Support NeoGAF

[JesseEwiak]

not really. I am not an asshole. But I like to play with stereotypes/clichés. My girlfriend is polish I'm german. I get stupid jokes about being german from her and she gets stupid jokes about her being polish from me.
It is just humour, we think stereotypes and clichés. are dump, so we use them to make jokes.

You know you can take power from things when you start making fun about them? If you do not take something serious.

Yeah, people just should've made fun of being lynched and banned from getting on the same bus as other people.

But yeah, Rock's not nostalgic for when the Chuckle Hut was a workshop factory. He's nostalgic for the days when you could walk a vile "joke" over the line until it stopped being a joke and became just punching somebody in the head, and then you could feel pleased because you discovered the "line" and could tap-dance along it.

The fact you can't do that anymore isn't a problem. It's a victory. Own your works. They don't suddenly count because you were "workshopping" material.

 

[Bobby Roberts]

not really. I am not an asshole. But I like to play with stereotypes/clichés. My girlfriend is polish I'm german. I get stupid jokes about being german from her and she gets stupid jokes about her being polish from me.
.

And if you and her are sharing your stupid jokes about stereotypes with each other, then that's a matter of you knowing your audience, limiting that audience, and thinking about who it is that can hear and appreciate what you're trying to do with your comedy.

That's absolutely not what we're talking about. You're taking way more care than almost anyone who complains about what a suffocating influence "political correctness" is, because they're not talking about making jokes in the privacy of their own home with loved ones. They're talking about feeling like their creativity and sense of humor is stifled because they have to wonder whether or not calling you a sausage-stuffed Nazi Kraut is going to hurt your windowlicking Polack wife's feelings.

You see what I'm saying there? When people argue against political correctness in threads like these, what they're really arguing is that they should have IMPLICIT permission to fuck with you the same way you and your wife joke with each other on a personal level, without having the knowledge, the connection, and the sense of understanding you two have. They think that a total stranger should be able to make light of you and your racial makeup simply because it makes them feel like they're funnier people for doing so. That their ability to freely transgress because they like how those words feel when they bite down on them is inherently worth more than any bad feelings you might have that they're reducing you to a stereotype without your permission..

What you're describing in your response wasn't what I was talking about in that post. What you're describing contains much more consideration and common sense - and is ALSO not applicable to the process of a working professional comedian trying to do their job. Chris Rock's complaints about liberal conservatism (the fear of offending someone leading to misinterpretations and misplaced concern and/or shaming) making his workshopping jokes harder has almost ZERO to do with Joe Messageboard feeling like it's unfair he doesn't get to quote Rock's "Niggas and Black People" routine when he sees a dumb video on Worldstar Hip Hop.

 

[Doc Holliday]

But we still can push the envelope! I'm a comedian and I think the fact that the audience can and will call me out for a bad bit is exciting. It forces me to make sure my jokes are air tight, instead of relying on lazy, tired tropes, or to reexamine a topic to find a new viewpoint.

Whenever I write a joke, I try to thing of who/what the target is and if it's worth telling. I've written some bits that killed, but because they felt unfair to the target, I let them go. Still have a right to say them, but I also feel a need to be inclusive. You can still fine valuable art by considering both of those aspects.

But that's your own choice and I applaud you for it. I'm not sure a guy like Jim Jeffries can be funny without being the complete asshole he is on stage, but there's nothing wrong with that. Who is to say what's better? Funny you brought up Cosby before because he used to give guys like Eddie Murphy shit for being offensive and low brow.


Bobby, don't know about anyone else but I'm talking about comedians.

Someone brought empathy before. Should chris rock had empathy for the kids in columbine? Molested kids? Single black moms? The only empathy you need in comedy is knowing what your audience will find funny.

 

[Jakten]

not really. I am not an asshole. But I like to play with stereotypes/clichés. My girlfriend is polish I'm german. I get stupid jokes about being german from her and she gets stupid jokes about her being polish from me.
It is just humour, we think stereotypes and clichés. are dump, so we use them to make jokes.

You know you can take power from things when you start making fun about them? If you do not take something serious.

Joking off the cuff with a friend or loved one is different than sitting down and constructing something hateful or misguided and telling it to a room of people who don't know you personally. You can take something negative and make an empowering joke from it you just have to know what you are talking about and the message you are trying to send.

 

[Sesuadra]

And if you and her are sharing your stupid jokes about stereotypes with each other, then that's a matter of you knowing your audience, limiting that audience, and thinking about who it is that can hear and appreciate what you're trying to do with your comedy.

That's absolutely not what we're talking about. You're taking way more care than almost anyone who complains about what a suffocating influence "political correctness" is, because they're not talking about making jokes in the privacy of their own home with loved ones. They're talking about feeling like their creativity and sense of humor is stifled because they have to wonder whether or not calling you a sausage-stuffed Nazi Kraut is going to hurt your windowlicking Polack wife's feelings.

But do these people not choose to go to his comedy shows? I mean he is a comedian he has a certain reputation you know what to expect from him.

