|
Who What Now posted:That's not a joke. Jokes have set ups, where you build a premise, and then a punchline, where you use that premise in a humorous way, usually by subverting it. What you described is not a joke. Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it*
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:58 |
|
|
little munchkin posted:*looks up the word "joke" in the dictionary* just as I thought, lock him up boys Unironically what should have happened to Sam Hyde.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I work with several people who have some or all of those things so that isn't a particular barrier in the UK, they just adjust the dress code to compensate. i mean i've seen people who work in head shops dressed that way as well but you're strictly limiting your employment potential when you cosmetically modify your face in what the west considers nontraditional ways such as tattoos, piercings, etc. this is part of the appeal of the thing to young people, to decorate one's body in a taboo fashion which marks you as someone who rejects mainstream society and the concept of having a straight job. suddenly this man has reversed himself and is very concerned about his future once he's started to face the repercussions of his behavior. it's weird how life sneaks up on you like that, huh?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
Midig posted:Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it* so the man who screamed at his children until they had panic attacks but then excused his behavior as a prank, you're on board with that? if not, why not? Midig posted:Good. If you understand that it is a joke you move on. Congratulatulations, you are not a moron. Instead of appeasing morons by giving him a sentence, how about not putting him under arrest. turns out when you break the law you don't get a freebie if you explain to the officer arresting you that you didn't really mean it. i'm not sure if you're aware of this but the penal system doesn't work that way
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
I agree that Pewds should be in jail, but that's just because being him should be illegal in general
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:so the man who screamed at his children until they had panic attacks but then excused his behavior as a prank, you're on board with that? if not, why not? The dog has no idea what it is doing and it has no effect on its life. The child was bullied by his dad for views. You guys should seriously start to learn that the differences matter more than the (highly reaching) similarities you find. EDIT: boner confessor posted:
Good thing that I have the luxury in a discussion to express that the problem is not him breaking the law, but the fact that the law is not flexible enough to detect obvious jokes. Midig fucked around with this message at 18:37 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Midig posted:The dog has no idea what it is doing and it has no effect on its life. The child was bullied by his protector for views. You guys should seriously start to learn that the differences matter more than the (highly reaching) similarities you find. they're both just pranks though? funny pranks? why is one different from the other if they're both just joking pranks among pals for laughs? a few posts ago you said "Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it*" so what makes you an expert on the critera now? how do you know screaming dad didn't really mean it? all of a sudden you feel confident that you can draw a line between acceptable joking and non-acceptable joking where previously that line couldn't exist, the fact that you would contradict your own argument so quickly is a little puzzling to me. can you explain it? nazi pug man specifically tried to prank another human, his girlfriend, the dog's owner. it's not like this man is just autistically repeating hate speech to a dog for his own amusement. why is it ok to startle someone by teaching their dog to respond to anti-semitism but it's not ok to startle someone by being much larger than them and screaming at them?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i mean i've seen people who work in head shops dressed that way as well but you're strictly limiting your employment potential when you cosmetically modify your face in what the west considers nontraditional ways such as tattoos, piercings, etc. this is part of the appeal of the thing to young people, to decorate one's body in a taboo fashion which marks you as someone who rejects mainstream society and the concept of having a straight job. suddenly this man has reversed himself and is very concerned about his future once he's started to face the repercussions of his behavior. it's weird how life sneaks up on you like that, huh? I suspect our laws work better to protect people from that sort of discrimination than yours do, people where I live look all sorts of odd ways, it's not a problem. People should not be penalized for their fashion choices.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Midig posted:The dog has no idea what it is doing and it has no effect on its life. The child was bullied by his dad for views. You guys should seriously start to learn that the differences matter more than the (highly reaching) similarities you find. yea the boner dude is being super disingenuous with that comparison and also with his hand-wringing over how the dude had facial piercings just admit that a guy yelling slurs at a dog suddenly makes you ok with fascism little munchkin fucked around with this message at 18:45 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:38
|
|
|
