0
Look at how you word and express your views, again, look at your views on racism. Now this? Your views are nothing but extremes, forgetting that there are middle grounds as a whole.
Yeah, arguing about likes and dislikes is futile. So what if someone enjoys a horrible movie? Is it someone else's problem to try to change that person's opinion?
The factual evidence that being a pessimist is bad is different than someone liking to be a pessimist.
Just because you think a joke can be cruel doesn't mean everyone will take it the same way.
Taking offense to a joke is something that anyone should be allowed to do.
It looks like you don't like people with different opinions as a whole and you want to change their perspectives on things. That says a lot about you.
Yeah, arguing about likes and dislikes is futile. So what if someone enjoys a horrible movie? Is it someone else's problem to try to change that person's opinion?
The factual evidence that being a pessimist is bad is different than someone liking to be a pessimist.
Just because you think a joke can be cruel doesn't mean everyone will take it the same way.
Taking offense to a joke is something that anyone should be allowed to do.
It looks like you don't like people with different opinions as a whole and you want to change their perspectives on things. That says a lot about you.
0
BigLundi wrote...
Lelouch24 wrote...
[color=#2e1a6b]Laughter is a means to gain acceptance of something. humor usually has hidden implications behind it. When we laugh at a joke, we accept the implication of it. People like Bill Maher use this tactic to get people to accept is views So, when you tell a joke that has an implication that people dislike/disapprove of, they shouldn't laugh at it. When they laugh at it, they deceive themselves into accepting something they dislike/disapprove of. I still think you have the right to tell the joke, but the listener can (and sometimes should) dislike it
Mmmmmno.
If I tel la rape joke, and you laugh at it, it's not you accepting Rape as being ok.
[color=#2e1a6b]That depends on the implication of the joke.
A woman is being chased by an attacker down an alleyway, only to find it's a dead end. She whines and says, "Oh come on..." to which the attacker grins and replies, "Where?"
[color=#2e1a6b]In this joke, the implications are:
- "oh come on..." has 2 different meanings
- the attacker wants to cum on her
This joke relies on a play on words. In such jokes, the implications are obvious and non-controversial. Anyone who laughs at this is accepting these implications as true. But since these implications are non-controversial, accepting them doesn't mean much. Now let's look at another joke:
What's the difference between speeding and raping? a cop will stop you from speeding
In this joke, the implications are:
- a cop will stop you from speeding
- a cop won't stop you from raping
These implications are still kinda obvious, but have controversial facts. Anyone who laughs at this joke is accepting the implications within it; In this case, the idea that a cop won't stop you from raping.
0
Everyone has different tastes in humour. I for one, (excuse me for being a prude) hate jokes laden with expletives with no other punchlines. I don't mind racist jokes. I see that other people are offended by making light of kidnapping and rape.
Tact needs to be exercised, I believe. If I were to make a contentious joke, I'd better know who my audience is. A lot of humour orginates from making fun and making light of people and things. Humour will definitely be abrasive or offensive to some.
Tact needs to be exercised, I believe. If I were to make a contentious joke, I'd better know who my audience is. A lot of humour orginates from making fun and making light of people and things. Humour will definitely be abrasive or offensive to some.
0
The Randomness wrote...
Look at how you word and express your views, again, look at your views on racism. Now this? Your views are nothing but extremes, forgetting that there are middle grounds as a whole. Yet you AGREE with them. Maybe not the racist bit, but this comedy thing you agree whole heartily with me. Which, of course, makes me confused as to why you're complaining.
Yeah, arguing about likes and dislikes is futile. So what if someone enjoys a horrible movie? Is it someone else's problem to try to change that person's opinion?
Depends. Is liking that horrible movie inhibiting something about that person? Like making it so that they wish to see the properties in a horrible movie in every good movie, causing them to hate good movies and thusly not be able to go to movies you want to go to? IF you're friends you would do well to convince them there are better things, wouldn't you?
The factual evidence that being a pessimist is bad is different than someone liking to be a pessimist.
But I can argue that if you value the things being a pessimist deteriorates then you shouldn't be a pessimist, even if it kind of makes you happy. For instance, if being a pessimist makes you lose friends, and you value your friends, you shouldn't be a pessimist, even if pessimism has other positive properties.
Just because you think a joke can be cruel doesn't mean everyone will take it the same way.
Taking offense to a joke is something that anyone should be allowed to do.
Taking offense to a joke is something that anyone should be allowed to do.
That is exactly my position. Why are you arguing with me when you agree with me?
It looks like you don't like people with different opinions as a whole and you want to change their perspectives on things. That says a lot about you.
If someone's a creationist, I'm going to attempt to reason with them that they're wrong, because it's hurting their intelligence to be one. If someone is a conspiracy theorist, I will argue their misinformation to prevent others from becoming the same. If someone wishes to limit my rights to tell whatever joke I want because it "makes some people feel bad." I will argue that my free speech shall never be limited just because someone else decided to take offense to something meant to entertain.
