Quote: sootyj @ March 24, 2008, 3:52 PM

Apropo of nothing. I didn't know till recently that Lenny Henrys big break, was on The Black and White Minstrel Show. Go figure.

View original

See, you're going by your own idea on what's racist there. But fair enough, moving on!

Quote: sootyj @ March 24, 2008, 3:52 PM

I also get very pissed at being told, I can't enjoy The Merchant of Venice as it's antisemitic.

View original

Neighbours is CLEARLY anti-semetic. Where's the Rabbi in it?!

Quote: sootyj @ March 24, 2008, 3:52 PM

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_45_14/ai_53409122

Be that'll make you spit tea on your keyboard!

View original

Says it all really.

Quote: zooo @ March 24, 2008, 3:58 PM

I deleted it!

I don't think I read it either. Sorry.

View original

Oh. Ok then.

Quote: Aaron @ March 24, 2008, 3:33 PM

I dunno. Erm. *scratches head* Communist cock-suckers? *shrug*

View original

They're polacks aren't they?

The Black & White minstrel show was in no way intended to be racist. How can it be?

They were just reflecting a style from the turn on the 20th century in America. Maybe that was racist.

Content versus intent? Try this sick joke that was doing the rounds two years ago:

Q: What's black and blue and doesn't like sex?

A: The eight-year-old boy in my cellar.

Now, as there's no intent on my part to ever indulge in such perversion, surely the content of this joke makes it unacceptable, no?

I wasn't accusing it of being racist (not that I am going to jump to it's defence either). Merely reflecting that Lenny was in Friday Night Live et al (pc), and minstrels (unpc) with in a very short space of time. I suppose I thought was interesting.

Well, I find that funny.

But if Gary Glitter was telling me that as fact, and it wasn't a joke, THEN it wouldn't be funny.

Quote: Antony Wheeler @ March 24, 2008, 5:59 PM

Content versus intent? Try this sick joke that was doing the rounds two years ago:

Q: What's black and blue and doesn't like sex?

A: The eight-year-old boy in my cellar.

Now, as there's no intent on my part to ever indulge in such perversion, surely the content of this joke makes it unacceptable, no?

View original

No it's the intent. You're with that joke, belittling victims of paedophilia, and murder for laughs.

What role does free speech play in what's 'fair game'.

I know people in the UK always bang on about their right to free speech, but does that right exist here? I know it's in the US constitutional law, but does the UK have a similar thing?

Pretty much anythings go as long as you don't break the law, or give some one cause to sue you.

1 So no hate speech (race discrimination act, but also anything that could be considered to actively encouraging criminal acts)
2 Don't libel.
3 Don't break the official secrets act.

Quote: sootyj @ March 24, 2008, 6:03 PM

No it's the intent. You're with that joke, belittling victims of paedophilia, and murder for laughs.

View original

You're only 'with' the joke if you laugh at or simply retell it. But of course, I only posted it here to make a point. It's not one I'd tell down the pub.

Quote: sootyj @ March 24, 2008, 6:19 PM

Pretty much anythings go as long as you don't break the law, or give some one cause to sue you.

View original

And even if you do break the law BIG TIME in this country you just get a slap on the wrists.

Kick someone to death and you get 6 months. Call someone something derogatory and you'll get life.

Quote: Antony Wheeler @ March 24, 2008, 6:25 PM

You're only 'with' the joke if you laugh at or simply retell it. But of course, I only posted it here to make a point. It's not one I'd tell down the pub.

View original

Sorry mean to say that, that joke illustrates. I'm with Larry FLint on this subject. If the law will defend some one like me's right to free speech, then it'll defend your right to free speech.

n.b. heard far worse, some times told worse as well.

Quote: Antony Wheeler @ March 24, 2008, 5:59 PM

Content versus intent? Try this sick joke that was doing the rounds two years ago:

Q: What's black and blue and doesn't like sex?

A: The eight-year-old boy in my cellar.

Now, as there's no intent on my part to ever indulge in such perversion, surely the content of this joke makes it unacceptable, no?

View original

Quote: David Chapman @ March 24, 2008, 6:28 PM

And even if you do break the law BIG TIME in this country you just get a slap on the wrists.

Kick someone to death and you get 6 months. Call someone something derogatory and you'll get life.

View original

Very true!

Quote: roscoff @ March 11, 2008, 8:45 PM

There is no criteria except funny and not funny and even that's down to taste.

View original

I think one distinction that can be made with "harsh" jokes like the baby one is the setting/context. Even racist jokes can be funny in the setting of "let's all tell some really off-colour jokes we've heard." When people find the jokes funny for any reason other than its internal logic or sheer taboo-breaking shock factor, then IMO it is too distasteful. And such off-colour jokes are not appropriate for general digestion or incorporation into an act - at least not without being put into the third-person box of, say, "irony".

n.b. there is more than one kind of joke, and there is more than one kind of laughter.

I hate this idea that watching jokes, is just looking, and going ha, ha that's funny,

Mark Thomas makes me laugh, but he also makes angry. League of Gentlemen is funny, but also scary, and frightening.

I find silly word jokes, and jovial observation e.g. the 2 Ronnies, it's funny for a while, but after a while it's dull, and a bit pointless.