For me (!) they should not stifle their sense of humour because of some people who take offense of a lot of things.

But I understand that it is a topic that has not been discussed in public enough, a line has not been defined AND we also have the social difference between countries.

Spoiler

and thanks for not being an asshole to me like the one guy above. I think at the end of that discussion we would find the same conclusion

Joking off the cuff with a friend or loved one is different than sitting down and constructing something hateful or misguided and telling it to a room of people who don't know you personally. You can take something negative and make an empowering joke from it you just have to know what you are talking about and the message you are trying to send.

Yes! Of course. No comedian should make hateful jokes. I would never make a hateful joke about other people. Because hateful jokes are not funny.
Like you, I was talking about empowering jokes, jokes where you know the person is not serious because it is this absurd/strange.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Joking off the cuff with a friend or loved one is different than sitting down and constructing something hateful or misguided and telling it to a room of people who don't know you personally. You can take something negative and make an empowering joke from it you just have to know what you are talking about and the message you are trying to send.

Would you have cut any jokes from Chris Rocks set because you thought they were offensive?

If so which ones and why?

 

[Jakten]

But do these people not choose to go to his comedy shows? I mean he is a comedian he has a certain reputation you know what to expect from him.

For me (!) they should not stifle their sense of humour because of some people who take offense of a lot of things.

But I understand that it is a topic that has not been discussed in public enough, a line has not been defined AND we also have the social difference between countries.

Spoiler

and thanks for not being an asshole to me like the one guy above.

Compare someone like Jeff Dunham to Chris Rock. Chris Rock knows what he is talking about, that's why he doesn't look like a racist asshole like Jeff does. Jeff obviously doesn't care and he knows his audience are racists. He doesn't magically stop being a racist just because it's a joke though.

 

[Deleted member 1235]

I thought the bit about how he doesn't play at colleges because they're too "conservative", or sensitive to rough jokes, was interesting. I wonder how many other comedians feel this way.

it's not just comedians. the gaf population is exactly those kids.

 

[vas_a_morir]

Chris is in my top 5 of all time. In the 90's, he was untouchable.

And I understand why he has to be careful in front of certain audiences. He did a standup routine saying the same things that completely ruined Jimmy the Greek's life.

it's not just comedians. the gaf population is exactly those kids.

Joe Rogan, a man I greatly admire, really opened my eyes to how standup comedy and satire should be free and challenging. Before that, yeah, I was a know-it-all stick in the mud about a lot of shit.

 

[ivysaur12]

Someone brought empathy before. Should chris rock had empathy for the kids in columbine? Molested kids? Single black moms? The only empathy you need in comedy is knowing what your audience will find funny.

No, it's not. But those aren't mutually exclusive things. It's possible to make a joke that's funny about molested kids while also not making fun of molested kids. Aziz has a decent joke in his standup about pedophiles. It's not belittling their victims. Dane Cook, of all people, has a pretty great joke about rape that does the same thing. And there are people who are find these jokes offensive, but mostly just because they don't understand the context of the joke or didn't read past the headline of "Aziz Ansari makes joke about pedophiles" or they're just generally stupid. It's also fine to make fun of someone -- that's how Kathy Griffin has basically made her living -- but the way she does it is in a self-depricating manner that understands that she's making fun of those more famous than her. That's the the thread, the line, that comedians work towards in their standup. Most of it is context.

Being in standup doesn't absolve you from any criticism to shitty jokes if you say something dumb and racist. If I make a joke about black people that's completely tone deaf to race that uses stereotypes as crutches and punches down, that's not great. A racist might find a blatantly racist joke funny, but that doesn't mean that the standup who made said joke can get a free pass on it because it was "comedy".

 

[Jakten]

Would you have cut any jokes from Chris Rocks set because you thought they were offensive?

If so which ones and why?

If you mean from the intro of SNL his bit was great, his jokes are criticizing things like consumerism not the victims of terror or perpetuating racist stereotypes etc. I'd actually say he is making fun of people who take serious events lightly or turn them into a farce. It was actually pretty tame.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Chris is in my top 5 of all time. In the 90's, he was untouchable.

And I understand why he has to be careful in front of certain audiences. He did a standup routine saying the same things that completely ruined Jimmy the Greek's life.



Joe Rogan, a man I greatly admire, really opened my eyes to how standup comedy and satire should be free and challenging. Before that, yeah, I was a know-it-all stick in the mud about a lot of shit.

Joe Rogan can say anything he wants. And people can call him out on his bullshit. People like Rogan and Rock are mad that they're not the only ones with the mics anymore and those "stick in the muds" dare criticize them.

 

[waypoetic]

I've been banned from this forum for making non-politically correct jokes. My opinion is that political correctness is awesome-sauce

I've been banned for a lighthearted joke about religious folks. I was away for like 5 months. At that point I suspected the mod was offended because he/she was religious. Funny thing about being banned in this forum; you don't get an explanation.

