# Jimmy Carr - The End?



## Swango1980 (Feb 8, 2022)

Well, I see Jimmy Carr is under the microscope for telling a joke referencing the holocaust and traveller communities. Thought I'd do a poll (never tried one one here before)

I'm intrigued that this could finally be the joke that ends his career. I've heard quite a bit of his comedy, and he has told thousands of offensive jokes on hundreds of sensitive issues. What is the difference between those jokes, and this one? Is it simply that it got out into mainstream media, and all of a sudden the easily offended (or those that wish to be offended) want to voice their opinions, and MPs demand he apologise (which is ironic)?

Surely, the whole reason the joke works is that the topic was so utterly horrific, that making light of it is so remarkably stupid it is funny. I cannot get into Jimmy Carr's head, but I strongly suspect that he thinks the holocaust was horrendous, I do not for one minute think that, by telling that joke, he seriously thinks it was a positive thing, otherwise it wouldn't be a joke, it would just be him stating what he believes and it wouldn't be comedy. Also, the fact that audience members laugh is because they too think it was a horrific event, and the absurdity of the joke highlights that fact.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 8, 2022)

Highly doubt it will end his career, the man is never off the telly so that would be quite a turnaround. And he has always had controversial jokes in his stand-up routines.

Personally I respect his right to tell whatever jokes he wants to an audience of his own fans. In this instance perhaps it just needed to be edited out before being released for public consumption on the likes of Netflix and YouTube - where the professionally offended can seek it out and sharpen their pitchforks. 

Not much point in expecting an apology, since if you do get one, you absolutely know that it won't be genuine anyway.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Feb 8, 2022)

I can’t belive a comedian of his experience would make a basic mistake like this.
There are today lots of things you can’t do and this is one of them.
I think nothing is out of bounds in comedy ,but am realistic enough to know this will offend many people.
Just unnecessary really. I am very surprised at it.
But think Twitter and public opinion holds to much sway today, if you don’t like him don’t watch simple.
Bernard Manning always said “ not racist I slag everyone” think JC is a bit like that.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 8, 2022)

clubchamp98 said:



			I can’t belive a comedian of his experience would make a basic mistake like this.
There are today lots of things you can’t do and this is one of them.
I think nothing is out of bounds in comedy ,but am realistic enough to know this will offend many people.
Just unnecessary really. I am very surprised at it.
But think Twitter and public opinion holds to much sway today, if you don’t like him don’t watch simple.
Bernard Manning always said “ not racist I slag everyone” think JC is a bit like that.
		
Click to expand...

It's not a mistake. He openly says he likes to try offend people. I think saying outrageous jokes is what amuses _him_ if anything. Exactly as Swango said above - I don't believe the joke is supposed to be "haha yes, we all hate gypsies as well" - it's more on the lines of "haha, I can't believe he's just said that, that's outrageous."  Some people like their sensibilities tested in comedy like that, whereas others will take everything at face value without context and be offended by it. It takes all sorts.

Sometimes with certain comedians I wonder if they try and push the envelope further and further out of boredom. He seems to openly have a tactic of let's see what it takes to get me cancelled. He's probably achieved everything he set out to achieve already anyway. If he loses a few contracts he'll just take a few years off.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 8, 2022)

I've seen clips of his live act and pushing boundaries is clearly central to much of it. He will sometimes make a controversial gag and then make a point of highlighting how many laughed, how many cringed and drew in a breath. If something got a big laugh, he might push a bit further, how far before the intake happens? He tries to see where the boundary is with a particular audience. 

I think he got this one wrong, bound to happen if you walk that tightrope often enough. A quick apology and all will be well again. His audience clearly likes him, Ch4 like him being edgy, so this wont be career ending. If anything, this is boosting his profile. I wonder how many more people have downloaded his Netflix act since this kicked off?


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 8, 2022)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I've seen clips of his live act and pushing boundaries is clearly central to much of it. He will sometimes make a controversial gag and then make a point of highlighting how many laughed, how many cringed and drew in a breath. If something got a big laugh, he might push a bit further, how far before the intake happens? He tries to see where the boundary is with a particular audience.

I think he got this one wrong, bound to happen if you walk that tightrope often enough. A quick apology and all will be well again. His audience clearly likes him, Ch4 like him being edgy, so this wont be career ending. If anything, this is boosting his profile. *I wonder how many more people have downloaded his Netflix act since this kicked off?*

Click to expand...

I was literally just thinking I need to hurry up and watch it before they take it down. Without any of this furore I probably wouldn't have watched it at all.


----------



## spongebob59 (Feb 8, 2022)

Ive seen him live many times, *that gag is not new*.
Its only come to light as a recording of a show was shown on Netflix.


----------



## rulefan (Feb 8, 2022)

*Jimmy Car - The End?*
Another 'r' is really the end


----------



## clubchamp98 (Feb 8, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			It's not a mistake. He openly says he likes to try offend people. I think saying outrageous jokes is what amuses _him_ if anything. Exactly as Swango said above - I don't believe the joke is supposed to be "haha yes, we all hate gypsies as well" - it's more on the lines of "haha, I can't believe he's just said that, that's outrageous."  Some people like their sensibilities tested in comedy like that, whereas others will take everything at face value without context and be offended by it. It takes all sorts.

Sometimes with certain comedians I wonder if they try and push the envelope further and further out of boredom. He seems to openly have a tactic of let's see what it takes to get me cancelled. He's probably achieved everything he set out to achieve already anyway. If he loses a few contracts he'll just take a few years off.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I meant putting it out into the public domain.
You might be right it wasn’t.
But if the Tax Man can’t finish him off I dought this will.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 8, 2022)

He made an offensive joke , there have been worse jokes said and comedians still work 

It won’t make a difference to his career as a stand up 

He may lose some hosting duties but again I doubt it


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 8, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			I was literally just thinking I need to hurry up and watch it before they take it down. Without any of this furore I probably wouldn't have watched it at all. 

Click to expand...

It's back to Father Ted and 'down with that sort of thing'.

Do you think someone in Netflix pr dept started this all off a week or so ago? Conspiracy theory time...........


----------



## BiMGuy (Feb 8, 2022)

Like I said in another thread. He’s been quite clever with his material, in that he’s been offensive to just about everyone. How can we condemn a joke about the holocaust, but not child abuse or rape? 

It’s all or nothing.


----------



## spongebob59 (Feb 8, 2022)

Lord Tyrion said:



			It's back to Father Ted and 'down with that sort of thing'.

Do you think someone in Netflix pr dept started this all off a week or so ago? Conspiracy theory time...........
		
Click to expand...

You could be right, there was that american comedian, Dave Chapelle, that was getting a lot of media attention after his gig was shown on Netflix too


----------



## RichA (Feb 8, 2022)

I'm not really into "apologise culture", so I haven't voted. I like him and really hope he'll rethink some of his material, but I don't think he will.

I feel like people need to understand what freedoms of speech and expression really mean and how powerful they are. 
In recent and distant history, horrific views have been expressed to laughing and cheering audiences. The support of your audience isn't a great barometer of right and wrong.

Freedom of speech is great for speaking out against perceived oppression or tyranny. It's wasted when used to justify a prejudicial joke about genocide.

Just regurgitating what I wrote on the other thread, for which I apologise.


----------



## greenone (Feb 8, 2022)

Did he incite hate or violence? No he told a joke in a routine. He's told many that imo are worse. People can by all means be offended by it but that doesn't override freedom of speech.


----------



## Brads (Feb 8, 2022)

As funny as a dose of the clap and irritating enough to be detestable.
No loss if he vanished forever really.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2022)

He can use the 'i am educating' line just the once.  He shouldn't use it again in the same or indeed any context. He's a comedian not an educator and so should stick to comedy that stands up in it's own right as comedy.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 8, 2022)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			He can use the *'i am educating' line just the once*.  He shouldn't use it again in the same or indeed any context. He's a comedian not an educator and so should stick to comedy that stands up in it's own right as comedy.
		
Click to expand...

But, then again, was this not part of the joke? I don't think he said it as he seriously thought he was performing the role of a school teacher and enlightening the audience. The joke being that he claims to be educating the audience, but done in a way that is obviously so far removed from what one would expect from an actual teacher that it becomes comical to a wide range of people. I assume that this line got a laugh from the audience? If so, it worked for the comic effect he was trying to achieve.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 8, 2022)

He is Pig ignorant with comments like that.

Quote. As a punchline, Carr makes a disparaging remark about the deaths of thousands of Gypsies at the hands of the Nazis, saying it was a “positive” of the Holocaust.
 He “says no one talks about the death of them”.
 If he got off his ignorant high horse and went to places like Auschwitz and Stutthof As I have done whilst on my Holidays/ travels. He would see that these extermination camps were not just for Jews. They clearly state it was the mass extermination of anyone that was not part of the Ayrian race. Inc Blacks, political, Gay, disabled etc etc. 
If he got off his ignorant horse and went to the National Holocaust centre in Notts like I did last year when I dropped off 100 star of David crosses and educated himself he would know that. 
How the extermination of anyone is funny is beyond me. What is the next funny subject, Rape. He has massively crossed a line for me and I am not a Gypsy or Jew.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			But, then again, was this not part of the joke? I don't think he said it as he seriously thought he was performing the role of a school teacher and enlightening the audience. The joke being that he claims to be educating the audience, but done in a way that is obviously so far removed from what one would expect from an actual teacher that it becomes comical to a wide range of people. I assume that this line got a laugh from the audience? If so, it worked for the comic effect he was trying to achieve.
		
Click to expand...

I myself wouldn't judge the rights or wrongs of a statement/joke such as that made by Carr on the reaction of the audience.  I am afraid that I am not convinced that others might not use the 'I'm educating' line as an an excuse/smokescreen for what may be widely unacceptable views.  So he - and all comedians - should not use it.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			He is Pig ignorant with comments like that.

Quote. As a punchline, Carr makes a disparaging remark about the deaths of thousands of Gypsies at the hands of the Nazis, saying it was a “positive” of the Holocaust.
He “says no one talks about the death of them”.
If he got off his ignorant high horse and went to places like Auschwitz and Stutthof As I have done whilst on my Holidays/ travels. He would see that these extermination camps were not just for Jews. They clearly state it was the mass extermination of anyone that was not part of the Ayrian race. Inc Blacks, political, Gay, disabled etc etc.
If he got off his ignorant horse and went to the National Holocaust centre in Notts like I did last year when I dropped off 100 star of David crosses and educated himself he would know that.
How the extermination of anyone is funny is beyond me. What is the next funny subject, Rape. He has massively crossed a line for me and I am not a Gypsy or Jew.
		
Click to expand...

Clearly you haven't followed him for long as he has made a rape joke in a past ..

Examples of rape comedy are easy to find. Reginald D Hunter has a routine that begins, "civilisation couldn't have arisen without rape . . ." Jimmy Carr, of course, has several one-liners on the subject ("What do nine out of 10 people enjoy? / Gang rape."). In a characteristic play on his words, Carr has called his current show Rapier Wit.

2010 that was


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 8, 2022)

pauljames87 said:



			Clearly you haven't followed him for long as he has made a rape joke in a past ..

Examples of rape comedy are easy to find. Reginald D Hunter has a routine that begins, "civilisation couldn't have arisen without rape . . ." Jimmy Carr, of course, has several one-liners on the subject ("What do nine out of 10 people enjoy? / Gang rape."). In a characteristic play on his words, Carr has called his current show Rapier Wit.

2010 that was
		
Click to expand...

Thankfully I haven’, which then begs me to ask the question. How is he still on television.? 😳


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2022)

Me and my Mrs went to see him some years ago - friends arranged the tickets as we wouldn't have thought about going otherwise.  I recall quite clearly that we didn't think much of it - and don't remember much in the way of belly laughs.  

And we don't watch any of the TV shows he's on or does, though we don't watch much if any of that sort of programme as they strike me as being full of folk who are very full of themselves and their own comedy cleverness.  The truth is that in general I don't find most of them very funny at all - despite howls of laughter from the audience and their fellow comedians/contestants/whatevers.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			Thankfully I haven’, which then begs me to ask the question. How is he still on television.? 😳
		
Click to expand...

People like him and he makes millions . Nothing he done has been illegal 

But if he gets cancelled maybe zouma can host 8 out of 10 cats


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			Thankfully I haven’, which then begs me to ask the question. How is he still on television.? 😳
		
Click to expand...

There are loads of comedians who deal with controversial jokes, quite a few mainstream ones as well, Jimmy Carr, Frankie Boyle and Ricky Gervais a few. Gervais talks very well about joking about controversial subjects, explaining that joking about bad subjects does not make you supportive of that topic, many times it is quite the opposite. He had a complaint once from a woman who said he went too far when he talked about food allergies. After asking why she was offended by that, and not other subjects he joked about like AIDS and Cancer, she replied "because children die from food allergies".

The thing is, there are subjects that hit a nerve in each and every one of us, so we'll feel uncomfortable about certain topics. However, I bet we also laugh at other topics (which we know are terrible topics) that other people could be offended by. Is that wrong?

I'd imagine if a comedian was truly sick, and it wasn't obvious that he/she was condoning the very topics they joked about, then they'd be very unsuccessful, apart from a very small cult following of pretty unpleasant people. They'd certainly not be successful in the mainstream, I'd imagine. But, if your style is dealing with taboo subjects, then you'll always be crossing the line, at least to one person if not many more. I am sure Carr, Boyle and Gervais offend at least one person every time they open their mouth on a controversial subject.


----------



## hovis (Feb 8, 2022)

I've seen him live 5 times.  Each time and without fail people get up and leave due to offensive jokes.    Last time a saw him he had a large group of amputee military sat at the front.  He highlighted who they where and the got a massive round of applause. He then said "the good thing about you lot being blown to pieces is we're gonna rock the next paralympics".   At least 6 people left despite the said group belly laughing.

He is a desired taste.  If you don't like his joke's then don't watch his TV shows and don't buy his tickets.  If that was the general consensus then he'll fade away.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Feb 8, 2022)

Wouldn't cross the road to watch him.


