He wasn't saying "I'm a Jew," he was saying "I'm a nice Jewish boy." Which should be read the same way, IMO, as "I'm not that kind of girl." It has to do with the topic because his meaning was: I am a gentleman, the kind of boy you want to marry, I am not promiscuous, nor would I date someone who is, you won't find me leering or talking about sex in public, etc.
[/quote]
So does that mean that if someone says they want to marry a "nice jewish doctor" that they're saying they want to marry a doctor who is a gentleman who doesn't leer or talk about sex in public? Because, to me, that saying means "marry a wealthy Jewish doctor." What does being jewish have to do with being modest about sex? In my book...nothing. It was my feleing that he was repeating the fact that he was jewish in order to connect with the (what he hoped or assumed) was a mostly/partly Jewish audience. I was even more convinced of this when he went on to comment about how he didn't want to spend money on a dinner date. Kind of like "you're all Jewish, you know what I'm sayin', right?"
His religion was NOT fair game for an offensive slur, which is what Clay uttered[/quote]
For it to be deemed a slur it would have to have been said with a malicious intent. I'm in the camp that thinks Clay was going to say "tight-ass" in regards to Adam being uptight and anal. It was a joke (a poor one) but Clay was simply repeatign what Adam, said about himself about three times. Which, BTW, in public speaking is a no-no. Not only did Adam continue to identify himself with his religeon but then he went on and made his own ignorant comment. As someone upthread mentioned...way to perpetuate a stereotype there, Adam. Which I don't think Adam would have ever said if he didn't think he wasn't in a room full of Jewish audience members. Then Adam gets pissed and says "Clay called me a tight ass Jew?" Dude....you were calling yourself that. Or at least it sounded that way to me.
Makes me wonder, since Adam had such a boy-crush on Josh, if Adam ever heard Josh refer to Clay as a "bitch" and defended Clay by telling Josh how innapropriate that word is when talking about a homosexual. And, did Adam get up in arms when Josh made his Hitler reference about Clay? Cause I'm doubting that Josh kept those little pearls to himself. Josh was an ignorant bigot is his own right, yet Adam loved him.
SimoneSays
Nov 7, 2005 @ 10:55 pm
Ashforth:
Either one would have been properly fired, but Trump ended up in a position where he had to fire either:
1. The alleged victim of an ethnic slur whom Trump had just subjected to a bizarre interrogation about his sex life; or
2. The first openly gay candidate, who had just confirmed his orientation to Trump, and whom Trump had just subjected to a bizarre interrogation about his sex life; or
3. The inarticulate, ineffective, bitter slacker whose sex life had remained, thankfully, undiscussed.
It was an easy call to fire Markus.[/quote]
Word. I actually held my breath when I realized the depth of Title VII hell in which Trump had immersed himself. Not that the dumbass had a clue. But the look on Carolyn's face was classic "Please don't let me get slapped as a fellow defendant in a sexual harassment suit" material. I couldn't believe this ended up on television -- if I were one of those two, I'd claim that this was a real job interview (reality TV/famewhore exposure be damned), hire a lawyer and sue his ass in a legitimate manner.
As for menu items, is the salad tossed? Ew.
Ashforth
Nov 7, 2005 @ 10:58 pm
Now you've got me imagining Markus rambling on and on about his sex life...[/quote]
aaaaand, here's the transcript:
I speak to the details, and I do feel, I do, uh, go into detail, and, uh, you know, I've tried to step up, and do the right thing, and, um, I'm, I... you know, wh- where, when you've done all you can do, where do you go fr- from there? I, I don't, I don't have a clue.[/quote]
Sorry, my friend, I could not resist!
lovemesomevos
Nov 7, 2005 @ 11:25 pm
I was even more convinced of this when he went on to comment about how he didn't want to spend money on a dinner date.[/quote]
I believe what he said was that he had to be comfortable with someone in order to take them to dinner, that he would begrudge spending a meal with someone he didn't know well. I didn't get any inference that he would begrudge spending the money, just the time on someone whose company he didn't enjoy.
