Distasteful Jokes
#1
Posted 20 February 2009 - 09:42 AM
A: Move the trees closer together.
Q: What's the difference between a Jew and a Pizza?
A: The pizza doesn't scream when you put it in the oven.
Q: What do you call a bunch of white guys sitting on a bench?
A: The NBA
Q: Why can't Mexican be firemen?
A: They can't tell Jose from Hose B
Q: How do you know when a baby is dead?
A: The dog plays with it more.
Did you hear the one about American Airlines new deal? They’ll fly you straight from the airport to the office!
Now I post these jokes, not to start a joke thread, but a thread about jokes. This is spawned from the NY Post cartoon and the Att. General threads. Sure we all know several distasteful, often racial jokes, and despite what any one of you say, I'm sure you find at least one type of joke funny. The question is, why can't anyone just get over it? Tell that black joke in public and you'll have Al Sharpton (whom I suspect fashions himself as the new MLK) picketing your house the next day. Tell a Holocaust joke and people will shun you saying, "Too soon." (the way I see it, since the victims of the Holocaust would be the dying generation now, its late enough) Same with the 9/11 joke. I don't know anyone that would make a fuss about white guy jokes, but Mexicans seem to be off-limits too. Dead baby jokes are always uncouth, but does that make it wrong to tell one? Do we have to keep tiptoeing around such issues? Should we have to put up with them, or do people have the right to be as uncouth as they want? Do we have to CTSO now that we have an ethnic president?
#2
Posted 20 February 2009 - 10:03 AM
#3
Posted 20 February 2009 - 10:16 AM
Vaal Satori, on Feb 20 2009, 04:03 PM, said:
Not necessarily no consequences, you can tell me straight out if you didn't like any of those jokes and you certainly can call me a racist pig, but I'm talking about people getting so upset that they actually go activist. Like Al Sharpton. He's a guy that has a stick up the $@! of the stick up his $@!. I admit one should not continuously tell offensive and dirty jokes, as everything is better in moderation, but is it worth getting up on your righteous indignation high horse just because of one joke?
#4
Posted 20 February 2009 - 10:17 AM
If you choose to exercise poor choice when it comes to telling offensive and distasteful jokes in public, you should fully accept the consequences when people are offended.
That being said, I don't think the NY Post cartoon was a distasteful joke. I don't think the artist, or the newspaper would be stupid enough to post something that was deliberately racist. They simply can't afford to. In this case, they were saying that the stimulus was so poorly written, that it could have been written by monkeys. Of course, I don't think the media is used to having a black president still, and I guess they forgot how else the symbol could be interpreted.
#5
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:19 AM
Now, what I don't care for are the Al Sharpton types who will condemn a white guy for telling a black joke but if Sindbad or Chris Rock or etc. tell jokes that are FAR worse then the shakedown artists like Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are totally silent.
#6
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:22 AM
Also, I don't see why we can't argue social norms either. Sure, you're free to say the jokes, and people ARE free to ostracize you. I don't see why we shouldn't be arguing against the ostracism anymore than we argue against racism.
#7
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:25 AM
Lord GVChamp, on Feb 20 2009, 06:22 PM, said:
Also, I don't see why we can't argue social norms either. Sure, you're free to say the jokes, and people ARE free to ostracize you. I don't see why we shouldn't be arguing against the ostracism anymore than we argue against racism.
Like I said, if your social group ostracizes you for a joke that might have been slightly over the top that's their prerogative, but they shouldn't go picketing your house for being a racist.
Also, I was trying to pick some of the less horrible jokes out of the bunch. Could have gone with the one about the 9/11 jumpers, but even I felt that was in incredibly bad taste (although funny).
#9
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:46 AM
Sunake, on Feb 20 2009, 11:16 AM, said:
No, ideally it's not really worth getting upset over. Usually those jokes say more about the person who uses them than about the people they are directed at. However, we are only human, and most of us cannot help but feel hurt when someone treats us disrespectfully.
I also feel it pertinent to remind you that there are a lot of non-black people who are exactly the same as Sharpton, and that you should not only focus entirely on him. In fact, for people who condemn whining and righteous indignation in others, conservative pundits certainly do a lot of it themselves, perhaps even surpassing those they are accusing. I believe Jesus had something to say about that.