----------



## patricks148 (Feb 8, 2022)

Watched it  on Netflix and seen him live a few years ago as the wife is a fan. Tbh it's his usp telling offensive jokes, 
 You wouldn't go and see him without knowing what was in store, or watch his stand up on Netflix.
Hes told plenty as bad in the past, he even says on each of the jokes on that bit of the routine "is the the career ender"

I dont think it is, but as they say, there's  no such thing as bad publicity


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Feb 8, 2022)

The fact that a couple of posters on here that I don't have a lot of time for, don't like Jimmy Carr, has actually really made my day.


----------



## AmandaJR (Feb 8, 2022)

I can't get past his really annoying laugh so, until this publicity, had never really heard him tell a joke!

The joke itself made me wince but in that "ouch, that's close to the mark" way rather than thinking it was really offensive.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			He is Pig ignorant with comments like that.

Quote. As a punchline, Carr makes a disparaging remark about the deaths of thousands of Gypsies at the hands of the Nazis, saying it was a “positive” of the Holocaust.
He “says no one talks about the death of them”.
If he got off his ignorant high horse and went to places like Auschwitz and Stutthof As I have done whilst on my Holidays/ travels. He would see that these extermination camps were not just for Jews. They clearly state it was the mass extermination of anyone that was not part of the Ayrian race. Inc Blacks, political, Gay, disabled etc etc.
If he got off his ignorant horse and went to the National Holocaust centre in Notts like I did last year when I dropped off 100 star of David crosses and educated himself he would know that.
How the extermination of anyone is funny is beyond me. What is the next funny subject, Rape. He has massively crossed a line for me and I am not a Gypsy or Jew.
		
Click to expand...

You obviously haven’t watched. His first joke is about rape…


----------



## hovis (Feb 8, 2022)

Fitting


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 8, 2022)

First off, I really enjoy Jimmy Carr on 8 out of 10 cats do Countdown. Some of the humour is close to the bone but I don’t think it crosses any imaginary line.

Next; does ‘freedom of speech’, really exist? Not seen Till death us do Part for a good while, nor Rising Damp. You can’t walk into a mosque and let rip with an anti-Muslim rant. There are boundaries/laws on what you can and can’t say. Some of those boundaries revolve around common decency and being courteous. Imagine walking up to the mum-in-law and saying, “you ugly, fat slug.” You wouldn’t because you know it would offend.

On a personal note, I think Carr crossed a line. No doubt some thought it funny, and others will have laughed through shock/embarrassment.

Back to Freedom of Speech. Use it wisely or risk losing it when the authorities step in and curtail it - think Till Death us do Part. I hate to think Carr’s ignorant joke erodes some of the freedom others fought to achieve.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Feb 8, 2022)

Career ending? No. He’ll still get gigs.

The live show that was filmed is called DARK MATERIAL. One could assume that it would consist of DARK MATERIAL. Unfortunately there is a subset of society who like to moan about any injustice or moral issue that may seem popular to be offended about. Heaven knows what they’d do if they found out love thy neighbour is on YouTube.

Maybe we should ban comedy gigs, make them snowflake proof. Regulate them.

I’ll start with a PC correct joke.

What do you call a bear with no teeth? Gummy bear.


----------



## Dando (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			Thankfully I haven’, which then begs me to ask the question. How is he still on television.? 😳
		
Click to expand...

Because people like him and think he’s funny


----------



## Dando (Feb 8, 2022)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Wouldn't cross the road to watch him.
		
Click to expand...

I doubt he’ll be too upset


----------



## Dando (Feb 8, 2022)

Jamesbrown said:



			Career ending? No. He’ll still get gigs.

The live show that was filmed is called DARK MATERIAL. One could assume that it would consist of DARK MATERIAL. Unfortunately there is a subset of society who like to moan about any injustice or moral issue that may seem popular to be offended about. Heaven knows what they’d do if they found out love thy neighbour is on YouTube.

Maybe we should ban comedy gigs, make them snowflake proof. Regulate them.

I’ll start with a PC correct joke.

What do you call a bear with no teeth? Gummy bear.
		
Click to expand...

I’m sure there’s a bed wetter somewhere who’ll find offense to that joke on behalf of toothless bears


----------



## DaveR (Feb 8, 2022)

hovis said:



			Last time a saw him he had a large group of amputee military sat at the front.  He highlighted who they where and the got a massive round of applause. He then said "the good thing about you lot being blown to pieces is we're gonna rock the next paralympics".   At least 6 people left despite the said group belly laughing
		
Click to expand...

This doesn't surprise me at all. Some groups of people accept their situation and make the best of it but there will always be somebody offended on their behalf.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			Thankfully I haven’, which then begs me to ask the question. How is he still on television.? 😳
		
Click to expand...

Because thankfully a lot of people can identify the difference between hate speech and a near-the-knuckle gag.


----------



## adam6177 (Feb 8, 2022)

I've said it before and I'll say it again.... There is not a single event or incident in history that should be outside the realms of comedy. Everything is fair game in my eyes.

I'm a huge Jimmy Carr fan, seen him several times and laugh at a lot he says.... But not everything.

This particular joke didn't make me smile, let alone laugh... But that doesn't change the fact that we're talking about cancelling speech.

It's ok to be offended.


----------



## IanM (Feb 8, 2022)

So, a mass murder can be used as a joke?  One still in the living memory of some.

Really?


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 8, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			Because thankfully a lot of people can identify the difference between hate speech and a near-the-knuckle gag.
		
Click to expand...

So basically as a fan of a Jewish football club if I said getting rid of 6 million Jews was a positive. Explain to me how that is funny. It’s not. So how is it funny because it is Gypsys.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 8, 2022)

adam6177 said:



			I've said it before and I'll say it again.... There is not a single event or incident in history that should be outside the realms of comedy. Everything is fair game in my eyes.

I'm a huge Jimmy Carr fan, seen him several times and laugh at a lot he says.... But not everything.

This particular joke didn't make me smile, let alone laugh... *But that doesn't change the fact that we're talking about cancelling speech.*

It's ok to be offended.
		
Click to expand...

no one has suggested cancelling speech. We are talking about what is and what is not funny. Or acceptable.


----------



## Captainron (Feb 8, 2022)

Judging by the poll results it’s not too badly received on here.


----------



## Wabinez (Feb 8, 2022)

I think at the start of the netflix show, he actively says about separating the terrible thing from the joke about the terrible thing. You have to expect it.

he also says during the show he knows he’ll get cancelled at some point 😂

going to see him live next month and can’t wait.


----------



## IanM (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			So basically as a fan of a Jewish football club if I said getting rid of 6 million Jews was a positive. Explain to me how that is funny. It’s not. So how is it funny because it is Gypsys.
		
Click to expand...

It isnt.  

Maybe he thinks he's less likely to suffer consequences....


----------



## rulefan (Feb 8, 2022)

Captainron said:



			Judging by the poll results it’s not too badly received on here.
		
Click to expand...

I wonder just how racist golfers really are in general.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Feb 8, 2022)

Captainron said:



			Judging by the poll results it’s not too badly received on here.
		
Click to expand...

And  that's disappointing, in my book.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 8, 2022)

rulefan said:



			I wonder just how racist golfers really are in general.
		
Click to expand...

What a leap that is 

Did you even think before posting that


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			So basically as a fan of a Jewish football club if I said getting rid of 6 million Jews was a positive. Explain to me how that is funny. It’s not. So how is it funny because it is Gypsys.
		
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be funny probably, as I am guessing you are not a professional comedian. However, if a world class comedian made that their topic, I wouldn't put it past them that they could make people laugh. That is their talent, their art form. And, I don't just mean far right people would find it funny, I wouldn't be surprised if even Jewish people found it funny.

It is the way you tell them. 

It is fine not to appreciate a style of comedy, or not like specific jokes. But, unless you genuinely believe a comedian is spreading hate speech and assume his statements are literally what he believes, then why complain?


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 8, 2022)

rulefan said:



			I wonder just how racist golfers really are in general.
		
Click to expand...

Wow, is that an accusation!? Quite a loaded question


----------



## rulefan (Feb 8, 2022)

Liverpoolphil said:



			What a leap that is

Did you even think before posting that
		
Click to expand...

Yes. An impression I'm sorry to say, I have got from visiting so many golf clubs.


----------



## DaveR (Feb 8, 2022)

rulefan said:



			I wonder just how racist golfers really are in general.
		
Click to expand...

Here we go, another sweeping generalisation tarring everyone with the same brush.


----------



## Jensen (Feb 8, 2022)

I’ve seen him 3 times, the first when he was an unknown at a comedy club in Newcastle. He wasn’t even the headline act, but was by far and the best.
He put some loud mouth smart arse down with a great reply, Carr said “the only reason I got into comedy was because I was told it was a fanny magnet, but you are not the type of  c**t I had in mind”
I like him, he’s very quick witted and entertaining.
PS Apologies if the above offends, but then again I didn’t say it. 😁


----------



## Oddsocks (Feb 8, 2022)

Watched him live at Woking last year, without doubt the worst comic I’ve seen live.

He’s quite funny on shows where he can bounce off of others but as a solo standup he was shocking, begging the crowd to heckle him as he had simply no material.  One liner after one liner with no flow… the list is endless.

If the joke ends his career it’ll do the world a favour!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 8, 2022)

rulefan said:



			Yes. An impression I'm sorry to say, I have got from visiting so many golf clubs.
		
Click to expand...

You are visiting the wrong clubs and think it’s shocking generalisation


----------



## adam6177 (Feb 8, 2022)

There is a very very good channel on YouTube called triggernometry where they tackle a lot of woke subjects.... Cancelling comedians was one of them recently if anyone has a spare hour to listen.


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Feb 8, 2022)

Dando said:



			I’m sure there’s a bed wetter somewhere who’ll find offense to that joke on behalf of toothless bears
		
Click to expand...

Goldilocks is just glad because it means she won't get any love bites.


----------



## Pin-seeker (Feb 8, 2022)

If he apologises he’s sold out imo.
It’s comedy,he’s not hurting anyone,no one is forced to watch him.


----------



## Ser Shankalot (Feb 8, 2022)

I’m not commenting at all on jimmy Carr as I’ve not seen his full show, but there’s laughing with somebody to bring us closer together and laughing at somebody. While judgement and context is important, it’s not rocket science. We can all generally tell as an audience which one it is, whether it’s on Netflix or at the clubhouse bar or in the school playground.

Nothing should be off limits to comedy - that’s the whole point of it. Life of Brian, Book of Mormon, The Producers, …. heck even Citizen Khan,  Love Thy Neighbour were all really funny whilst tackling controversial subjects. As both an ethnic and religious minority I totally loved Four Lions.
But just resorting to laughing at someone, especially if that someone is in a weaker position than you, has always been the bully’s refuge. There’s nothing woke or snowflake  about that.


----------



## patricks148 (Feb 8, 2022)

rulefan said:



			I wonder just how racist golfers really are in general.
		
Click to expand...

Do you have evidence to support this or is it just hearsay?


----------



## HampshireHog (Feb 8, 2022)

I’ll start by saying I like TV personality Jimmy Carr, not a fan of his Stand Up.

Should he apologise? No, it would be lie, or that half arsed sorry if anyone was offended.  He knew the reaction it would provoke and is prepared for the infamy, publicity and consequence.

Was I personally offended?  I don’t have a foot in any of the 3 groups mentioned so no.  100% I find it distasteful and not something I personally think should be joked about.

The issue with I have with jokes around atrocities like genocide, rape, domestic violence is it diminishes the heinousness of that crime.  It desensitises us to it, and for some legitimises it.

I can be fairly sure if the punchline to a joke was Grenfell Victims or Hillsborough Victims rather than Gypsy’s, this forum would be more offended/outraged.


----------



## greenone (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			no one has suggested cancelling speech. We are talking about what is and what is not funny. Or acceptable.
		
Click to expand...

And that's the point. Who has the right to tell someone  else what is funny or acceptable? If you dont like it turn it off.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Feb 8, 2022)

Is it possible to discuss the subject without using examples that others might find offensive?


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 8, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			So basically as a fan of a Jewish football club if I said getting rid of 6 million Jews was a positive. Explain to me how that is funny. It’s not. So how is it funny because it is Gypsys.
		
Click to expand...

I never said it was funny.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 8, 2022)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Is it possible to discuss the subject without using examples that others might find offensive?
		
Click to expand...

I’m not sure it is possible when we are discussing what is or isn’t considered offensive Phil. 

Given that plenty here don’t seem to have an issue with using the attempted extermination of a race by one of the most odious human beings ever to walk the face the face of the planet as a subject for humour, I’m wondering what could possibly be considered offensive? 

But I’m fairly sure if I posted one of the memes I’ve been sent relating to Kurt Zouma’s cat I’d find out…


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 8, 2022)

greenone said:



			And that's the point. Who has the right to tell someone  else what is funny or acceptable? If you dont like it turn it off.
		
Click to expand...

Are you living in another world, you’re posting on a forum that is governed by rules of what you can and can’t say and moderatored to the point they can decide what is funny or acceptable.

It’s a cliche to say no one has the right to tell someone else what is funny or acceptable, we live in a civilised democracy governed by laws and saying the “wrong” thing in public has consequences.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 8, 2022)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Is it possible to discuss the subject without using examples that others might find offensive?
		
Click to expand...

But isn’t that what the debate is all about, discussing something some of us find extremely offensive? It’s ok to discuss that but not ok to bring up comparable examples… is that a level playing field?


----------



## greenone (Feb 8, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			Are you living in another world, you’re posting on a forum that is governed by rules of what you can and can’t say and moderatored to the point they can decide what is funny or acceptable.
		
Click to expand...

 and that is fair enough. I agreed to those rules when i signed up. How is that different to Anyone who wants watch a Jimmy Carr stand routine that is called his dark material. The clue is in the name.




			It’s a cliche to say no one has the right to tell someone else what is funny or acceptable, we live in a civilised democracy governed by laws and saying the “wrong” thing in public has consequences.
		
Click to expand...