BlakeSpeare
Nov 7, 2005 @ 11:34 pm
He did comment on not wanting to spend the money, Lovemesomevos. He said something like, "I have to be comfortable with them AND I have to be willling to spend the money."
Pasticcia
Nov 8, 2005 @ 6:18 am
It was my feleing that he was repeating the fact that he was jewish in order to connect with the (what he hoped or assumed) was a mostly/partly Jewish audience. I was even more convinced of this when he went on to comment about how he didn't want to spend money on a dinner date. Kind of like "you're all Jewish, you know what I'm sayin', right?" [/quote]
pinkytuscadero could you explain what you mean? Because what you say above is a lot less ambiguous than what Clay said on stage.
PinkyTuscadero
Nov 8, 2005 @ 8:00 am
pinkytuscadero could you explain what you mean? Because what you say above is a lot less ambiguous than what Clay said on stage. [/quote]
I'll use a hypothetical situation. I'm Italian. I hate that we're frequently associated with the Mafia. So let's say I'm out with a group of people. I say something to the effect of how I'm "going to make someone an offer he can't refuse" and associate myself with that stereotype. To me, the only group of people to which I'd feel comfortable making a comment like that would be other Italians because they'd be more likely to get the reference and know that I was being facetious/tongue in cheek.
Now, if I made that comment to a handful of people in the group that I knew were Italians, and then someone else in the group (not Italian) decided to continue the joke and make a Mafia reference towards me then I don't think I have the right to get offended because I've just made light of the stereotype myself and set the tone. Whether I made light of it unconsciusly or not, I still set the tone by what I said. Adam set the tone, consciously or unconsciously, and then took no responsibility for what transpired afterwards. He could have meant nothing by his comment about not wanting to pay for dinner. It could have just been a poor choice of words that he didn't intend to be construed in a certain way. Unfortunately, Clay might have taken what he said as Adam making light of the stereotype and then followed his lead. Or Clay could have just been repeating Adam's statement of being the "shy Jewish boy" as a joke. In either case, Clay was following Adam's lead. In a proffesional setting like that, you can't afford NOT to be fully aware of what you say and how it can be perceived. So, to me, they're both equally guilty.
BlakeSpeare
Nov 8, 2005 @ 9:36 am
While I thought it was kind of odd for Adam to bring up his religion over and over again, I don't think it in any way justifies Clay bringing up his remarks in a completely different context to make an ethnic joke.
If one of the contestants had said, "I'm a nice Irish-Catholic girl, and I'm not comfortable talking about sex," and then later she made a comment about getting drunk, would that justify someone saying, "Remember, folks, she is Irish" or something along those lines?
Pundit
Nov 8, 2005 @ 10:21 am
Please see my above comments, where I hammer this point more than once, while expressing outrage that anyone could possibly disagree.
PinkyTuscadero
Nov 8, 2005 @ 11:03 am
Even Clay knew he crossed the line by characterizing someone Jewish as "tight." [/quote]
If you re-watch the episode, there's a slight pause after Clay says the word "tight." It's not clear what taht's from..was it a pause, was he censoring himself, etc. In a confessional in the episode, Clay says Adam is uptight and that he needs to relax. That's why I'm thinking that Clay was censoring himself when he made the comment in the presentation. When he apologizes to Adam, Clay says he had no idea that what he said was offensive. So, yeah, it was an ignorant comment but not malicious or a slur.
deaja
Nov 8, 2005 @ 11:13 am
I re-watched the episode last night, and this is what I learned:
Donald orders steak from the menu.
Clay orders pasta from the menu.
Adam asks for the kiddie menu.
Still not sure what this has to do with sex in the workplace........
Alla seriously bugs me. If she's really worth $12 million, can't she afford her own Michael Kors? Just a thought.
Rebecca also just grates on me more and more every week. She's yet to show herself as anything other than good at arguing in the boardroom and complaining about other people. They didn't even show her really contributing in the presentation either. I hope she's gone really soon.
Jacob
Nov 8, 2005 @ 1:07 pm
Please think hard before weighing in on the dead horse that is the Clay/Adam thing.
1) Am I saying something I haven't said previously, in this thread or the candidate threads?
2) Am I, in fact, adding to the conversation in some way?
