a hit piece rather than real journalism.

  74. Esti says:

    Yes, disliking his shirts and sunglasses are subjective style critiques and do not mean that he is sexist or homophobic or whatever else. But that doesn’t mean that it’s classist to call his shirts and sunglasses ugly. Are we seriously at a point where people can’t express opinions about fashion without being called out for it?

    Look, some clothing or hair styles are very connected to class or race or what have you — if Jill had said that do-rags are stupid, or that all those poor people in their coveralls on their way to work are fashion victims, that would be one thing. But as many people have already pointed out, bright flame patterned shirts, wrap around shades, and bleached spiky hair are not signifiers of race or class. And even if, where you live those things tend to be associated with either working class or nouveau riche people (which, again, is certainly not true all over the place — I’m someone else who grew up in an area where you were much more likely to see those styles on someone driving a souped up BMW to high school than on people with less/no money), that doesn’t make dislike of those styles classist. Unless what you mean by “classist” is just “dislike of something that tends to be more true of working class people than wealthy people.” Which is… ridiculous. And really diminishes actual classism.

  75. I think there’s a significant difference between noting that some things involve class dynamics and calling people out for classism. The first is not in any way an accusation unless someone reads one in.

  76. La Lubu says:

    No, the argument is that “fashion” is totally subjective, and thus irrelevant. Most of the critiques of Guy Fieri (in general, not necessarily on this thread) basically amount to “eew! He’s chubby and has tattoos and bleaches his hair and uses too much gel and wears low-end department store clothes!”……all of which is irrelevant. Long before this article came out, when the only issue was “can he cook or not”…..too many “foodies” thought he was ruining the brand by looking like an average, everyday guy. He didn’t look *respectable*.

    And I know some folks will justify that attitude by pointing to the stereotype that people who look like Guy Fieri are supposedly more bigoted than the Average Television White Guy™ (who is supposed to look more like Alton Brown). And that’s a myth. Men who look like Alton Brown are just as likely to be bigoted as men who look like Guy Fieri.

    Critiquing behavior is relevant. Critiquing appearance is not.

  77. zuzu says:

    La Lubu:
    No, the argument is that “fashion” is totally subjective, and thus irrelevant. Most of the critiques of Guy Fieri (in general, not necessarily on this thread) basically amount to “eew! He’s chubby and has tattoos and bleaches his hair and uses too much gel and wears low-end department store clothes!”……all of which is irrelevant.

    Too much gel on a guy preparing my food? Not irrelevant. It grosses me out just like it grosses me out that Paula Deen never takes off her rings while she’s cooking.

  78. La Lubu says:

    Yeah, but with that amount of product in his hair, there’s a helluva lot less chance that wayward hairs are going to make their way into the food. Theoretically….in reality, everybody in a commercial kitchen is going to have a hairnet or hat on their heads. I’m just calling bullshit on the idea that critique of fashion—anyone’s fashion—is anything more than “not our kind, dear™”.

  79. EG says:

    I’m just calling bullshit on the idea that critique of fashion—anyone’s fashion—is anything more than “not our kind, dear™”.

    I think that’s a rather extreme view–that passing any aesthetic judgment on how somebody decorates themselves is only ever “not our kind.” It is often that, or that is often in the mix…but also, sometimes people find things ugly. The first people I saw wearing flip-flops around and about as though those things were real shoes were young white students at a private college, a group I once belonged to, and not so long ago when I first saw this, either. Nonetheless, I am of the opinion that flip-flops are not shoes, and they are ugly and stupid and I don’t want to see your feet, thank you. There may be some class resentment mixed in, as the kids I first saw wearing these were of considerably more monied and privileged backgrounds than I am, but I don’t think that’s the whole story there, either.

  80. La Lubu says:

    Sure. But what people find ugly or attractive is based in their background. I mean, what other explanation is there for Jill thinking that empire waist dresses are attractive, when “objectively”, they are an almost universally unflattering silhouette for adult women? But they are coded as “classy” or “sophisticated”.

