By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Movies & TV - Should comedians have boundaries?

 

Should comedians have boundaries?

Yes 12 19.67%
 
No 49 80.33%
 
Total:61
the-pi-guy said:
DarthMetalliCube said:

But here's the thing - if an idea is awful or holds no water, it will NEVER gain enough popularity to gain much traction or shape society in the first place. Or if the rare time it does, it will not last long and the pendulum will swing back to sanity and truth, overwhelming it. The truth always wins out in the end.

If this is the case - if they ARE in fact so false and unpopular, why worry about them, or the effect they'll have? At the end of the day isn't this just another form of "Democracy"?

That's because there are people who fight for the right things.

Slavery lasted hundreds of years, before enough fighting happened that ended it.

These things don't just magically go away. Awful ideas get put down by people who fight them.

Who said anything about these ideas being unpopular? A lot of terrible ideas are incredibly popular or becoming more popular. 

Jumpin said:

You can’t say you weren’t talking about comedy in a previous post and then come back and say that you are.

I don’t buy your arguments at all, South Park spent over 25 years joking about all those subjects.

Comedy and hate speech are not the same thing.

Hitler stood up and spoke before a crowd. Hitler was a clown. But that is not stand-up comedy. I think you should learn the difference between the two.

Sure, some of these jokes made by South Park may encourage some credulous twat to be more antisemitic, but that’s a small minority at best, and not the fault or general result of comedy… it’s because of inbreeding.

My last comment was that you misunderstood what I was talking about. 
I didn't say I wasn't talking about comedy. 

Hate speech can overlap with comedy. 

If a comedian were putting Hitler's talking points into their bits, do you think that would be fine? Do you think that is impossible for some reason? 

>I don’t think any comedian should be limited on any subject.

You can make jokes about the holocaust, you can make jokes about 9/11, you can make jokes about trans people and black people. 

The issue isn't the subject. Who are you making fun of when you make the joke. Plenty of comedians and plenty of comedy movie/tv series still make outrageous things just the way you like, and it works because the real joke is frequently that the person is an idiot. 

You're conflating art and entertainment with real life. At the end of the day, this is still nothing more than the modern version of a moral panic (which almost always turn out to be false and misguided hysteria, whether the satanic panic of the 80s, PMRC of the 90s, the Jack Thompson video game violence scare of the 2000s, or the current hyper sensitivity against comedy). It makes the argument that art/entertainment = dangerous in some real life, tangible form. I strongly disagree with that, and I always will. 



 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident - all men and women created by the, go-you know.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

Around the Network
curl-6 said:

Nobody is going to hear a comedian make a joke then go out and commit a hate crime because of it. And even if they did, that's not the comedian's fault; jokes and actions are separate things and actions are the responsibility of the person who chooses to do them.

The notion that comedy causes real world harm is the same flawed logic used by the right back in the 90s when they argued that games like Doom were gonna make Millennials grow up to be a generation of sociopathic serial killers.

This.  Start restrictions on comedians and something else will be next.  Then something after that.

Remember when full abortion bans was an overreaction from the SCOTUS ruling?  Yeah, I do to.  But here we are.  

Restrictions aren't a good idea.  I stand by my original view, I'm stunned people are so quick to give up freedom that so many fought and died for.  

And if we start restrictions on speech, whomever holds that power has a ton of power....  like Russia and North Korea...  sounds lovely.  



i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

Chrkeller said:

Maybe I'm just smarter than most.  I wouldn't go to a comedy show with a notebook so jot down life lessons.  

I didn't realize people couldn't disconnect reality from make believe.  

By default it makes no sense for someone to take a comedian seriously....  

DarthMetalliCube said:

You're conflating art and entertainment with real life. At the end of the day, this is still nothing more than the modern version of a moral panic (which almost always turn out to be false and misguided hysteria, whether the satanic panic of the 80s, PMRC of the 90s, the Jack Thompson video game violence scare of the 2000s, or the current hyper sensitivity against comedy). It makes the argument that art/entertainment = dangerous in some real life, tangible form. I strongly disagree with that, and I always will. 

How do you people think propaganda works? 

By this logic, there shouldn't be a such thing as propaganda whatsoever. Yet history, psychology, etc clearly show otherwise.  



Chrkeller said:

This.  Start restrictions on comedians and something else will be next.  Then something after that.

Remember when full abortion bans was an overreaction from the SCOTUS ruling?  Yeah, I do to.  But here we are.  