3) Am I talking about the episode itself, or about my overarching theories of sexuality and/or racism?
4) Am I telling people what I think about what was said, or am I telling them what was said?
5) Is this actually what I think, or am I just shit-stirring?
Quiddler
Nov 8, 2005 @ 1:27 pm
Edited because: the horse? she is dead. And because while I'm 99% sure my comments fit into Jacob's five guidelines, I'm not 100%. So, off she goes. Thank you. I am perplexed. Which menu item is straight or gay? Is pasta straight or gay? Or is it the steak? What about fish or chicken? A salad? Dessert?[/quote]
Well, hapless, according to Donald’s Guide to Heterosexual Food Choices:
Steak – straight.
Pasta – gay. Unless it has a meat sauce with sausage and/or meatballs. Then? Straight.
Chicken – depends. If it’s BBQ’ed or deep fried it’s straight. If it’s broiled or paired with steamed vegetables? Gay.
Fish – if it has a manly name (Swordfish, shark, etc) or is deep fried then it’s straight. But Whitefish? Monkfish? Catfish? Gay, gay, gay.
Salad is bi. Unless the dressing is green. Then it’s gay.
Desserts: anything involving fruit is gay. Unless it’s strawberry cheesecake, which is omnisexual. Any dessert involving alcohol = straight. Unless the alchohol is served in an ice cream drink. Then? Lesbian.
(y'all know this is tongue in cheek right? You do? OK. Just making sure...)
ETA .... 12 hours later ... ok, Jacob, which one of us gets the credit for killing the thread? Me, for my "humorous" Gay v. Straight menu guide? or you, for the Clay v. Adam Guidelines for Posting? Maybe if we put it to a vote the thread will come back to life .... ;-)
BenjyDiMera
Nov 9, 2005 @ 3:49 pm
BibiBella:I thought I heard Clay said (about Adam) during the seminar "he's the tight Jewish boy from Atlanta" -- with the implication that he's cheap. And that was deregatory. I don't blame Adam for being insulted.[/quote]
Maybe Adam was so insulted because he took the 'tight' comment as a dig that he's a bottom. Although, in my world 'tight' is the best compliment a top can give ya!
Quite frankly, Adam seems a bit fey to me.
All in all, that was the gayest episode ever.
hoodooznoodoooz
Nov 9, 2005 @ 4:19 pm
Any chance NBC will re-broadcast this episode? I stopped watching "The Apprentice" after season 2. (My husband mocked me too much.)
eta: Thanks, BabyG! I'm a tool & missed both re-broadcasts, too, so I'm actually going to have to rent the DVDs. But I can't NOT see this episode.
BabyG
Nov 9, 2005 @ 4:52 pm
The Apprentice airs again on CNBC on Tuesday and Friday at 8:00 pm and 11:00 pm. Sadly though this episode will not air again this week.
Nutjob
Nov 9, 2005 @ 4:53 pm
Quite frankly, Adam seems a bit fey to me.[/quote]
Adam is so Eugene Jerome it isn't funny.
lucelu
Nov 9, 2005 @ 5:54 pm
I think everyone has the right to be offended when something offensive is said. However, I don't think that people have the Right to be Unoffended. Your results may vary from one person to the next.
Saying that, there is something called social dexterity or social intelligence. If your point is to make a very nice positive impression to the public (ie. people you don't know) it pays to have the social intelligence to sidestep the social/racial/ethnic/sexual/gender/religious/nationofancestralorigin lingual landmines. Granted it helps if you have experience with the population sample you are pulling from. Some verbal slings may be fine in the Midwest but won't play on the West Coast. Sensitivity is proportional to designated density (if the even makes sense). Being snarky about Mormons in my community probably wouldn't raise an eyebrow but in anytown, Utah...
Clay is one big mouthfull of foot, much better selling. Which brings me to my biggest bitch about this show.
The challenges or projects are always specialist types of things--if you work in PR quite a bit, maybe running an event is a nobrainer. But if you are a designer, perhaps it isn't your thing but you would excell at designing clothes for American Eagle that integrate technology, however, if you are a graphic designer, clothing won't be your bag nor selling sports equipment nor running a stupid Atlantic city flophouse. Perhaps designing a brochure is an item a graphic designer will shine at (not a corporate attorney).