Why is having a healthy respect for truth a bad thing?
Lelouch24 wrote...
[color=#2e1a6b]That depends on the implication of the joke.
A woman is being chased by an attacker down an alleyway, only to find it's a dead end. She whines and says, "Oh come on..." to which the attacker grins and replies, "Where?"
[color=#2e1a6b]In this joke, the implications are:
- "oh come on..." has 2 different meanings
- the attacker wants to cum on her
This joke relies on a play on words. In such jokes, the implications are obvious and non-controversial. Anyone who laughs at this is accepting these implications as true. But since these implications are non-controversial, accepting them doesn't mean much.
So you're saying it's perfectly ok to accept an attacker of a woman wanting to cum on them, and that it's an uncontroversial subject? If I were of your position that laughing at a joke implicitly moralizes the action being laughed about, then I'm accepting, according to you, the action of an attacker of a woman wanting to cum on them.
Now let's look at another joke:
What's the difference between speeding and raping? a cop will stop you from speeding
In this joke, the implications are:
- a cop will stop you from speeding
- a cop won't stop you from raping
These implications are still kinda obvious, but have controversial facts. Anyone who laughs at this joke is accepting the implications within it; In this case, the idea that a cop won't stop you from raping.
What's the difference between speeding and raping? a cop will stop you from speeding
In this joke, the implications are:
- a cop will stop you from speeding
- a cop won't stop you from raping
These implications are still kinda obvious, but have controversial facts. Anyone who laughs at this joke is accepting the implications within it; In this case, the idea that a cop won't stop you from raping.
Or, that cops rape people, or that cops are simply shitty at their jobs, or that cops are lazy in dangerous situations, there are a lot of possible implications. One of the problems with a joke is you can't force people to view it one certain way.
If I laughed at that joke, I might be accepting the premise that cops are lazy bastards that wouldn't stick their neck out for you. That's still not accepting that rape is in any way legal, or that cops think rape is ok, or anything like that. It's just a "cops are lazy cowards." joke.
Besides, I still don't see how you're connecting the dots from, "IF you laugh about rape, you accept rape as morally permissible.". Please draw that logical line.
0
"Freedom and Pursuit of Happiness"
It's a natural right I always believed in, I don't care what beliefs another has, as long as they aren't bothering others or are threat to others. I don't care if someone knows or states that they "know the truth and the only correct values", people are allowed to have their opinions, even if they believe in Creationism. Anyone bothering them to change their opinion have no right to tell anyone why they're wrong.
As long as these people don't prove to be a threat or danger (both sides) to anyone, I'm okay with them.
Some conspiracy theorists really do need to get a slap though.
It's a natural right I always believed in, I don't care what beliefs another has, as long as they aren't bothering others or are threat to others. I don't care if someone knows or states that they "know the truth and the only correct values", people are allowed to have their opinions, even if they believe in Creationism. Anyone bothering them to change their opinion have no right to tell anyone why they're wrong.
As long as these people don't prove to be a threat or danger (both sides) to anyone, I'm okay with them.
Some conspiracy theorists really do need to get a slap though.
0
The Randomness wrote...
"Freedom and Pursuit of Happiness" It's a natural right I always believed in, I don't care what beliefs another has, as long as they aren't bothering others or are threat to others. I don't care if someone knows or states that they "know the truth and the only correct values", people are allowed to have their opinions, even if they believe in Creationism. Anyone bothering them to change their opinion have no right to tell anyone why they're wrong.
As long as these people don't prove to be a threat or danger (both sides) to anyone, I'm okay with them.
Some conspiracy theorists really do need to get a slap though.
It's perfectly alright to believe what you want.
If you put your views in the public forum, you open them up to people telling you why you're wrong.
If I decide to put my opinion out there, it's now open to criticism. And everyone has the right to do that, and, in my opinion, SHOULD.
If someone decides to be a creationist, but never decides to indoctrinate their children or spread misinformation publically or try to get it in schools...then fine. But as soon as they do something with their beliefs that affects others, they open themselves up, rightfully so, to be told why they're wrong.
I have a right to pursue happiness too. And my idea of happiness is learning the truth. If people decide to delineate that truth, or deny that truth TO me, it infringes on me being happy. So then, I may respond to them derisively, or at least in a dissenting manner.
The problem is, nobody keeps their beliefs to themselves, and if they do, they're not a part of this forum anyhow, and are irrelevant. Beliefs inform actions, and dangerous beliefs or incorrect beliefs can, logically, lead to dangerous actions and incorrect actions.
So it behooves everyone, to educate everyone, to learn as much as we can, and show where we're wrong.
0
mibuchiha
Fakku Elder
This post may not be worthy of SD, but from some of your posts I get the feeling that you're just trying to justify the fact you're a dick.
