Should comedians have boundaries?

[The_Yoda]

the-pi-guy said:

The_Yoda said:

Again I could be wrong but these seem like questions asked when looking at the points Runa was trying to make.

These questions seem pretty pertinent in the UK by the way which seems to worry about "Punching Down" (pretty much the crux of Runa's argument).  I've seen plenty of posts from people that are upset about UK "hate speech" laws on other sites. I think you are being obtuse.

Once again not my questions though.  I am guessing at their intended target. They seem to be a natural progression in that line of reasoning is all I am saying.

Julius wasn't asking Runa or anyone else any actual questions. They were pretending to argue on the behalf of Runa or myself or someone else in the thread, while vastly misunderstanding what has been argued in the thread. 

I don't think I'm the one being obtuse.

Again, this is another post that encapsulates what I was talking about a few pages ago.  

the-pi-guy said:

A big issue I have with a lot of this thread is that it is incredibly subjective.

Comedy is subjective.

Boundaries are subjective.

A lot of people here are coming into this discussion talking about completely different things. A lot of people are coming into this discussion with completely different baggage (I'm upset about ____ being cancelled or something).

A lot of people here might even be interpreting "comedians" differently from each other.

A lot of people have different ideas on how boundaries should be enforced or not enforced. Then people are being expected to take ownership of someone else's viewpoint on how enforcement happens, on the basis that they agree with boundaries existing.

Just because someone is talking about there being boundaries, doesn't mean they agree with whatever it is people think is happening in the UK. 

Punching down is not some concept that is exclusively applied in the UK.

This is a concept that George Carlin was effectively talking about here. 

A major issue with Julius's comment is the implication that "punching down", "power" are these ultra vague concepts that anyone can define in completely different ways in a way to manipulate people. 

They may not be ultra vague but they are very tied to perspective.  What happens if a gay makes a joke about a lesbian and vise versa?  What happens when both the gay and the lesbian think from their perspective they are more repressed and they are punching up while the other group is punching down.  They cannot both be right. If they were not tied to perspective then you should be able to provide a list and we will know, based on the list, if a person is punching down or up.  Cut and dry.

At that point who is making the impossible list of who is punching down and who is punching up? It is tied to perspective, you could be a straight white male and feel like you are on the bottom of the totem pole all the while others say you are privileged. 

From my perspective his points were pertinent. It is a subjective thing, tied to perspective. So who decides?

I know punching down is not tied solely to the UK but that is one of the places where a tweet can land you in jail and it seems very inconsistent with who can say what without the law getting involved. So "Where does Runa talk about any kind of punishment?" Runa doesn't need to spell it out, it is a natural progression from "cutting the bad-faith 'jokes' off before they grow into something more is the issue."  If shrugging it off is "dangerous" then shrugging it off or ignoring the source is not an option.  That would leave mainly murder or legislation. I'd guess Runa isn't thinking murder so that leaves laws.  How are laws enforced ... with a form of punishment.  You are not stupid so I accused you of being obtuse since you refuse to see the progression.

Also with Runa's reactions and all the words put in Legit's mouth why aren't you all over Runa?  You had no problem jumping in on Julius's comment, why not Runa's?  Of the two sets of comments I found Runa's to be far more toxic than Julius's.