 

[BobbyRobby]

Joe Rogan can say anything he wants. And people can call him out on his bullshit. People like Rogan and Rock are mad that they're not the only ones with the mics anymore and those "stick in the muds" dare criticize them.

Likewise Rock is entitled to defend himself. And others still can bolster comics like Rock and Rogan and encourage them to continue with their comedy uninhibited. Don't get mad that people will defend art they create and like.

I don't think Rock and Rogan would mind if you picked up a mic and started telling jokes or creating art yourself.

It's your use of the mic, the attempt to silence artists that annoys people.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Likewise Rock is entitled to defend himself. And others still can bolster comics like Rock and Rogan and encourage them to continue with their comedy uninhibited. Don't get mad that people will defend art they create and like.

I don't think Rock and Rogan would mind if you picked up a mic and started telling jokes or creating art yourself.

It's your use of the mic, the attempt to silence artists that annoys people.

"Not being paid well to appear at a college" isn't being silenced. Chris Rock can show up and speak anywhere he wants. Not getting a fat check from the Student Association's account isn't silencing him.

 

[BobbyRobby]

"Not being paid well to appear at a college" isn't being silenced. Chris Rock can show up and speak anywhere he wants. Not getting a fat check from the Student Association's account isn't silencing him.

I didn't say it was silencing him, nor did I didn't say criticism was encroaching on his right to speech.

But what exactly does calling the artist out on their 'bullshit' hope to accomplish if not alter their act/behavior??

If you call out a joke, aren't you trying to get the comedian to stop telling or alter that joke?

 

[Valhelm]

Liberal was around well before 1960. Milton Friedman fought the war to take back "liberal" from Democrats for decades with plenty of others with him. It was kind of silly.

18th/early 19th ideas of negative and positive liberalism were pretty correspondent to the modern conservative/liberal dichotomy.

 

[spliced]

He has a point, but at the same time some comedians think they have impunity just because they work in comedy. Sorry it doesn't work that way, you don't get a free pass to say anything you want just because you call it a joke.

Rock is a funny guy but he's always seemed pretty selfish and unlikeable.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

Stewart Lee, British comedian

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IYx4Bc6_eE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc

Dead on, as per usual. Unfortunately the people who tend to be against 'political correctness' tend to be people who wish to say homophobic, racist or sexist things and for people to just receive a slap on the wrists for saying something dodgy (with no nefarious intent) isn't really that much of a big deal.

But, as Chris said, he never goes out to offend anyone and doesn't particularly want to either.

 

[Prime crotch]

The issue is not so much PC environment, but this knee jerky fixation on tweeting every single thing in a nano second; and then have to back it up when you really should have probably took an extra minute to think before putting that shit for everyone to see.

If you can't forget, you can't forgive.


People should take a gander at themselves to see if they're not just offended for the sake of it.

 

[joedan]

GAF is proof that Chris Rock is right. I think liberalism and conservatism have switched positions to some extent. Twenty years ago it was conservatives trying to ban offensive music and games etc. In the current times its liberals trying to get that kind of stuff banned.

 

[Lone Wolf]

He has a point, but at the same time some comedians think they have impunity just because they work in comedy. Sorry it doesn't work that way, you don't get a free pass to say anything you want just because you call it a joke.

Rock is a funny guy but he's always seemed pretty selfish and unlikeable.

I don't think Chris Rock or any comedian was asking for a free pass to say whatever they want. Did you read the full article?

 

[Abounder]

How many people will take this as him decrying political correctness in general, and not specifically when it comes to comedians (which is what he was actually talking about)?

I'm guessing a lot.

He is talking about both comedians and political correctness in general; he specifically mentions cultural shifts beyond the stage and whatnot unless the OP's excepts are misleading.

 

[Doc Holliday]

If you mean from the intro of SNL his bit was great, his jokes are criticizing things like consumerism not the victims of terror or perpetuating racist stereotypes etc. I'd actually say he is making fun of people who take serious events lightly or turn them into a farce. It was actually pretty tame.

No, I meant his stand-up specials.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

GAF is proof that Chris Rock is right. I think liberalism and conservatism have switched positions to some extent. Twenty years ago it was conservatives trying to ban offensive music and games etc. In the current times its liberals trying to get that kind of stuff banned.

I think there's a difference in the severity of the offense in these. Whilst I don't agree with it I think you're making a false equivalence. Conservatives, traditionally, will try to ban things which they feel disrespects 'Christian values' or Christianity itself and is thus closer to making laws surrounding blasphemy, something which protects the majority. Liberalism, however, tries to censor things which are offensive to the minority, people who would actually be harmed by offensive or misrepresentative media. Therefore, liberal attempts to censor are altruistic but conservative attempts rarely are.

Do you feel like I'm being fair?

 

[-MB-]

GAF is proof that Chris Rock is right. I think liberalism and conservatism have switched positions to some extent. Twenty years ago it was conservatives trying to ban offensive music and games etc. In the current times its liberals trying to get that kind of stuff banned.