Sure comedy shouldn't have a limit, but telling rape jokes to victims serves no other purpose than pissing them off. Or traumatize the hell outta them.
Sure comedy shouldn't have a limit, but telling rape jokes to victims serves no other purpose than pissing them off. Or traumatize the hell outta them.
0
mibuchiha wrote...
This post may not be worthy of SD, but from some of your posts I get the feeling that you're just trying to justify the fact you're a dick.Sure comedy shouldn't have a limit, but telling rape jokes to victims serves no other purpose than pissing them off. Or traumatize the hell outta them.
I didn't say you should go around telling rape victims rape jokes. Throughout this thread I've clarified that there is indeed a time and place for humor.
I'm sorry if you think I'm trying to justify being a dick. Surely didn't desire for it to sound that way.
All the best though.
0
Interjecting on a very light tone, may I propose a sober defintion to the action of laughter?
Laughing is provoked by the body to respond to something that it did not expect, or that it does not understand or know how to process because it does not enter the "normal" way it should.
Just a small poke at your discussion, ignore if you wish.
Also, I consider that any joke can be told to anyone with enough sense to contextualize, meaning realize that the joke is intended as something to laugh at,and not directed at a particualr gender, race or action. That is true.
What may be the point is that you, teller of the joke, must be certain that everyone can contextualize. And if they cannot, make it clear after the joke by another pun on the contrary, or any such twist.
Leaving you to your debate.
Cheerio.
Laughing is provoked by the body to respond to something that it did not expect, or that it does not understand or know how to process because it does not enter the "normal" way it should.
Just a small poke at your discussion, ignore if you wish.
Also, I consider that any joke can be told to anyone with enough sense to contextualize, meaning realize that the joke is intended as something to laugh at,and not directed at a particualr gender, race or action. That is true.
What may be the point is that you, teller of the joke, must be certain that everyone can contextualize. And if they cannot, make it clear after the joke by another pun on the contrary, or any such twist.
Leaving you to your debate.
Cheerio.
0
BigLundi wrote...
...[color=#2e1a6b]I don't think I did a good job of explaining (my fault), so I'll start over and try again
When a joke only makes sense if a certain fact (or facts) is true, and you laugh at the joke, you agree that that the joke makes sense, and thus agree that the certain fact (or facts) is true.
Because of this, you need to be careful of what facts are actually involved in the joke, since some people might disagree/disapprove/be offended with those facts.
These are facts that must be true in order for the rape joke to make sense
- "oh come on..." has 2 different meanings
- the attacker wants to cum on her
No one should be offended by these facts. But with one small change, it can offend people:
A woman is being chased by a Christian down an alleyway, only to find it's a dead end. She whines and says, "Oh come on..." to which the Christian grins and replies, "Where?"
obviously, this can now offend people, since people are offended by the fact that a christian wants to cum on her.
0
Lelouch24 wrote...
BigLundi wrote...
...[color=#2e1a6b]I don't think I did a good job of explaining (my fault), so I'll start over and try again
When a joke only makes sense if a certain fact (or facts) is true, and you laugh at the joke, you agree that that the joke makes sense, and thus agree that the certain fact (or facts) is true.
But the thing is, a joke doesn't HAVE to make sense for it to be funny, or even a good joke in general. Indeed most of the time a joke is funny simply because of its level of absurdity.
Because of this, you need to be careful of what facts are actually involved in the joke, since some people might disagree/disapprove/be offended with those facts.
These are facts that must be true in order for the rape joke to make sense
- "oh come on..." has 2 different meanings
- the attacker wants to cum on her
No one should be offended by these facts. But with one small change, it can offend people:
A woman is being chased by a Christian down an alleyway, only to find it's a dead end. She whines and says, "Oh come on..." to which the Christian grins and replies, "Where?"
obviously, this can now offend people, since people are offended by the fact that a christian wants to cum on her.
These are facts that must be true in order for the rape joke to make sense
- "oh come on..." has 2 different meanings
- the attacker wants to cum on her
No one should be offended by these facts. But with one small change, it can offend people:
A woman is being chased by a Christian down an alleyway, only to find it's a dead end. She whines and says, "Oh come on..." to which the Christian grins and replies, "Where?"
obviously, this can now offend people, since people are offended by the fact that a christian wants to cum on her.
To which I would say...so what? Even if we add "christian" on there the joke isn't about rape it's about a perverted christian that wants to cum on some lady.
And even if you laugh at this it's not at all as if you're necessarily advocating the idea that christians in general want to cum on women(Though...why not would be my question to that conclusion). It's just an absurd situation that tickles that part of the brain that enjoys absurdity.
Yet again, you can't really know WHY someone is laughing at a joke until they tell you exactly what it is they find funny.
0
devsonfire
3,000,000th Poster
You could say whatever you feel like, but say it in a right place in a right time. AND MAKE SURE YOU DON'T OFFEND ANYONE THAT HEARD YOUR JOKE.
Simple..
Simple..