When does humour become offensive?

[MaryKB]

... How does one reconcile aggressive sexual impulse when it lives in your brain? All the time? Intrusive thoughts? ...

Therapy.

 

[Farm Boy]

Man, that light is burning bright.

Glad we got a line run in, fuel oil was getting expensive.

I reconciled mine with a life of tender devotion. I miss it. But it worked. I still have to laugh at myself, just different parts.

 

[Fippy]

If someone wants to hear / read such jokes for therapy (as mentioned above), they can prolly google (or duckduck ) and instantly find plenty.
If 2 or more individuals like such jokes and tell them to each other in private - fine. We would never know.
If CivFanatics has a jokes section, and somebody randomly posts a joke about rape that should be deleted. Why? Cos victims or just those who hate them might accidently read it.

Sounds like common logic, but somehow we still found a big discussion.

 

[Gorbles]

Man, that light is burning bright.

Glad we got a line run in, fuel oil was getting expensive.

"how can we deal with all these bad things in our heads" is basically, nearly-always, "therapy". Assuming you can afford it, etc. We pay for my wife to go, for example. But, we don't have any money at the moment for me to. The key thing is that I'm not opposed to the idea, nor should anyone be.

Of course, you can make all the excuses you want. But there's the answer to the question.

 

[Samson]

Are you seriously going to mansplain this?

You seem to hold the opinion that male survivors of sexual assault have no valid opinion here, or that other coping strategies to yours are somehow invalid. I certainly understand that there is something particularly bad about male on female sexual assault, but that is not to say that other forms of sexual assault do not really mess people up, or that others do not have different coping strategies to you. If it takes me to explain that to you, then I am not going to be embarrassed about mansplaining. Someone has a sig here that is relevant: “Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.” ― Brad Meltzer

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The problem is, the mediums aren't equivalent. Nevermind the fact there actually has been a lot of discussion in the CFC community alone about the validity of things like slavery and so on, where people do hold positions of "should" and "should not", violence as portrayed in video games is dissimilar from something like rape. They're both "bad things", but they're not analogous. They don't traumatise in the same way; the psychological triggers are different. Also, notably, Civilisation abstracts a lot of its violence away. It's hard to do that with something like rape.

And yes, making a rape joke absolutely reveals something about you. It reveals that you're comfortable joking about rape. The reason for this could vary dramatically, but this is like claiming using a particular racial slur reveals nothing about the user. Of course it does. But it differs depending on who's using it (along racial lines, typically).

I disagree so much. Couple of things:

First the false equivalence.
"violence as portrayed in video games is dissimilar from something like rape". That's not the comparison I am making. Explain how "violence as portrayed in video games is dissimilar from something like rape jokes"
And this is a very important distinction I hope you understand.

Second:
"They don't traumatise in the same way; the psychological triggers are different"
While this is correct, you cannot make the argument that slavery or being genocided is less bad than rape. These are all atrocious matters, but when you spend hours in a game mass murdering a people, how is that less offensive than a rape joke?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Making light of something, which is what jokes do, is inherently a way to normalise the thing (which isn't by itself a bad thing - it's contextual). So while this doesn't have to be the implication of every rape joke, I don't understand your objection to that it could be the implication of a subset of all rape jokes.

The one making the joke isn't just making a joke. Nope. The one making a joke is implicating is the women was "gagging" for it or should think herself lucky someone was willing to rape her, or tries to normalise it.

Any support for any of that?

How about the motivation that one is just making a joke? Without any implications.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

By the way, you know which comedian never made a rape joke or even used a swear word?

Yeah, that's right. We should all be more like him.

 

[Akka]

Except it's not "on principle".

Reread what I wrote. Nobody has made an actual joke about rape. It's not a reaction on something which is happening. There is no context that is even spoke of. It's a blanket statement that "rape jokes shouldn't be made". It's the very definition of rejecting something "on principle".

If it was a thread literally discussing rape, I'd be making a different argument. We're not. A rape joke is a singular example which can absolutely be discarded for the benefit of all participants, because surely there'll be plenty more examples for us to rely on to prove any points we need to make. There is no need for participants to exclude themselves because the examples chosen are harmful, when we can simply choose different examples.

Isn't the very subject of the thread when humour becomes offensive ?