Sunake, on Feb 20 2009, 12:25 PM, said:
Do you think that's perhaps because it hit closer to home for you than the others? Perhaps you don't find the Black or Mexican jokes to be in bad taste because you are not a Black or a Mexican? If so then I would suggest you try to put yourself in other people's shoes, as that can be a useful skill for social creatures such as us to have.
This post has been edited by Vaal Satori: 20 February 2009 - 11:53 AM
#10
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:50 AM
On the flip side, if you say these jokes with the actual intent of malice or ridicule (IE: Using that Mexican firefighter joke as a slur against Mexicans) it is wrong.
Other than that, just watch who you say them around.
For the record, I laughed at every single one of those.
This post has been edited by Kenadian_2006: 20 February 2009 - 11:51 AM
#11
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:54 AM
Sunake, on Feb 20 2009, 11:25 AM, said:
Also, I was trying to pick some of the less horrible jokes out of the bunch. Could have gone with the one about the 9/11 jumpers, but even I felt that was in incredibly bad taste (although funny).
It is their prerogative, just like it is my prerogative to not like because your user-name begins with the letter "S".
Or, to sum up my point in demotivator form:
#12
Posted 20 February 2009 - 11:57 AM
#13
Posted 20 February 2009 - 12:00 PM
Vaal Satori, on Feb 20 2009, 06:46 PM, said:
Q: What was the last thing to go through the mind of an employee in the 90th floor of the WTC?
A: The 91st!
Happy now? I know we have a lot of international members, but death is rarely seen as funny. If we can't get over the Holocaust after over sixty years then how will we expect to get over 9/11? Is it somehow right to laugh at fun poked at an event with twelve million casualties, yet is somehow wrong to laugh at a measly 2,752 deaths? Maybe we should ban 9/11 jokes. Maybe I'm an insensitive prick, but I can give you the web page with the 9/11 jokes and truthfully tell you I laughed at every one.
#14
Posted 20 February 2009 - 01:01 PM
Vaal Satori, on Feb 20 2009, 05:03 PM, said:
They have a right to be offended, but unless it is "a term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action[citation needed] against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, ideology, social class, occupation, appearance (height, weight, hair color, etc.), mental capacity, and any other distinction that might be considered by some as a liability," they can't do anything. Otherwise, I am going to start suing record labels for using the N word because I'm offended.
#15
Posted 20 February 2009 - 02:28 PM
#16
Posted 20 February 2009 - 02:39 PM
America, on Feb 20 2009, 02:01 PM, said:
They have the right to boycott your products, protest in the streets, and sue you in civil court. Freedom of speech is designed to protect you from government prosecution. As long as your fellow citizens don't break the law there are plenty of things they can do to make your life miserable. In certain areas with lax noise pollution laws they can even picket your house, provided they are on public land and don't trespass.
#17
Posted 20 February 2009 - 02:39 PM
#18
Posted 20 February 2009 - 02:49 PM
Vaal Satori, on Feb 20 2009, 09:38 PM, said:
"Boycott my products?" The only product I produce is spite, and you get that whether you like it or not. I'm a private citizen, and any protest on my lawn will be interpreted as an unwelcome excursion on my property. You get one warning and ten seconds to get off my lawn. Then the lead goes down range.
#19
Posted 20 February 2009 - 03:23 PM
edikroma, on Feb 20 2009, 10:17 AM, said:
From my experience, a lot of racist/Jewish/white/Mexican jokes are told to people of that characteristic.
As long as they're only in humor and there's no intentional malice, I'm okay with them.
#20
Posted 20 February 2009 - 03:33 PM
And people talking about "its okay if it just humor" vs "its not okay if its malice or prejudice"....so now we need to define what is acceptable free speech? Not a huge fan of that. Someone using a joke in a malicious way is really showing their true colors. I'd rather hear an outright bigot telling a stupid, unfunny racist joke and be able to know who he is and stay away from him. When you wear it on your sleeve, its one thing, when you wear it in your heart, its a darker more sinister thing.
The failsafe in all of this is if your offended, don't listen, leave, turn the channel, stop reading, whatever. If your an offender, expect people to be offended and leave or boo you or whatever. But noone should ever, ever have the right to silence you for any reason.
anyways. yeh.

Sign In
Register
Help



Top
MultiQuote