Jerry Seinfeld: Political Correctness Will Destroy Comedy
658 replies, posted
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912654]I just don't like how shit humans are becoming. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912423]So if you're fat and I look at you and go "you're fat" as my judgment, I'm not wrong and I might change my mind when you show me some evidence you aren't fat.
But I'm sorry. You're fat, You're ugly, I don't like you, and I wanna have sex with you because I'm attracted to you.[/QUOTE]
You're right, humans are becoming pretty shitty.
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912654]The world is a pretty dark place and you actually have to try to make light of it which I strive to do, but it's really hard when everyone just wants to create some kind of conflict with each other and it's a bit of a bummer.
[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure how you can say that when you think outright insulting people based on appearance is an okay thing to do.
[QUOTE=Scum;47912682]
oh you don't actually go outside nvm
here's a great quote for u by another old white guy
“It is the individual who is not interested in his fellow men who has the greatest difficulties in life and provides the greatest injury to others. It is from among such individuals that all human failures spring"
you should probably try to develop an interest in other people which doesn't amount to you scoffing and thinking you're better.[/QUOTE]
That's the line I think. You and MisterMooth hero here are simply assuming because I'm saying it's fine to judge people sometimes and that fat people are fat, ugly people are ugly and I'm skinny and white as sour cream, that I'm an "asshole, dick and a shitty person. I also don't go outside."
I could be a homosexual transvestite disabled black sex worker who beats their kids. You don't know a thing about me and all you can come up with is "asshole who doesn't go outside".
Opinions are okay. I'm allowed to think whatever I want about someone and you're allowed to think whatever you want about me. It's when people act maliciously based on those opinions it's not okay.
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;47912685]
I'm not sure how you can say that when you think outright insulting people based on appearance is an okay thing to do.[/QUOTE]
I'll blame my poor use of quotation marks for the reason you think I tell people they are fat. I think shit like that all the time, and so do you.
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912729]That's the line I think. You and MisterMooth hero here are simply assuming because I'm saying it's fine to judge people sometimes and that fat people are fat, ugly people are ugly and I'm skinny and white as sour cream, that I'm an "asshole, dick and a shitty person. I also don't go outside."
I could be a homosexual transvestite disabled black sex worker who beats their kids. You don't know a thing about me and all you can come up with is "asshole who doesn't go outside".[/QUOTE]
I literally just applied the same exact logic you wrote about to your own posts.
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912729]Opinions are okay. I'm allowed to think whatever I want about someone and you're allowed to think whatever you want about me. It's when people act maliciously based on those opinions it's not okay.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912423]So if you're fat and I look at you and go "you're fat" as my judgment, I'm not wrong and I might change my mind when you show me some evidence you aren't fat.
But I'm sorry. You're fat, You're ugly, I don't like you, and I wanna have sex with you because I'm attracted to you.[/QUOTE]
???
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;47912744]I literally just applied the same exact logic you wrote about to your own posts.
???[/QUOTE]
This is just back and forth now. I have trouble explaining myself sometimes I'll admit, but I think I did okay.
I just think people are too sensitive. That's about it. That'll do me on this topic.
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912729]That's the line I think. You and MisterMooth hero here are simply assuming because I'm saying it's fine to judge people sometimes and that fat people are fat, ugly people are ugly and I'm skinny and white as sour cream, that I'm an "asshole, dick and a shitty person. I also don't go outside."
I could be a homosexual transvestite disabled black sex worker who beats their kids. You don't know a thing about me and all you can come up with is "asshole who doesn't go outside".
Opinions are okay. I'm allowed to think whatever I want about someone and you're allowed to think whatever you want about me. It's when people act maliciously based on those opinions it's not okay.
[/QUOTE]
what the heck.
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912729]I'll blame my poor use of quotation marks for the reason you think I tell people they are fat. I think shit like that all the time, and so do you.[/QUOTE]
I try not to judge or treat people differently based solely on their appearance though. You're obviously allowed to think whatever you want, but I don't think that's really a healthy mindset, and neither is defending it online.
I don't think you can complain about humanity being shitty or people being too sensitive when you actively defend judging and attacking people for superficial reasons.