And yes, making a rape joke absolutely reveals something about you. It reveals that you're comfortable joking about rape. The reason for this could vary dramatically, but this is like claiming using a particular racial slur reveals nothing about the user. Of course it does. But what it reveals differs depending on who's using it (along racial lines, typically).

You admit that what it reveals could vary dramatically, but you certainly looks like very eager to see it through the usual prisms. Does this leaning reveals something about you too ?

If you don't know your audience, which is likely true a lot of the time, perhaps this is actually good advice to follow? Unintentional hurt is still hurt, even if there's nobody directly to blame. It's not like somebody watches comedy with the foreknowledge that a rape joke's going to pop up.

There definitely is something to say about being classy about jokes and about being considerate. I'm not rejecting it at all, and I even appreciate it. But making self-censorship on the chance that someone might get offended at your joke a moral imperative means you just opened the door to a neverending moving goalpost.

 

[Samson]

If it was a thread literally discussing rape, I'd be making a different argument. We're not. A rape joke is a singular example which can absolutely be discarded for the benefit of all participants, because surely there'll be plenty more examples for us to rely on to prove any points we need to make. There is no need for participants to exclude themselves because the examples chosen are harmful, when we can simply choose different examples.

We are talking about the acceptable limits of offensive humour. It is hard without mentioning examples of offensive humour. It does seem that rape jokes are less acceptable than holocaust jokes, which says something. I guess the personal distance between the thing and the participants of this thread probably explains it. It is that very distance that makes it easier for me to comment on rape jokes than holocaust jokes. Is is really mansplaining for me to talk about rape jokes, but not gentilesplaining to comment on holocaust jokes, or whitesplaining for me to comment on racist jokes? I certainly feel better positioned to talk on the former. Do we need to meta the discussion, and talk about the acceptable limits of the discussion of the acceptable limits of offensive humour?

Though this does make another case for trigger warnings, which would be helpful in-context to the entire thread. Unfortunately they're often opposed despite having basically zero impact on anybody who doesn't need them. They, like many other things, have been made a "culture war" thing. Kinda sucks.

This is very true. If there was ever an need for trigger warnings it is this.

 

[Kyriakos]

"how can we deal with all these bad things in our heads" is basically, nearly-always, "therapy". Assuming you can afford it, etc. We pay for my wife to go, for example. But, we don't have any money at the moment for me to. The key thing is that I'm not opposed to the idea, nor should anyone be.

Of course, you can make all the excuses you want. But there's the answer to the question.

So now instead of therapy, you are stuck at Cfc which only can make things worse

But I hear you, therapy helps everyone.

 

[amadeus]

By the way, you know which comedian never made a rape joke or even used a swear word?

Brian Regan?

 

[AmazonQueen]

You really think that's the implication of a rape joke?

Really?

Its certainly the implication of some, for example the "jokes" made by Carl Benjamin about Jess Phillips.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-youtube-carl-benjamin-jess-phillips-comments

I don't know about whats said in locker rooms but rape jokes made in the presence of women are IMO intended to humiliate women and make them feel uncomfortable.

 

[Fippy]

It does seem that rape jokes are less acceptable than holocaust jokes, which says something. I guess the personal distance between the thing and the participants of this thread probably explains it.

I don't find that strange at all, Holocaust is a very tragic past event while rape can hit everyone. Yep that includes men cos who didn't hear about prison for example. So that means you are much more likely to meet rape victims (or those who despise the very topic alone), but how likely will you meet somebody who suffered under original Nazis.

 

[Samson]

I don't find that strange at all, Holocaust is a very tragic past event while rape can hit everyone. Yep that includes men cos who didn't hear about prison for example. So that means you are much more likely to meet rape victims (or those who despise the very topic alone), but how likely will you meet somebody who suffered under original Nazis.

I am pretty likely to meet someone who's relative died at the hands of the Nazi's, and who can very justifiably be considered a victim. Perhaps not quite as likely as someone who have experienced sexual assault, but frequently enough that you should consider it when telling jokes around people you do not know really well.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Its certainly the implication of some, for example the "jokes" made by Carl Benjamin about Jess Phillips.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-youtube-carl-benjamin-jess-phillips-comments

I don't know about whats said in locker rooms but rape jokes made in the presence of women are IMO intended to humiliate women and make them feel uncomfortable.

