ok, so i made my girlfriend mad with my joke tonight. She was playing mahjong on her phone and i thought that i'd make fun of the people who made it, so i said "ching chong, i eat cats and dogs" , like the whole thing was a rhyme. She got so pissed lmao.

But this isn't racist because they eat dogs. There was this yearly dog meat festival in china for a while. That's disgusting. When i was a little kid, i saw this documentary on HBO, and they had a bunch of cats in cages, and these chinese people would boil those cages and make coats out of the fur. Me and my little bro joked about that for a long time about how messed up that was. So, i don't feel sorry at all for making jokes, since they do this kind of thing.

Now, i've had several chinese roomates, and fortunately, none of them ate dogs at least while i was there. The first one was this physics grad student, he's an instructor now somewhere. And i taught him to say "fvck you, stupid american". Because Asians have a higher income than most immigrants so this isn't punching down at all, it's punching up if anything. Don't even get me started on the penis size thing.

Anyway, y'all have a good night, i'll excuse myself after this offensive display, thank you very much


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


article for reference, these chinese people in the article's picture are salivating over those dogs, they can't wait to eat some dog bbq.


https://www.humaneworld.org/en/blog/yulin-dog-meat-festival-begin-weekend-defying-chinese-declaration-dogs-are-pets-not-food

Comedy vs dramas.

Why is it that comedy is so offensive in the first place? Comedians get a bad rap but you have drama movies featuring things like rape/murder/etc etc etc. But you people have panties in a viscous twist of over some jokes that are being made. see, I can't respect that. People are completely missing the idea of what is a big wrong vs a small one.

Dramas do get criticized. 

13 Reasons Why got criticized about how it was depicting suicide. 

But I think in general, dramas tend to show the consequences of something. Which is the biggest concern. 

Rape doesn't tend to be glorified in a drama, it tends to be a heavy experience that makes people feel bad about it. 

Whereas the comedy people are concerned about belittles that trauma. As I've said multiple times in this thread, you can absolutely joke about anything, what matters is how. 

Does your holocaust joke make fun of Nazis or does it make fun of people who think Nazis are bad? 

Does your drama convince people that rape is good or that rape is a bad traumatic thing? 

What is the message you're giving people? 

The thing that gets me about all of this is that plenty of people who understand that the message matters, suddenly don't think it does when it's hypothetical. Lots of conservatives are concerned about the messages that Hollywood, the gaming industry, news media is putting out. 

Ben Shapiro, on multiple occasions, has made a big deal about how the tv show Will & Grace has brainwashed people into accepting gay people in society. 

Yet somehow, when you ask the hypothetical question about comedians, it is now unthinkable that comedy could potentially have any kind of impact on people's behaviors and beliefs. I would say that most people don't actually believe that, when you really got down to it. I think that they're just concerned that these things will start to negatively impact them. 

You're totally right here. They act as if they are not influenced by the message of the jokes just because "it's a joke so we don't have to take it into consideration". And this is so common nowadays. Take these jokes where women are the target. A lot of young boys are led to think they are funny and consume them day and night. Soon these boys are likely to become those kind of misogyny men we've seen popping up constantly in the last year.

Fool is the one who can't see that comedy is used as a strategy to co-opt people into believe in certain ideals and beliefs, and it is one of the best stretagies exactly because of the "inoffensive" façade it carries with it. If you want to shape peoples opinion about something, go with jokes. Your target audience won't see it coming and they will be more willing to accept your message because what you said was fun to hear.

