Ground Zero Mosque - Tolerance, Racism or Comedy?

Hyro says: ;-)The absolutely best ever movie rendition of "FUCK YOU" was - in my opinion - delivered by Emilio Estavez in Repo Man, just moments before he gets fired at the grocery store in the beginning. A perfect delivery. This was not a sudden interjection in the heat of action, like a hand-to-hand combat or something. No. This was a carefully measured optimal way to respond to the situation at hand. When that came around on TV they had the nerve to bleep it out with a piss-ass "flip-you" sort of overlay that made me shut it off.

---

- xongsmith, 5.7d

Don't know if it's a bit late in the discussion for this (couldn't be bothered to read up ,) but I have made some pretty "crude" remarks which I (and my friends), thought were very funny.My favourite one was this one:This happened several years ago, we were watching a football game and one of my friend's girlfriends (who is quite a football fanatic), was really stressing out the entire time, yelling, cussing, screaming, quite annoying. So, after the game ended, she gets a phone call, her granfather had had a heart attack (and later died because of that). So, I say "Oh, he watched the game as well?", and everybody cracked up.

You seem to be saying that there are some things which are too sick to be considered comedy no matter how many people find them funny whilst also maintaining your "there is no line" mantra. I don't see how these are compatible. Well how many people have to find it funny for it to be considered "comedy" if a performer decides to do that in the name of laughs? But you have just said that NOT everything is acceptable in the name of comedy. Torture being an extreme example of that which isn't. Because it is "sick".What about ripping the clothes off a hugely fat person against their will for laughs? If the performer does that and the audience find a naked fatty being humiliated on stage frikkin hilarious is that comedy? Who decides when that is?In the previous thread on this subject you and I agreed that somebody telling a joke about raping someone when he blatantly wasn't going to actually rape the person in question (or indeed anyone else) was intended as a joke exactly because it wasn't going to happen. Tasteless or otherwise.I would defend the right of comics to tell jokes about rape regardless of who might be randomly offended by that. But that is not the same (for example) as finding out that a particular member of the audience has been raped and then ripping the piss out of that individual and their experiences in public in the name of cutting edge comedy.Do you see the difference? And yet we all have different ideas as to what is acceptable and what is not. So it cannot be as simple as you are making out. Must try harder..... Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

I have explained how I'm using the "there is no line" mantra, it does not in anyway leave a window open for torture and murder to sneak in under the guise of comedy.YOU are forcing it in with YOUR take on what it means. Wasn't torture and capital punishment once done in public to the amusement of a crowd? I'd say revert back to the dark ages, back to when the Bible was taken literally - that seems to breed insanity. Against their will? That is not comedy, that is rape, we've already defined it and created laws to punish those who commit it. Seriously Straggler this seems rather comical in it's own right. I've clearly stated in the last post that finding something funny doesn't make it comedy. You could just be a sick fuck, or retarded and find everything funny, or just plain stupid and laugh at tragedy. Just because a crowd laughs doesn't make what is being done "comedy." Do I see the difference? Yes of course...and did you see how easy it was to tell the difference between comedy and bullying? The people you're performing to, or in the real world, the people you are telling your joke to. It's no different than any other situation. I think you're making it purposely harder than it really is.I think you'll find we can all agree on what is considered "in the genre of comedy" and what is not. The difference of course is in what individual people find FUNNY, and that is where you're getting stuck. What someone finds funny doesn't automatically make it comedy, like I said, you could find The Godfather hilarious but that doesn't make The Godfather a comedy.Everyone will find different things funny, but we can all agree on what is in the genre of comedy and what is, say, a drama or a thriller or a suspense or a horror. We've already done that. So even if you publicly murder someone to the rip-roaring laughter of a crowd, doesn't automatically make what you're doing "comedy" - it is murder - and I don't think you'll find anyone that will disagree. And even if you do, say, find one or two people that think it's a comedy, if the consensus amoung the rest of society is that it is not, then the opinion of one or two people doesn't mean shit.- Oni

That's it?Okay. Is anybody saying otherwise?Being comedy doesn't mean that its funny and being funny doesn't mean that its comedy.You can't draw a line on what people will find funny. There's a line on what is comedy, but we're not going to be able to identify it.In Message 102 you wrote: I don't think it can be resolved.

Have you seen Kimmel's Unneccessary Cencorship?:I think its hilarious.

Resolved in the sense of everyone agreeing? No.But it can be resolved in the sense that society can decide where it draws the line between comedy and targeted bullying whilst also weighing up principles like free- speech.It is a balancing act. And no doubt the lines will change over time. But to pretend that there is no line is just silly.