    (There’s an essay by Maria Laurino in her book, “Were You Always an Italian?” On the differences between the northern-Italian aesthetic (Armani) and the southern-Italian and Sicilian aesthetic (Dolce & Gabbana) that touched on the class and regional codes in clothing and how the fashion industry plays on those pre-existing messages while appropriating styles.)

  81. Off White says:

    I’m with La Lubu, the fashion is irrelevant. We’re born naked, after that its all drag. Its not what we look like that matters, its how we act and treat others. I’m unfamiliar with the man in question, and I really have no way to know whether the piece written about him is true, but the part about how he looks and dresses struck me as unconsidered and kind of offensive, in a very shallow way. Is he a homophobic bigot? Now, that’s the crux of the biscuit, isn’t it?

  82. Fat Steve says:

    Based on numerous comments I can’t see how there could be many Mayflower blue-bloods on this site, and I suspect most, like me, are or have known the first member of their family who migrated to this county.

    I think what people are objecting to about Fieri’s stylistic choices are that they are ‘loud’, which to me does not signify working class, it signifies attention seeking. Everything about him SCREAMS ‘look at me!!!!! LOOK AT MEEEEE!!!!!’ Which is fine, but some people are going to respond with ‘ok, you look like a dickhead.’

  83. Miku says:

    I don’t have anything to really add, but I totally agree with La Lubu and others on the classism. No one wants to burn Jill at the stakes for making such remarks, it’s just being noted. No need to get so defensive that you ostracise others from the comments…

  84. Florence says:

    Okay, okay, I concede that my fashion comments are so much snark. Honestly, I see the guy and see a total narcissist, and the funny thing about narcissism is that it’s often ill-placed.

    BUT I DO JUDGE YOU FOR WEARING SUNGLASSES ON THE BACK OF YOUR HEAD.

  85. zuzu says:

    I might agree that his look would be off-limits for criticism if he were Joe Schmoe, but he’s a TV personality, and this is his costume, even if it’s a version of what he’s always worn. People choose costumes to convey a message, and he’s pretty clearly sending a message that he wants to be seen as loud and attention-grabbing and a thorough dudebro.

    I’m really not down with the idea that we can’t critique anyone’s fashion choices when they’re in the public eye and when they have a carefully crafted image. I do, however, absolutely agree that his look is not related to, or an indication of, any antisemitism, homophobia or misogyny on his part.

  86. Bitter Scribe says:

    Not to be a concern troll, but that Page guy doesn’t sure doesn’t seem like any prize package himself. This looks to me like a case of one overpaid asshole sniping at another, and who cares.

  87. There’s nothing wrong with critique of fashion choices, and recognizing that clothes have class implications doesn’t foreclose a discussion of taste, it informs it.

    It’s just that that’s a very separate issue from whether he’s a bigot. The only thing I am really arguing against is the notion that the one has any bearing on the other.

  88. Fat Steve says:

    Thomas MacAulay Millar:
    There’s nothing wrong with critique of fashion choices, and recognizing that clothes have class implications doesn’t foreclose a discussion of taste, it informs it.

    It’s just that that’s a very separate issue from whether he’s a bigot.The only thing I am really arguing against is the notion that the one has any bearing on the other.

    Well, perhaps it’s because the article offers such weak proof of his bigotry that people are criticizing the thing we can actually see.

  89. EG says:

    But what people find ugly or attractive is based in their background. I mean, what other explanation is there for Jill thinking that empire waist dresses are attractive, when “objectively”, they are an almost universally unflattering silhouette for adult women?

    I’ve always thought the empire waist was universally flattering, objectively speaking. They work on beanpole me, softening my sharper edges, and they work on my more rotund or even pregnant friends, with a nice drapey effect.

    That said, obviously background has a big influence on what people find ugly or attractive; what I objected to was that aesthetic judgment was based on nothing other than class division.

  90. igglanova says:

    Oh good grief, nobody thinks his fashion sense is related to his stupid views. Clearly a direly serious post, this was.