That's a pretty darn specific case to be making a general statement. Which brings us back to intent. Making a rape joke with the intent to hurt people is bad. But that isn't unique to jokes. Making any kind of comment with the intent to hurt people is bad.

But your statement said the implication of rape jokes is that women are gagging for it, and they should be happy someone was willing to rape her.
And that's a pretty fowl sentiment to attribute to for instance Jim Jefferies. Do you think Jefferies feels that women are gagging for it, and they should be happy someone was willing to rape them?

 

[Gorbles]

I disagree so much. Couple of things:

First the false equivalence.
"violence as portrayed in video games is dissimilar from something like rape". That's not the comparison I am making. Explain how "violence as portrayed in video games is dissimilar from something like rape jokes"
And this is a very important distinction I hope you understand.

Second:
"They don't traumatise in the same way; the psychological triggers are different"
While this is correct, you cannot make the argument that slavery or being genocided is less bad than rape. These are all atrocious matters, but when you spend hours in a game mass murdering a people, how is that less offensive than a rape joke?

What's the distinction? A joke about a rape, a mechanic about slavery. They're both something about a traumatic thing. You're attempting to suggest that because people are saying we shouldn't have rape jokes, we therefore shouldn't have violence in video games. Or the reverse (that because we do, we should therefore permit rape jokes). And that's not a nuanced comparison. It's one rooted in simple yes / no permissiveness. It ignores context. For example, Civilisation might be able to implement something in a way that is more constructive (to the point of the game and the history than it's trying to portray), but another game might not. See again: slavery, and how it kinda vanished from the franchise.

I said, they don't traumatise in the same way. Again, we can't really stick on slavery here because it pretty much vanished from the game. I wonder why? Violence is different because the aspect of trauma will change depending on context. People object to killing humans in video games more than they do something like demons. People object to realistic depictions of violence more than they do cartoon violence. The closer to "real" something is, the more traumatising it can be. A rape joke is joking about something real.

Also, notably, games put a ton of work into cultural depictions of minorities and subjects like genocide. So I'm not sure where you're going with this, because you seem to be using all the work that goes into a game to support an argument that comedians don't have to do anything except tell the jokes they want to tell. My point is that comedians should put in the work, and if their content ends up offending people, that's on them. Not the people who're offended. It's quite literally their job to create this content, so I don't think I'm imposing some kind of unrealistic standard here.

I mean, what is your worry here? That comedy will cease to exist? If that's the case I've got a bunch of fantastic comedians to recommend that don't need to go near edgy humour to be funny. Genuinely. James Acaster is a brilliant (British) example.

The one making the joke isn't just making a joke. Nope. The one making a joke is implicating is the women was "gagging" for it or should think herself lucky someone was willing to rape her, or tries to normalise it.

Any support for any of that?

How about the motivation that one is just making a joke? Without any implications.

I mean, I don't understand why you're taking something that might be, and rephrasing it to suggest I (or other posters) are saying it always is. Sometimes a joke is just a joke. Sometimes it's worded badly. Sometimes it's lacking helpful context. Sometimes it is not. You seem to be objecting to the idea that "sometimes it is not", and I don't see why.

If someone is "just" making a joke, then they're still choosing to make a joke about rape. If they don't want to contextualise it or relate it to their own trauma in any way, then people are going to draw their own conclusions. This is just how it works. Thankfully, most jokes come with appropriate context that lends itself to a more accurate judgement. But insisting that jokes are "just" jokes - to me - seems like a way of removing that context. Which then causes problems in analysis.

Reread what I wrote. Nobody has made an actual joke about rape. It's not a reaction on something which is happening. There is no contest that is even spoke of. It's a blanket statement that "rape jokes shouldn't be made". It's the very definition of rejecting something "on principle".

Trauma doesn't work solely by someone cracking a joke about a thing. This entire discussion, my own contributions included, relate to any potential trauma (and I considered this before I started replying on these tangents with Ziggy and yourself).

Isn't the very subject of the thread when humour becomes offensive ?

It is. And contextually it can be argued that humour specifically about rape is offensive. Because we have at least one rape survivor posting.

You admit that what it reveals could vary dramatically, but you certainly looks like very eager to see it through the usual prisms. Does this leaning reveals something about you too ?

If I said "yes", would you concede the point?