You been following what's been going on in Westminster for the last few years?


----------



## RichA (Feb 8, 2022)

Hobbit said:



			But isn’t that what the debate is all about, discussing something some of us find extremely offensive? It’s ok to discuss that but not ok to bring up comparable examples… is that a level playing field?
		
Click to expand...

I think he's referring to a post that has been deleted. It wasn't adding to the debate, just an attempt at humour including a tired stereotype.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 8, 2022)

greenone said:



			and that is fair enough. I agreed to those rules when i signed up. How is that different to Anyone who wants watch a Jimmy Carr stand routine that is called his dark material. The clue is in the name.


You been following what's been going on in Westminster for the last few years?
		
Click to expand...

I like Jimmy Carr, yes he is edgey, I also thought his joke about the Holocaust was too far, I believe there is nothing funny about the Holocaust and he or anyone else should not make jokes about it. I also agree some people have no issue with the joke.

The fact is, lots and lots of people are now aware of the “joke” and never saw the show, therefore, saying “anyone who doesn’t like it can switch it off” is irrelevant and he will suffer the backlash, whether that’s in bookings or TV Contracts remains to be seen. People who are in positions of authorities, ie, head of venues or CEO’s of Companies etc now have the power to block or ban Jimmy Carr.

You only have to look at Jim Davidson and how is career nose dived because of his right to say what he wanted.

Good luck to anyone who believes you can say what you like, just so long as you/they understand there may be consequences.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 8, 2022)

RichA said:



			I think he's referring to a post that has been deleted. It wasn't adding to the debate, just an attempt at humour including a tired stereotype.
		
Click to expand...

I saw the post before it was deleted, and I get what your saying. But if we’re having an almost open house on the material, why delete a lame joke that was nowhere as offensive as carr’s material.


----------



## ExRabbit (Feb 9, 2022)

The poll has no option for me.

My vote: Don't like him, don't find him funny, he overstepped the mark - but not interested in the cancel culture. 

Also hated the 'joke'.  

Visited this place https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natzweiler-Struthof_concentration_camp quite a few years ago when we came across it on one of our European camping holidays. Just driving through the mountains, drove past and turned round because we thought we should see what we had been told about.

Surprisingly it was one of the most peaceful places I have ever been to.

And the most harrowing.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Feb 9, 2022)

Hobbit said:



			I saw the post before it was deleted, and I get what your saying. But if we’re having an almost open house on the material, why delete a lame joke that was nowhere as offensive as carr’s material.
		
Click to expand...

Brian , I have to keep an eye on how the forum affects GM’s public image.

So the choices are to either just close the thread or to ask people to refrain from examples of extreme “humour” that they know will offend.

Welcome to my world 👍


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 9, 2022)

Going off at a tangent, a by-product of this thread, for me, is education. Reading up just how much ethnic cleansing the Germans practiced. The number 6 million Jews is often quoted, and although I was aware that other groups had also been targeted I didn’t know how many. A further 5 million were killed, including 500,000 Eastern European gypsies.

But it didn’t end there. The Russians continued the cleansing till 1956.

Like so many, we’ve visited several historical sites. The camps are as you’ve seen in many photographs and film pieces, and evoke the thoughts you would expect… and then some. But the sites where it really hits home for us are where our world collides with the history. The village in France that is deserted following the massacre of over 600 inhabitants - it’s eerie. The square in the Jewish Quarter in Rome where over 2,100 people were rounded up and sent off to the camps - only 4 survived. And the conversations with the grandfather, Jewish, of our Spanish teacher, the only survivor from his family and friends of the Polish uprising in Warsaw.

Each to their own but, for me, it’s not a subject for jokes.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

Hobbit said:



			Going off at a tangent, a by-product of this thread, for me, is education. Reading up just how much ethnic cleansing the Germans practiced. The number 6 million Jews is often quoted, and although I was aware that other groups had also been targeted I didn’t know how many. A further 5 million were killed, including 500,000 Eastern European gypsies.

But it didn’t end there. The Russians continued the cleansing till 1956.

Like so many, we’ve visited several historical sites. The camps are as you’ve seen in many photographs and film pieces, and evoke the thoughts you would expect… and then some. But the sites where it really hits home for us are where our world collides with the history. The village in France that is deserted following the massacre of over 600 inhabitants - it’s eerie. The square in the Jewish Quarter in Rome where over 2,100 people were rounded up and sent off to the camps - only 4 survived. And the conversations with the grandfather, Jewish, of our Spanish teacher, the only survivor from his family and friends of the Polish uprising in Warsaw.

Each to their own but, for me, it’s not a subject for jokes.
		
Click to expand...

Interestingly, the fact he brought up the subject instigated discussions in the public like this, including people researching what actually happened and educating themselves. Maybe an unintended consequence, but at least a positive for those that think he shouldn't have raised the subject in the 1st place?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 9, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Interestingly, the fact he brought up the subject instigated discussions in the public like this, including people researching what actually happened and educating themselves. Maybe an unintended consequence, but at least a positive for those that think he shouldn't have raised the subject in the 1st place?
		
Click to expand...

You really don’t get it, do you? No one in their right mind has an issue with the subject being raised or people being educated about it; the issue is using it to get a cheap laugh.  

To try and claim that there is a positive in this smacks of a drowning man grabbing desperately for a life belt.


----------



## RichA (Feb 9, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Interestingly, the fact he brought up the subject instigated discussions in the public like this, including people researching what actually happened and educating themselves. Maybe an unintended consequence, but at least a positive for those that think he shouldn't have raised the subject in the 1st place?
		
Click to expand...

Not knocking your point, but Jimmy Carr has previously said that he writes jokes to make people laugh, not to make them think.
If it makes people think, then something good might come out of it. Unfortunately, it's made other people think that trotting out old stereotyping jokes is a justified freedom of speech thing.


----------



## Don Barzini (Feb 9, 2022)

Any comedian who apologises for a joke ends up worse off in my opinion as they lose credibility. In this situation, if he apologised it would just be about trying to quell the hysterical masses and would be disingenuous. Knowing the way he is, he won't apologise - and I believe has already said he won't anyway. So good on him.

What first surprised me about this story when it broke was the timing of it. His Dark Material was released over a month ago and no-one commented until a few days ago. Who was the person or group who suddenly decided to kick up a fuss about it, when it was already out there for several weeks? Normally these things are picked up immediately, so the delay surprised me.

I had actually watched His Dark Materials when it was first released. I didn't take particular notice of the joke at the time - it was just one in a long line of....well.....dark material. I think he's made worse jokes in the past to be honest.

To me, the joke was funny. Not because I was thinking "Ha ha yes wasn't it good that gypsies were killed in the Holocaust" - which I believe is how most people who are upset about it seem to have interpreted it. But when most of us think of the Holocaust we immediately think "Jews" and don't think of the other groups it affected. So he was joking that the bits we don't think about must therefore be "the good stuff". Made me chuckle and made me think.

As I've always said, humour is entirely subjective. Many will no doubt think that my interpretation of the joke isn't funny. Fine. That's how comedy works.

And as someone (may have been Ricky Gervais...?) once said "Just because you're offended, it doesn't mean you're right."


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

Blue in Munich said:



			You really don’t get it, do you? No one in their right mind has an issue with the subject being raised or people being educated about it; the issue is using it to get a cheap laugh. 

To try and claim that there is a positive in this smacks of a drowning man grabbing desperately for a life belt.
		
Click to expand...

Actually, I think it is you that doesn't get it (from the other sides perspective). This is a conversation about the ethics on using controversial subjects in comedy. I completely get that many will not find it funny. The question is, does that therefore make it wrong? The fact that you think it is wrong does not give you the right to say that people who disagree with you "just don't get it". Because, as I demonstrated, I can just say exactly the same thing back to you.

As I have mentioned, Carr and other comedians make jokes about disabilities, homosexuality, aids, cancer, rape, religion, race, etc. Do you find any of those jokes funny, or should all those topics be taken off the table? I bet there are plenty of people that would not laugh at one or more of those topics, but laughed at his holocaust joke. And, not for one second did they laugh because they think the holocaust was funny. That was clearly NOT the point of the joke.

I bet most people know the holocaust was horrendous, and are aware is was the mass extermination of Jewish people by the Nazis. However, unless you have educated yourself further, I bet less people realised that other groups were killed. That was the twist of the joke. Not that the extermination of the travelling community was a good thing, but the absurdity of putting a positive spin on it, knowing it is far from being positive. I am sure these comedians are more interested in the shocked groans rather than just belly laughs, that's what highlights how horrific these things really are.

I suspect people in society simply feel guilt if they laugh at any horrible subject, that they somehow feel that by laughing, it endorses it. However, if we just ask comedians not to make jokes around sensitive subjects, is it not just another method of forgetting about those incidents from history for many people? I know some have educated themselves about the holocaust, but many will have only really had any education on is at school (maybe), and forgotten about most of it. Many are not the type to watch documentaries or read books. So, when a comedian raises such a subject, it puts it in the forefront of people's minds. Some may even go and fo a bit of research afterwards to see why a joke was deemed so edgy.

And, why stop at stand up routines. What about movies? Should we ban all movies about sensitive subjects, especially if they are comedies or inaccurate? After all, they are also part of the entertainment industry, and made to make money.

For me, my first thought would always be "is this person being literal in their absurd views on a bad event". If they are, then maybe there is an argument that it is "hate speech" and they should suffer the consequences. Although, I'd imagine the person would only have a very small following anyway, and not be mainstream. If not, and it is clear many find the absurdness in what they say funny (the whole point of the joke), then I have no issue. It may or may not be to my tastes, but that's fine. If I enjoy the comedian, I'll watch them on TV or book a ticket. If I don't, I'll not go to their show or watch them on TV.

I'm sure many of us have said terrible things about horrible subjects in our past to families and friends. However, hopefully the context of it wasn't you found the topic literally funny, but the fact the opposite was true was what brought the amusement to it. The "I can't believe you said that" reaction, but knowing you did it for comedic effect rather than airing your warped views. Some comedians simply do that publicly rather than within their own homes. And, the audience, by and large, get the context. Sadly, there are others that forget about context, and simply judge whether the words / topic are acceptable or not


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

RichA said:



			Not knocking your point, but Jimmy Carr has previously said that he writes jokes to make people laugh, not to make them think.
If it makes people think, then something good might come out of it. Unfortunately, it's made other people think that trotting out old stereotyping jokes is a justified freedom of speech thing.
		
Click to expand...

He is a comedians though, it is the primary part of his job. Had he simply said "the holocaust exterminated not just millions of Jews, but people in the travelling community", it would have been educational, but not a great line at a stand up comedy show.

Many of the best comedians DO get people thinking, that is what makes them so good and popular. They tell a story, or bring sensitive topics close to our minds, topics many would often try and avoid. They are often very well educated, which is generally how they are able to broach these topics. If they were pig ignorant, it would easily be picked up on by the audience.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 9, 2022)

Don Barzini said:



			Any comedian who apologises for a joke ends up worse off in my opinion as they lose credibility. In this situation, if he apologised it would just be about trying to quell the hysterical masses and would be disingenuous. Knowing the way he is, he won't apologise - and I believe has already said he won't anyway. So good on him.

What first surprised me about this story when it broke was the timing of it. His Dark Material was released over a month ago and no-one commented until a few days ago. Who was the person or group who suddenly decided to kick up a fuss about it, when it was already out there for several weeks? Normally these things are picked up immediately, so the delay surprised me.

I had actually watched His Dark Materials when it was first released. I didn't take particular notice of the joke at the time - it was just one in a long line of....well.....dark material. I think he's made worse jokes in the past to be honest.

To me, the joke was funny. Not because I was thinking "Ha ha yes wasn't it good that gypsies were killed in the Holocaust" - which I believe is how most people who are upset about it seem to have interpreted it. But when most of us think of the Holocaust we immediately think "Jews" and don't think of the other groups it affected. So he was joking that the bits we don't think about must therefore be "the good stuff". Made me chuckle and made me think.

As I've always said, humour is entirely subjective. Many will no doubt think that my interpretation of the joke isn't funny. Fine. That's how comedy works.

And as someone (may have been Ricky Gervais...?) once said "Just because you're offended, it doesn't mean you're right."
		
Click to expand...

Why just because someone finds a joke or anything offensive do they have to labelled as “hysterical” or a “snowflake” or “bedwetter” etc?

Has anyone who’s said they disagree with the joke or is offended by it said they are “right”

It seems these days you can’t disagree or have a thought of your own without those who aren’t offended coming out with all sorts of exaggeratted language to label others.

There are many areas were any intelligent person can see something as offensive without themselves being offended.

If somebody told a joke about the 1958 Munich Air disaster I would find it offensive without personally being offended, I’m sure their would be those who’d be both offended and find the joke offensive.
Then off course we’d have those telling us the joke isn’t offensive because the joke teller is simply warning us of the dangers of Air Travel and using Munich as the example.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



*Why just because someone finds a joke or anything offensive do they have to labelled as “hysterical” or a “snowflake” or “bedwetter” etc*?

*Has anyone who’s said they disagree with the joke or is offended by it said they are “right”*

*It seems these days you can’t disagree or have a thought of your own without those who aren’t offended coming out with all sorts of exaggeratted language to label others.

There are many areas were any intelligent person can see something as offensive without themselves being offended.

If somebody told a joke about the 1958 Munich Air disaster I would find it offensive without personally being offended, I’m sure their would be those who’d be both offended and find the joke offensive.
Then off course we’d have those telling us the joke isn’t offensive because the joke teller is simply warning us of the dangers of Air Travel and using Munich as the example.*

Click to expand...



Five paragraphs on here.

Hits the nail firmly on the head. Even on here it seems the ability to agree to disagree is a no no.
Ave said my piece on the subject, am I gonna fall out with someone or block someone over Jimmy Carr’s “ Humour”. Nope.

Have a good day everyone


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			Why just because someone finds a joke or anything offensive do they have to labelled as “hysterical” or a “snowflake” or “bedwetter” etc?