  91. Kristen J. says:

    EG: I’ve always thought the empire waist was universally flattering, objectively speaking.They work on beanpole me, softening my sharper edges, and they work on my more rotund or even pregnant friends, with a nice drapey effect.

    That said, obviously background has a big influence on what people find ugly or attractive; what I objected to was that aesthetic judgment was based on nothing other than class division.

    Imagine an empire waist on a large breasted person…. It tends to communicate: ENORMOUS BOOBS HERE. Which is rarely something I’m attempting to communicate.

  92. EG says:

    I guess my large-boobed friends are just flashy ladies!

  93. La Lubu says:

    What Kristen J. said. Good Maude are empire waists unflattering—besides the ENORMOUS BOOBS HERE, they make most women look shapeless and frumpy.

  94. Florence says:

    La Lubu: Good Maude are empire waists unflattering—besides the ENORMOUS BOOBS HERE, they make most women look shapeless and frumpy.

    They make me look like I’m hiding pregnancy. Especially the dresses.

  95. Sheelzebub says:

    They make me look like I actually have boobies, so I do kinda love them but they aren’t for everyone.

  96. Kristen J. says:

    EG:
    I guess my large-boobed friends are just flashy ladies!

    Hey, when I was signaling boob availability they were an excellent. ;)

  97. William says:

    I think what people are objecting to about Fieri’s stylistic choices are that they are ‘loud’, which to me does not signify working class, it signifies attention seeking. Everything about him SCREAMS ‘look at me!!!!! LOOK AT MEEEEE!!!!!’ Which is fine, but some people are going to respond with ‘ok, you look like a dickhead.’

    Except…the cultural signs go deeper than “loud.” Maybe it isn’t the same everywhere, but in working class Chicago “loud” isn’t just attention seeking but attention seeking in a very specific way. Its seen as clownish, as something the lower classes do to mimic what they believe to be the behaviors of the rich. Its animal prints on your couch and expensive marble statues in your front yard. Its the conspicuous consumption of immigran, be they Polish, Greek, Italian, Puerto Rican, or Mexican. “Loud” is often code for “spending money to show you have money in ways that more established ethnic groups find distasteful.” A custom lowrider might cost a hell of a lot of money to build, but no one is going to confuse it for an Aston Martin.

  98. La Lubu says:

    “Loud” is often code for “spending money to show you have money in ways that more established ethnic groups find distasteful.”

    This, and also, “loud” means being visible when you’re supposed to be invisible; present when you’re supposed to be absent. Showing pride in your heritage when you’re supposed to be whitewashing yourself (why haven’t you assimilated yet?). “Loud” is another rendering of “not our kind, dear™”.

    (seriously. think about that butt-fugly hat of Princess Beatrice—the one that garnered a helluva lotta comments on this blog. Of the many descriptors of that fine example of WTF, “loud” wasn’t one of them….despite the whole world standing in solid agreement that it was the ugliest hat in recorded history.)

  99. Fat Steve says:

    La Lubu: (seriously. think about that butt-fugly hat of Princess Beatrice—the one that garnered a helluva lotta comments on this blog. Of the many descriptors of that fine example of WTF, “loud” wasn’t one of them….despite the whole world standing in solid agreement that it was the ugliest hat in recorded history.)

    Well, I dont think it was ugly per se, as it resembled a woman’s reproductive system, something which is quite beautiful. I think loud should have been used, and well, you are right to point out if it wasn’t. (I didn’t read that post, so I assume you’re right, apologies if anyone did call it ‘loud’.)

  100. Fat Steve says:

    William: Except…the cultural signs go deeper than “loud.” Maybe it isn’t the same everywhere, but in working class Chicago “loud” isn’t just attention seeking but attention seeking in a very specific way. Its seen as clownish, as something the lower classes do to mimic what they believe to be the behaviors of the rich.

    Yes, but the subject in question here is not mimicking the rich, he is the rich.

    Its animal prints on your couch and expensive marble statues in your front yard. Its the conspicuous consumption of immigran, be they Polish, Greek, Italian, Puerto Rican, or Mexican.