Remember Tipper Gore? She was trying to get offensive music banned in the 80s, and shes a democrat. So not much changing of positions happened in that sense.

 

[leadbelly]

Dead on, as per usual. Unfortunately the people who tend to be against 'political correctness' tend to be people who wish to say homophobic, racist or sexist things and for people to just receive a slap on the wrists for saying something dodgy (with no nefarious intent) isn't really that much of a big deal.

But, as Chris said, he never goes out to offend anyone and doesn't particularly want to either.

Anything meant for good taken to the extreme can have the opposite effect though. The argument seems to be that people being hounded for little things is a small price to pay for all the good it does to society. 'Political Correctness' is not some kind of divine truth set in stone though, it is something that is fluid and ever-changing. A society where you can't say anything, is a society without freedom.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

Anything meant for good taken to the extreme can have the opposite effect though. The argument seems to be that people being hounded for little things is a small price to pay for all the good it does to society. 'Political Correctness' is not some kind of divine truth set in stone though, it is something that is fluid and ever-changing. A society where you can't say anything, is a society without freedom.

Of course it's not set in stone, it's contextual.

What I take umbrage with is that people act like this is something new, it's not. It is unacceptable to say things which would cause upset or distress to other people if you work in a service industry or HR department and thus anyone who breaches that can be fired, we've seen that this week with 'racists being fired' or whatever it was called. It's just that now the white, male establishment which has been privileged for so long is being told it can't just say whatever it wants to whoever without any consequence, these people were hardly complaining when you could lose your job (and even be imprisoned) for being a communist or when black people couldn't use the same toilets or water fountains but now that they have to be careful not to make racist, sexist or homophobic comments there's apparently some huge breach of personal liberty.

What's more ridiculous is that In society you can say anything

Spoiler

(except countries which have hate speech laws)

but you are not absolved from any ramification of doing this but people like to act as if having consequences for what you say and do is some kind of breech of liberty and it most definitely isn't.

 

[kruis]

He has a point, but at the same time some comedians think they have impunity just because they work in comedy. Sorry it doesn't work that way, you don't get a free pass to say anything you want just because you call it a joke.

It does work that way. It's called free speech. It's a constitutional right.

 

[Mohonky]

I've been banned for a lighthearted joke about religious folks. I was away for like 5 months. At that point I suspected the mod was offended because he/she was religious. Funny thing about being banned in this forum; you don't get an explanation.

Yeh that is pretty shit. Got banned once and it was more like I was being trolled by the mod who did it as there was a vague outline that I made a comment about something and that 'with my post history' I shouldnt be making a comment like that. No idea who it was or what it was in relation to or what my post history had to do with it. Its useless to ban people without an explanation as what the relevent post was, as if its not a perma ban, the person learns nothing from it.

Political correctness can be a lot like trying not to get banned on neogaf. It doesnt matter what you say, some one some where is going to be offended by it, and to varying extremes. The difference between getting banned from it on neogaf is whether that persons nick is in red or not and where their opinion lies on the matter. Often times you might be left scratching your head wondering why someone would get upset by something that seems so innocuous but it only takes one individual who is more personally invested for whatever reason than that and your done.

 

[joedan]

Remember Tipper Gore? She was trying to get offensive music banned in the 80s, and shes a democrat. So not much changing of positions happened in that sense.

Democrat != Liberal.

 

[VistraNorrez]

But you're missing his point of the comedians that AREN'T established superstars that are trying to build their material, experiment, write, rework, test in front of an audience. Re-write...etc.

Those are the people that really struggle in this atmosphere of not being able to make any joke that offends my "liberal/conservative" sensibilities. The point is I don't think there will be more Rocks/C.K.s/Carlins w/ the current politically correct environment.

Comics need to experiment. But you're worried about being destroyed on twitter it can hamper that process. Twitter bullshit controversies make national news now. It's crazy.



Like Rock said...the immediate feedback is no one laughs. That's the point. Gotta test new material though. Crossing the line is a part of that process for some comics. Doesn't make them stupid. It's called learning.

If they aren't established superstars, they won't make a splash on social media and if they do, it'll soon be forgotten. For lesser known comedians it won't become a long term controversy. The fact is most stand up comics never "make" it. There is only ever room for few superstars of comedy. Political Correctness will not change that at all. Most standup comics struggle for a good decade before they can even consider it a sustainable career. It usually takes another decade after that to make into the mainstream, and that's still a longshot.

The flip side of PC is that when a controversy hits, it enshrines someone as great to a certain group of people, especially if they do not back down. All I ever hear is anyone complain about our PC society. That tells me most people hate PC so it really shouldn't hurt comedians, not in the long run.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I think there's a difference in the severity of the offense in these. Whilst I don't agree with it I think you're making a false equivalence. Conservatives, traditionally, will try to ban things which they feel disrespects 'Christian values' or Christianity itself and is thus closer to making laws surrounding blasphemy, something which protects the majority. Liberalism, however, tries to censor things which are offensive to the minority, people who would actually be harmed by offensive or misrepresentative media. Therefore, liberal attempts to censor are altruistic but conservative attempts rarely are.