Has anyone who’s said they disagree with the joke or is offended by it said they are “right”

It seems these days you can’t disagree or have a thought of your own without those who aren’t offended coming out with all sorts of exaggeratted language to label others.

There are many areas were any intelligent person can see something as offensive without themselves being offended.

*If somebody told a joke about the 1958 Munich Air disaster I would find it offensive without personally being offended,* I’m sure their would be those who’d be both offended and find the joke offensive.
Then off course we’d have those telling us the joke isn’t offensive because the joke teller is simply warning us of the dangers of Air Travel and using Munich as the example.
		
Click to expand...

Of course, all your doing is stating a topic that is quite clearly horrendous. Of course, when you say that, no one will say they will find it funny, because the topic is not funny. However, until you hear the specific joke on that subject, you cannot really judge whether you'll find it funny or not.

I do not find disability a funny subject, and I could easily say "I would find a joke about disability offensive", and I certainly would if it was mocking a disabled person. And yet, I know that when a several professional comedians have then gone and told a joke around disability, I have at times been in stitches.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			Why just because someone finds a joke or anything offensive do they have to labelled as “hysterical” or a “snowflake” or “bedwetter” etc?

Has anyone who’s said they disagree with the joke or is offended by it said they are “right”

It seems these days you can’t disagree or have a thought of your own without those who aren’t offended coming out with all sorts of exaggeratted language to label others.

There are many areas were any intelligent person can see something as offensive without themselves being offended.

If somebody told a joke about the 1958 Munich Air disaster I would find it offensive without personally being offended, I’m sure their would be those who’d be both offended and find the joke offensive.
Then off course we’d have those telling us the joke isn’t offensive because the joke teller is simply warning us of the dangers of Air Travel and using Munich as the example.
		
Click to expand...

I'm always reminded of Stephen Fry's words on the subject.

_“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so * what."_

This sums up my thoughts on it really. Have no problem with someone being offended by something. "That offends me" - ok, sorry to hear that. It's when the offended try and band together and get something shut down, something that plenty of other people are enjoying without being offended - that's when it annoys me. You being offended doesn't actually have importance over those who aren't - it's just personal to you. People have lost the ability to see things in perspective and turn the other cheek to things they don't like.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 9, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			I'm always reminded of Stephen Fry's words on the subject.

_“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so * what."_

This sums up my thoughts on it really. Have no problem with someone being offended by something. "That offends me" - ok, sorry to hear that. It's when the offended try and band together and get something shut down, something that plenty of other people are enjoying without being offended - that's when it annoys me. You being offended doesn't actually have importance over those who aren't - it's just personal to you. People have lost the ability to see things in perspective and turn the other cheek to things they don't like.
		
Click to expand...

So if the Gypsy community say they are offended, should we listen?

Or ignore them if they are in a minority?

No one is saying my opinion is more important than yours or anyone else, but surely you’re not suggesting this sort of thing is decided by numbers?


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			So if the Gypsy community say they are offended, should we listen?

Or ignore them if they are in a minority?

No one is saying my opinion is more important than yours or anyone else, but surely you’re not suggesting this sort of thing is decided by numbers?
		
Click to expand...

I don't understand your reply, I don't know how you've read that from what I said.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			So if the Gypsy community say they are offended, should we listen?

Or ignore them if they are in a minority?

No one is saying my opinion is more important than yours or anyone else, but surely you’re not suggesting this sort of thing is decided by numbers?
		
Click to expand...

Are the gypsy community offended? Or, are people who are offended speaking on behalf of the gypsy community? If a person from the gypsy community found it offensive, should we then say that the subject must be banned from all comedy in future? Would they be speaking on behalf of their community? What happens if someone from the gypsy community found it funny? Whose opinion should we go with?


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 9, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			I don't understand your reply, I don't know how you've read that from what I said.
		
Click to expand...

You said it’s when the offended band together to get something shut down when plenty of others are enjoying it, so in the case of Jimmy Carr, I’m asking you if it should be shut down (regardless of numbers) if the Gypsies are offended.

Plus as an after thought, there is a difference between being offended and finding something offensive.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			You said it’s when the offended band together to get something shut down when plenty of others are enjoying it, so in the case of Jimmy Carr, I’m asking you if it should be shut down (regardless of numbers) if the Gypsies are offended.

Plus as an after thought, there is a difference between being offended and finding something offensive.
		
Click to expand...

But I've already answered the question you're asking then? You've lost me anyway.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 9, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Are the gypsy community offended? Or, are people who are offended speaking on behalf of the gypsy community? If a person from the gypsy community found it offensive, should we then say that the subject must be banned from all comedy in future? Would they be speaking on behalf of their community? What happens if someone from the gypsy community found it funny? Whose opinion should we go with?
		
Click to expand...

The speaking on behalf of is quite relevant. There are any number of minority groups that if they alone spoke out, probably, wouldn’t be heard because they are a minority. Offended on behalf of, which we quite often hear trotted out by those that look to push boundaries, is a cop out and an excuse.

A simple example; a big kid is bullying a little kid. Should someone else step in, offended on behalf of…? And that’s why offended on behalf of is often very valid. Minority groups often ‘don’t have the clout,’ and others need to step in to support them. Backhandedly denigrating the offended on behalf of just isn’t smart.


----------



## Papas1982 (Feb 9, 2022)

In comedy everything is fair game.

I would say if he was at a rememberance service or the like then yeah, maybe show some restraint. 

But unless the joke is intentionally aimed at someone who is  actually there. Go ahead. 

Anyone who watched him, knows it's gonna get innapropriate at some point. So if you choose to watch him. You accept that. None of those offended have had it forced upon them. 

We all have had things happen to us that touch a nerve, and if someone I knew made light of it then yeah I'd take offence as it's personal. But I'll watch comedians joke about all those subjects and laugh about them as much as anyone. 

Since when did "stick and stones" stop working.....


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 9, 2022)

RichA said:



			Not knocking your point, but Jimmy Carr has previously said that he writes jokes to make people laugh, not to make them think.
If it makes people think, then something good might come out of it. Unfortunately, it's made other people think that trotting out old stereotyping jokes is a justified freedom of speech thing.
		
Click to expand...

The irony of the education argument is that those laughing won’t be educated by it and those not laughing are already educated enough to see the problem.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

Hobbit said:



			The speaking on behalf of is quite relevant. There are any number of minority groups that if they alone spoke out, probably, wouldn’t be heard because they are a minority. Offended on behalf of, which we quite often hear trotted out by those that look to push boundaries, is a cop out and an excuse.

A simple example; a big kid is bullying a little kid. Should someone else step in, offended on behalf of…? And that’s why offended on behalf of is often very valid. Minority groups often ‘don’t have the clout,’ and others need to step in to support them. Backhandedly denigrating the offended on behalf of just isn’t smart.
		
Click to expand...

I agree that minority groups need support from those outside the minority groups. But, I just wondered have the travelling community as a whole expressed their offence at the joke, and asked support from the masses? Or, are some from the masses simply taking it upon themselves to speak on behalf of the minorities? 

An individual who expresses they were offended by something, and then explains they are offended on behalf of other people is also a cop out. It is often individuals who feel they are taking the moral high ground, and feel they can define what is right and what is wrong. 

In terms of the bullying, yes I'd be offended for the little kid, and like to think I'd stick up for him. But, that would be because my assessment of that situation would be that the big kid is very much taking pleasure from the pain of the small kid. He is not bullying him to highlight to others how bullying is wrong. He is doing it to feel powerful, and to get laughs from other people who also like to see the little kid suffer. I'd also be very critical if I felt the same of Jimmy Carr, that he was bullying the travelling community and he was wanting everyone to laugh at their expense. However, that is not how I see the context. I see it that he has highlighted a devastating issue from our history, and he needs the audience to be shocked for his joke to work. If the audience were not shocked, then I'm sure he'd consider that joke a failure.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

Blue in Munich said:



			The irony of the education argument is that those laughing won’t be educated by it and those not laughing are *already educated enough to see the problem*.
		
Click to expand...

You mean the better people? The ones that have a right to tell the rest of us what is right and what is wrong? The ones that have a right to tell us where the line is, and to tell the rest of us we do not get it and therefore do not know where the line is? I love those people...


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 9, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			But I've already answered the question you're asking then? You've lost me anyway.
		
Click to expand...

No you haven’t! 

To quote you:
_"That offends me" - ok, sorry to hear that. It's when the offended try and band together and get something shut down, something that plenty of other people are enjoying without being offended - that's when it annoys me. *You being offended doesn't actually have importance over those who aren't* - it's just personal to you._

So my question is/was what if the You, in the bit in bold is a Gypsy?


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

Kaz said:



			I think the offence is the point. It’s not big and it’s not clever but there are lots of people out there who like being offensive. I think it’s fine to form an opinion of those people.

Take rape jokes, for example. I struggle with these and I wonder who could possibly find them funny. *I guess rapists probably find them funny*. So when someone tells a rape joke I wonder why and I think “what a horrible person”. Or words to that effect.

It’s amazing to me that mods have apparently “cleaned up” this thread but left the rape joke in place.
		
Click to expand...

Hmmm, maybe not. Rapists probably take the subject very seriously, in completely the wrong way, sadly. I'm sure millions of people have laughed at such jokes told by mainstream comedians? Are they all horrible people, or do they laugh because they are fully aware of how awful the subject is and they understand the context in which the statement (joke) was made?


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			No you haven’t!

To quote you:
_"That offends me" - ok, sorry to hear that. It's when the offended try and band together and get something shut down, something that plenty of other people are enjoying without being offended - that's when it annoys me. *You being offended doesn't actually have importance over those who aren't* - it's just personal to you._

So my question is/was what if the You, in the bit in bold is a Gypsy?
		
Click to expand...

? It makes no difference? I'm seriously lost with this line of questioning, I thought I was perfectly clear. If a person finds something offensive that doesn't give them any extra rights to completely shut it down for those who don't.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 9, 2022)

Orikoru said:



			? It makes no difference? I'm seriously lost with this line of questioning, I thought I was perfectly clear. If a person finds something offensive that doesn't give them any extra rights to completely shut it down for those who don't.
		
Click to expand...

It does if it’s personal, and yes there will be those who have personnel connections that won’t be bothered by the joke, that still doesn’t mean you simply ignore the offended one because someone else enjoyed it.

He should at least have the common decency or respect to acknowledge what he said.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			It does if it’s personal, and yes there will be those who have personnel connections that won’t be bothered by the joke, that still doesn’t mean you simply ignore the offended one because someone else enjoyed it.

He should at least have the common decency or respect to acknowledge what he said.
		
Click to expand...

My opinion hasn't changed, I still think they probably should have cut the joke from the publicly accessible broadcast but he still has the right to make that joke at his shows. If you pay your money for a Jimmy Carr ticket you can expect to hear some offensive humour. If it ends up that you are the target for a joke then tough luck, you have to take it on the chin. Again repeating myself from earlier, but I can understand if people want that joke cut from the show, but 'cancelling' the whole thing and the man himself is miles too far.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 9, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



*Actually, I think it is you that doesn't get it *(from the other sides perspective). This is a conversation about the ethics on using controversial subjects in comedy. I completely get that many will not find it funny. The question is, does that therefore make it wrong? The fact that you think it is wrong does not give you the right to say that people who disagree with you "just don't get it". Because, as I demonstrated, I can just say exactly the same thing back to you.

As I have mentioned, Carr and other comedians make jokes about disabilities, homosexuality, aids, cancer, rape, religion, race, etc. Do you find any of those jokes funny, or should all those topics be taken off the table? I bet there are plenty of people that would not laugh at one or more of those topics, but laughed at his holocaust joke. And, not for one second did they laugh because they think the holocaust was funny. That was clearly NOT the point of the joke.

I bet most people know the holocaust was horrendous, and are aware is was the mass extermination of Jewish people by the Nazis. However, unless you have educated yourself further, I bet less people realised that other groups were killed. That was the twist of the joke. Not that the extermination of the travelling community was a good thing, but the absurdity of putting a positive spin on it, knowing it is far from being positive. I am sure these comedians are more interested in the shocked groans rather than just belly laughs, that's what highlights how horrific these things really are.

I suspect people in society simply feel guilt if they laugh at any horrible subject, that they somehow feel that by laughing, it endorses it. However, if we just ask comedians not to make jokes around sensitive subjects, is it not just another method of forgetting about those incidents from history for many people? I know some have educated themselves about the holocaust, but many will have only really had any education on is at school (maybe), and forgotten about most of it. Many are not the type to watch documentaries or read books. So, when a comedian raises such a subject, it puts it in the forefront of people's minds. Some may even go and fo a bit of research afterwards to see why a joke was deemed so edgy.

And, why stop at stand up routines. What about movies? Should we ban all movies about sensitive subjects, especially if they are comedies or inaccurate? After all, they are also part of the entertainment industry, and made to make money.

For me, my first thought would always be "is this person being literal in their absurd views on a bad event". If they are, then maybe there is an argument that it is "hate speech" and they should suffer the consequences. Although, I'd imagine the person would only have a very small following anyway, and not be mainstream. If not, and it is clear many find the absurdness in what they say funny (the whole point of the joke), then I have no issue. It may or may not be to my tastes, but that's fine. If I enjoy the comedian, I'll watch them on TV or book a ticket. If I don't, I'll not go to their show or watch them on TV.

I'm sure many of us have said terrible things about horrible subjects in our past to families and friends. However, hopefully the context of it wasn't you found the topic literally funny, but the fact the opposite was true was what brought the amusement to it. The "I can't believe you said that" reaction, but knowing you did it for comedic effect rather than airing your warped views. Some comedians simply do that publicly rather than within their own homes. And, the audience, by and large, get the context. Sadly, there are others that forget about context, and simply judge whether the words / topic are acceptable or not
		
Click to expand...




Swango1980 said:



*You mean the better people?* The ones that have a right to tell the rest of us what is right and what is wrong? *The ones that have a right *to tell us where the line is, and *to tell the rest of us we do not get it* and therefore do not know where the line is? *I love those people...*

Click to expand...