    I am currently wearing purple leopardskin sneakers and a purple leopardskin belt, a purple shirt, and purple hat (with black ‘skinny jeans,’ although they are clearly faulty because I still look fat.) Plus I have a leopardskin chair and ottoman, a pair of zebra skin print shoes, and I though I am a 2nd generation USian on my mother’s side, I’m of an ethnic group you didn’t mention. I have never been told I look ‘loud’ (and believe me, my wife would tell me,) so I disagree with you on animal print being a signifier of anything.

    “Loud” is often code for “spending money to show you have money in ways that more established ethnic groups find distasteful.” A custom lowrider might cost a hell of a lot of money to build, but no one is going to confuse it for an Aston Martin.

    You may be right that “Loud” is often code for “spending money to show you have money in ways that more established ethnic groups find distasteful,” but I am not a member of one of those groups, so can’t speak for them. However, I find spending money to show you have money in ANY way distasteful. Not only is it distasteful but it’s wasteful and also extremely insensitive to people who don’t have that kind of money, especially in these economic times. I have much more respect for someone with a passion for cars who builds a custom low-rider because they have completed a labor of love than someone who buys an Aston Martin just to park it in their driveway to impress the neighbors.

  101. EG says:

    I am currently wearing purple leopardskin sneakers and a purple leopardskin belt, a purple shirt, and purple hat (with black ‘skinny jeans,’ although they are clearly faulty because I still look fat.)

    You are awesome. That is all.

  102. FashionablyEvil says:

    Virginia Postrel wrote a piece for the Atlantic a few years back that summarizes social science research on consumption, luxury goods, and affluence.

  103. Lara Emily Foley says:

    whatsername: Haha I know this one actually.Wiki is wrong, Fieri IS his last name.However, according to his mother, it is traditionally pronounced “fairy” and so, yes, he pronounces it “fee-airy” instead now and has since he was young.Anyway, fun fact..?

    Just for curiosity what is your source on this?

    I’ve seen countless articles that refer to him as being born Guy Ferry, and cite him saying he changed it to honour is grandfather. I know false information gets around easily, but this is popping u[ again and again and I’ve seen no sources that explicitly say that they are false.

  104. Lara Emily Foley says:

    But you know what never mind it sounds like what happened is if anything his Grandfather changed his own name when he came to America to be more anglo and Guy just returned his name back to it’s original form.

    So it’s honestly irrelevant if he changed it or not.

  105. Safiya Outlines says:

    La Lubu:
    “Loud” is often code for “spending money to show you have money in ways that more established ethnic groups find distasteful.”

    This, and also, “loud” means being visible when you’re supposed to be invisible; present when you’re supposed to be absent. Showing pride in your heritage when you’re supposed to be whitewashing yourself (why haven’t you assimilated yet?). “Loud” is another rendering of “not our kind, dear™”.

    (seriously. think about that butt-fugly hat of Princess Beatrice—the one that garnered a helluva lotta comments on this blog. Of the many descriptors of that fine example of WTF, “loud” wasn’t one of them….despite the whole world standing in solid agreement that it was the ugliest hat in recorded history.)

    Ah, but if you are posh, you can be eccentric. If you are not posh then you will either have your taste condemned or your mental health questioned.

  106. whatsername says:

    Jadey: It should probably be noted that “Fieri” isn’t his given name – according to Wikipedia, he changed it from “Ferry”. I’m not sure if he made it up or it was an old family name that got Anglicized, or whathaveyou.

    (I also do not know why my brain insisted on misspelling it all yesterday!)

    Haha I know this one actually. Wiki is wrong, Fieri IS his last name. However, according to his mother, it is traditionally pronounced “fairy” and so, yes, he pronounces it “fee-airy” instead now and has since he was young. Anyway, fun fact..?

  107. Jadey says:

    whatsername: Haha I know this one actually.Wiki is wrong, Fieri IS his last name.However, according to his mother, it is traditionally pronounced “fairy” and so, yes, he pronounces it “fee-airy” instead now and has since he was young.Anyway, fun fact..?