Do you feel like I'm being fair?

The thing is who decides this stuff? Scientology is a religion and they are a minority i'm sure tons of people would laugh it off they spoke up about insensitive jokes. I know there is a line it's hard to see it until it's blatanly crosses.

It's a tough subject that's only gotten more complicated with the Internet and how open society in general has become. i personally don't sweat it much because like most things it swings back and fourth and changes with different generations.

Btw you know things have changed when Howard stern uses "Wendy the slow adult" vs "wendy the retard" lol

Edit: I have no problem with this, it's his personal choice

 

[TheChewyWaffles]

Don't agree with him about Obama and progress. You can't undo other qualified candidates being overlooked but surely electing a black president can be considered progress at some level.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

The thing is who decides this stuff? Scientology is a religion and they are a minority i'm sure tons of people would laugh it off they spoke up about insensitive jokes. I know there is a line it's hard to see it until it's blatanly crosses.

It's a tough subject that's only gotten more complicated with the Internet and how open society in general has become. i personally don't sweat it much because like most things it swings back and fourth and changes with different generations.

Btw you know things have changed when Howard stern uses "Wendy the slow adult" vs "wendy the retard" lol

The decision is made by employers, really. Because in the US there seems to be a certain level of fear towards government controlling anything that's all you guys really have. If someone says some stupid shit, it goes viral and it makes your company look bad then you fire them.

Political correctness is an odd thing and it most definitely isn't perfect but I genuinely think that trying to negotiate a generally agreed upon, acceptable (non-legislative) lexicon is really not a bad thing, it's good that societies concern themselves with being nice and respectful to people with different norms and values.

What it comes down to is an informed decision-making process, especially in comedy. If you make clever, considered jokes about something such as Islam then you're probably going to be okay (well, not in every country) but if the crux of your joke is 'they're fucking idiots and worship a paedophile' (straight out of the EDL playbook) then you're an ass. I assume that this is why it's generally not acceptable for white people in the US to do comedy about black people, because you don't know the community and your jokes wont be representative of their lives or struggles and so you're catering to a cadre of white people who want to make fun of black people.

Sorry if this seems a bit jumbled but hopefully you'll understand what I'm attempting to say.

 

[Infinite]

Don't agree with him about Obama and progress. You can't undo other qualified candidates being overlooked but surely electing a black president can be considered progress at some level.

He didn't say it wasn't progress he actually said "so, to say Obama is progress is saying that he’s the first black person that is qualified to be president. That’s not black progress. That’s white progress. There’s been black people qualified to be president for hundreds of years." Basically it's progress that the majority of a country elected a black man to be president but it's insulting to say that it's progress that a black man is qualified enough to be one.

 

[MacNille]

I've been banned for a lighthearted joke about religious folks. I was away for like 5 months. At that point I suspected the mod was offended because he/she was religious. Funny thing about being banned in this forum; you don't get an explanation.

And if you do, it just some snark. And you can't see which one banned you. It is BS.

 

[leadbelly]

Of course it's not set in stone, it's contextual.

What I take umbrage with is that people act like this is something new, it's not. It is unacceptable to say things which would cause upset or distress to other people if you work in a service industry or HR department and thus anyone who breaches that can be fired, we've seen that this week with 'racists being fired' or whatever it was called. It's just that now the white, male establishment which has been privileged for so long is being told it can't just say whatever it wants to whoever without any consequence, these people were hardly complaining when you could lose your job (and even be imprisoned) for being a communist or when black people couldn't use the same toilets or water fountains but now that they have to be careful not to make racist, sexist or homophobic comments there's apparently some huge breach of personal liberty.

What's more ridiculous is that In society you can say anything

Spoiler

(except countries which have hate speech laws)

but you are not absolved from any ramification of doing this but people like to act as if having consequences for what you say and do is some kind of breech of liberty and it most definitely isn't.

Well first of all, I am from a country where 'hate speech' is a crime. It doesn't really matter all that much whether it is a crime or isn't a crime however because the purpose of 'political correctness' and 'social engineering' is to manipulate people into self-censoring. Human beings will naturally self-censor when the majority of people around them react negatively to that opinion.

When you create an atmosphere where it simply 'won't do' to express a certain opinion, information becomes suppressed. People feel the need to start 'walking on egg shells' or to not bother mentioning it at all through fear of the reaction from a certain group or society in general.

I am reminded of something George Orwell said:

Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news — things which on their own merits would get the big headlines-being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that ‘it wouldn’t do’ to mention that particular fact.

My point wasn't really about overtly offensive things being criticised or having some form of repercussion, I just have issue with the idea that it is 'okay' when people merely expressing an opinion that falls in a grey area are staunchly attacked because of the overall 'good' political correctness does for a society. It is a small price to pay, they think. When some people view things as overly PC, it's not necessarily because they want to express racist, homophobic, ideas, it is simply that they find the attack over-the-top and disproportionate to what is being said. And going back to my point about taking things to the extreme: in a climate where every single thing you say is dissected and analysed for any potential offence it may cause, society will begin to self-censor and legitimate ideas will not be expressed through fear of reprisal. That is what political correctness does at its 'extreme'.

