• Jerry Seinfeld: Political Correctness Will Destroy Comedy
    658 replies, posted
[QUOTE=sloppy_joes;47909616]Why did the chicken cross the road? To get to the other side[/QUOTE] actually that joke is about a chicken committing suicide and my aunt committed suicide so I'M OFFENDED [editline]8th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Swebonny;47909934]Define the PC you're seeing on this forum.[/QUOTE] Unbanning you :v:
[QUOTE=bdd458;47909947] Unbanning you :v:[/QUOTE] I swear mate
I personally think humor about things that make us uncomfortable sincerely helps. Humor takes the edge off of things that hurt us the most, and the people that are complaining are the people that are being pedantic about things like word choice and shit philosophies they've learned through Tumblr activism.
[QUOTE=Pretiacruento;47909691]Hell, even this forum is polluted with PC crap.[/QUOTE] Nah, it was just garrys birthday. It will go back to normal in a few months.
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47909908]I think the problem here is you're seeing it at a college level, when historically it's been with the older generation.[/QUOTE] Do people seriously think this is true? Is that level of historical ignorance really what this issue has come to? [quote=Wikipedia]In 1990 on the Harvard campus liberal students called themselves politically correct proudly, asking those they met, "Are you PC (also)?" But the term was swiftly adopted by the right, with its media use as a pejorative phrase becoming widespread in 1991. It became a key term encapsulating conservative concerns about the left in academia in particular, and in culture and political debate more broadly. [/quote] 'Political correctness' and the debate around it [i]started at a college level[/i]. The reaction to it, [i]then and now[/i], came from an older generation scared at the idea of young people destroying freedom of speech and subverting America or whatever. The [i]President[/i] made a big campaign out of opposing it. [quote]Hence, in 1991, at a commencement ceremony for a graduating class of the University of Michigan, the then U.S. President George H.W. Bush spoke out against: "... a movement (that would) declare certain topics 'off-limits', certain expressions 'off-limits', even certain gestures 'off-limits'..."[/quote] Seriously, [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness#1990s]none of this is new[/url].
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47909959]I personally think humor about things that make us uncomfortable sincerely helps. Humor takes the edge off of things that hurt us the most, and the people that are complaining are the people that are being pedantic about things like word choice and shit philosophies they've learned through Tumblr activism.[/QUOTE] I don't know how you can categorically dismiss people using a micro-blogging site, but alright. I personally think that humor isn't universal and I sincerely doubt jokes using the word "tranny" takes the edge off of anything. If anything, they're jokes designed to get the entire crowd to agree with the comedian saying them. You know, just like using the word "political correctness."
i find gay jokes to be the best jokes because I'm an over-sensitive tit who bitches on twitter over my rights being stepped on because someone said the word "Faggot", and I'm not going to cry over some black person making fun of white people*** ***I'm talking jokes that are in fair context
[QUOTE=thisispain;47909935]Nice, except you said "humor itself;" if anyone "moved the goal posts" it was you.[/QUOTE] alright so I mis spoke initially My bad. That is what I meant though
[QUOTE=Rocket;47909131]You face advantages in life because you're white. One might say they're "privileges." You can be dirt poor and still have privilege. That doesn't mean your life is easy, or that your life is better than a rich black person, but you still have privilege due to your race. [editline]8th June 2015[/editline] i'm done with this. god damn.[/QUOTE] If you're a white person of European descent, in Africa, many parts of Asia, islamic countries, you are essentially fucked. being white doesn't make you this universally OK unless you're living in the 1800's where blacks were lynched and beaten. This isn't the 40's dude, white people aren't the 'master race' any more, that's absolutely assinine
I wasn't aware of that, catbarf. No need to through a tissy fit, man. With my experience, though, I've really only seen the outrage fall downwards in age as opposed to anything else. It used to be what upset my grandmother, but it slowly trickled downwards in age to things that were very nearly mundane. After all, that's all I have at the moment - experience. If you want to educate people, your best bet is to not call them a bunch of idiots.
[QUOTE=Kinglah Crab;47909886]man what a great comment section[/QUOTE] [QUOTE] If you have to use racism or sexism in order to deliver a joke you probably need a new career.[/QUOTE] Jokes should never hurt peoples feelings.
[QUOTE=thisispain;47909988]I don't know how you can categorically dismiss people using a micro-blogging site, but alright.[/QUOTE] Bah. Too many people complain about this, but how am I supposed to refer to the type of activists I'm trying to get at? If I saw "SJW", people lose their shit. If I say "Tumblr activists", people still complain. So lets settle it right here and right now: what do I refer to these people as? What's satisfactory?
[QUOTE=thisispain;47909988]I don't know how you can categorically dismiss people using a micro-blogging site, but alright. I personally think that humor isn't universal and I sincerely doubt jokes using the word "tranny" takes the edge off of anything. If anything, they're jokes designed to get the entire crowd to agree with the comedian saying them. You know, just like using the word "political correctness."[/QUOTE] It's all about context. I love offensive humor but I also can't think of any material hinging on the word "tranny" and being funny so I feel like that's just a bad example on your part.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;47910038]Jokes should never hurt peoples feelings.[/QUOTE] Your feelings should never be hurt by a joke.