Midig posted:Good thing that I have the luxury in a discussion to express that the problem is not him breaking the law, but the fact that the law is not flexible enough to detect obvious jokes. "officer, please, let me explain - i was ironically mugging this man! this is a toy gun! we have a hidden camera! i was going to give his money back! it's a social experiment! this is a violation of my free speech! officer, stop hitting me, this is censorship-" little munchkin posted:yea the boner dude is being super disingenuous with that comparison and also with his hand-wringing over how the dude had facial piercings Area Man With Facial Tattoos Complains That Drug Misdemeanor Unfairly Impacts His Employment Potential
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:
This is the big point. "I was joking" always comes after people like this get in trouble. Pug dude wanted to hurt his ex and thought he could also get some attention and youtube money out of it. Once poo poo got bad he tried to slam the "prank" button but the UK law doesn't actually care about that, or at the very least the judge doesn't care to just dismiss it. Here's a pretty good breakdown of why these defenses are bullshit, but not directed at this guy or actually being antagonistic against those who use it in bad faith (it specifically relates to the Pewdiepie fiverr scandal). It's actually a breakdown of "how to avoid completely loving up your controversial joke and getting a media firestorm after your rear end if you're famous enough to garner one". But It still applies I think. Linked to the relevant bit, since it also goes into some youtube sorting algorithm stuff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxphJ-dnX2Y&t=228s TLDW: These kinds of events don't start out as "jokes", they are attacks designed to make a group the target of ridicule. When someone like Pug dude, or some alt-right rear end in a top hat, says "PC Culture has made it so we can't take a joke anymore" what they mean is "I can't just ridicule and wantonly attack this group for fun anymore". There's no set up, turn, punchline, the whole joke is just "[outgroup] is a bunch of subhumans, let's laugh at them". And laughter is only the outcome if you're already on the same page as the "comedian". Additionally the sources aren't comedians. They're just commentators who switch hats constantly. In one video they could be legitimately arguing for the re-enslavement of black people, then in another make an off handed joke about slavery that they get in trouble for, which they proceed to defend as "just a joke". The difference between Sargon making claiming a (hypothetical) Nazi salute in a picture is a joke and John Cleese in Fawlty Towers goosestepping while throwing the Nazi salute is that one is an established environment where jokes are expected and the other is just some guy with no context beyond "being an arsehole". Then there's the classic Punching down vs Punching Up. Don't need to go too far with this I hope. But the target of the joke, the greater social context, matters. And finally: Consequences matter. If a 15 year old set out to prank his friend at a sleepover by setting off a firecracker while he slept and ends up burning his house down, killing the friend and their family, which ends up leading to a wildfire that sweeps through a rural community destroying homes and businesses: It no longer matters that it started as a prank. Extreme hyperbole? Yes it is, but once a joke moves beyond it's initial confines it has transformed into something else. Even if it was legitimately constructed as a joke, told in a classic set up-turn-punchline format, and delivered in an environment where the joke is expected. A bad joke can become the spark that starts a larger social conversation about the topic. I know that's not very short for a tl:dw, but the video is 20 minutes so...
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:they're both just pranks though? funny pranks? why is one different from the other if they're both just joking pranks among pals for laughs? a few posts ago you said "Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it*" so what makes you an expert on the critera now? how do you know screaming dad didn't really mean it? all of a sudden you feel confident that you can draw a line between acceptable joking and non-acceptable joking where previously that line couldn't exist, the fact that you would contradict your own argument so quickly is a little puzzling to me. can you explain it? The dad's joke hurt a kid in an environment he was stuck in. You can scroll past the nazi-pug joke. Again, have to emphasise that the way you try to make it similar falls flat.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:nazi pug man specifically tried to prank another human, his girlfriend, the dog's owner. it's not like this man is just autistically repeating hate speech to a dog for his own amusement. why is it ok to startle someone by teaching their dog to respond to anti-semitism but it's not ok to startle someone by being much larger than them and screaming at them? lol if you don't think that gf gave consent, youtube personalities stage everything they do
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
^^^^^ So you don't think that kid was abused? It was all staged? Midig posted:The dad's joke hurt a kid in an environment he was stuck in. You can scroll past the nazi-pug joke. Again, have to emphasise that the way you try to make it similar falls flat. So does it being a """joke""" matter or not?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
*teaches 2-year old child to say "Hitler was good"* *makes YouTube video called "Woah, that baby's a Nazi!"* *gets child taken away by CPS* "It was just a joke! He doesn't know what it means! What about my free speech?!!"