Restrictions aren't a good idea.  I stand by my original view, I'm stunned people are so quick to give up freedom that so many fought and died for.  

And if we start restrictions on speech, whomever holds that power has a ton of power....  like Russia and North Korea...  sounds lovely.  

For the 400th time, I'm not personally advocating for any kind of restrictions. 

I think the free market does a good job in this particular instance. 

Chrkeller said:

Remember when full abortion bans was an overreaction from the SCOTUS ruling?  Yeah, I do to.  But here we are.  

This is a completely different matter. 

The full abortion bans were never going to happen over night for the entire country. 

Many states are still pushing for stricter bans. It's not an imaginary issue. 



the-pi-guy said:
Chrkeller said:

This.  Start restrictions on comedians and something else will be next.  Then something after that.

Remember when full abortion bans was an overreaction from the SCOTUS ruling?  Yeah, I do to.  But here we are.  

Restrictions aren't a good idea.  I stand by my original view, I'm stunned people are so quick to give up freedom that so many fought and died for.  

And if we start restrictions on speech, whomever holds that power has a ton of power....  like Russia and North Korea...  sounds lovely.  

For the 400th time, I'm not personally advocating for any kind of restrictions. 

I think the free market does a good job in this particular instance. 

Chrkeller said:

Remember when full abortion bans was an overreaction from the SCOTUS ruling?  Yeah, I do to.  But here we are.  

This is a completely different matter. 

The full abortion bans were never going to happen over night for the entire country. 

Many states are still pushing for stricter bans. It's not an imaginary issue. 

Exactly my point and a great example of why giving up freedoms is a bad idea.



i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:
Chrkeller said:

Maybe I'm just smarter than most.  I wouldn't go to a comedy show with a notebook so jot down life lessons.  

I didn't realize people couldn't disconnect reality from make believe.  

By default it makes no sense for someone to take a comedian seriously....  

DarthMetalliCube said:

You're conflating art and entertainment with real life. At the end of the day, this is still nothing more than the modern version of a moral panic (which almost always turn out to be false and misguided hysteria, whether the satanic panic of the 80s, PMRC of the 90s, the Jack Thompson video game violence scare of the 2000s, or the current hyper sensitivity against comedy). It makes the argument that art/entertainment = dangerous in some real life, tangible form. I strongly disagree with that, and I always will. 

How do you people think propaganda works? 

By this logic, there shouldn't be a such thing as propaganda whatsoever. Yet history, psychology, etc clearly show otherwise.  

Propaganda I equate far more to media - news outlets, editorials, etc. You can make the argument that there is propaganda in art and entertainment, but these fields have the burden of actually having to have some merit or value in order to succeed and be popular. They have to be compelling on some level or people won't pay them any mind and they'll wither away. If their messages are weak, stupid, shallow, or otherwise hold no water, 95% of the time they will never gain traction anyway. This is why the free market is so important. Not just a free market of business but also of ideas. And as is true in the business world, the best will rise while the weakest will fall.

Anyone who is influenced by art/entertainment to the extent that they commit a crime or even do bad in society were ALREADY screwed up on some level and were a ticking time bomb anyway. You'll never convince me that any source of art/entertainment is the cause for any real ills in society (other than reality/trash TV perhaps making people dumber lol).

Art is usually a reflection of society. Not the other way around.



 

"We hold these truths to be self-evident - all men and women created by the, go-you know.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

What about Sam kinison and his bit about gay rape in the morgue? It makes fun of gay people and you have a soft heart you might be quite offended. But that's how comedy is, it's nuanced as gay people in the example I gave aren't really the point, it's how the unfairness of life doesn't necessarily stop when you die.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cCItAdezw6A&pp=ygUSU2FtIGtpbmlzb24gbW9yZ3Vl

Here's the bit that I was referring to. Is this punching down too much? What if your whole shtick is to be as loud and wild as possible? I guess it goes back to individual taste to ne and whether you want to buy a ticket. 

Last edited by shavenferret - on 05 May 2024

the-pi-guy said:
JuliusHackebeil said:

I don't know man. Perhaps I am just projecting, but I sense the movement of a goal post. Sure you did not say anything about the government. But you did say it was key to find out if something is thinly veiled hate speech or not. And how do we find that out? Your position seems to be: everyone for themselves. So your answer to the central question in the op would be "no, comedians should not have any limits". They can say whatever they want and if what they say is wrong, soon nobody would listen anymore. Free market, like you said.

Do you think that limits are only when the government applies them?