[QUOTE=SPESSMEHREN;47909671]No one is holding a gun to a college dean's head and forcing them to cancel a guest lecture or not hire a specific individual with a controversial background. Students use their free speech rights to voice objections to a particular speaker. College chooses to either listen to those concerns or not. Many colleges choose to ignore students' concerns and proceed anyway. Some do not, to cut back on negative PR. It's no different than GamerGate's semi-successful campaign to silence web sites which express viewpoints GGers are opposed to by attacking advertisers. Advertisers have to decide if the complaints are enough to pull out of websites that are contrary to the company's goals.[/QUOTE] It's well within the rights of a college to do whatever they want. At the same time I think it's a shame that some colleges would give in. I thought the purpose of college was to challenge, to confront. And sometimes things can "offend" one's sensibilities without automatically meaning that the person doing the offending is being a racist or a sexist. And I think that's where the problem lies. There's being offended at somebody being racist or sexist, and then there's being offended because somebody's ideas or sensibilities are being challenged in a provocative and unconventional way. Some of the best arguments, some of the best art, is designed to bring people out of their comfort zone. To illicit an emotional response, to make an audience feel. I think that people are afraid to be taken out of that comfort zone. I think that's the problem with "political correctness." Not that people aren't being allowed to say racist things, but that people aren't being allowed to say thought-provoking things. To illustrate my point, I present an excerpt from a relatively recent article. [quote] I once saw an adjunct not get his contract renewed after students complained that he exposed them to "offensive" texts written by Edward Said and Mark Twain. [B]His response, that the texts were meant to be a little upsetting, only fueled the students' ire and sealed his fate.[/B] That was enough to get me to comb through my syllabi and cut out anything I could see upsetting a coddled undergrad, texts ranging from Upton Sinclair to Maureen Tkacik — and I wasn't the only one who made adjustments, either. [url]https://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid[/url][/quote] That said I'm not so sure it's that big of a problem. Throughout history new art is always criticized as being evil, as being bad. This is the same for our generation. Truth is that art and ideas are going farther than they ever have before. These so-called "PC police" or "SJWs" or whatever the cool kids are calling them now will fail to restrict art just like they have failed for generations upon generations. Nothing new under the sun.
I can't even think of material that relies on the word "tranny" or transexual humor, and I've listened to some raunchy people. [editline]8th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Monkah;47910063]Your feelings should never be hurt by a joke.[/QUOTE] Wrong. Severity and playfulness is a part of this. A little tease vs. a monstrous takedown shouldn't equal the same thing, and sometimes it just comes down to people that should man up and get a sense of humor.
[QUOTE=SGTNAPALM;47910065]will fail to restrict art just like they have failed for generations upon generations. Nothing new under the sun.[/QUOTE] This! Progressive movements, free speech, etc always come out on top in the end even if it takes years I'm not too worried about these overly sensitive peeps
[QUOTE=wauterboi;47910050]Bah. Too many people complain about this, but how am I supposed to refer to the type of activists I'm trying to get at? If I saw "SJW", people lose their shit. If I say "Tumblr activists", people still complain. So lets settle it right here and right now: what do I refer to these people as? What's satisfactory?[/QUOTE] You can refer to them as anything you want, as long as you realize it's rhetorical. Saying "Tumblr activist" is connotative, it implies a whole bunch of things which serve to demean their arguments. The fact that no-one calls themselves a "Tumblr activist" is also a safe-pass to ascribe what is rhetorically convenient for your argument to an uncountable "other." If I say "Tumblr activists think all men should be castrated," it doesn't matter that no-one is actually within the group "Tumblr activist" and it doesn't matter how many of the people within that group are representative because it doesn't exist as a representative entity. In addition, anything you find on Tumblr which is convenient to your argument will serve as an example of "Tumblr activist" while everything else will self-evidently not be a part of it. It's like saying "all conservatives hate homosexuals" and then you say "well, THIS conservative doesn't." Then I'll say "obviously I don't mean conservatives who don't hate homosexuals," even though that's what my argument was based on in the first place. This is pretty basic argumentation and logic 101. As long as you acknowledge that you're making a rhetorical statement, it's fine. The vast majority of people who use that language do not, however.
[QUOTE=Monkah;47909873][URL=https://www.facebook.com/Jezebel/posts/10152748771642434?comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22O%22%7D]The Jezebel Facebook comment section is cancerous.[/URL][/QUOTE] That's beautiful. "College students don't know what racist, sexist, and prejudice mean." "Look at the straight white male being racist, sexist, and prejudice again."
[QUOTE=FingerSpazem;47910089]This! Progressive movements, free speech, etc always come out on top in the end even if it takes years[/QUOTE] Its usually the conservatives oft he last generation that push the censorship. Now its young progressives who don't want to hurt peoples feelings. Not sure if we should look back to history on this one.