 

[DoktorEvil]

Great interview by NY Mag(Vulture didn't write it), even if Rock was a bit all over the place. He'd definitely make 60 Minutes more interesting than the dull news show it currently is.

These two quotes stuck out to me:

I assume one such place is Hollywood.

I don’t think I’ve had any meetings with black film execs. Maybe one. It is what it is. As I told Bill Murray, Lost in Translation is a black movie: That’s what it feels like to be black and rich. Not in the sense that people are being mean to you. Bill Murray’s in Tokyo, and it’s just weird. He seems kind of isolated. He’s always around Japanese people. Look at me right now.

It’s bookkeeping. What’s your relationship with the Hollywood power structure? How do you deal with the failures you’ve had there?

I’m still on the table, which is good. No one’s yanked me off. You can be behind and on the table. I never take any of it personally. It’s all money, especially when you’re talking about playing a lead of anything. I guess if you’re a supporting character, friendships may come into play here and there — strings can be pulled in the lower echelons. But as far as being a leading man, there’s a printout, and there’s how much the movie made here, here, and here. How do you do in Budapest? How do you do in Calgary? Germany? And they make the decision.

Never thought he'd be the guy that would feel detached from the everyday pressures of life as a celebrity comic, considering he spent time in the same breath to emphasize how important it was for him to be a dad to his daughters.

 

[JCX]

But that's your own choice and I applaud you for it. I'm not sure a guy like Jim Jeffries can be funny without being the complete asshole he is on stage, but there's nothing wrong with that. Who is to say what's better? Funny you brought up Cosby before because he used to give guys like Eddie Murphy shit for being offensive and low brow.


Bobby, don't know about anyone else but I'm talking about comedians.

Someone brought empathy before. Should chris rock had empathy for the kids in columbine? Molested kids? Single black moms? The only empathy you need in comedy is knowing what your audience will find funny.

Ivysaur pretty much addressed this, but it's about how and who you're targeting.

After a certain point, comedians have to decide how to make audiences laugh. They already have the talent, and could easily just sling tired street jokes within their own stage persona and work at a bunch of clubs, but I feel like getting to the next level requires next level thinking. if you look at early Carlin, Pryor, Oswalt, CK, they all had older personas they shed in order to grow. Oswalt threw out all his jokes after one particularly bad set because he had essentially outgrown the material.

He has a point, but at the same time some comedians think they have impunity just because they work in comedy. Sorry it doesn't work that way, you don't get a free pass to say anything you want just because you call it a joke.

Rock is a funny guy but he's always seemed pretty selfish and unlikeable.

I don't want any sort of immunity, just understanding of my context. Pretty much all my closest friends at this point are aspiring comedians of various levels. As a group, we have a higher tolerance for things that most people would find awful. Widespread depression/self loathing by people who go on stage to make people happy. It's a strange paradox.

As a side effect, sometimes you don't understand the boundaries because norms of what is acceptable vary depending on the group, i.e a group of comedians have wider boundaries than a club audience on a Thursday night.

Like Rock says in the article, stand up has to work in front of an audience(some argue it only exists in front of an audience) , that's how we find out if something works or not. While you get better at judging things over time, you still need some leeway to figure out what works and what may not work. I've definitely crossed the line before, and even feel guilty for some of the awful bits I thought would work (yay comedian self-hatred!), but I've learned from those missteps and honed a better comedic sense because of it.

 

[ivysaur12]

It does work that way. It's called free speech. It's a constitutional right.

No, that's not how it works.

Let's look at this thread, where Lord Chistopher Monckton claims that gays are gross perverts who have over 20,000 sexual partners. While he certainly has a right to say this, and he doesn't seem to be provoking a riot or shouting fire in a burning building, just because he "says" something doesn't absolve him of criticism for saying such things. Freedom of speech does not mean you have the freedom to not be criticized.

What the poster you quoted said was that just because you're a comedian, doesn't mean you can throw your hands up and go "but I'm a comedian!" to absolve oneself of criticism from this so-called "PC police." Now, my feeling is that most of the time, there is a lack of context with those who don't take the time to understand the setting/context of many of these jokes. I don't find many major comedians that would be labeled as "offensive" as actually offensive. People are usually just to dumb to read past a headline and understand context.

Well first of all, I am from a country where 'hate speech' is a crime. It doesn't really matter all that much whether it is a crime or isn't a crime however because the purpose of 'political correctness' and 'social engineering' is to manipulate people into self-censoring. Human beings will naturally self-censor when the majority of people around them react negatively to that opinion.

When you create an atmosphere where it simply 'won't do' to express a certain opinion, information becomes suppressed. People feel the need to start 'walking on egg shells' or to not bother mentioning it at all through fear of the reaction from a certain group or society in general.