    Oh, good catch! Damn you, collective knowledge resource!

  108. evil fizz says:

    (seriously. think about that butt-fugly hat of Princess Beatrice—the one that garnered a helluva lotta comments on this blog. Of the many descriptors of that fine example of WTF, “loud” wasn’t one of them….despite the whole world standing in solid agreement that it was the ugliest hat in recorded history.)

    Well, it was beige. Notwithstanding, I think part of the point was that “Well, they’re the royals. They are expected to wear ridiculous hats. It’s a part of their identity.” But the royals get a pass on it for reasons which are (at core) classist. It’s apparently entitled to context in a way that Guy Fieri is not.

    Regarding the original piece: Page and Fieri both come off as flaming jackasses whose egos are threatening to stage a coup.

  109. Junaid says:

    It seems like the entire accusation is based on a co-worker who was kicked off the show Guy was in.

    Guy’s rep says the allegations are baseless.

    I believe that’s reasonable doubt, Jill. Didn’t they teach you that in law school?

    • Jill says:

      I believe that’s reasonable doubt, Jill. Didn’t they teach you that in law school?

      They did! I also learned in fifth-grade civics class that the concept of “reasonable doubt” is one used in criminal trials, and not on blog posts. I guess you were absent that day?

  110. Kristen J. says:

    Junaid:
    I believe that’s reasonable doubt, Jill. Didn’t they teach you that in law school?

    OMIGOD! Jill is the criminal justice system?!!? I had NO idea. Jill, you should apologize immediately. Guy Fieri is going to prison FOREVER and its ALL YOUR FAULT because you judge people on the internet.

  111. EG says:

    Yes, what is the sentence for the crime of “being a racist, sexist douchbag,” these days?

  112. Fat Steve says:

    Junaid:
    It seems like the entire accusation is based on a co-worker who was kicked off the show Guy was in.

    Guy’s rep says the allegations are baseless.

    I believe that’s reasonable doubt, Jill. Didn’t they teach you that in law school?

    The accusations were made by two separate people who said they witnessed this behavior. The defense was made by someone who earns his living off of Guy Fieri. That is about as unreasonable as doubt gets.

  113. Lara Emily Foley says:

    whatsername: h

    Coolio. Yeah I realized right after that my challenge was irrelevant anyway but thanks for the source reveal, was just curious :)

  114. whatsername says:

    Lara Emily Foley:
    Butyou know what never mind it sounds like what happened is if anything his Grandfather changed his own name when he came to America to be more anglo and Guy just returned his name back to it’s original form.

    Yep you got it. :) My source is my husband. Guy’s mom told him (my husband) that fact some time back (Guy’s parents both came in and did work on the restaurants from time to time and took a shine to my hubs).

    I didn’t know the name had ever been anglicized (though that’s no great surprise really) but what she had said is that the pronunciation of it is “ferry/fairy” and that Guy purposefully pronounces it differently, which she found quite amusing reportedly.

    Make of that what you will, lol.

  115. Kelly says:

    Jadey pretty much summed up my reaction. Well, fuck. I was never a fan of his but I love DDD. Bummer.

  116. FashionablyEvil says:

    Yes, what is the sentence for the crime of “being a racist, sexist douchbag,” these days?

    I’d hate to see what percentage of the US population would be incarcerated if that were a crime.

  117. tinfoil hattie says:

    Phrasing that staring as “Fieri also can’t keep his eyes off any tits in the room…” connotes the specific kind of gaze involved with a clarity that a more clinical or critical description would lack for a broader audience.

    If, indeed, that was the author’s intent, then putting quotation marks around the word, “tits” would have been more effective.

    I don’t like women being called “chicks,” either. I find it demeaning. I also find it ridiculous to have to use a term other than “breasts” because it’s too “clinical.” Is “leg” too clinical? How about “neck,” or “hair,” or “foot”? Is “pussy” or “c***” preferable to “vagina”?