And before someone says, "oh, I know to separate things. One thing is a message in a joke, another thing this message in a serious context", know that, first, not everyone is willing to separate things, and, second, the more you get exposed to these types of jokes the more you get desensitized to the target of the joke and without noticing, starts to accept the message of the joke. Hypothetically, if you live in a society in which there's a marginalized group of people and jokes about them raping kids for examples starts to pop up, just wait and see the increase of people who will actually believe in this

Well, asking in theoreticals brings out the ideals we want. But aside from that: in practice comedians got into hot water for jokes that are certainly touching difficult topics, but aren't just bad taste jokes. Often comedians get criticized just for using a word, without even considering the context or content of the joke. Sarah Silverman, George Carlin, and South Park. They all cross arbitrary set up lines in the sand, but this allows us to discuss difficult topics. Too much people are hung up often on a single word, taken out of context. People are offended - often even offended in place of other people they aren't part of. Dave Chappelle got famous for jokes about racism and allowed to have a wider discussion - often using no-no words. I think having this discussion is more useful than ignoring it all. So if you ask about hypotheticals - it often is not as hypothetical as you suggest. Comedians actually see the backlash, including death threats. Often by few persons, but an attack can be made by a single person.

There is also this belief - wrongly - that media (this includes comedy) makes our world view. But that is not true. The reality is that media may shape some superficial parts of it, but our core beliefs are formed elsewhere. The best propaganda doesn't change our core beliefs, it uses our core beliefs and twists it towards another goal. The idea that media forms these core beliefs is in the most part not scientifically sound.

For example often is the Sapir-Whorf-Hypothesis cited. But the reality is that this is shaky, especially in the extend it often is used. But yes, it is popular in science fiction for a good reasons: believing words have outstanding power over the thoughts of people is a very attractive idea for authors - people who use words as their tool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmZdGo6b5yA

The jokes that I appreciate making the most at least point to how wrong things are.  But, i will admit that many are crass for its own sake.  So, sometimes nuance just goes out the window and i start making dick jokes.  I also disagree, because you are asking too much.  You are asking for an art form to be evolved and socially involved as well on these important issues.  But sometimes art works on a lower and more subtle level:  it just does things like letting you know where we are as a nation on these issues.  It lets us laugh at a nuanced issue, when even the good guys don't always have good behavior.  In which case, some comedians may lob jokes at disenfranchised groups and this can set y'all off.   Also, please realize that once you start designating certain groups as sacred, and can't criticise those groups any more; you will then get comedians to slay these sacred cows with their jokes.  The whole point is to make people a bit uncomfortable and get them to relieve that through a laugh.  You can't do that by playing nice.  

Enough of this nonsense we already refuted earlier in this thread. It's still wrong.

Your post commits the slippery slope fallacy - “if this happens, then this will happen, and eventually this will happen” with no demonstration to the truth of this.

Liberated free societies aren’t so stupid that they can't differentiate arts & entertainment from reality. If you are finding they are, then your problems are far beyond than anything going on in a comedy show, or books, video games, films, music, or other works of art or entertainment - it rather means the foundation of a liberated and free society has eroded away.

Nanny state protocols will not prevent hatred, or make stupid people less dangerous—in fact, they’re generally implemented by authoritarian regimes to reinforce the stupidity of a population, making them less individualistic, and more subservient to the regime - who then leads them along with the big lies that they can use to oppress/kill minorities. We’ve seen this occur in the fascist states of the early 20th century and the fundamentalist states this century. And the reverse is true, where liberating the arts and entertainment has pulled society away from authoritarianism - as we saw recently in Poland and Ukraine.

Free societies should never compromise their values based on what the stupidest people in their society might think or do. Such compromises only serve to weaken the foundation of liberty and freedom. Nanny state protocols against the arts & entertainment don’t make stupid people less dangerous, but they do make the arts & entertainment less artistic, less entertaining, and less free.

Have people in this thread been pushing for specific "nanny state protocols", or other compromises or are we just getting mad at hypotheticals? 

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9510925

This one did, so absolutely.  The wokeness is getting out of control.

I am so sick of this 'wokeness is getting out of control' nonsense.

Bro, we're just sick of people being aggressively ignorant, bigoted, and hateful without being called out for it. All we want is for people to be held accountable for their nasty behaviour. 

"Oh no, anything but consequences for my actions" is the entire 'anti-woke' rhetoric summed up.