Calling a Kid the "C" Word

[Do4600]

Doing something "ironically" is still doing it.

The actions and words may be the same but the meaning is totally different, totally different and that's what really matters. Do you hold "The Producers" to the same standard, that even though they meant "Springtime for Hitler" ironically, they are still performing it and therefore it glorifies the Third Reich?

 

[Do4600]

The problem is that it took 2 pages to explain the satire of the joke. That's a problem right there.

Actually, I think the best jokes are the ones that require two pages to explain to somebody who didn't get it. The more information the joke involves the more your mind has to compare and juxtapose those different sets of information and with that there are more incongruities that cause you to laugh.

 

[MasterOfHisOwnDomain]

(which I understand to be common to the point of casual use in the UK)

HAHA. Oh my no. It's become vaguely growing as an acceptable swear word, but it's still far more incendiary than the f-word and certainly not thrown around casually unless you're with people you're absolutely sure won't go ballistic.

 

[2xDouble]

Doing something "ironically" is still doing it.

The actions and words may be the same but the meaning is totally different, totally different and that's what really matters. Do you hold "The Producers" to the same standard, that even though they meant "Springtime for Hitler" ironically, they are still performing it and therefore it glorifies the Third Reich?

Yes. Fortunately for The Producers there was significantly more to the plot than the play within the play. The "ironic" glorification of the Third Reich is muted by the absurdity (not irony) of the circumstances surrounding it; specifically the borderline insane people embracing and endorsing that. It shows other characters glorifying Hitler "ironically" and the involves us (the audience) making fun of them for it. There is no such context here, or in most cases claiming an "irony" defense for their poor taste and vulgar actions... the cunts.

 

[AgentNein]

http://badassdigest.com/2013/02/26/film-crit-hulk-smash-hulk-vs.-the-context-of-comedy/


As usual Film Crit Hulk has a lot of interesting and insightful stuff to say on the matter.

I do keep on hearing people say something to the effect of "no one should be made to apologize, freedom of speech blah blah". To be clear, no one forced anyone to apologize. The Onion decided that maybe their joke was either misunderstood, or went too far, and they chose to apologize.

If I tell a joke to a friend and my friend takes offense, he's not making me apologize. I'm apologizing because obviously my intent wasn't to offend (unless I'm a dick).

No one wants to destroy freedom of speech. But as others have said in the past, freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism and consequence.

 

[strumbore]

I don't see the problem.
I see exactly why the joke DOES work,
and it's all the reasons Bob described!

1) it's shocking
2) it's offensive
3) its target is antithetical to the accusation

Here's where Bob and all the insufferable,
liberal knee-jerks keep getting wrong though:

The joke isn't on society--
there's no intellectual point intended;
The joke's on the guy making the joke!

It's been formulative comedy for decades!
He's the buffoon! The outcast! The manchild!

The audience IS SUPPOSED to hold the guy making the joke in contempt
and laugh that he would be stupid enough to say such a thing!
__________________________________________
As an observant member of society, I know all about modern taboos,
and what is troubling is that while most subjects are fair-game in
comedy, the same old sacred cows remain. If you question why taxpayers
should pay for people to have sex (contraceptives), you're a combatant
in the War-on-Women. Whoever denies you can't make fun of a black icon
(IN ANY WAY) without being called a racist is simply a liar who doesn't
read their own angry, online screeds.

 

[MB202]

...Who the f*** calls a 9-year-old a c**t? Like seriously, where's the joke in that? "Ha ha, you called a 9-year-old something you shouldn't call anyone, ha ha." Where's the humor in that?

 

[MB202]

Although, Bob helped explain it better, but really, who's going to be smart enough to "get" that kind of joke?

 

[Lieju]

. If you question why taxpayers
should pay for people to have sex (contraceptives).

Ah, yes, because you can't have sex without contraceptives, everyone knows that.
If your joke is nonsensical and dumb, people are right to point that out.

Eddie: Hey, Richie...
Richie: What is it Eddie?
Eddie: Can we say ''****''?
...
Richie: Very much not.
Eddie: Right you are... *ahem* CUUUUUUUUUNT!