[QUOTE=Rangergxi;47910038][quote]If you have to use racism or sexism in order to deliver a joke you probably need a new career.[/quote]Jokes should never hurt peoples feelings.[/QUOTE] he's right you know he's not saying you should never use that stuff, he's saying that if you absolutely can't make a good joke without using controversial material you're a shit comedian
[QUOTE=Monkah;47910063]Your feelings should never be hurt by a joke.[/QUOTE] Some people can take jokes way too far. Now, what I mean by this is that people can borderline bully you then go "haha it was just a joke lighten up loser" I'm not saying anything else is wrong, but just that this statement in and of itself leaves a lot of things out of consideration.
[QUOTE=FingerSpazem;47910051]It's all about context. I love offensive humor but I also can't think of any material hinging on the word "tranny" and being funny so I feel like that's just a bad example on your part.[/QUOTE] That's very pedantic. Think of all the faggot jokes and replace it with the word "tranny" and it's still syntactically the same joke, just you might feel less comfortable laughing at it. That is, if you buy the idea that's "just" word choice. The point is that such things aren't universal. Context itself is not universal, that's why it's context. Humor relies on pragmatics, semantics, proxemics etc. Someone isn't extra-sensitive simply because they don't think jokes using the word "faggot" aren't funny. I don't think they're funny; partly because my own personal experiences with the word are negative, but also because the joke is really lame for myself. That's not a question of word choice, and to pair down humor to that is missing a lot about what humor is and what it functions as in our society. It shouldn't be a surprise that many comedians are class-clowns, i.e. people who get liked in class because they play to their peers sensibilities, with all implications of such.
Tpain are Jews white I need an answer.
[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;47910114]he's right you know he's not saying you should never use that stuff, he's saying that if you absolutely can't make a good joke without using controversial material you're a shit comedian[/QUOTE] I'd disagree with this on the basis that Louis CK uses some controversial and rather trashy language and definitely isn't politically correct all of the time, but is still a pretty good comedian. I can get people being offended, but taking offense to a comedian when they're clearly saying everything in jest is trying to be offended.
there seems to be a funny sort of competition on the internet between people who consider themselves the rationals against the "art college" people who are considered the feels. it's like what alan watts talks bout with his whole prickles and goo [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4vHnM8WPvU[/media]
[QUOTE=thisispain;47910094]You can refer to them as anything you want, as long as you realize it's rhetorical. Saying "Tumblr activist" is connotative, it implies a whole bunch of things which serve to demean their arguments. The fact that no-one calls themselves a "Tumblr activist" is also a safe-pass to ascribe what is rhetorically convenient for your argument to an uncountable "other." If I say "Tumblr activists think all men should be castrated," it doesn't matter that no-one is actually within the group "Tumblr activist" and it doesn't matter how many of the people within that group are representative because it doesn't exist as a representative entity. In addition, anything you find on Tumblr which is convenient to your argument will serve as an example of "Tumblr activist" while everything else will self-evidently not be a part of it. It's like saying "all conservatives hate homosexuals" and then you say "well, THIS conservative doesn't." Then I'll say "obviously I don't mean conservatives who don't hate homosexuals," even though that's what my argument was based on in the first place. This is pretty basic argumentation and logic 101. As long as you acknowledge that you're making a rhetorical statement, it's fine. The vast majority of people who use that language do not, however.[/QUOTE] From Maddox' website: [img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/965202/ShareX/2015/06/2015-06-08_17-38-15.png[/img] I follow this rule. I'm not going to curtail what I say for useless pedantics. If you really have to question what I'm referring to and want to but in and say, "Well, not [I]all[/I] of X is Y", then I sincerely wish to stop talking with you and want you to go away. (not you specifically, I think you're great in a lot of threads) The point is, if I say "tumblr activist" or "SJW", people automatically get an idea of the person I'm talking about. Stereotypes exist for a reason, and while they can be venemous, they can also carry out the basic idea I'm trying to convey. The people that get pissy about this are getting pissy to get pissy, and are probably complaining because they don't want to be grouped with others despite the similarities. And in that case, I really don't care.
fuck the whole stereotypes exist for a reason, reason for using stereotypes is the worst thing in the world
[QUOTE=Explosions;47910132]Tpain are Jews white I need an answer.[/QUOTE] I don't know if the question is purposefully vague but okay. If you mean "white" as a systematic concept then that depends, Jews have historically been considered the ethnic "other" in Europe so they weren't considered white by those nations for a long time; in the United States however a lot of Jews have integrated as part of the dominant class (though not all by far, especially if they maintain the more outwardly Jewish cultural beliefs such as the Orthodox and Hasidim) which I suppose makes them "white". If you mean skin color then no, Jews from Beta Israel have dark skin.
[QUOTE=Saza;47910140]I'd disagree with this on the basis that Louis CK uses some controversial and rather trashy language and definitely isn't politically correct all of the time, but is still a pretty good comedian. I can get people being offended, but taking offense to a comedian when they're clearly saying everything in jest is trying to be offended.[/QUOTE] you don't have to disagree, i'm not saying louis ck is shit because he relies so much on controversial humor, i'm saying he'd be shit if that was the only thing he could do (when it really isn't) i disagree with the second part though, not all jokes are purely jest, in fact the schtick most successful stand up comedians use is agreeable but controversial social commentary
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.