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:Area Man With Facial Tattoos Complains That Drug Misdemeanor Unfairly Impacts His Employment Potential I think you're being really weird with this line unless you actually think that people looking odd means they shouldn't have jobs.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:42
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:"officer, please, let me explain - i was ironically mugging this man! this is a toy gun! we have a hidden camera! i was going to give his money back! it's a social experiment! this is a violation of my free speech! officer, stop hitting me, this is censorship-" Because this is a scenario that will actually happen. The band of well intentioned ticklers.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Midig posted:The dad's joke hurt a kid in an environment he was stuck in. You can scroll past the nazi-pug joke. Again, have to emphasise that the way you try to make it similar falls flat. you can scroll past the screaming dad too. "just don't listen to it if you don't like it" is a stupid comparison i'll ask you one more time and then i'm just going to assume you acknowledge your argument is stupid and you can't defend it - why did you say "Because the joke doesn't fit my specific criteria that means he meant it*" as a defense of one thing, but then you immediately violated your own rule when presented with a more obvious case of harm being done with the "it's just a prank" defense? why would you trap yourself in a double standard like this? don't you recognize that immediately undermining your own argument makes you look like you don't really believe in the things you say? OwlFancier posted:I think you're being really weird with this line unless you actually think that people looking odd means they shouldn't have jobs. i dont know how to use any simpler words to explain it. it's silly to me that someone who would damage their employment potential by getting unnecessary piercings and modifications to their face would be concerned about damaging their employment potential by comitting light hate speech. either be a social rebel or don't, you can't half rear end it and do both without looking like a coward. if you're going to be edgy, you have to go all the way, you can't retreat back into safe conformity the second that things get too real
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:^^^^^ no I'm saying the kid abuser is not at all comparable to the other guy and his adult girlfriend who is able to give consent for him to yell at her dog
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:^^^^^ Wait, you are actually implying that the dog reacting to anti-Semitism hurt someone?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:45
|
|
|
Midig posted:Wait, you are actually implying that the dog reacting to anti-Semitism hurt someone? i'd imagine that jews didn't like it, but that's just a hunch. we all know hate speech laws exist in a vacuum anyway
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:you can scroll past the screaming dad too. "just don't listen to it if you don't like it" is a stupid comparison I am talking about the actual kid. Not the viewers.The kid can't scroll past his dad. Midig fucked around with this message at 18:49 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:no I'm saying the kid abuser is not at all comparable to the other guy and his adult girlfriend who is able to give consent for him to yell at her dog You said "youtube personalities stage everything they do". That dad was a YouTube personality. So was his videos staged or not? If not, then they obviously don't stage everything, now do they?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:47
|
|
|
Midig posted:I am talking about the actual kid. Not the viewers. thank you for admitting you have a weird double standard here that isn't logically consistent, it will help me consider whether or not to read your posts in the future. god bless
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
*louis CK says the n-word* *man in military uniform pulls a pistol out of it's holster and turns towards a decibel-meter* *louis CK sweats nervously while watching the decibel-meter* *eventually the crowd's laughter is loud enough for what he said to be legally considered a joke, and he continues with his act*
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Midig posted:Wait, you are actually implying that the dog reacting to anti-Semitism hurt someone? There's probably some Jewish people that were hurt by it, yes. Not physically hurt, but if that's all you care about then you're an emotionally stunted idiot (which would explain a lot).
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:You said "youtube personalities stage everything they do". That dad was a YouTube personality. So was his videos staged or not? If not, then they obviously don't stage everything, now do they? drat, I am truly trapped in this perfect web of logic you have constructed, I admit defeat and now think this guy should be in jail for even longer for the crime of saying words to a dog without possessing a joke-telling license
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:thank you for admitting you have a weird double standard here that isn't logically consistent, it will help me consider whether or not to read your posts in the future. god bless How is it a double standard for me to think that a kid who can't escape the abuse of his dad while being filmed is similar to a dog doing something that might offend viewers? Midig fucked around with this message at 18:55 on May 31, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:drat, I am truly trapped in this perfect web of logic you have constructed, I admit defeat and now think this guy should be in jail for even longer for the crime of saying words to a dog without possessing a joke-telling license Finally somebody sees reason!