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912751]This is just back and forth now. I have trouble explaining myself sometimes I'll admit, but I think I did okay.
I just think people are too sensitive. That's about it. That'll do me on this topic.[/QUOTE]
yeah people are too sensitive i cant even call them fat and ugly to their face without getting the shit kicked out of me like wtf
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=The Janitor;47912729]
I'll blame my poor use of quotation marks for the reason you think I tell people they are fat. I think shit like that all the time, and so do you.[/QUOTE]
hey man dont project your lame ass superficial mindset onto me ~my mind is pure~
can you two stop bickering so we can go back on topic.
also, if we didn't have non-PC comedy, we wouldn't have Chapelle. And a world without Chapelle is not a world worth living in
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;47912775]I try not to judge or treat people differently based solely on their appearance though. You're obviously allowed to think whatever you want, but I don't think that's really a healthy mindset, and neither is defending it online.
I don't think you can complain about humanity being shitty or people being too sensitive when you actively defend judging and attacking people for superficial reasons.[/QUOTE]
When I meet two persons: one overweight and one average, I will treat the average guy better. And I don't think I am wrong.
First of all it's wired in my biology. Second of all overweight is a sign of either laziness and passiveness or a really bad decease. The chance of it being conpletely out of a mans power to change it is really small.
People are not a binary fat/non-fat binary thing, so its likely that I will make friends with the fat guy if he is a good person. But I will treat him differently, that's what he gets for being different.
[QUOTE=MuffinZerg;47912863]When I meet two persons: one overweight and one average, I will treat the average guy better. And I don't think I am wrong.
First of all it's wired in my biology. Second of all overweight is a sign of either laziness and passiveness or a really bad decease. The chance of it being conpletely out of a mans power to change it is really small.
People are not a binary fat/non-fat binary thing, so its likely that I will make friends with the fat guy if he is a good person. But I will treat him differently, that's what he gets for being different.[/QUOTE]
or you can just address the person like you do with every other person and act like a functioning adult
[QUOTE=Ownederd;47912932]or you can just address the person like you do with every other person and act like a functioning adult[/QUOTE]
I adress every person differently. I don't see why I would insult people by pretending that I don't see their unique properties.
Blonde? Muscular? Blind? Tall?
Whatever property you have will change how I percieve you. And it will change how every other man percieves you. There is no way around it, why pretend?
I am not saying I will attack someone for a negative property, but inside I will still gravitate towards people with less negative traits (on average).
Also if it happens that a man asks me:"Am I fat/tall/ugly/sexy/whatever?" I will tell the truth about what I think.
What's so wrong with acknowledging that people are different? I laugh at my problems and all sane people I know laugh at their negative stuff and enjoy the positive stuff.
I know this thread is bad and is stooping to really low insults, but I still feel weird about that SJW topic a while back.
I'd hate to shove my fandoms everywhere I go, but Maddox made a post:
[t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/965202/ShareX/2015/06/2015-06-09_03-23-18.png[/t]
In this instance, is anyone able to describe the group or groups of people he is referring to without "stooping" to stereotypes? Is it wrong to do so?
I can see why people can get tired of using the word "SJW" - in a way I am personally tired of it because they've become the punching bag for everyone, as if attacking them has become the criteria for being cool. When people mention Tumblr in a thread that is unrelated, I've told people to cut that shit out.
However, it's really the most descriptive thing I can attribute to these types of people, and even if I work my way lower to the groups that are in there, and even individuals, you could be pedantic and say, "Nah man, not all of X is Y."
So if that's the case, what can I do?
I've mentioned before, but I lost a friend to extreme feminism. She was a self-proclaimed SJW. How do I refer to the group she's in?
I've yet to see a solution to any of this. Instead, I've seen a lot of, "you're bad at arguing" or "that's just some petty insult" when I'm seriously at loss for what I'm trying to communicate. And I don't think what I'm trying to say is even that radical or disagreeable - there's a lot of people that follow certain philosophies and nitpick about things like ableism. These people exist, and I know them personally, so what's the word I'm allowed to use?