...


----------



## Don Barzini (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			Why just because someone finds a joke or anything offensive do they have to labelled as “hysterical” or a “snowflake” or “bedwetter” etc?
		
Click to expand...

I personally haven't called anyone a snowflake or bedwetter. I did use the phrase "hysterical masses" though because I do find the response to this somewhat hysterical.

Jimmy Carr, the well-known stand up comedian who is famous for making near-the-knuckle gags made a near-the-knuckle gag during one of his gigs and it was first screened over a month ago. Suddenly it's headline news and people (not necessarily on this forum, but elsewhere) are calling for all sorts of punishments and restrictions on him! He made a joke. He didn't incite violence, commit hate speech or anything else. It was a joke, made in the context of a stand-up comedy show which was well advertised as containing extreme material. And the response has been over the top. People who didn't even hear the joke were condeming him!



pauldj42 said:



			Has anyone who’s said they disagree with the joke or is offended by it said they are “right”
		
Click to expand...

Not directly perhaps. But when people are saying "This offends me and no-one should be allowed to make jokes about this sort of thing" (which a lot of people are, again not necessarily here), then it suggests to me they think they are right, or that they have some sort of right over others. People have every right to be offended by anything they want to be, but I'm afraid it isn't a trump card.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 9, 2022)

Don Barzini said:



			I personally haven't called anyone a snowflake or bedwetter. I did use the phrase "hysterical masses" though because I do find the response to this somewhat hysterical.

Jimmy Carr, the well-known stand up comedian who is famous for making near-the-knuckle gags made a near-the-knuckle gag during one of his gigs and it was first screened over a month ago. Suddenly it's headline news and people (not necessarily on this forum, but elsewhere) are calling for all sorts of punishments and restrictions on him! He made a joke. He didn't incite violence, commit hate speech or anything else. It was a joke, made in the context of a stand-up comedy show which was well advertised as containing extreme material. And the response has been over the top. People who didn't even hear the joke were condeming him!



Not directly perhaps. But when people are saying "This offends me and no-one should be allowed to make jokes about this sort of thing" (which a lot of people are, again not necessarily here), then it suggests to me they think they are right, or that they have some sort of right over others. People have every right to be offended by anything they want to be, but I'm afraid it isn't a trump card.
		
Click to expand...

I didn’t say you had used all those terms it was a general point, in much the same way you have used generic terms.

I don’t believe people should make jokes of the Holocaust as I don’t find any humour in the subject, much the same way I don’t believe people should make jokes about the IRA blowing up kids in Warrington or Hillsborough or a few other examples I’d find offensive, it doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s just my opinion and I don’t believe I or anyone else is using it as a trump card in the same way I don’t believe those saying no subject should be off limits for comedy are using it either.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 9, 2022)

I disliked intensely, indeed abhorred, what he said, but I wasn't surprised.

However, when I heard the full 'I'm educating' context I find myself more willing to 'forgive' him (no point in my getting het up about it in any case) in the hope that he sees the error of his ways in trying to use the 'educating' stuff as a means of mitigating the risk he recognised he would run when making such a 'joke'.  I am not at all convinced by his 'I'm educating' line...but am willing to accept it as an error on his part if he changes his ways and does not try and use it in future as cover for other unacceptable views - views put across as jokes but made simply to shock.

BTW - most on here should know by now why I must look to 'love' and so to forgive the words and actions of those who hurt or offend me. And so it is for me with Carr.


----------



## Robster59 (Feb 9, 2022)

I've avoided commenting on this because I am genuinely torn on this matter.  There should be freedom of speech.  Quell that, and where does it end?  Who decides what can and can't be said?  There has to be a right for people to challenge the system but there also has to be a perspective and respect for people.  
All I will say on this is, at the moment, I am listening to a docudrama on Radio 4 on the Nuremberg trials.  It's quite disturbing, and what it does for me is that this particular joke overstepped the mark.  It wasn't attacking convention, it wasn't challenging the system.  It was a joke designed to shock, and to attack thousands of people who were killed simply because of who they were.  And it also, IMO, belittled all those killed in the holocaust as they were used as the basis of that joke.  
There are some things that shouldn't be used as the basis of a joke.  And the genocide of millions of people is one of them.


----------



## Fade and Die (Feb 9, 2022)

Kaz said:



			I think context is definitely a big part of it and often a joke pulled from a two hour show sounds far worse than if you’ve heard all the preamble. Don’t know if that’s the case here.

I also think personal context is a big part of it. So an offensive joke about some person might be funny to you, less so if it was someone close to you.

I’ll phrase this clumsily I’m sure, but in the case of the 9/10 rape joke I’d suggest those that find it funny don’t see themselves as potentially being the odd one out in that scenario.
		
Click to expand...

I think you have phrased it clumsily as it seems that you are saying all men that would laugh at that gag see themselves as Rapists? (Probably football fans too eh?)

I’m in the camp that nothing is off limits but the comedian takes a risk by telling a near the knuckle joke, he wants to equally offend and delight but sometimes it goes wrong.( Roy Chubby Brown was attacked on stage in Bradford after making jokes about the fire only a few weeks before.)

I’ve heard comics making jokes about The Yorkshire Ripper, Soham, Madeline Mcann, and loads more. All awful and offensive and not all my cup of tea but all received riotously.

As Maureen Lipton says “laughter is best when forbidden”

https://amp.theguardian.com/culture...risks-wiping-out-comedy-claims-maureen-lipman


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			I didn’t say you had used all those terms it was a general point, in much the same way you have used generic terms.

I don’t believe people should make jokes of the Holocaust as I don’t find any humour in the subject, much the same way I don’t believe people should make jokes about the* IRA blowing up kids in Warrington or Hillsborough* or a few other examples I’d find offensive, it doesn’t mean I’m right, it’s just my opinion and I don’t believe I or anyone else is using it as a trump card in the same way I don’t believe those saying no subject should be off limits for comedy are using it either.
		
Click to expand...

That is an interesting example. I grew up in N Ireland during the troubles. The things that happened were awful, on both sides of the political fence. My cousins lived and were out in Warrington at the time of that bombing ironically (thankfully not hurt). I remember first coming to England in 2005, and randomly in some village pub whilst watching the football, a group of guys started singing pro IRA songs (not instigated because they heard my accent or something like that). I'd call that offensive, and certainly the context wasn't "they are singing those songs to highlight the atrocities they committed". I only hoped they sang those songs in ignorance. I wouldn't buy a ticket to watch them perform, and society would not give them a platform to make it into the mainstream.

However, as you can imagine, I have heard many many stand up routines about terrorism. It is almost a guarantee coming from a Northern Irish comic. I've also heard Billy Connolly joke on the subject. Am I offended? Absolutely not. Because I know the context has nothing to do with being pro terrorism. It makes fun of it, even if it is told in a way that, if read literally, would seem it was condoning it.


----------



## RichA (Feb 9, 2022)

It all depends how we are defining comedy. 

Just because somebody laughs and you say you were joking should it offer the protection of freedom of speech or expression? I've witnessed people laughing at some horrific things.

I'm not especially talking about Jimmy Carr and this episode - just the concept being repeated that anything goes in the name of comedy.
I'm not suggesting censorship or anyone being banned - just that it's bizarre to imply that anyone taking issue with it is wrong because it's a protected art form.


----------



## DaveR (Feb 9, 2022)

I wonder how funny comedy would be if every comedian avoided any subject remotely contentious or 'edgey'.


----------



## greenone (Feb 9, 2022)

DaveR said:



			I wonder how funny comedy would be if every comedian avoided any subject remotely contentious or 'edgey'.
		
Click to expand...

If Micheal McIntyre is anything to go by it wouldn't be.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

greenone said:



			If Micheal McIntyre is anything to go by it wouldn't be.
		
Click to expand...

Haha, I was about to type that response as well. The most extreme sitcoms may be things like "My Family". I presume Dad's Army would be completely and utterly unacceptable, there is nothing funny about WW2.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 9, 2022)

There are plenty of comics who don't do edgy. McIntyre is the obvious but also Tim Vine, Milton Jones. I'm pretty sure Peter Kay doesn't push those boundaries from memory.

Going back, Ken Dodd was the same, Barry Cryers jokes shown after his death were not nasty. It's perfectly possible to be very, very funny without being cruel.


----------



## 2blue (Feb 9, 2022)

DaveR said:
I wonder how funny comedy would be if every comedian avoided any subject remotely contentious or 'edgey'.
		
Click to expand...





greenone said: *If Micheal McIntyre is anything to go by it wouldn't be.*

Click to expand...




Swango1980 said:



*Haha, *I was about to type that response as well. The most extreme sitcoms may be things like "My Family". I presume Dad's Army would be completely and utterly unacceptable, there is nothing funny about WW2.
		
Click to expand...

Well that was easy....  nor remotely contentious or 'edgey'.


----------



## DaveR (Feb 9, 2022)

2blue said:



			Well that was easy....  nor remotely contentious or 'edgey'. 

Click to expand...

???


----------



## 2blue (Feb 9, 2022)

DaveR said:



			???  

Click to expand...

Swango found Greengo's response funny....  Haha
None of it was remotely contentious or 'edgey


----------



## DaveR (Feb 9, 2022)

2blue said:



			Swango found Greengo's response funny....  Haha
None of it was remotely contentious or 'edgey
		
Click to expand...

OK, that's not how I read it. If I understood it correctly greenone doesn't think comedy would be funny if nothing edgy or contentious was said.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

2blue said:



			Swango found Greengo's response funny....  Haha
None of it was remotely contentious or 'edgey
		
Click to expand...

To clarify, funny in a text chat sort of way. No offence to Greenone, but I probably would pay to watch him if that statement was part of his stand up routine


----------



## HampshireHog (Feb 9, 2022)

Fade and Die said:



			I think you have phrased it clumsily as it seems that you are saying all men that would laugh at that gag see themselves as Rapists? (Probably football fans too eh?)
		
Click to expand...

I read it as she is saying that none of the men who laugh at that joke see themselves as the victim.  I think she is right.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 9, 2022)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There are plenty of comics who don't do edgy. McIntyre is the obvious but also Tim Vine, Milton Jones. I'm pretty sure Peter Kay doesn't push those boundaries from memory.

Going back, Ken Dodd was the same, Barry Cryers jokes shown after his death were not nasty. It's perfectly possible to be very, very funny without being cruel.
		
Click to expand...

When I emigrated from Rochdale to Mansfield back in 1970. We used to hang around with kids from all over the UK. I spent hours listening to Mike Harding, Bobby Knutt and someone called Billy Connolly On LPs. We would cry laughing.


----------



## RichA (Feb 9, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



			When I emigrated from Rochdale to Mansfield back in 1970. We used to hang around with kids from all over the UK. I spent hours listening to Mike Harding, Bobby Knutt and someone called Billy Connolly On LPs. We would cry laughing.
		
Click to expand...

Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 9, 2022)

RichA said:



			Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.
		
Click to expand...

I cannot remember the story but he did one about a Glaswegian wrestler who fought this beast on a man and ended up biting his own Willy. We spent ages lifting the needle and going back three minutes on the Lp listening to it again and again 😂


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Feb 9, 2022)

RichA said:



			Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.
		
Click to expand...

By far and away the best live comedy performer I have seen. Yes he swears but always seemed to know where to draw the line


----------



## greenone (Feb 9, 2022)

HomerJSimpson said:



			By far and away the best live comedy performer I have seen. Yes he swears but always seemed to know where to draw the line
		
Click to expand...

Ken Bigley?


----------



## HomecountiesJohn (Feb 9, 2022)

Brads said:



			As funny as a dose of the clap and irritating enough to be detestable.
No loss if he vanished forever really.
		
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly.

I am getting really fed up of people who clamber for extreme  punishments whenever something they don’t like happens. Whether it’s a footballer or a celebrity, some people aren’t happy until they’re broken into a million pieces and they’ve lost everything.

Whatever happened to accepting the apology and moving on with life?


----------



## HomecountiesJohn (Feb 9, 2022)

HomerJSimpson said:



			By far and away the best live comedy performer I have seen. Yes he swears but always seemed to know where to draw the line
		
Click to expand...

Not quite.



greenone said:



			Ken Bigley?
		
Click to expand...

Billy Connolly is my Favourite Comedian but I must admit his Ken Bigley comment overstepped the line.He made an apology and moved on.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 9, 2022)

RichA said:



			Billy Connolly. He has had me crying with laughter since I first saw him on TV 40 years ago. I have a fondness for him that I don't usually get for celebs of any flavour.
		
Click to expand...

Billy Connolly is undoubtedly my all time favourite comic. However, I'm pretty sure he has hugely offended some people during his career. I'm sure many of his jokes have well crossed over the line in some people's minds.

But, does that not just go to show that this imaginary line is completely subjective? It is easy for any of us to day whether we liked a joke or not, but it is not easy to say whether the joke should or should not have been told, on behalf of everyone. The acid test is whether people continue to support the comic, go to their shows and buy their DVDs.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 9, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Billy Connolly is undoubtedly my all time favourite comic. However, I'm pretty sure he has hugely offended some people during his career. I'm sure many of his jokes have well crossed over the line in some people's minds.

But, does that not just go to show that this imaginary line is completely subjective? It is easy for any of us to day whether we liked a joke or not, but it is not easy to say whether the joke should or should not have been told, on behalf of everyone. The acid test is whether people continue to support the comic, go to their shows and buy their DVDs.
		
Click to expand...

See Pastor Jack Glass and The Crucifixion...

As it happens my parents forbade me or my brother buying his Solo Concert LP, such was the upset it caused in some sections of the Scottish population and it's notoriety.   But as you might expect - my brother bought it and we listened to it in secret - and wet ourselves laughing   It took some time - and some nerves - for us to suggest to our parents that they had a listen...and they found themselves laughing also.  Why?  Because Connolly simply talked about people we knew and the things they (and we) did.


----------



## RichA (Feb 10, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Billy Connolly is undoubtedly my all time favourite comic. However, I'm pretty sure he has hugely offended some people during his career. I'm sure many of his jokes have well crossed over the line in some people's minds.