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Literally criminally unfunny
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:There's probably some Jewish people that were hurt by it, yes. Not physically hurt, but if that's all you care about then you're an emotionally stunted idiot (which would explain a lot). Even if no one who was directly hurt by it saw it, it kind of hurts everyone to normalize that kind of stuff as a funny joke to tell to make people laugh.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:There's probably some Jewish people that were hurt by it, yes. Not physically hurt, but if that's all you care about then you're an emotionally stunted idiot (which would explain a lot). we do not take lightly to hurting people with words here, in the thread devoted to mocking people
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:54
|
|
|
Everyone's also latching onto the greatest possible punishment as if it's the only punishment. Yes, the guy got arrested, but that's because it is a criminal statute and not just a simple fine that they mail you. Also it was created in an era that didn't account for you to be able to meet the criteria of the law from the privacy of your own home. Probably created to deal with people going nuts in the town square, not idiots on youtube. Most likely the guy'll just get a slap on the wrist legally. The biggest complaint he has is the social fallout.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:we do not take lightly to hurting people with words here, in the thread devoted to mocking people Our jokes are funny and actually recognizable as jokes. Maybe Nazi-dog guy should have tried doing that.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:also again i think it's extremely funny that a man with facial piercings and earplugs trying and failing to become a youtube comedy star is suddenly worried about his employment potential depends what you do for a job really dude. kind of judgemental.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
boner confessor posted:i dont know how to use any simpler words to explain it. it's silly to me that someone who would damage their employment potential by getting unnecessary piercings and modifications to their face would be concerned about damaging their employment potential by comitting light hate speech. either be a social rebel or don't, you can't half rear end it and do both without looking like a coward. if you're going to be edgy, you have to go all the way, you can't retreat back into safe conformity the second that things get too real Because you should reasonably be expected to be treated like a normal human being regardless of whether you have piercings, and frankly, in the UK, saying outright nazi poo poo apparently makes you a serious political reporter who asks the tough questions and gets you a shitload of money, except if the press decides they don't like you in which case it gets you prison. It really isn't very dissonant to think that piercings are OK and lame hitler jokes are permissible and I maintain that the only reason he got done for it is because of the press deciding to gently caress up his life, not because the state actually cares about preventing that kind of speech. It should, but is the selective application of the law against people who, frankly, are not a significant problem while ignoring much worse said by much more prominent leaders of public discourse, more or less just than not applying it at all?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
lot of people struggling with understanding and accepting reality itt todayMidig posted:How is it a double standard for me to think that a kid who can't escape the abuse of his dad is similar to a video that is voluntary? because you refused to acknowledge there's an acceptable threshold between comedy and damaging acts by supporting the "it's just a prank" defense for one youtube idiot but you did draw that line for a different youtube idiot, despite both youtube idiots filming themselves doing illegal things. in two similar cases you applied a shoddy defense to one of them but not the other, and you're relying on strange appeals to common sense to support your argument. you're saying people who don't think like you regarding teaching a dog to respond to hate speech are just humorless buzzkills but then you cross the line and join team this isn't funny when we go a bit further down the line into a man pranking his children with emotional abuse. this all indicates to me you haven't really thought at all about the things you're saying and you're just throwing big words out in a pile to justify your kneejerk emotional reactions, which is a boring thing to read since neither i nor anybody else cares about your opinion on things
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:56
|
|
|
BattleMaster posted:Even if no one who was directly hurt by it saw it, it kind of hurts everyone to normalize that kind of stuff as a funny joke to tell to make people laugh. I 100% agree as someone who grew up in a small, 99% white town and saw this phenomenon first-hand. I still don't think any of those racist joke-tellers from my youth should be imprisoned for it.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:57
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Our jokes are funny and actually recognizable as jokes. Maybe Nazi-dog guy should have tried doing that. *glances at boner confessor's posts and frowns*
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 23:58 |
|
|
Lovechop posted:depends what you do for a job really dude. kind of judgemental.  take it up with society. the reason young people do it is because it's transgressive. i dont care if someone has piercings or not, and only someone who can't read would think i've made a personal statement on the matterit's just so absolutely simple to me, and also funny, that someone who alters their appearance on purpose to look edgy and fashionably taboo would come to regret their decisions in this manner. it makes him look like a big fat pansy bawwwing about the sudden realization that his decisions in life have consequences he has to deal with OwlFancier posted:It really isn't very dissonant to think that piercings are OK and lame hitler jokes are permissible only quoting you to let you know i've seen your post and chosen to ignore it because you have absolutely no idea what i'm arguing here despite me saying it multiple times in very plain english
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2017 19:00
|
|