I don't see this trouble when people refer to furries and bronies as being sex-driven fetishists. (Note: I don't give a shit about furries and bronies.) That's a pretty gnarly stereotype that's unfairly put on a bunch of users with the intent of using them as a punching bag, when not all of them are fetishists or even all that crazy about being a furry.
Is there a separation between using a word in a positive and derogatory manner? Should we just start banning words or should we use it as a means for comprehension?
Im not racist!
Some of my best friends are inferior!
[QUOTE=Superkilll307;47913040]Im not racist!
Some of my best friends are inferior![/QUOTE]
Well, if you want to be specific, my friend stopped talking to me after she failed to convince me that reverse racism exists and that I was oppressing her. She went off the deep end.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47913076]Well, if you want to be specific, my friend stopped talking to me after she failed to convince me that reverse racism exists and that I was oppressing her. She went off the deep end.[/QUOTE]
I wasn't pertaining to any situation, it was just a Joke
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
Oh the Irony
It's really something I feel emotionally connected to, because while it is something that I pick at and use a stereotype for, it's not something I'm ill-informed about. It turned my friend who was slightly troubled into someone who is incredibly paranoid, hateful, and militant. It's not possible to break her new stance on everything. Everyone is wrong, the world has gone to hell, and hell is against her. She spends so much time cursing others. While she used to be hotheaded, she wasn't always this way, but she's pretty much gone at this point.
It's not just her - it's so many people. It's not just one movement, but a ton of them. It's not one form of oppression, but all of them. It's not what you have to say, but how sensitive and oppressed you can appear. It's not about who you are, but how worthless you are if you aren't oppressed.
The bad thing about bad movements and philosophies are the people that truly believe it, and as a result cannot trust the world and hate themselves as a result. I don't know anything about what my friend is up to, but I sincerely hope she is not that far down in it.
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Superkilll307;47913086]I wasn't pertaining to any situation, it was just a Joke
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
Oh the Irony[/QUOTE]
It really didn't sound like a joke - it sounded like a poor response to the fact that I have friends that are a part of the people I criticize.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47912983]However, it's really the most descriptive thing I can attribute to these types of people, and even if I work my way lower to the groups that are in there, and even individuals, you could be pedantic and say, "Nah man, not all of X is Y."
So if that's the case, what can I do?[/QUOTE]
Someone (Killuah?) already answered this when you posted the same link earlier. The problem isn't the terms you're using, the problem is when those terms aren't defined and are used as some amorphous punching bag we can all circlejerk over.
If you're going to describe someone as a SJW or Tumblr activist or something of that sort, you need to establish who you're talking about and what they represent. Some people use SJW to refer to anyone left of center who expresses opinions. Others use SJW to refer to people who campaign as activists in real life. It's not a well-defined term, which is part of why people use it- it lets you rally the base against the perceived threat, even if not everyone is on the same page as to what the threat actually is, and it's an easy label to throw at people who dissent or give opposition. It's not like furries and bronies because those are pretty easy to recognize because they're defined by a specific attribute, but SJW is a catch-all term with a hundred meanings to a hundred people.
So if you want to talk about SJWs, make it clear who an SJW actually is and then talk to that. That's really all there is to it. In your example, is an SJW an extreme feminist who places social good over individual well-being? That's a definition we can work with, and it gives your argument more context and more meaning than the name 'SJW' alone.
By the way, I wanted to apologise to you for my tone in [url=http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1469925&p=47909974&viewfull=1#post47909974]this post[/url] yesterday. I've just grown a little annoyed by the doomsaying over the end of free expression, that seems to miss how all this has happened before and almost certainly will happen again.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47913112]It's really something I feel emotionally connected to, because while it is something that I pick at and use a stereotype for, it's not something I'm ill-informed about. It turned my friend who was slightly troubled into someone who is incredibly paranoid, hateful, and militant. It's not possible to break her new stance on everything. Everyone is wrong, the world has gone to hell, and hell is against her. She spends so much time cursing others. While she used to be hotheaded, she wasn't always this way, but she's pretty much gone at this point.