Trump is looking for an apprentice? An apprentice to do what? Trump doesn't do any of those things. Except apparently being an ass on tv which almost every apprentice seems perfectly capable of duplicating (many of those get fired--the most qualified!).
How about pitting two graphic designers against each other in a relevent-to-their-expertise contest?
Why can't they use some of their budget to hire a "consultant" in these tasks? At least the sponsors would get some real value. (Head hurting from the memory of A3 Staples task or worse--the cucumber commercial).
End rant.
Glad Marcus is gone because although he is talented in the ass category on tv, we don't know what he is talking about. Trump does get his points across (even though they are often in direct contradiction in what he said last week) and this week he entered a very twisted and scary place. I'm still having nightmares of my boss with the bitch Trump face asking me humiliating personal questions during a staff meeting.
Nutjob
Nov 9, 2005 @ 6:48 pm
Why can't they use some of their budget to hire a "consultant" in these tasks? At least the sponsors would get some real value. (Head hurting from the memory of A3 Staples task or worse--the cucumber commercial).[/quote]
They can hire consultants, and a few of the teams have done just that in the past. (Specifically, I recall one team during S2 hiring a consultant on the bridal shop task.) Raj's team during that same season also hired a cleaning company to clean their restaurant space before they opened. I think they can use their budget for whatever they want, as long as it's not specifically prohibited in the task dossier.
bigbookworm
Nov 9, 2005 @ 9:41 pm
From Jacob's recap regarding Randall....
His smile makes tiny birds and angels fly out of the television and dress your Christmas tree for you.[/quote]
I couldn't have said it better myself!
Chicagoland
Nov 10, 2005 @ 1:42 am
Clay was repeating what Adam said 15 times, and I think he meant 'uptight'.
But I wasn't ickked out like Jacob was with Trump talking about Clay. He just matter of factly said "people are different", no biggie, about it.
And, to answer all the critics who wonder "Why wasn't Marcus fired earlier?" He got lucky being on winning teams until now. The one other time he could have been canned, Chris tried too hard and got the boot, instead.
Lead Magnet
Nov 10, 2005 @ 2:37 am
Just thought I'd say "Great recap" to Jacob, for transcribing Markus, presenting his own opinions, and generally conveying in text how the Boardroom turned into a strange psychotic carnival.
And for mentioning the Palpatine comparison :)
I have to wonder this though: If the Boardroom is edited/reshot/etc. to make it more TV-viewer interesting, what did not make it on air? Can that even be imagined considering how weird was the stuff we did see?
Odyssea
Nov 10, 2005 @ 4:10 am
Can that even be imagined considering how weird was the stuff we did see?[/quote]
Ow, now my eye won't stop twitching.
jarja grl
Nov 10, 2005 @ 7:09 am
Watching both Trump with Adam and the Whole. Marcus. Trainwreck. makes me feel that I have soiled myself by mocking the short bus occupants. It's not good. Marcus really needs some meds to slow the boiling whitewater-rapids of his thoughts. His biggest entertainment future lies in doing PSAs for mental health interventions.
I need a moral cleansing ritual for my shame.
jaycbird
Nov 10, 2005 @ 2:13 pm
I can't find a 'props to Jacob' thread, so I'll just put it here...
Most of the time, I have enough narcissim to think "Recap? I could do that!" But Jacob's recap of this episode was so analytical and dynamic, my ego was put to shame!
Jacob, You're AWESOME!!!
auntiemame
Nov 10, 2005 @ 3:42 pm
The altar to Jacob is in Apprentice General Gabbery under the thread title, "Climbing Jacob's Corporate Ladder."
But appreciation for the recap belongs all over, because it was that good.
I lack any shame for my scorn of Markus. He could have been saved, but he chose not to be. I'm just glad to be free of the mental labor of figuring out what he's trying to say.
Chicagoland
Nov 10, 2005 @ 7:32 pm
On the Yahoo site, they show the uncut Boardroom scenes.
What was interesting is you never knew who was going until Marcus di his usaul yapping.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.