Ho Hum...Knicks Win. Just Wait Till We Play Utah

[LogGrad98]

It's incredibly easy not to tell jokes that can easily be interpreted as transphobic. The world misses out on exactly nothing when we lose access to such jokes. It baffles me that people think it's such a burden or tragedy to lose some joke about somebody and their balls.

Who said it's a burden or tragedy to lose any joke at all. You don't like a joke, don't tell it. But just because it might offend someone doesn't automatically make it execution-worthy for anyone that might chuckle.

 

[Cptgrnlngs22]

haha test icles is censored but balls isn't because sports

That’s offensive to me as a man……..


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz

 

[One Brow]

Who said it's a burden or tragedy to lose any joke at all. You don't like a joke, don't tell it. But just because it might offend someone doesn't automatically make it execution-worthy for anyone that might chuckle.

If some is making jokes about people who have lost a leg or suffers severe back pain, it's a kindness to point out how rude they are being. Same thing here.

 

[LogGrad98]

I'm sure it is to some of them.


Pretty much all offense, or lack of offense, is based on preconceived notions.


I don't recall making any determination that you don't acknowledge was being made.


So, you made the same determination I did. You agree the joke was just how funny it would be if a woman had *********.


I don't recall claiming there was any intent, which would be necessary for there to be an attempt.


You must know a very limited range of jokes.

You are playing your normal game of semantics. To me it is pretty simple. You found the joke to be objectively transphobic, I did not. Subjectively perhaps, based, as you said, on preconceived notions, but not objectively so. I did not find the penis to be the punchline, you did. That is your perception, and that is my perception in a nutshell. We can agree to disagree.

We can also agree to disagree about comedy and offensiveness. My wife found a group of people on facebook (sorry, on "Meta") complaining about Jim Gaffigan of all people. Blew us away. Found much of what he did to be body- and fat-shaming, and such. Just because you find something inoffensive does not mean that no one else does. You grossly underestimate the human animal's ability to find offense, and overestimate your own ability to judge offensiveness for others.

Here is an interesting question: as long as even one person can be offended by something, should it be eradicated, and everyone who is not offended villified?

 

[LogGrad98]

If some is making jokes about people who have lost a leg or suffers severe back pain, it's a kindness to point out how rude they are being. Same thing here.

I make jokes about back pain, I suffer from it chronically due to surgery. I make jokes about my ability to bend over, how I can't look up properly because I can't bend my neck, and how silly it looks. I can find humor in the situation and it doesn't bother me one bit if someone else does too. The assumption is that you are taking the position of the arbiter of offensiveness. Offensiveness is as personal as body parts themselves. Should we try to not be offensive? Sure, doesn't hurt anyone. Should we be up in arms due to our own perceived offense or our judgement of offense for others? That is the point of debate. So I can find a joke funny, and not pass it along. Both conditions existing at once is possible. Is that doing my part to not pass it along? Do I need to go after people who do pass it along, shame them or something, or petition for their posts or communication to be removed or stifled? As you said, point out how rude I feel they are being? What if it isn't intended to be rude? What if others don't find it rude?

 

[Rubashov]

You are playing your normal game of semantics. To me it is pretty simple. You found the joke to be objectively transphobic, I did not. Subjectively perhaps, based, as you said, on preconceived notions, but not objectively so. I did not find the penis to be the punchline, you did. That is your perception, and that is my perception in a nutshell. We can agree to disagree.

We can also agree to disagree about comedy and offensiveness. My wife found a group of people on facebook (sorry, on "Meta") complaining about Jim Gaffigan of all people. Blew us away. Found much of what he did to be body- and fat-shaming, and such. Just because you find something inoffensive does not mean that no one else does. You grossly underestimate the human animal's ability to find offense, and overestimate your own ability to judge offensiveness for others.

Here is an interesting question: as long as even one person can be offended by something, should it be eradicated, and everyone who is not offended villified?

I used to wear a t shirt to work that said 'Smoke crack and worship Satan'. People found it offensive, they couldn't complain about me wearing it cause I'd change into uniform before I started shift. What it did do is get a whole bunch of God bothering ***** complaining about everything else i did to management.

 

[One Brow]

You are playing your normal game of semantics. To me it is pretty simple. You found the joke to be objectively transphobic, I did not. Subjectively perhaps, based, as you said, on preconceived notions, but not objectively so. I did not find the penis to be the punchline, you did. That is your perception, and that is my perception in a nutshell. We can agree to disagree.

My misunderstanding. If the existence of balls was not the punchline, what do you think was the punchline?

Yeah, it's pretty objectively transphobic. It's making fun of a woman for having what she likely views as a physical defect. It's liking making fun of a tumor on a person's neck.

We can also agree to disagree about comedy and offensiveness. My wife found a group of people on facebook (sorry, on "Meta") complaining about Jim Gaffigan of all people. Blew us away. Found much of what he did to be body- and fat-shaming, and such. Just because you find something inoffensive does not mean that no one else does. You grossly underestimate the human animal's ability to find offense, and overestimate your own ability to judge offensiveness for others.

I heard this complaint about Gaffigan years ago.

I'm not at all surprised by the ease with which people take offense. Some people take offense so easily, they feel the need to argue when some tells them something is transphobic and not funny, even when they didn't make the joke.

Here is an interesting question: as long as even one person can be offended by something, should it be eradicated, and everyone who is not offended villified?

Do you understand the difference between inclusive and exclusive humor? Punching up versus punching down? Does it matter, as long as you get a laugh?