It's not just her - it's so many people. It's not just one movement, but a ton of them. It's not one form of oppression, but all of them. It's not what you have to say, but how sensitive and oppressed you can appear. It's not about who you are, but how worthless you are if you aren't oppressed.
The bad thing about bad movements and philosophies are the people that truly believe it, and as a result cannot trust the world and hate themselves as a result. I don't know anything about what my friend is up to, but I sincerely hope she is not that far down in it.
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
It really didn't sound like a joke - it sounded like a poor response to the fact that I have friends that are a part of the people I criticize.[/QUOTE]
Didnt even read this page, posted from front page.
Reading through this thread reminded me how many SJW's plague this site.
I swear these people would all be for a world where there where thought police, and comedy that doesn't fit their standards should be punishable as thought crime.
People, let me tell you about [I]Free Speech[/I]
[QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;47913409]Reading through this thread reminded me how many SJW's plague this site.
I swear these people would all be for a world where there where thought police, and comedy that doesn't fit their standards should be punishable as thought crime.
People, let me tell you about [I]Free Speech[/I][/QUOTE]
since when has anyone here suggested that freedom of speech needs to be taken down
[QUOTE=catbarf;47913185]Someone (Killuah?) already answered this when you posted the same link earlier. The problem isn't the terms you're using, the problem is when those terms aren't defined and are used as some amorphous punching bag we can all circlejerk over.
If you're going to describe someone as a SJW or Tumblr activist or something of that sort, you need to establish who you're talking about and what they represent. Some people use SJW to refer to anyone left of center who expresses opinions. Others use SJW to refer to people who campaign as activists in real life. It's not a well-defined term, which is part of why people use it- it lets you rally the base against the perceived threat, even if not everyone is on the same page as to what the threat actually is, and it's an easy label to throw at people who dissent or give opposition. It's not like furries and bronies because those are pretty easy to recognize because they're defined by a specific attribute, but SJW is a catch-all term with a hundred meanings to a hundred people.
So if you want to talk about SJWs, make it clear who an SJW actually is and then talk to that. That's really all there is to it. In your example, is an SJW an extreme feminist who places social good over individual well-being? That's a definition we can work with, and it gives your argument more context and more meaning than the name 'SJW' alone.
By the way, I wanted to apologise to you for my tone in [url=http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1469925&p=47909974&viewfull=1#post47909974]this post[/url] yesterday. I've just grown a little annoyed by the doomsaying over the end of free expression, that seems to miss how all this has happened before and almost certainly will happen again.[/QUOTE]
Oh, oh, oh. I understand what you're talking about. Kind of like with programming - you're usually supposed to define all of the important variables that will be used throughout the program first.
I think I was coming onto that point and then totally ditched it when I said, "I can see if you're confusing my definition with someone else's definition." I totally spaced that, and I think I made the assumption that everyone was hopping on the "SJW's don't exist/Never use the word SJW" bandwagon.
My definition of a SJW is someone who is for the social rights of neglected and often overlooked groups. My definition is the general goal, which includes a ton of different movements like feminism, racial-oriented activism, and what not. The problem is when the need to protect these people come at the cost of creating its own form of discrimination against non-SJW's or outsiders of these groups, and can potentially cause harm through mediums like legislation and censorship. That's where my true focus is.
The secondary focus is based inside these groups, and how destructive it can be with each other.
[QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;47913409]Reading through this thread reminded me how many SJW's plague this site.
I swear these people would all be for a world where there where thought police, and comedy that doesn't fit their standards should be punishable as thought crime.
People, let me tell you about [I]Free Speech[/I][/QUOTE]
I fucking know hey, those darn SJW's at it again. Can you go on about free speech tho brethren?
[QUOTE=Kinglah Crab;47908614]old white man upset he's not allowed to say racist shit anymore. more at 12[/QUOTE]
[quote]Seinfeld said [del]college students[/del] facepunchers don't understand racism and sexism. "They just want to use these words: 'That’s racist;' 'That’s sexist;' 'That’s prejudice.' They don’t even know what the fuck they’re talking about.”[/quote]
Wait, shit, I could have sworn it wasn't 13 pages already.. ohwell
[QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;47913409]Reading through this thread reminded me how many SJW's plague this site.