I am reminded of something George Orwell said:



My point wasn't really about overtly offensive things being criticised or having some form of repercussion, I just have issue with the idea that it is 'okay' when people merely expressing an opinion that falls in a grey area are staunchly attacked because of the overall 'good' political correctness does for a society. It is a small price to pay, they think. When some people view things as overly PC, it's not necessarily because they want to express racist, homophobic, ideas, it is simply that they find the attack over-the-top and disproportionate to what is being said. And going back to my point about taking things to the extreme: in a climate where every single thing you say is dissected and analysed for any potential offence it may cause, society will begin to self-censor and legitimate ideas will not be expressed through fear of reprisal. That is what political correctness does at its 'extreme'.

The idea of political correctness is rooted in a conservative term that's a knee-jerk reaction to caring more and listening to minorities/women/LGBT individuals, so while you might not mean that when you say "overly PC", I would venture a guess that the vast majority of people who complain about political correctness, not just on message boards, would.

A lot of this is in the abstract, do you mind clarifying what exactly you mean in terms of an opinion that might fall into the grey area that's staunchly attacked?

 

[ReplacementPelican]

Well first of all, I am from a country where 'hate speech' is a crime. It doesn't really matter all that much whether it is a crime or isn't a crime however because the purpose of 'political correctness' and 'social engineering' is to manipulate people into self-censoring. Human beings will naturally self-censor when the majority of people around them react negatively to that opinion.

When you create an atmosphere where it simply 'won't do' to express a certain opinion, information becomes suppressed. People feel the need to start 'walking on egg shells' or to not bother mentioning it at all through fear of the reaction from a certain group or society in general.

I am reminded of something George Orwell said:



My point wasn't really about overtly offensive things being criticised or having some form of repercussion, I just have issue with the idea that it is 'okay' when people merely expressing an opinion that falls in a grey area are staunchly attacked because of the overall 'good' political correctness does for a society. It is a small price to pay, they think. When some people view things as overly PC, it's not necessarily because they want to express racist, homophobic, ideas, it is simply that they find the attack over-the-top and disproportionate to what is being said. And going back to my point about taking things to the extreme: in a climate where every single thing you say is dissected and analysed for any potential offence it may cause, society will begin to self-censor and legitimate ideas will not be expressed through fear of reprisal. That is what political correctness does at its 'extreme'.

Honestly I do feel like your language in the first paragraph is a bit off, it almost seems as if you're trying to imply that there is something nefarious about it. More than that though, I disagree that the purpose is to self-censor. Political correctness is not some government-sponsored dictionary on which we all must commit to memory, it is a societal notion of acceptable speech and has been present for much of civil society however before where you could be beheaded for insulting the nobility or crucified for heresy you're told 'don't say that' when you call someone a faggot or a nigger.

You're also obsessed with the idea of a 'notion' here. It may very well be your opinion that a certain religious or ethnic group is worthy of criticism but you will catch flak for doing it and more than that you express it with no purpose. If you want to make fun of Muslims or gays some other group then of course you'll be viewed as a bit of an arse because most people don't like being cruel to other groups of people, at least a comedian has an excuse is being a jester and meaning no ill, the racist bloke down the pub doesn't have that.

Also, what's this about 'walking on eggshells'? What are you suppressing yourself from saying?

It's your language which I don't understand here, you're speaking as if this is a codified notion which bans speech of certain issues but it isn't. You're free to express any opinion which you hold however people will judge you for it and quite rightly too.

 

[NekoFever]

"Conservative" and "liberal" have thuout their entire histories as words been incredibly maleable and everchanging, much to the horror and shame of those who define their politcal selves entirely by the aegis of those terms.

I always like the paradox that supporting economic liberalism makes you an economic conservative on the American right-left spectrum.

 

[leadbelly]

The idea of political correctness is rooted in a conservative term that's a knee-jerk reaction to caring more and listening to minorities/women/LGBT individuals, so while you might not mean that when you say "overly PC", I would venture a guess that the vast majority of people who complain about political correctness, not just on message boards, would.

A lot of this is in the abstract, do you mind clarifying what exactly you mean in terms of an opinion that might fall into the grey area that's staunchly attacked?

Well, I'm kind of looking at the bigger picture. Something more broader than political correctness in itself. The way in which governments and institutions manipulate society in order to control opinions, attitudes and behaviours. In terms of the actual discipline within social science, 'it would be social engineering.

In my original point, I stated that it is not really a 'divine truth' set in stone, but rather something that is fluid and ever-changing. What may be viewed as inoffensive now, may not be 30 years from now.

In terms of grey areas, it could be any politically sensitive topic. Charges of anti-semitism for a particular attack or criticism of Israel or 'Zionism', for example. I'm not going to give a particular example, or does it necessarily mean it is a topic I am deeply entrenched in, just that it is a very complicated issue, which is also politically sensitive. Max Keiser for instance said that when he was working for the BBC, he was explicitly told that he could comment on any subject except Israel. Such was the political sensitivity of the subject at the time, he was barred from speaking about it. Max Keiser, it should be stated, is a very opinionated presenter.