But, does that not just go to show that this imaginary line is completely subjective? It is easy for any of us to day whether we liked a joke or not, but it is not easy to say whether the joke should or should not have been told, on behalf of everyone. The acid test is whether people continue to support the comic, go to their shows and buy their DVDs.
		
Click to expand...

I think you're right. It is completely subjective. 
Connolly has massively gone after the church, Catholicism in particular, throughout his career, but mostly poking fun at the ridiculousness of it. For sure it caused outrage and offence in some circles, but I've never heard him do it in a way that was callous. Also, it was a culture that he grew up in, not somebody else's.
Some of his comic stories have been shocking to some and while he's probably not an apologiser, I have read him saying that he's human and he's made mistakes and errors of judgement. 
Personally, I don't look for people to apologise, but it's good if they can reflect on something that they possibly got wrong and make changes. Some people, in all walks of life, think that they're untouchable and just double down. It catches up with them eventually.
Jimmy Carr is sharp and extremely funny. Personally, I hope he just rethinks the more extreme material that just causes shock and offence for the sake of it. He doesn't need to join the ranks of comedians who've disappeared from view because of their obnoxious material. I think he's got the talent to stay on the edge without tumbling over it.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 10, 2022)

RichA said:



			I think you're right. It is completely subjective.
Connolly has massively gone after the church, Catholicism in particular, throughout his career, but mostly poking fun at the ridiculousness of it. For sure it caused outrage and offence in some circles, but I've never heard him do it in a way that was callous. *Also, it was a culture that he grew up in, not somebody else's*.
Some of his comic stories have been shocking to some and while he's probably not an apologiser, I have read him saying that he's human and he's made mistakes and errors of judgement.
Personally, I don't look for people to apologise, but it's good if they can reflect on something that they possibly got wrong and make changes. Some people, in all walks of life, think that they're untouchable and just double down. It catches up with them eventually.
Jimmy Carr is sharp and extremely funny. Personally, I hope he just rethinks the more extreme material that just causes shock and offence for the sake of it. He doesn't need to join the ranks of comedians who've disappeared from view because of their obnoxious material. I think he's got the talent to stay on the edge without tumbling over it.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that would be an excuse to religious people who were deeply offended by Connolly? Or probably much of a get out clause. Otherwise, you could argue that the holocaust must not be joked about, unless you are Jewish? A white male comic can only joke about what a white male has experienced growing up in the UK. Billy Connolly was working class, and that provided plenty of great material. But perhaps a white middle class funny guy would be starved of material simply because they were brought up in an environment that doesn't especially provide an abundance of comic material. 

But, it simply gets back to this. If topics the holocaust was taken off the table that could be included within a comics routine, there are many many more topics that would have to be excluded as well. And, even if you caveated certain subjects that could be included, but only if it was part of that comics culture, most comics would have to avoid most topics. I'd imagine it would be the end of the likes of Jimmy Carr, Ricky Gervais and Frankie Boyle, or at least as we know them. You could argue that nearly every single joke if extremely offensive if you take it literally.

Most of us have probably seen Jim Jeffries excellent routine on US gun control. He acknowledges in that routine that about 10% of those listening in the US will be absolutely furious, knowing he'd be causing extreme offence to them and their constitutional rights. In fact, the context of his routine is that he very much is talking down towards him (whereas in Carr's routine, it is pretty clear the context has nothing to do with putting down the travelling community, but the shock of it revealing how horrific it actually was). Is that sort of offence acceptable, or should he be more considerate to the many people that love their guns and don't want their Second Amendment changed? Or, do we all need to nominate someone to speak on behalf of us all, and tell us what sort of offence is acceptable, what isn't, what topics are fine and what topics are an absolute no go area?

P.S. I probably sound like a huge Jimmy Carr fan. I'm not, I like his quips, decent on 8 out of 10 Cats, and seen a few snippets of his routines and put downs of hecklers on youTube, which I'll chuckle at. But never sat through an entire stand up routine. I'm not a huge fan of comedians who tell one line jokes generally. I much prefer the story tellers, which is why Billy Connolly is my all time favourite, Ricky Gervais is another, and and the other end of the spectrum Peter Kay. My favourite Billy Connolly moments on youtube:


Show in America (invited by Whoopi Goldberg) where he talks about the safety of airplanes
Parkinson interview which included Tom Cruise
Not being allowed to use the word "dwarf"
An Audience with Billy Connolly
Lady falling of the bus


----------



## RichA (Feb 10, 2022)

I'm not suggesting that anything should be taken off anyone's table, in terms of comedy material.
In the UK, comedy is governed by the same laws that affect all of us - Obscene Publications, Public Order, various Discrimination acts, etc. In our society, unless something is specifically legislated against, it is legal and I'm broadly in favour of free speech and against censorship. 
However, in all aspects of society, even legal behaviour has limits which any of us will be shunned if we exceed. 
I could join a golf club and take 6 hours for every round, wearing pink socks and having my Bluetooth speaker blaring out drum'n'bass as I played. It wouldn't be illegal, but pretty soon everyone would think I was a dick and I would find myself marginalised.
Surely the skill in any activity is finding balance and not only listening to people who agree with you.


----------



## hovis (Feb 10, 2022)

Alot of people are missing the point.  What is and isn't acceptable is subjective.  You wouldn't have any comedians at all if they weren't allowed to use "potentially" offensive material.   There will be people out there that find Ken Dodd offensive.   It seems to be fashionable to be "offended" on other people's behalf.  I suppose it makes the person think they are a decent human being.  
If you are offended by a joke then fine. Be offended.  What's wrong with being offended?  You know not to watch them, be around them or buy their tickets.   They'll soon be sorry when they have no friends or income.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 10, 2022)

RichA said:



			I'm not suggesting that anything should be taken off anyone's table, in terms of comedy material.
In the UK, comedy is governed by the same laws that affect all of us - Obscene Publications, Public Order, various Discrimination acts, etc. In our society, unless something is specifically legislated against, it is legal and I'm broadly in favour of free speech and against censorship.
However, in all aspects of society, even legal behaviour has limits which any of us will be shunned if we exceed.
I could join a golf club and take 6 hours for every round, wearing pink socks and having my Bluetooth speaker blaring out drum'n'bass as I played. It wouldn't be illegal, but pretty soon everyone would think I was a dick and I would find myself marginalised.
*Surely the skill in any activity is finding balance and not only listening to people who agree with you*.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely. However, if you took 6 hours for every round and had a bluetooth speaker blaring out, I don't think ANYBODY would be a fan of you. In fact, the music alone would probably end up being against the club's etiquette policy, so although not illegal by law, it would probably be illegal in terms of the club's policies, and so I'd not be surprised if you got kicked out. Take those 2 aspects away, you'd probably get away with the pink socks, although I'm sure a few would still think you were a d*ck (for wearing the socks, not specifically talking about you).

It would be interesting to know how many people that are outraged by the joke actually like him? According to this basic poll, at the moment 14.7% claim to like him and he should apologise. Although, not sure how many of those like him just in the sense of "I see him on telly sometimes, and he is decent" and how many go out of their way to listen to his routines. 8% don't like him and think he should apologise. So, 1/5 of people potentially think he crossed the line, although it may even be smaller than that. After all, anybody offended are more likely to use this thread to voice their opinion. Many who do not care probably won't come near it and cast their vote, so maybe it is well under 1/5 of people that are outraged?

I find it interesting that many people that are offended and shocked by this joke, and are spending energy telling us he crossed a line, have not spent any energy in the past campaigning against Jimmy Carr jokes. For years he has joked about things that are probably much worse, or will certainly offend certain groups of people much worse than this joke would have offended those same people. So, to simply argue this latest joke is unacceptable, to me is a fairly limited argument. For those that object, I'd actually give more respect if they researched all of his most controversial jokes over the years, and all the controversial topics they deal with, and then list exactly which subjects he should not have gone near, and excluded from a comedy routine. At least that would then show a consistent approach to the argument, rather than isolating the debate to this one particular topic. I would still argue that no topic should be censored, because it is all about the context of how the comedian delivered the joke, and the fact that there will always be someone somewhere offended by some of the most trivial of topics.


----------



## RichA (Feb 10, 2022)

You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised. 
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy.  
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 10, 2022)

RichA said:



			You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy.
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.
		
Click to expand...

Great post, it also seems to me some people are still confused by the difference between the words offended and offensive.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 10, 2022)

RichA said:



			You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy. 
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.
		
Click to expand...

To be fair, I've no gripe if an individual is offended. I think I've made that clear. And, my post wasn't "were you offended personally by his joke", it was actually a broader post about will this / should this be the end for Carr. It is one thing stating an individual is offended, and if he crossed their individual line, so be it. However, I think it becomes more of an issue when individuals state he crossed a line on a broader sense, where they no longer speak for themselves, but for society in general. I'm not aiming this directly at you, but simply clarifying my point generally. The fuss within the media, and why he appears to be in hot water, is not really because people didn't like the joke personally, but because they didn't like it they have claimed it is therefore unacceptable.

If someone could convince me his joke was effectively hate speech, in that he was obviously and intentionally putting down a minority group, I would be more likely to agree that society would consider this unacceptable. I don't agree that was his intention, or how the joke came across. Furthermore, there have some said that a terrible event such as the holocaust should not be part of and comedic topic whatsover. However, there may be many ways to approach this topic that many would feel less offended by that Carr's specific joke, for example a joke that clearly pokes fun of the perpetrators of the whole thing.

So, I apologise if you feel that a lot of my comments are aimed directly at you and how your reacting. They are not, I just happen to be responding to your post, but adding my own more general viewpoint.


----------



## phillarrow (Feb 10, 2022)

RichA said:



			You realise that people are only giving their opinions on this thread because you opened it asking for them?
People only expressed an opinion on the Irritations thread because somebody led with a gripe about the joke being criticised.
It feels like you either actually want people to keep telling you how offended they are or just agree that anything goes. As with most issues, there's a massive grey area in the middle that I suspect is occupied by most thoughtful, moderate people with a reasonable amount of empathy. 
Personally, I'm not offended. I just think it was a poor joke based on a subject that should be treated with a lot more respect, if used in a comedy routine.
		
Click to expand...

This! 

I like Jimmy Carr as a game show host - apart from him irritating laugh. I used to like him as a stand up but I think he's a bit stale now. I also like comedy that shocks and makes us wince a little. However, Carr's back catalogue, or the concept of near-the-knuckle comedy wasn't in question here. The poll was only about this specific joke. Voting on this poll and expressing an opinion about this specific joke doesn't mean we have to choose a side of the comedy fence and justify our stance.

Personally, I think the holocaust should be off limits and that this particular joke was a bit OTT. Can I justify that with every other thing I have an opinion on? Of course I can't! None of us can fully justify all of our opinions, they are an eclectic mix with lots of overlaps and contradictions. That's just human nature. 

P.S. If anyone wants to explore the nature of comedy and be genuinely challenged in how they feel about comedic subjects, watch Nannette by Hannah Gadsby. It's brilliant, funny, shocking, disgusting and thought provoking.


----------



## RichA (Feb 10, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			To be fair, I've no gripe if an individual is offended. I think I've made that clear. And, my post wasn't "were you offended personally by his joke", it was actually a broader post about will this / should this be the end for Carr. It is one thing stating an individual is offended, and if he crossed their individual line, so be it. However, I think it becomes more of an issue when individuals state he crossed a line on a broader sense, where they no longer speak for themselves, but for society in general. I'm not aiming this directly at you, but simply clarifying my point generally. The fuss within the media, and why he appears to be in hot water, is not really because people didn't like the joke personally, but because they didn't like it they have claimed it is therefore unacceptable.

If someone could convince me his joke was effectively hate speech, in that he was obviously and intentionally putting down a minority group, I would be more likely to agree that society would consider this unacceptable. I don't agree that was his intention, or how the joke came across. Furthermore, there have some said that a terrible event such as the holocaust should not be part of and comedic topic whatsover. However, there may be many ways to approach this topic that many would feel less offended by that Carr's specific joke, for example a joke that clearly pokes fun of the perpetrators of the whole thing.

So, I apologise if you feel that a lot of my comments are aimed directly at you and how your reacting. They are not, I just happen to be responding to your post, but adding my own more general viewpoint.
		
Click to expand...

No apology needed or sought, brother. As far as I'm concerned we're having a chat over a cup of coffee - not arguing or trying to change each other's opinion.


----------



## need_my_wedge (Feb 10, 2022)

hovis said:



			Fitting






Click to expand...

I've not seen the show or heard the joke, and to be honest don't really care. The clip above is perfect.

Comedy is as comedy does. I can choose to be offended by humour, that's my problem it doesn't affect anyone else. If I'm offended by a comedian, I'll normally just switch them off, and likely won't watch them again. Equally, I can choose to laugh at something that someone else may be offended at, that's entirely my own right. Black humour has been around for years, making fun out of bad situations, liking something that others find offensive does not make me a bad person, I just have a different sense of humour to them. Just because I find a comedian offensive doesn't make me want to get them cancelled or their show taken off air, it's no skin off my nose if others that like want to continue to watch. Personally comedy is a black & white situation to me, it's funny or it's not.  Derek & Clive spring to mind. I'm sure that most of their act will be offensive to many today, and likely not funny to another many, but it still makes me laugh when I hear it.

If his thread hadn't been opened, I wouldn't have even know about the joke, and I still don't care about it, or who's offended by it.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 10, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			To be fair, I've no gripe if an individual is offended. I think I've made that clear. And, my post wasn't "were you offended personally by his joke", it was actually a broader post about will this / should this be the end for Carr. It is one thing stating an individual is offended, and if he crossed their individual line, so be it. However, I think it becomes more of an issue when individuals state he crossed a line on a broader sense, where they no longer speak for themselves, but for society in general. I'm not aiming this directly at you, but simply clarifying my point generally. The fuss within the media, and why he appears to be in hot water, is not really because people didn't like the joke personally, but because they didn't like it they have claimed it is therefore unacceptable.