So as long as the performer intends it to be comedy and the vast majority find it funny and consider it comedy — It is comedy regardless of any other moral considerations? Is that what you are saying? Or not? Easy? If it is so frikkin easy and obvious why is there any debate at all as to whether certain jokes are acts of comedy or acts of bullying? Why are jokes such as the one in the OP even remotely contentious if what you say is true?Now I suspect that you and I would largely agree as to what is funny and what isn’t. I suspect we would agree on what constitutes comedy and what doesn’t. I suspect we would strongly agree that free-speech is a principle worth upsetting people for. I suspect we would agree on the nature, intent and validity of the jokes made in the OP. My point here is not to disagree with any of that.My point is that those who object to certain jokes relating to certain minorities are not doing so because they consider some topic taboo as you are asserting. Instead they find such jokes to be acts of bullying by the majority rather than comedy. They consider these jokes acts of bullying rather than comedy for exactly the same reasons that you consider singling out a rape victim in an audience as the target of comedic wit to be bullying rather than legitimate comedy.My point is that although you may disagree with people who object to such jokes you are not as radically different in principle as you seem to assume you are. You simply draw the line between comedy and bullying in a different place to them. But you still draw your own subjective line between acceptable comedy and unacceptable bullyingThat is the point I am making.Now which part of that do you actually disagree with?

Sure, there is a social line. Not a well-defined line, as it is arbitrary, but a line nonetheless.For instance, telling Holocaust jokes at a Bar Mitzvah might not go over too well.

---

"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

But would serving Calamari rings in tomato bisque after the Bris be considered as crossing a line?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Suspiciously... I'd say, yes. But the "moral consideration" part is leaving me a bit uneasy with my reply. If the vast majority of people can find something funny that was intended as comedy, what kind of moral considerations weren't already taking into account before laughing? Because someone will always complain about something...no matter what it may be - people have turned into quite the cunt these days when it comes to humor.Also, there really is no debate IN COMEDY about what comedy is, the debate is had outside when non-experienced people without a broad sense of humor or knowledge in the field think they can weigh in on an issue - like the twat giving her opinion about the O&A bit. But you would NEVER catch comics doing that shit, arguing about the finer points of what bullying is and isn't - we just know. And those who don't know get weeded out - where's Andrew Dice Clay these days? Yup. Some people like to eat pears and I can't fucking stand them. We're all different I guess. I never thought they were, I think we all share the same ability, for the most part, to signal out comedy and bullying - there wouldn't exist a law against bullying if we couldn't. There will be some grey areas, but that is expected. I don't know where I said different or lead you to think I was of a different opinion.The issue comes in when we seek retribution, this is where I take issue. This is when it can get ugly in the discussion, as you've seen here in the past. But that is expected too.- Oni

It took me a minute but I got it. Quite the faux pas I think.- Oni

I used to frequent a club where the entertainment--bands, comics, strippers--appeared behind a chain link enclosure with a dedicated exit.It's hard to imagine a bullying comic there.Lesbian comics were always a hit--the female barflies would climb the fence and pump 'n grind at them; male barflies would expose themselves.The only lines were white, chopped, and not long on the table.Ah, those were the days, my friend Ever play that kind of venue?

---

Dost thou prate, rogue?
-Cassio

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

Niceee. I think these are usually the lines draw by the comics I know too. Never anything that rough, that place sounds like it needs a bouncer by the name of, Dalton (anyone catch the reference?) It does sound like those were fun times though.I do perform at a few rough rooms, out of the way bars mainly, but never with a fence separating me. The worse was early on when I started, a place in Ft. Myers, Florida, realllly out of the way from anything - one of those places were nothing is around for miles except that bar and one street light. But I was hungry and would take anything.Anyway, about halfway into my set, which was about 7 minutes in, a giant redneck, mullet wearing, 3 tooth'd motherfucker stands up, points at my face (and the audience wasn't far from the stage so the tip of his finger was about 5' away from me) and says, "I don't like you, man. You suck something bad, and I think everyone here thinks you suck too. Ima let you finish, but just know that you ain't that good."So I paused for a few, looked at the rest of the crowd and said, "Well, I guess we've heard from the town's English professor, anyone else want to chime in and tell me how good I ain't?" And the place errupted in laughter. The best part was the "professor" didn't get it, he just stood there wondering why everyone was laughing. He never said anything else but I truly was scared for the rest of the set. Me and the other comics didn't stay long after the show either.I've heard some real horror stories about the road.- OniEdited by onifre, : No reason given.

Pactrick Swayze - Road HouseMy wife loves any Patrick Swayze movie.