  118. EG says:

    Eh, almost all the sexualized body parts have slang terms, as do others. Feet, for instance, have had all kinds of slang terms over the years. And sometimes I do use “cunt” rather than “vagina” when I want a certain effect or to convey a certain emotion.

  119. William says:

    Yes, but the subject in question here is not mimicking the rich, he is the rich.

    Having cash is related to class, but it isn’t the same thing. Thats what I’m trying to say. Accusations of “loud” are often loaded with racial, ethnic, and class messages. Just because someone like Fieri has money doesn’t mean that certain statements about how he spends it and how he presents himself aren’t rooted in classism.

    I have never been told I look ‘loud’ (and believe me, my wife would tell me,) so I disagree with you on animal print being a signifier of anything.

    Perhaps you have the perceived privilege to be read as eccentric rather than loud, perhaps the signifiers of class and privilege as it relates to conspicuous consumptions are different where you live, perhaps (and by the style you described I’m guessing this isn’t entirely unlikely) you’re involved in a subculture with different rules and reads.

    A woman in her 40s with a Leopard print couch covered in plastic isn’t going to have quite the same reads because of her leopard print as a hipster in his 20s.

    However, I find spending money to show you have money in ANY way distasteful. Not only is it distasteful but it’s wasteful and also extremely insensitive to people who don’t have that kind of money, especially in these economic times.

    Not only does that put you squarely in the minority of human beings, but its irrelevant. The issue of class isn’t here to measure our left wing credentials, but to point out that certain kinds of criticisms have certain kinds of power attached to them. Maybe you’re not the kind of person who would say “that person’s outfit makes them look like a pollak” or “you can tell greeks live there” or “you can take the kid out of the barrio but you can’t take the barrio out of the kid, huh?” but there are a lot of people in a position to oppress who absolutely would and do, I’ve heard it.

    Yeah, Guy Fieri seems to be a class A douchebag, but that doesn’t change some of the ways in which criticisms of him are loaded. Not the least because a lot of people here seemed to have a general negative attitude towards him before his behavior was exposed.

  120. FashionablyEvil says:

    However, I find spending money to show you have money in ANY way distasteful.

    That’s a function of class, though. The article that I linked to above does a nice job of showing how people who feel more secure in their social status and wealth level tend to reject conspicuous consumption, while those who are part of non-wealthy, less stable social groups tend to spend more money on flashy items.

  121. Florence says:

    FashionablyEvil: while those who are part of non-wealthy, less stable social groups tend to spend more money on flashy items.

    This is interesting. I was ruminating the other day on how my personal taste has evolved now that I am older and want to be seen as a member of the “successful” “middle class” (And that this has become a value of mine at all? Tell sixteen-year-old mohawked me that I’ll later spend hours on ebay trolling for designer handbags and she will never believe you). One of the things I’ve noticed is that I’ve become more interested in small designer items (i.e. cheap) that are conspicuously branded. I know full well that sporting anything with a giant designer label on the side instantly marks you among the true upper classes as a low-rent poser, but nevertheless, that desire is there. What’s that about?

  122. Fat Steve says:

    EG:
    Yes, what is the sentence for the crime of “being a racist, sexist douchbag,” these days?

    Ten years on The Food Network, apparently.

  123. Fat Steve says:

    EG: And sometimes I do use “cunt” rather than “vagina” when I want a certain effect or to convey a certain emotion.

    I tend to use it when I’m referring to Piers Morgan.

  124. Kara says:

    I am currently wearing purple leopardskin sneakers and a purple leopardskin belt, a purple shirt, and purple hat (with black ‘skinny jeans,’ although they are clearly faulty because I still look fat.)

    Is the hat a fedora? I am a sucker for a brightly colored fedora.

    (I owe this weakness to a great admiration of Archie Goodwin’s outfits in the A&E Nero Wolfe series… he was a helluva snappy dresser.)