If someone could convince me his joke was effectively hate speech, in that he was obviously and intentionally putting down a minority group, I would be more likely to agree that society would consider this unacceptable. I don't agree that was his intention, or how the joke came across. Furthermore, there have some said that a terrible event such as the holocaust should not be part of and comedic topic whatsover. However, there may be many ways to approach this topic that many would feel less offended by that Carr's specific joke, for example a joke that clearly pokes fun of the perpetrators of the whole thing.

So, I apologise if you feel that a lot of my comments are aimed directly at you and how your reacting. They are not, I just happen to be responding to your post, but adding my own more general viewpoint.
		
Click to expand...

Very interesting post. In Europe, we’re on the cusp of this being outlawed/made illegal. The country pushing this stance is Germany. It been kicked around committee for about 3 years now. Researched, analysed and stress tested, and subsequently decided upon as … I’m not sure of the definitive perspective but respect that brighter minds than mine are involved.

I’ve not followed the debate closely and, in fairness, can’t give a huge amount of detail on it apart from saying that if that much effort has been put in, it’s worth considering.


----------



## Beedee (Feb 10, 2022)

I noticed he's playing my town this weekend. The venue have been at great pains to point out that there will be no holocaust jokes.


----------



## larmen (Feb 10, 2022)

He was on the Comedians Comedian podcast just before Christmas. Also mentioned the then upcoming special. It’s a 2 hour interview worth listening to. It’s a quite nice podcast in general if you like comedy.

One thing he mentioned a couple of times is that it is usually other people being offended on behalf of the ‘target’ of the joke, the ‘target’ actually not bothered or even enjoying it.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 10, 2022)

larmen said:



			He was on the Comedians Comedian podcast just before Christmas. Also mentioned the then upcoming special. It’s a 2 hour interview worth listening to. It’s a quite nice podcast in general if you like comedy.

One thing he mentioned a couple of times is that it is usually other people being offended on behalf of the ‘target’ of the joke, the ‘target’ actually not bothered or even enjoying it.
		
Click to expand...

And he know that because>……………. he reads minds too. Touch arrogant?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 10, 2022)

larmen said:



			He was on the Comedians Comedian podcast just before Christmas. Also mentioned the then upcoming special. It’s a 2 hour interview worth listening to. It’s a quite nice podcast in general if you like comedy.

One thing he mentioned a couple of times is that it is usually other people being offended on behalf of the ‘target’ of the joke, the ‘target’ actually not bothered or even enjoying it.
		
Click to expand...

The "target" were murdered about 80 years ago; they'd have a bit of a job being offended and I suspect they were bothered and didn't enjoy it.

I'm quite familiar with gallows humour and not much is out of bounds, but genocide is in my book.


----------



## IanM (Feb 10, 2022)

Agreed..... a bloke says that one of the worst crimes against humanity in history, wasn't all bad cos a certain group were included in the death toll.

Someone please explain the satirical content of that.  I can't spot it.


----------



## DaveR (Feb 10, 2022)

IanM said:



			Agreed..... a bloke says that one of the worst crimes against humanity in history, wasn't all bad cos a certain group were included in the death toll.

Someone please explain the satirical content of that.  I can't spot it.
		
Click to expand...

I understand where he is coming from with that 'joke' about a minority that causes a lot of distress and upset to others but I'm not sure that makes his gag acceptable.


----------



## 2blue (Feb 10, 2022)

Anti-woke Warriors are working so, so hard on this one......  must be well knackered when they go to bed...  haha....  & well confused with who they are defending.


----------



## Don Barzini (Feb 11, 2022)

IanM said:



			Agreed..... a bloke says that one of the worst crimes against humanity in history, wasn't all bad cos a certain group were included in the death toll.

Someone please explain the satirical content of that.  I can't spot it.
		
Click to expand...

No one will ever be able to explain it to you in a way you find satisfactory because that’s the very essence of comedy. It’s entirely subjective. No joke has ever been made that everyone finds funny. No comedian has ever existed that is appreciated by all. 

It was ever thus and it will ever be.


----------



## IanM (Feb 11, 2022)

Has anyone actually tried to explain it?


----------



## Don Barzini (Feb 11, 2022)

IanM said:



			Has anyone actually tried to explain it?
		
Click to expand...

Different people interpret the same joke in different ways and get different things from it. 

I made a post earlier in this thread explaining why I personally found the joke funny. I also acknowledged that other people would no doubt disagree that my interpretation was funny. Page 4 or 5 of this thread if you genuinely are interested.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 11, 2022)

Don Barzini said:



			No one will ever be able to explain it to you in a way you find satisfactory because that’s the very essence of comedy. It’s entirely subjective. No joke has ever been made that everyone finds funny. No comedian has ever existed that is appreciated by all.

It was ever thus and it will ever be.
		
Click to expand...

I get what you’re saying, I genuinely do, but the problem I have with your post (not aimed at you) is, those who say no subject is off limits are actually saying that it would be ok to make jokes about subjects like Child rape or murder etc so long as somebody, somewhere laughs!

I struggle with the, no subject should be off limits.


----------



## IanM (Feb 11, 2022)

I remember your post at the time.

If you'd have stopped at, "it made me think," I'd have agreed  with you.  If that thought made you chuckle at your own narrow understanding about it, I guess I can understand that.  But that is laughing at a joke?

Either way, seems wrong media, wrong time to me.


----------



## phillarrow (Feb 11, 2022)

So, to offer a genuine explanation as to why it is 'meant' to be funny...

The crux of this style of comedy is to create tension in the audience and then to relieve that tension. It is the relief of tension that makes people laugh. It's the same evolutionary response to the relief we feel when a scary situation is over - which explains why some people love roller coasters or horror films, for example. 
By introducing a topic that is so obviously taboo (the holocaust) and then saying something that is utterly outlandish to the point of being nonsensical (that the holocaust had a positive side) this relieves the tension about the subject, because the punchline is so ludicrous. That is the explanation of why some people find comedy like this funny. In others, such a ludicrous punchline actually exacerbates the tension, so we wince and/or find it genuinely offensive. For us, the relief of tension didn't work, so we didn't laugh. This is where it is so subjective, just like some people only ever go on a roller coaster once.

Note: I am not saying it IS funny. I am not making a judgement at all about it (I've made my views clear earlier in the thread). I am simply answering the question about why it works as comedy.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			I get what you’re saying, I genuinely do, but the problem I have with your post (not aimed at you) is, those who say no subject is off limits are actually saying that it would be ok to make jokes about subjects like Child rape or murder etc so long as somebody, somewhere laughs!

I struggle with the, no subject should be off limits.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure anybody said that? Or does that interpretation help you try and justify your own stance?

I'm pretty sure if a joke was told, and just 1 person in a world of billions found it funny, it probably was not a good joke, and probably extremely offensive if it was on such a sensitive topic. 

That is different to many many people finding it funny, and also respecting the fact that the vast vast majority of people laughing are actually in agreement that the event / topic being discussed was a truly dreadful thing.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 11, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



*Not sure anybody said that? Or does that interpretation help you try and justify your own stance?*

I'm pretty sure if a joke was told, and just 1 person in a world of billions found it funny, it probably was not a good joke, and probably extremely offensive if it was on such a sensitive topic.

That is different to many many people finding it funny, and also respecting the fact that the vast vast majority of people laughing are actually in agreement that the event / topic being discussed was a truly dreadful thing.
		
Click to expand...

Just a few examples from this thread, try playing the post instead of the poster!

“I think nothing is out of bounds in comedy”

“There is not a single event or incident in history that should be outside the realms of comedy. Everything is fair game in my eyes.”

“Nothing should be off limits to comedy”

“In comedy everything is fair game.”

“I’m in the camp that nothing is off limits”


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			Just a few examples from this thread, try playing the post instead of the poster!

“I think nothing is out of bounds in comedy”

“There is not a single event or incident in history that should be outside the realms of comedy. Everything is fair game in my eyes.”

“Nothing should be off limits to comedy”

“In comedy everything is fair game.”

“I’m in the camp that nothing is off limits”
		
Click to expand...

Please highlight which one of those statements backs up you claim *"so long as somebody, somewhere laughs!"*

Pretty please.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 11, 2022)

phillarrow said:



			So, to offer a genuine explanation as to why it is 'meant' to be funny...

The crux of this style of comedy is to create tension in the audience and then to relieve that tension. It is the relief of tension that makes people laugh. It's the same evolutionary response to the relief we feel when a scary situation is over - which explains why some people love roller coasters or horror films, for example.
By introducing a topic that is so obviously taboo (the holocaust) and then saying something that is utterly outlandish to the point of being nonsensical (that the holocaust had a positive side) this relieves the tension about the subject, because the punchline is so ludicrous. That is the explanation of why some people find comedy like this funny. In others, such a ludicrous punchline actually exacerbates the tension, so we wince and/or find it genuinely offensive. For us, the relief of tension didn't work, so we didn't laugh. This is where it is so subjective, just like some people only ever go on a roller coaster once.

Note: I am not saying it IS funny. I am not making a judgement at all about it (I've made my views clear earlier in the thread). I am simply answering the question about why it works as comedy.
		
Click to expand...

I've been trying to work out in my head how this style of comedy works, usually when walking the dog, driving in to work etc. Mulling it over, how would I explain it etc. I kind of knew what I wanted to say but just couldn't get my explanation right. I read your post and you have nailed it. It doesn't judge the joke, or the reaction, simply explains the mechanics of it and the reactions people have. Top post


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 11, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Please highlight which one of those statements backs up you claim *"so long as somebody, somewhere laughs!"*

Pretty please.
		
Click to expand...

Again! Read my post! If a comedian tells a joke and nobody laughs or 1 million people laugh, have they or have they not told a JOKE? It may be the worst joke ever or the best joke ever, it was still a joke!
Stop looking for arguments!


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

phillarrow said:



			So, to offer a genuine explanation as to why it is 'meant' to be funny...

The crux of this style of comedy is to create tension in the audience and then to relieve that tension. It is the relief of tension that makes people laugh. It's the same evolutionary response to the relief we feel when a scary situation is over - which explains why some people love roller coasters or horror films, for example.
By introducing a topic that is so obviously taboo (the holocaust) and then saying something that is utterly outlandish to the point of being nonsensical (that the holocaust had a positive side) this relieves the tension about the subject, because the punchline is so ludicrous. That is the explanation of why some people find comedy like this funny. In others, such a ludicrous punchline actually exacerbates the tension, so we wince and/or find it genuinely offensive. For us, the relief of tension didn't work, so we didn't laugh. This is where it is so subjective, just like some people only ever go on a roller coaster once.

Note: I am not saying it IS funny. I am not making a judgement at all about it (I've made my views clear earlier in the thread). I am simply answering the question about why it works as comedy.
		
Click to expand...

This is far too logical of a post. I like it.

Moving comedy to the side, we know many people like horror movies. I'm not a big fan, as they often make me feel uncomfortable, although I have watched a few in my time. Films like Saw, Hostel, The Human Centipede are primarily about extreme human torture. Should these movies be allowed to be made and screened? We all know that anyone who has suffered torture, including during the holocaust, it would have been the most horrific of ordeals. I'm sure those that have survived it, I'd understand many not enjoying these types of films. I watched one last week that was based around Nazi medical experiments during the holocaust. It wasn't a documentary, it was completely fictional and went crazy. Basically US soldiers get stuck in enemy territory, need to blow up a communication tower in a church, find out Nazis are conducting human experiments, one of which causes humans to become super powerful, almost indestructible monsters. Should films like this be banned, as effectively they are simply made for entertainment and make money? Or is it just comedy that needs to stay away from these subjects? Borat and his "kill the Jews" or "throw the Jews down the well"?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 11, 2022)




----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			Again! Read my post! If a comedian tells a joke and nobody laughs or 1 million people laugh, have they or have they not told a JOKE? It may be the worst joke ever or the best joke ever, it was still a joke!
Stop looking for arguments!

Click to expand...

Come on paul, you are digging yourself a hole here. This is exactly what you said:

"I get what you’re saying, I genuinely do, but the problem I have with your post (not aimed at you) is, those who say no subject is off limits are actually saying that it would be ok to make jokes about subjects like Child rape or murder etc so long as somebody, somewhere laughs!"

I had no issues with how you began this statement, up to and including "no subject is off limits". However, you explanation thereafter, speaking on those peoples behalf, to justify this view was simply to say it is OK if one person in the world laughs. That is absolute garbage, not one person has said that anywhere. And, to be fair, if a comedian was only successful in making one person in the world laugh, they'd be pretty rubbish. They wouldn't make it very far in the mainstream, and that would be the clearest indication that this comedian has crossed "society's line"


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 11, 2022)

ffs! What line, we’ve been told and I’ve given examples of some saying there are NO LINES! ie NO SUBJECT OFF LIMITS

Have you ever been to a “Comedy Club” or an “Open Night Mic”? Or are you restricting the debate to just high profile comedians?

And why are you answering on others behalf? Let those who made the statements answer!


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			ffs! What line, we’ve been told and I’ve given examples of some saying there are NO LINES! ie NO SUBJECT OFF LIMITS

Have you ever been to a “Comedy Club” or an “Open Night Mic”? Or are you restricting the debate to just high profile comedians?

And why are you answering on others behalf? Let those who made the statements answer!
		
Click to expand...

Capital letters do not make your point make any more sense.

You are the one talking on others behalf. You are just making rubbish up. I asked you to highlight where others have said this. You didn't, you couldn't. I'm simply saying I have not seen anybody anywhere say what you have alleged. I am not speaking on their behalf, I was simply asking you to show the evidence.

Btw, I clearly said I agreed with the bit "no subject is off limits", so why on earth are you putting that in capital letters, I do not know. I didn't have issue with that. As I said, it was what followed. When dealing with sensitive issues, I am sure there are billions of way that a joke could be told that would be offensive to just about everyone, and that "society" would not find it funny. That the comedians would not have enough fans to become successful, as most would find them truly offensive. However, a great comedian has the skill to talk about any subject without doing this. That doesn't mean that no one gets offended at all. It is not as if there is a point at which everyone in the world is offended, and then told slightly differently no one is.