I swear these people would all be for a world where there where thought police, and comedy that doesn't fit their standards should be punishable as thought crime.
People, let me tell you about [I]Free Speech[/I][/QUOTE]
This is the type of person that misuses the word "SJW" for the sake of covering up ineptitude, particularly lack of wit and comprehension.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47913430]My definition of a SJW is someone who is for the social rights of neglected and often overlooked groups. My definition is the general goal, which includes a ton of different movements like feminism, racial-oriented activism, and what not. The problem is when the need to protect these people come at the cost of creating its own form of discrimination against non-SJW's or outsiders of these groups, and can potentially cause harm through mediums like legislation and censorship. That's where my true focus is.
The secondary focus is based inside these groups, and how destructive it can be with each other.[/QUOTE]
That's kind of a broad definition, don't you think? If an SJW is just someone who supports the social rights of neglected and often overlooked groups, then that would make most of Facepunch SJWs as we support the social rights of gay and trans individuals.
But like, if you said that's your definition of SJW, and then talked about social issues in a broad sense, I imagine any backlash would be less because you're using the term and more about attaching the 'SJW' label to such a mild definition- kind of like using 'fascist' to mean 'anyone who supports government'.
The problem with SJW as most people use it really comes down to a [url=http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/]motte and bailey[/url] fallacy. People use 'SJW' without further clarification to complain, essentially, about anyone expressing feminist beliefs, then when called out on it say 'but I don't mean [i]all[/i] feminists, just these really crazy ones!'. Then when they're not being challenged it's back to how feminism vis-a-vis SJWs are destroying society. If you're up-front about your definitions and aren't being unreasonable about them then there's really no problem.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47912983]
[t]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/965202/ShareX/2015/06/2015-06-09_03-23-18.png[/t]
[/QUOTE]
I still don't understand how anyone can find Maddox funny.
[QUOTE=EdvardSchnitz;47913409]Reading through this thread reminded me how many SJW's plague this site.
I swear these people would all be for a world where there where thought police, and comedy that doesn't fit their standards should be punishable as thought crime.
People, let me tell you about [I]Free Speech[/I][/QUOTE]
these type of posts make me snigger
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47913519]This is the type of person that misuses the word "SJW" for the sake of covering up ineptitude, particularly lack of wit and comprehension.[/QUOTE]
But you're the one using it wrong.
[QUOTE=CapellanCitizen;47913560]I still don't understand how anyone can find Maddox funny.[/QUOTE]
I'm sure he's not just a humorist, you know?
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;47913571]But you're the one using it wrong.[/QUOTE]
The difference is using it as a quick way to insult someone and the other one is for argumentative purposes. That's like comparing calling someone a thug in a derogatory way and referring to thugs in the context of school safety.
[editline]9th June 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=catbarf;47913553]That's kind of a broad definition, don't you think? If an SJW is just someone who supports the social rights of neglected and often overlooked groups, then that would make most of Facepunch SJWs as we support the social rights of gay and trans individuals.
But like, if you said that's your definition of SJW, and then talked about social issues in a broad sense, I imagine any backlash would be less because you're using the term and more about attaching the 'SJW' label to such a mild definition- kind of like using 'fascist' to mean 'anyone who supports government'.
The problem with SJW as most people use it really comes down to a [url=http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-motte/]motte and bailey[/url] fallacy. People use 'SJW' without further clarification to complain, essentially, about anyone expressing feminist beliefs, then when called out on it say 'but I don't mean [i]all[/i] feminists, just these really crazy ones!'. Then when they're not being challenged it's back to how feminism vis-a-vis SJWs are destroying society. If you're up-front about your definitions and aren't being unreasonable about them then there's really no problem.[/QUOTE]
The problem, I think, is quantifying or qualifying when it becomes extreme. I think there's a separation is between moderates and SJW's, with SJW's being the more extreme upholders of their principles. I can provide examples of people I know are definitely SJW's, but I can't think of where the dropoff is outside of how vocal one is about their beliefs.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.