And that, my friends, is how we deal when someone says we cannot say the word ''****''. Cunting fuck.

The issue is not about whether you can use the word, but whether using it is appropriate and if this joke was unintentionally offensive.

There is time and place for different kinds of language.

I can see why Onion would have to apologise on this.

If they meant the offense, and wanted to seriously say she is a ****, then they have the right to. But if they made a joke that largely failed, making people take it as something it wasn't meant to be, it's their failure.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I get what they were trying to do. The amount of scrutiny female actors get during the Oscars is ridiculous (and then they get ridiculed for having shown their boobs) but Twitter really isn't a good place to get that kind of joke across and it just fell flat.

I think people are making a mountain out of a molehill on this one.

If you question why taxpayers
should pay for people to have sex (contraceptives), you're a combatant
in the War-on-Women. .

Just want to enlighten people (since it's Endometriosis awareness month) 1 in 20 women suffer from a disease called Endometriosis it's painful, sometimes crippling and if left untreated can turn into cancer. It's incurable and the only treatment is birth control. So some women asking for free birth control aren't looking for a fun time just relief from a horrific disease. Not to mention the whole pregnancy management aspect.

 

[nolongerhere]

God, I love these forums sometimes. So many people talking about how they just fling out slurs left and right because they're just 2 EDGY 4 U!!!!! Also, all the people saying The Onion shouldn't have apologized are infringing on The Onion's right to free speech.

 

[strumbore]

Just want to enlighten people (since it's Endometriosis awareness month) 1 in 20 women suffer from a disease called Endometriosis it's painful, sometimes crippling and if left untreated can turn into cancer. It's incurable and the only treatment is birth control. So some women asking for free birth control aren't looking for a fun time just relief from a horrific disease. Not to mention the whole pregnancy management aspect.

besides the very last thing, I like this person.
Just the facts.
and you know what?
I didn't know this.

I *assumed* there were health benefits of some
birth-control drugs, but really, I never thought
such drugs would be denied for that purpose.
Who would? Honestly and sincerely?

The reason people on the other side of the issue
get angry over about this is all they hear on tv
is idiots saying they need them SPECIFICALLY because
it's their "right" to have sex [without getting pregnant].
It's bizarre and infuriating because it diminishes
the importance of REAL, Natural Rights, which are
not whimsical demands forced on individuals by society,
but things society cannot infringe on:

Freedom of Speech.
Freedom of Religion.
Freedom of Enterprise.
Right to Property
Right to Bear Arms

Right to safe sex
(???)

sometimes, individuals need to be responsible for themselves.

Pay 7-11 the six bucks.

 

[strumbore]

(I want to point out also, before **** starts flying,
that even Sandra Fluke acknowledged that the reason
her friends needed b.c. was medicinal, not recreational,
so I don't know how people can insist the latter reason
holds equal weight.)

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

SNIP

Granted I live in the UK but I've never heard any put it quite like that. Mostly it's women who want some control over their life. We give birth control free on the National Health Service (alongside sex education class) because it's preferable to having a massive population, spread of STD's(condoms), and unplanned and teenage pregnancies. People are going to have sex so why not encourage them to be responsible about it. The UK is decidedly more socialist than the US though.

That said most people buy condoms anyway because it's a pain to ask the doctor/ go to the clinic all the time. The pill is free but you have to see a GP for it.

I think it should be free because if you can't afford birth control you sure as hell can't afford a kid, but sex is free and people are stupid.

 

[strumbore]

I think it should be free because if you can't afford birth control you sure as hell can't afford a kid, but sex is free and people are stupid.

I'm sorry, but in the United States we don't call
our citizens stupid and make laws to protect them
from themselves.
If people are too lazy to buy condoms and risk
spending 18 years raising kids they can't afford,
that says more about culture than it does about
government.

Could have done without the "SNIP" too,
no quote at all would have been fine.
I thought I was very polite towards your
opinion.

Control over society isn't the same as control over oneself.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Most people write snip when they just want to answer people on this forum, it wasn't hostile ;p

The thing is the people who are too poor to buy birth control are the people who don't need unwanted pregnancies. That's pretty logical.