 

[One Brow]

I make jokes about back pain, I suffer from it chronically due to surgery. I make jokes about my ability to bend over, how I can't look up properly because I can't bend my neck, and how silly it looks.

You make jokes abut your pain, and the intent and effect is too include other people in your experience. Did the joke that started this conversation strike you as one that was inviting people to be closer to the person who was the subject of the joke?

I can find humor in the situation and it doesn't bother me one bit if someone else does too. The assumption is that you are taking the position of the arbiter of offensiveness. Offensiveness is as personal as body parts themselves. Should we try to not be offensive? Sure, doesn't hurt anyone. Should we be up in arms due to our own perceived offense or our judgement of offense for others? That is the point of debate. So I can find a joke funny, and not pass it along. Both conditions existing at once is possible. Is that doing my part to not pass it along? Do I need to go after people who do pass it along, shame them or something, or petition for their posts or communication to be removed or stifled? As you said, point out how rude I feel they are being? What if it isn't intended to be rude? What if others don't find it rude?

I was unaware that my three-word sentence meant I was "up in arms". Could you explain why you thought that?

You are more than old enough to decide what part you want to play.

I typed in a three-word sentence that didn't mention the original poster at all. You responded will aa full paragraph talking about what I was doing and how I was approaching this the wrong way. Who is "going after" people in this conversation? Has anyone been calling for a poster to be publicly shamed, given them a warning, etc.?

Well, there will always be people who don't find some comment rude. Personally, if I am being rude without intending to, I want that brought to my attention even more than if I am doing it deliberately. Why would anyone want to be accidentally rude, unless they just don't care about being rude?

 

[LogGrad98]

My misunderstanding. If the existence of balls was not the punchline, what do you think was the punchline?

Yeah, it's pretty objectively transphobic. It's making fun of a woman for having what she likely views as a physical defect. It's liking making fun of a tumor on a person's neck.


I heard this complaint about Gaffigan years ago.

I'm not at all surprised by the ease with which people take offense. Some people take offense so easily, they feel the need to argue when some tells them something is transphobic and not funny, even when they didn't make the joke.


Do you understand the difference between inclusive and exclusive humor? Punching up versus punching down? Does it matter, as long as you get a laugh?

Again, your perception is not reality for all others. And that was not my perception. Therefore it is not objective at all. It is subjective. By definition.

And you are right people are so quick to take offense that they make assumptions and position themselves as the arbiter of offensiveness when they could have just ignored the joke, since they personally find it offensive, but they feel the need to point out their personal offense and ascribe it to others as well. And the arguing comes about from your implication that only people who find transphobic humor funny could find that joke funny, and that is simply not true, and so that implication is, interestingly enough, offensive.

Do you understand that the very nature of humor is subjective? Beauty, and humor, is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[LogGrad98]

You make jokes abut your pain, and the intent and effect is too include other people in your experience. Did the joke that started this conversation strike you as one that was inviting people to be closer to the person who was the subject of the joke?


I was unaware that my three-word sentence meant I was "up in arms". Could you explain why you thought that?

You are more than old enough to decide what part you want to play.

I typed in a three-word sentence that didn't mention the original poster at all. You responded will aa full paragraph talking about what I was doing and how I was approaching this the wrong way. Who is "going after" people in this conversation? Has anyone been calling for a poster to be publicly shamed, given them a warning, etc.?

Well, there will always be people who don't find some comment rude. Personally, if I am being rude without intending to, I want that brought to my attention even more than if I am doing it deliberately. Why would anyone want to be accidentally rude, unless they just don't care about being rude?

You are being intellectually dishonest to think that your "three word sentence" was not loaded with implication in regards to both the poster and anyone else who might find the joke funny. Again, hiding behind semantics.


Again, being rude is not a universal thing. I am sure most can agree that certain things have a very high probability for being perceived as rude, but does that mean that everything anyone could ever saw that could be perceived by anyone to be rude needs to be called out? I once had to write up an employee for their behavior in the workplace. We had several witnesses, including in her defense. I was told by a witness and by the person being written up, that I was being rude for detailing her behavior. I did not feel that way, nor did HR, so was it rude?

 

[Rubashov]

My misunderstanding. If the existence of balls was not the punchline, what do you think was the punchline?

Yeah, it's pretty objectively transphobic. It's making fun of a woman for having what she likely views as a physical defect. It's liking making fun of a tumor on a person's neck.


I heard this complaint about Gaffigan years ago.

I'm not at all surprised by the ease with which people take offense. Some people take offense so easily, they feel the need to argue when some tells them something is transphobic and not funny, even when they didn't make the joke.


Do you understand the difference between inclusive and exclusive humor? Punching up versus punching down? Does it matter, as long as you get a laugh?

Ive seen some **** recently which i really have an issue with, the whole im offended by this or im offended by that. There are a bunch of good laws around discrimination and hate speech, somebody meets the legal standard for action fine. In most workplaces the threshold is nowhere near a legal standard its just offence. Which can typically have a lot to do with personalities and very little to do with objective facts.

 

[MeloTheJazzKiller]

Ho hum....another game in the NBA for the Knicks, another win.

Last night we humiliated the undefeated Bulls on their home court. Knicks now stand with an NBA best record of 9-0.

I am always right. I tell you the Jazz will be destroyed by us. I have a feeling you are now quietly saying to yourself, "Man, that MeloTheJazzKiller is right."