Consumer bases apply limits too. Society/culture places limits.

I've argued a few pages ago that everyone has limits. I wrote at least one post in here about how conservatives have their own boundaries.

JuliusHackebeil said:

And yet, you also said the problem is punching down. But who would stop people from punching down?

You said the problem is that some people push power over others. But who is to decide on what people in what instances have what sorts of transgressions? Speech transgressions mind you. Pushing power by saying stuff in a comedy show.

Then you said the real issue is being condescending and if you make holocaust jokes without being condescending, that is alright. So again, who is to say when somebody was a littel or too condescending?

These are me describing the same concept while using different words, hoping that one set of them will reach an understanding for someone. 

I try to understand, but I cannot. I hope you are trying the same. Because even though to you the real issue, the problem, the key here is to "get when somebody is punching down, that some people push power over others, is being condescending, etc". -in other words - people saying things that you don't like. And if enough people feel offended by something, that person (comedian) is going down. Free market.

To me, the problem is elswhere:

1) There is no free market here. It is not about democratic decision making and what most people are for is being done. It is about who screams loudest and most obnoxiously. A few tweets of some seriously sick people are enough to cost you your job. Cancel culture is real and it runs on faux social credit. 

2) There is no evidence that people are influenced by comedy shows in a way that makes them do or even believe bad things. As far as I can see, you have provided no evidence for such a claim yet (which, others have pointed out, seems a lot like the moral panic around comic books, metal music, watching tv, playing video games, etc). Yet there are now frighteningly restricting laws against speech in Scotland and Canada (to name two popular examples). People in these so called free western countries are criminally charged with thought crime, with wrong think. This is Stasi-shit.

3) Yes, hate speech actually exists. There are groups of people who hate others. And they talk about that. But I have not seen any evidence that restricting speech will make the situation better. I would presume it will not, but just make hate speech go underground where it will fester and become something much uglier. 

So I would propose that the problem is not to find out if somebody used wrong think and hate speech and condescending thought. It is that far fewer people (if any) have suffered because of comedy shows than they have because of a political climate where speech becomes a crime. Like it has in Scotland and Canada and many other places. The west lives under de facto blasphemy laws. People lose their jobs, their freedom to partake in public discourse, lose their money, lose their lives. And I am not talking about Iran or Afghanistan or North Korea. I am talking about the worlds bastions for individual freedom. And you seem to be an enabler for malicous people to take that down.



the-pi-guy said:
Jumpin said:

Yes, because I understand the difference between a joke and reality. And I don't think we should make compromises for young children and those who suffer from credulity and the inability to separate entertainment from reality.

"it's funny because it's true"

Pretty much all of comedy works because the joke is applicable to how people understand reality. 

You talk about liking outrage comedy. Outrage comedy only works because of reality. You can't make outrage comedy about blorgflobs, because that's meaningless.  

You have to poke fun at people's real insecurities or real life challenges.  

Jumpin said:

Do you actually agree with the radical feminists who wanted to ban the Bret Easton Ellis dark comedy novel American Psycho?
Or do you agree with the radical feminists who wrote and directed a film adaptation of the Bret Easton Ellis dark comedy novel American Psycho?

If you were bothering to understand my perspective, instead of getting worked up, you'd understand that I'm not in favor of banning anything. 

Just because I disagree with you, doesn’t mean I’m worked up. I’m genuinely confused on your position of conflating comedy with reality and propaganda. If you’re not in favour of banning anything, why do you repeatedly support arguments to give boundaries to comedians? How would you have that enforced if not banning? What outcome do you hope to achieve if you’re not supporting the point that comedians should have boundaries?

I’m other words, if you’re in support of the radical feminists who adapted American Psycho, why do you support the arguments of those who wanted to ban it?

If all comedy works because it’s applicable to reality, then your point isn’t relevant. When Jimmy Carr makes a bunch of pedophile jokes and then points out the warning on viagra “keep away from children” - we can point out the basis in reality, but we can also point out that it’s comedy, and normal functioning people can easily separate it from reality. 



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Runa216 said:
Mnementh said:

I think George Carlin and Dave Chapelle are equally funny. And Chapelle makes mostly jokes about black people.

Chapelle was fine before the trans jokes started. Now that's all I know him for, and that's bad 'comedy' punching down. 

I watched the "offensive" show Sticks&Stones and the the LGBTQ-jokes were only a small part. If that is all you know him for now, then this is because you only consume his jokes out of context from the terminally online twitter bubble.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]