  125. EG says:

    My personal taste has barely evolved at all. I’ve mellowed a bit, and I want to project a different persona, so I do dress differently (also because I care less about what other people think of how I look), but when push comes to shove, I will always prefer brightly dyed/bleached hair with obvious roots, fishnet stockings, motorcycle jackets, etc.

  126. Florence says:

    EG: but when push comes to shove, I will always prefer brightly dyed/bleached hair with obvious roots, fishnet stockings, motorcycle jackets, etc.

    Yeah, me too. But now I want the motorcycle jackets to be real leather and the hair job to have been professional. :P Thankfully my rational brain talks my lizard brain out of spending the money.

    Fat Steve: Ten years on The Food Network, apparently.

    Lulz.

  127. zuzu says:

    Junaid:
    It seems like the entire accusation is based on a co-worker who was kicked off the show Guy was in.

    Guy’s rep says the allegations are baseless.

    I believe that’s reasonable doubt, Jill. Didn’t they teach you that in law school?

    Bwahahaha.

    I bet you think Jill violates your First Amendment rights, too.

  128. zuzu says:

    Fat Steve: I tend to use it [cunt] when I’m referring to Piers Morgan.

    This from the guy who thought that Alexander Sarsgard was being sexist for saying Swedes were sexually liberal?

  129. Fat Steve says:

    zuzu: This from the guy who thought that Alexander Sarsgard was being sexist for saying Swedes were sexually liberal?

    Maybe you’re right, and I shouldn’t find that word less sexist when I use it towards a British man than towards a woman or a vagina.

  130. zuzu says:

    Fat Steve: Maybe you’re right, and I shouldn’t find that word less sexist when I use it towards a British man than towards a woman or a vagina.

    Why would you use it toward a woman, Steve?

  131. igglanova says:

    Eh, I think ‘cunt’ can be used as an insult on the internet as long as you understand the person is using it in the ‘British way.’ Of course, that requires knowing the person using it relatively well. Context changes everything.

    /not helping

  132. Fat Steve says:

    zuzu: Why would you use it toward a woman, Steve?

    I wouldn’t. I meant that that is where I draw the line, and now you’ve made me think about that.

  133. Fat Steve says:

    igglanova:
    Eh, I think ‘cunt’ can be used as an insult on the internet as long as you understand the person is using it in the ‘British way.’Of course, that requires knowing the person using it relatively well.Context changes everything.

    /not helping

    That’s what i thought, but zuzu’s comments made me realize that not everyone understands that, and I should be more careful with my words.

  134. zuzu says:

    Fat Steve: That’s what i thought, but zuzu’s comments made me realize that not everyone understands that, and I should be more careful with my words.

    Also, if you are not British, do not even try to use the “But I was using it in the British way!” argument.

  135. Fat Steve says:

    zuzu: Also, if you are not British, do not even try to use the “But I was using it in the British way!” argument.

    If you knew me, you wouldn’t say that. Which is why it was stupid of me to say it (or imply it,) in a forum where people don’t know me.

  136. sabrina says:

    just want to point out that vagina was a slang word that got turned into a medical word because people are fucking misogynist douche canoes. Cunt on the other hand was an actual medical word that got made into a derogatory slang word because again people hate women.

  137. Amelia ze lurker says:

    Fat Steve: Ilovethewordboobs.It’stheonlywordthatlookslikethethingitmeans.

    Synesthesia! Know it! Love it! I love Fat Steve’s comment because it directly relates to the bouba/kiki effect. Or should I say boobah/kiki effect LOLOLOL (if you shot me I would not be offended).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouba/kiki_effect

  138. Amelia ze lurker says:

    Fat Steve: Ilovethewordboobs.It’stheonlywordthatlookslikethethingitmeans.

    Synesthesia! Know it! Love it! I love Fat Steve’s comment because it directly relates to the bouba/kiki effect. Or should I say boobah/kiki effect LOLOLOL (if you shot me I would not be offended).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bouba/kiki_effect

    /end derail

  139. Clarence says:

    Having been raised in a rural community where Oakleys on the back of the head are a standard accessory, I can testify that they aren’t all jackasses.

Comments are closed.