So, I am happy if you simply retract the second half of the statement, the bit you clearly do not want to back up.

And yes, I have been to live local comedy gigs, does this make any difference?


----------



## phillarrow (Feb 11, 2022)

Lord Tyrion said:



			I've been trying to work out in my head how this style of comedy works, usually when walking the dog, driving in to work etc. Mulling it over, how would I explain it etc. I kind of knew what I wanted to say but just couldn't get my explanation right. I read your post and you have nailed it. It doesn't judge the joke, or the reaction, simply explains the mechanics of it and the reactions people have. Top post 

Click to expand...

Thanks, but I can't take any credit for it. It's what Hannah Gadsby explains in Nannette, and why her deliberate choice to set up the tension but then refuse to relieve it is so powerful. Jimmy Carr himself is a real student of comedy and has talked openly about the mechanics of jokes and why they work. As a self-confessed nerd, I find this kind of stuff fascinating. Anything that helps to explain aspects of human nature that are often taken with a pinch of salt is fascinating to me.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 11, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Capital letters do not make your point make any more sense.

You are the one talking on others behalf. You are just making rubbish up. I asked you to highlight where others have said this. You didn't, you couldn't. I'm simply saying I have not seen anybody anywhere say what you have alleged. I am not speaking on their behalf, I was simply asking you to show the evidence.

Btw, I clearly said I agreed with the bit "no subject is off limits", so why on earth are you putting that in capital letters, I do not know. I didn't have issue with that. As I said, it was what followed. When dealing with sensitive issues, I am sure there are billions of way that a joke could be told that would be offensive to just about everyone, and that "society" would not find it funny. That the comedians would not have enough fans to become successful, as most would find them truly offensive. However, a great comedian has the skill to talk about any subject without doing this. That doesn't mean that no one gets offended at all. It is not as if there is a point at which everyone in the world is offended, and then told slightly differently no one is.

So, I am happy if you simply retract the second half of the statement, the bit you clearly do not want to back up.

And yes, I have been to live local comedy gigs, does this make any difference?
		
Click to expand...

There is a tree in the Amazon thats sole purpose is to make the oxygen you breath, I suggest you go find said tree and apologise to it.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			There is a tree in the Amazon thats sole purpose is to make the oxygen you breath, I suggest you go find said tree and apologise to it.
		
Click to expand...

OK, we'll accept that you believe what you said, and that I know you are talking rubbish and are now trying to spout irrelevant nonsense (and now personally offensive to me) so you don't have to back up your silly statement. We can now move on thankfully


----------



## phillarrow (Feb 11, 2022)

I think you're both 'missing' each other?

Paul said that the line "Nothing is off limits in comedy" suggests that some truly vile subjects that almost everybody would find repulsive are okay as long as someone somewhere laughs. He's backed that up by proving that people have said that first bit - that nothing is off limits.
Swango, you are focusing solely on the last few words, which suggests that you are viewing this sentence as "Anything is funny as long as one person laughs."?? But that's not what Paul was saying. His reference to someone laughing is simply linked to the purpose of comedy. Unless someone is 'supposed' to laugh, by definition it's not comedy. 

Paul (clearly in my view) wasn't saying that anything is funny as long as someone laughs. He wasn't even saying that others had said that. He was saying that others had said that any topic is fair game for comedy...which they had.

At least that's how I read those posts. No need to fall out over it.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

pauldj42 said:



			There is a tree in the Amazon thats sole purpose is to make the oxygen you breath, I suggest you go find said tree and apologise to it.
		
Click to expand...

Nice one. You rage about offence, and then make a statement indicating I am a waste of oxygen and would be better off being starved of oxygen resulting in my death. And why? What is the context? It is simply because you made a rubbish statement, cannot back it up and so change the subject effectively saying I'd be better off dead.

Am I offended? Yes. Will I complain and ask for the statement to be deleted and for you to be kicked off this forum? Absolutely not. I appreciate (hope) you genuinely would not have me killed if you had that power, and you are simply frustrated about this particular discussion.


----------



## 3offTheTee (Feb 11, 2022)

Have not read the whole thread and have no intention of doing so.

However if Carr had said afterwards that it was a joke said on the night for the audience and he did not mean to offend, it that is actually the case which hopefully it is, the majority would be happy.

An apology to the people he offended would also help.


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Feb 11, 2022)

phillarrow said:



			I think you're both 'missing' each other?

Paul said that the line "Nothing is off limits in comedy" suggests that some truly vile subjects that almost everybody would find repulsive are okay as long as someone somewhere laughs. He's backed that up by proving that people have said that first bit - that nothing is off limits.
Swango, you are focusing solely on the last few words, which suggests that you are viewing this sentence as "Anything is funny as long as one person laughs."?? But that's not what Paul was saying. His reference to someone laughing is simply linked to the purpose of comedy. Unless someone is 'supposed' to laugh, by definition it's not comedy.

Paul (clearly in my view) wasn't saying that anything is funny as long as someone laughs. He wasn't even saying that others had said that. He was saying that others had said that any topic is fair game for comedy...which they had.

At least that's how I read those posts. No need to fall out over it.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

phillarrow said:



			I think you're both 'missing' each other?

Paul said that the line "Nothing is off limits in comedy" suggests that some truly vile subjects that almost everybody would find repulsive are okay as long as someone somewhere laughs. He's backed that up by proving that people have said that first bit - that nothing is off limits.
Swango, you are focusing solely on the last few words, which suggests that you are viewing this sentence as "Anything is funny as long as one person laughs."?? But that's not what Paul was saying. His reference to someone laughing is simply linked to the purpose of comedy. Unless someone is 'supposed' to laugh, by definition it's not comedy.

Paul (clearly in my view) wasn't saying that anything is funny as long as someone laughs. He wasn't even saying that others had said that. He was saying that others had said that any topic is fair game for comedy...which they had.

At least that's how I read those posts. No need to fall out over it.
		
Click to expand...

Of course, it is a sensitive topic which can lead to sensitive debates. And, I get what you are saying. I just wanted to clarify that we both agree that people say no topic is off limits, as you say that is not disputed. However, that doesn't mean these people are saying anything the way in which this topic is used is acceptable so long as one person laughed (again, to clarify, I have not interpreted anybody as thinking this from the posts I read, but they can clarify themselves). That is not the justification for "any topic is off limits". The justification is what the context is in which the comedian takes. If only one person in the world laughed (with billions hearing the joke), then without even knowing what that joke is about, I could pretty much decide that, at best it was an awful joke, and at worst it was truly offensive, both in the topic and in the context it was told.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 11, 2022)

phillarrow said:



			Thanks, but I can't take any credit for it. It's what Hannah Gadsby explains in Nannette, and why her deliberate choice to set up the tension but then refuse to relieve it is so powerful. Jimmy Carr himself is a real student of comedy and has talked openly about the mechanics of jokes and why they work. As a self-confessed nerd, I find this kind of stuff fascinating. Anything that helps to explain aspects of human nature that are often taken with a pinch of salt is fascinating to me. 

Click to expand...

You should have kept quiet and we would all have though that you were some sage wise man .

Still a top post though, thank you for digging out the quote and posting it.


----------



## HampshireHog (Feb 11, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			Not sure anybody said that? Or does that interpretation help you try and justify your own stance?

I'm pretty sure if a joke was told, and just 1 person in a world of billions found it funny, it probably was not a good joke, and probably extremely offensive if it was on such a sensitive topic.

That is different to many many people finding it funny, and also respecting the fact that the vast vast majority of people laughing are actually in agreement that the event / topic being discussed was a truly dreadful thing.
		
Click to expand...

You have consistently over the course of this thread stated that you consider nothing is is out of bounds for comedy and you do not have any gripe with people being offended by a subject.  But you don’t like Child Rape being called out as a legitimate topic which by your definition it is.

Reaction of the room in no way validates the joke, you fill a room with fans having enjoying a show and throw in this joke you will get laughter, in that moment.

Offended has scales from someone telling you that you look like a dick in pink golf trousers right up to upset, pain and anguish.  I am genuinely surprised that I am in a minority in that I don’t think it appropriate to make jokes about topics that engender high levels of distress.

There are plenty of comedy films and TV shows that have covered the Nazi’s but they do not use genocide as a punchline.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 11, 2022)

HampshireHog said:



			You have consistently over the course of this thread stated that you consider nothing is is out of bounds for comedy and you do not have any gripe with people being offended by a subject.  But you don’t like Child Rape being called out as a legitimate topic which by your definition it is.

Reaction of the room in no way validates the joke, *you fill a room with fans having enjoying a show and throw in this joke you will get laughter, in that moment.*

Offended has scales from someone telling you that you look like a dick in pink golf trousers right up to upset, pain and anguish.  I am genuinely surprised that I am in a minority in that I don’t think it appropriate to make jokes about topics that engender high levels of distress.

There are plenty of comedy films and TV shows that have covered the Nazi’s but they do not use genocide as a punchline.
		
Click to expand...

I think this is partly because they understand the context, i.e. if he's doing a section of particularly offensive jokes and his audience understands that the shock value _is_ the joke rather than the 'targets'. Whereas much of the outrage on social media is from people who have read it in isolation and out of context.


----------



## Swango1980 (Feb 11, 2022)

HampshireHog said:



			You have consistently over the course of this thread stated that you consider *nothing is is out of bounds for comedy* and you do not have any gripe with people being offended by a subject.  But you don’t like Child Rape being called out as a legitimate topic which by your definition it is.

Reaction of the room in no way validates the joke, you fill a room with fans having enjoying a show and throw in this joke you will get laughter, in that moment.

Offended has scales from someone telling you that you look like a dick in pink golf trousers right up to upset, pain and anguish.  I am genuinely surprised that I am in a minority in that I don’t think it appropriate to make jokes about topics that engender high levels of distress.

There are plenty of comedy films and TV shows that have covered the Nazi’s but they do not use genocide as a punchline.
		
Click to expand...

True. And that does not mean that I wouldn't be offended either, I simply wouldn't state that because I hated it, then the comic should apologise and avoid the subject in the future. I'll let society decide the future of the comic, not me. All I would do is make a decision as to whether I want to watch this comic in the future, or avoid at all costs.

What I don't get is people simply saying "the holocaust should not be a topic in comedy", the end. I mean, I do get where they are coming from in terms of them not liking it and being offended on behalf of them or others, but I'd ask them not to just stop there. I'd ask, is this the ONLY thing that should not be included? Is this for everyone, or would it be OK for a Jewish comedian? What about a white German comedian, but who wanted to use the subject to poke fun at the Nazi party and Hitler? List the other topics that should be banned. Should all comics who have included any of these in their routines apologise for every joke? Do these restrictions only apply to stand up comedy, or also comical films? What about fictional horror films / dramas? How would you react to people who have laughed at these jokes, that you do not find funny yourselves? Are they bad people, misguided, uneducated, or simply seeing it in a different context?

I'm simply trying to clarify that, when such simplistic statements are made about what an individual thinks is acceptable or not, it leads to a million and one other questions about how else the world should change in their view. Even if Carr apologised, was cancelled from everything and the holocaust was banned from all stand up comedy in the future, it is not problem solved. We'd just move on to the next controversial subject and the next comedian that raises it.

And, just generally as a disclaimer (not to you specifically), I don't want to feel like I'm offending anyone when having these discussions, as I appreciate it can be a heated topic (and I've made a number of replies, so am conscious there is a lot of toing and froing and the feeling behind some of the posts) . I may call out if I think someone has made a statement that I feel is absurd / rubbish in my opinion, but that is only related to their statement, not to them as an individual. Even if people have massively different views on this, and no doubt other things, there are equally probably a thousands subjects that we could equally agree on.


----------



## Orikoru (Feb 11, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			True. And that does not mean that I wouldn't be offended either, I simply wouldn't state that because I hated it, then the comic should apologise and avoid the subject in the future. I'll let society decide the future of the comic, not me. All I would do is make a decision as to whether I want to watch this comic in the future, or avoid at all costs.

*What I don't get is people simply saying "the holocaust should not be a topic in comedy"*, the end. I mean, I do get where they are coming from in terms of them not liking it and being offended on behalf of them or others, but I'd ask them not to just stop there. I'd ask, is this the ONLY thing that should not be included? Is this for everyone, or would it be OK for a Jewish comedian? What about a white German comedian, but who wanted to use the subject to poke fun at the Nazi party and Hitler? List the other topics that should be banned. Should all comics who have included any of these in their routines apologise for every joke? Do these restrictions only apply to stand up comedy, or also comical films? What about fictional horror films / dramas? How would you react to people who have laughed at these jokes, that you do not find funny yourselves? Are they bad people, misguided, uneducated, or simply seeing it in a different context?

I'm simply trying to clarify that, when such simplistic statements are made about what an individual thinks is acceptable or not, it leads to a million and one other questions about how else the world should change in their view. Even if Carr apologised, was cancelled from everything and the holocaust was banned from all stand up comedy in the future, it is not problem solved. We'd just move on to the next controversial subject and the next comedian that raises it.

And, just generally as a disclaimer (not to you specifically), I don't want to feel like I'm offending anyone when having these discussions, as I appreciate it can be a heated topic (and I've made a number of replies, so am conscious there is a lot of toing and froing and the feeling behind some of the posts) . I may call out if I think someone has made a statement that I feel is absurd / rubbish in my opinion, but that is only related to their statement, not to them as an individual. Even if people have massively different views on this, and no doubt other things, there are equally probably a thousands subjects that we could equally agree on.
		
Click to expand...



__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1489911643974914051


----------



## hovis (Feb 11, 2022)

Perfect 🤣🤣🤣
https://fb.watch/b69WghCpfc/


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 11, 2022)

hovis said:



			Perfect 🤣🤣🤣
https://fb.watch/b69WghCpfc/

Click to expand...

I've seen a few clips from that character online and he does make me laugh pretty much every time. I think most of us know people, relatives in particular, who make the same mishaps.


----------