There is a difference between being realistic and practical and thinking every one is going to live all chastely until they want a baby. It's just not going to happen.

A similar thing would be not paying for a police force and expecting nobody to steal anything. Unfortunately it's human nature may as well head it off rather than deal with the consequences which will be infinitely more expensive. It's common sense.

 

[strumbore]

snip

Most people write snip when they just want to answer people on this forum, it wasn't hostile ;p

ok, thank you for saying so.

No, it's not the same.
And I'm not talking abstinence.

NOBODY is too poor for six bucks of condoms.
Panhandlers make more than that in a day,
and if the women who can't afford condoms are panhandlers,
their priority shouldn't be sex, should it?

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Most people write snip when they just want to answer people on this forum, it wasn't hostile ;p

ok, thank you for saying so.

No, it's not the same.
And I'm not talking abstinence.

NOBODY is too poor for six bucks of condoms.
Panhandlers make more than that in a day,
and if the women who can't afford condoms are panhandlers,
their priority shouldn't be sex, should it?

There are plenty of people who don't have that sort of money to spend on luxuries because they need to buy food and pay the rent. When I was at university there were times I wouldn't have been able to afford the pill or condoms and I'm reasonably well off.

The pill lets women have more control over their lives. Telling them that they have to pay for birth control is like saying there is a tax on women alone. Maybe the government just likes making money on VAT on sanitary towels (as it views them as 'luxury' item which is a fucking joke)

Like that woman said if men could get pregnant there would be vending machines with bc in different flavours.

 

[strumbore]

There are plenty of people who don't have that sort of money to spend on luxuries because they need to buy food and pay the rent. When I was at university there were times I wouldn't have been able to afford the pill or condoms and I'm reasonably well off.

I will respect that if you say so,
but if men are still gentlemen
they should bring the buns with the
hotdogs when they come to the bbq.

The pill lets women have more control over their lives.

You tried that one already.
It doesn't hold up.
Try something else.

Telling them that they have to pay for birth control is like saying there is a tax on women alone.

Tax :
(1) a sum of money demanded by a government for its support or for specific facilities or services, levied upon incomes, property, sales, etc.

people have to pay government for...women?
women have to pay the government to...have sex?
(funny, that goes right along with my criticism of the policy!)
try again.

Maybe the government just likes making money on VAT on sanitary towels (as it views them as 'luxury' item which is a fucking joke)

I don't even know what that means.

This is why everything you just said is ridiculous:

Natural Rights are based on rights
people inherently have by virtue of
existing.
They are meant to protected, not imposed.

"take it for me" isn't a right.
People weren't born with condoms,
healthcare, or textbooks. To say
anyone has a "right" to such things
is to say their creators have no
rights over their intellect, their
skill, or their production, as
society can seize it at any time.
People who created such things as
knowledge, medicine, and birth control
need to be justly compensated on mutual terms,
not government force.

It is baffling that you could be so
enraged that such a cheap commodity
isn't free. In the case of b.c. pills,
a better argument would be that they
shouldn't be prescription-only (if that
is the case, and if there are no risks)

Like that woman said if men could get pregnant there would be vending machines with bc in different flavours.

lol

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

Sorry but when you have a discussion with someone you can't just dismiss what they say out of hand with no explanation of why it's wrong.

Women have more control over their lives with birth control because they can plan when they are going to get pregnant so they can manage their career and what they are going to do. If you don't get that I don't know what to say to you.

If it's so cheap why is it such a problem to provide it free. It's says a lot that you don't even know that the government charges tax on tampons and sanitary pads for women because it views them as a luxury when in reality they are a necessity.

You also don't seem to know that the government actually pays the makers of the birth control in lieu of the people. They just don't get them to give it to people for free...

Maybe you should go away and learn some facts about what you are talking about before you get into a discussion about it hmm.

As for birth control being a human right? I think it should be, especially for women.

Looks like the UN agrees with me

http://www.policymic.com/articles/19272/un-declares-birth-control-a-human-right-and-america-falls-short