 

[LakeEarth]

My girlfriend got offended by his SNL standup act, especially the bit on the Boston Marathon bombings. Meanwhile, I'm laughing my ass off the entire time.

 

[besada]

I've been banned for a lighthearted joke about religious folks. I was away for like 5 months. At that point I suspected the mod was offended because he/she was religious. Funny thing about being banned in this forum; you don't get an explanation.

If you'd like an explanation of your ban, you're welcome to PM a mod at any time.

In your case, you have multiple bans for derailing threads by shitting on religious posters and religion in general, with increased ban times when you didn't get the point. And you were banned by an atheist moderator.

If you'd like to discuss them further, PM a mod.

That goes for the rest of you who are complaining about your bans. If you want to know why you got them, PM a mod.

I will point out to other people in the thread that often the guys complaining about their unfair bans are being incredibly dishonest in how they represent them. That's pretty common, so take what's said with a grain of salt.

 

[ppor]

Only tangentially related, but I have a problem with people labeling political correctness as a thing that only liberals can engage in. As if conservatives would be totally ok with any jokes lobbed at them, of course they get offended too. We just don't have a catchy phrase for conservative outrage at jokes targeting "traditional" values like Christianity, whites, military/police, and family/kids.

 

[leadbelly]

Honestly I do feel like your language in the first paragraph is a bit off, it almost seems as if you're trying to imply that there is something nefarious about it. More than that though, I disagree that the purpose is to self-censor. Political correctness is not some government-sponsored dictionary on which we all must commit to memory, it is a societal notion of acceptable speech and has been present for much of civil society however before where you could be beheaded for insulting the nobility or crucified for heresy you're told 'don't say that' when you call someone a faggot or a nigger.

You're also obsessed with the idea of a 'notion' here. It may very well be your opinion that a certain religious or ethnic group is worthy of criticism but you will catch flak for doing it and more than that you express it with no purpose. If you want to make fun of Muslims or gays some other group then of course you'll be viewed as a bit of an arse because most people don't like being cruel to other groups of people, at least a comedian has an excuse is being a jester and meaning no ill, the racist bloke down the pub doesn't have that.

Also, what's this about 'walking on eggshells'? What are you suppressing yourself from saying?

It's your language which I don't understand here, you're speaking as if this is a codified notion which bans speech of certain issues but it isn't. You're free to express any opinion which you hold however people will judge you for it and quite rightly too.

No, it was in the context that, anything meant for good can have the opposite effect if used to the extreme. The argument was based around the idea that any opinion that falls in a grey area, or debatable and gets attacked, is a small price to pay for the 'good' political correctness does for society. It is something that comedian said, and in some sense you echoed. My point was that if you create this climate where any trivial little thing or any legitimate opinion that falls outside of the conventional wisdom, is staunchly attacked and has repercussions, then people will self-censor. It was an argument made also, as I mentioned by George Orwell, who explained how things can be suppressed without an official ban by a government or institution. He was also talking about the current climate in his day as well.

And it is not some government-sponsored dictionary no, but you seem to dismiss completely the notion that 'political correctness' or whatever you choose to call it, needs institutions and governments to help insure its success.

I mean, it's hard to make a case for saying there is no positive benefit to it, but I'm not saying that. I'm not saying fighting against racism or anything else is wrong in any way. I just understand that a climate where every single thing is picked apart isn't necessarily a good thing either in the bigger scheme of things. In terms of being 'overly PC' well, you could be overly PC, it's possible it could go in a direction where it no longer becomes beneficial to society as a whole.

 

[entremet]

I've always felt the comedy stage is sacred. Sad to see what's happened of late.

Comedians want to be edgy. You can't be edgy without passing the envelope. It's almost a kiss of death resume wise if you're a safe comedian.

Only tangentially related, but I have a problem with people labeling political correctness as a thing that only liberals can engage in. As if conservatives would be totally ok with any jokes lobbed at them, of course they get offended too. We just don't have a catchy phrase for conservative outrage at jokes targeting "traditional" values like Christianity, whites, military/police, and family/kids.

It's not about just being offended but creating campaigns to squash any voices. #CancelColbert is good example of this.

You can be offended by a joke. That has happened ever since comedy existed. But when you over the offense and look totally railroad a comedian with a social media campaingn. That's a bit different.

 

[DoktorEvil]

I've always felt the comedy stage is sacred. Sad to see what's happened of late.

Comedians want to be edgy. You can't be edgy without passing the envelope. It's almost a kiss of death resume wise if you're a safe comedian.

Comedians can still be edgy. Daniel Tosh still has a TV show after that whole rape incident at the Laugh Factory.

Russell Peters whole touring gig is based around lame racist Indian jokes.

You can be offended by a joke. That has happened ever since comedy existed. But when you over the offense and look totally railroad a comedian with a social media campaign. That's a bit different.

Social Media has given people with loud mouths louder voices to dictate how the rest of the general public can and should like/dislike.