There definitely is something to say about being classy about jokes and about being considerate. I'm not rejecting it at all, and I even appreciate it. But making self-censorship on the chance that someone might get offended at your joke a moral imperative means you just opened the door to a neverending moving goalpost.

A lot of comedy is about self-censorship. It's about knowing when to say something, and when not to. Self-censorship is inherent to the medium. A good joke can't just be a good joke, it has to land well. That's why a lot of routines involve warming up the audience. It's a social engagement; humanising the relationship between the comedian and their audience (to whom the comedian, though maybe famous, is still a stranger in personal terms).

EDIT

Yeesh this post is getting long.

We are talking about the acceptable limits of offensive humour. It is hard without mentioning examples of offensive humour. It does seem that rape jokes are less acceptable than holocaust jokes, which says something. I guess the personal distance between the thing and the participants of this thread probably explains it. It is that very distance that makes it easier for me to comment on rape jokes than holocaust jokes. Is is really mansplaining for me to talk about rape jokes, but not gentilesplaining to comment on holocaust jokes, or whitesplaining for me to comment on racist jokes? I certainly feel better positioned to talk on the former. Do we need to meta the discussion, and talk about the acceptable limits of the discussion of the acceptable limits of offensive humour?

It is hard without mentioning examples. Doesn't mean we have to stick with one example until the end of time, though. There was no problem using it as a measuring stick until a poster talked about how it was unacceptable to them. Mary then further evidenced this by pointing out she's a rape survivor. As far as I'm concerned, that's where any attempt at defending its necessity should stop. In the current context.

That doesn't mean you can't try to explore things like you are doing with her, but in general I feel there's far less honest respect for someone like Mary's position than there should be. In short, I'm talking about other posters.

 

[AmazonQueen]

That's a pretty darn specific case to be making a general statement. Which brings us back to intent. Making a rape joke with the intent to hurt people is bad. But that isn't unique to jokes. Making any kind of comment with the intent to hurt people is bad.

But your statement said the implication of rape jokes is that women are gagging for it, and they should be happy someone was willing to rape her.
And that's a pretty fowl sentiment to attribute to for instance Jim Jefferies. Do you think Jefferies feels that women are gagging for it, and they should be happy someone was willing to rape them?

I've never heard or heard of Jim Jeffries so I can't judge that. I'm going on is rape jokes I have heard men telling.

I note that Jim Jefferies himself has engaged in some reflection about the type of humour hes employed in the past.

"Now, I’ve been known to make the occasional inappropriate or sexist joke. My act is what you’d call an acquired taste. But I’ve always believed that my audience understood that those are jokes and don’t represent my actual beliefs. Then came the day when a large part of America was willing to write off pussy-grabbing as 'locker room talk,' and I started to rethink that. And if this latest news has made me realize anything, it’s that we as men have been incredibly ignorant about what’s happening right underneath our noses. The women who are now sharing their painful experiences are some of the richest, most powerful, and beloved women in the country, and if they’re fearful of speaking out, just imagine how hard it must be for every other woman in the world.

I was stupid to think that people like Harvey Weinstein were rare. Look at your Twitter and Facebook feeds this week, and you’ll see women sharing their own stories using the hashtag #MeToo. Chances are that every woman you know has experienced harassment or worse. I thought I was a pretty good guy, what with all the not raping I’ve done, but it turns out, that’s not enough. It’s a start, but it’s not enough. We need to create a culture where women feel safe coming forward about their experiences, and when they do, we need to hear them. Every week on this show I say, 'I think we can do better.' I know I can."

 

[Kyriakos]

I don't think you'd hear/read rape jokes in any setting which isn't either really stupid/jerkish, or some extreme dark comedy (which can include stuff about murder and worse things, and is very rare; maybe cyanide and happiness and Gooby pls had such stuff). So I wouldn't think that rape jokes are something routine/common at all.

 

[Fippy]

I am pretty likely to meet someone who's relative died at the hands of the Nazi's, and who can very justifiably be considered a victim. Perhaps not quite as likely as someone who have experienced sexual assault, but frequently enough that you should consider it when telling jokes around people you do not know really well.

Correct, but if something horrible is done to ourselves victims are often scarred for life. While relatives of peoples who were effected can often live normal lives. Not always but it's more likely.
Anyways i don't like any such jokes..not trying to downplay anything.