Should comedians apologise? [Split topic]

[Fambo Number Mive]

The amusement was just around the idea that certain people whose appalling behaviour is if not caused then exacerbated by their mental illness would be offended by such an innocuous playground word, or that we shoudn't seek to characterise their behaviour as that of a nutter to avoid offending people whose behaviour is far more offensive than any cluster of phonemes.

Of course not all people with a mental illness are nutters, only the ones who act like nutters, as do many sane people, so it's not black and white. Not that black and white is all that simple either.

If so it's because another statement has prompted me to try and ascertain an objective and consistent way of dealing with folk who are offended by jokes.

I didn't mention behaviour in my critisicm of Baddiel's usage of the word, and he wasn't using it about people who behaved appallingly.

This link explains one of the problems with the word "nutter": https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/news/inappropriate-language-adds-mental-health-stigma-and-stops-people-seeking-help

Also, why link learning difficulties with being a "nutter", regardless of what you think about the word?

And some jokes are offensive just like some comments are offensive.

[robhug]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmT2sJAWFSs

[Fambo Number Mive]

In the 80/90s we'd refer to someone as a "nutter" the same way you'd call them a "mad lad" today.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mad%20lad

Ah I wasn't aware of that, I thought the word was used like it was today. Fair enough I withdraw my criticism of Baddiel on that front. I still don't get why he called the theatre company that word though. And I still think his claim that comedy doesn't apologise is wrong.

[Barry Admin]

This thread was a clean split off the end of this thread : https://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/index.php/topic,77039.0.html

[JumpAction]

Yeah, I think it's fine for a comedian to apologize.

In most cases, I would think that apologizing shouldn't have a negative stigma about it. In terms of comedy, I suppose it's the notion that just because someone took offense to a joke, doesn't mean you should apologize for telling a joke. That being said, it implies that the comedian understands precisely why someone is offended and level whether or not that is something they are apologetic about.

In the current culture of comedy, there's a strict rule about comedians not apologizing for offensive jokes but rarely do you see comedians or the ones supporting this 'no apology' principal demonstrate that they understand exactly why it is offensive and regard the gravity of their jokes. Particularly in comedy that 'punches down', there seems to be this hand-waving notion that claiming it is a joke simply absolves the words from having any impact on stigmatization or perpetuating negative stereotypes of the groups they are marginalizing.

[Better Midlands]

Ah I wasn't aware of that, I thought the word was used like it was today. Fair enough I withdraw my criticism of Baddiel on that front. I still don't get why he called the theatre company that word though. And I still think his claim that comedy doesn't apologise is wrong.

I'm a bit younger than Baddiel, it was always a pretty mild thing to call someone at the time but I never heard it actually used for developmentally disabled issues - it was either as I described above or for someone who might be violent (eg  a bully).

[Autopsy Turvey]

This link explains one of the problems with the word "nutter": https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/news/inappropriate-language-adds-mental-health-stigma-and-stops-people-seeking-help

"Generations of people have grown up in societies that have found terms like "crazy" "psycho" "schizo" "loonie" and "nutter" acceptable.  We must change this."

No, we mustn't. The radical hypersensitive policing of language, encouraging more people to be disturbed by syllables, turning lighthearted everyday euphemisms into unsayable taboos, these don't sound like great useful ideas in reality.

And some jokes are offensive just like some comments are offensive.

Well it's not quite that simple again because a joke/comment that offends you might not offend me, and vice versa, unless you want to expand that to 'all jokes are potentially offensive to someone' and conclude that getting offended by jokes is a waste of energy, and possibly even a prerogative of privilege to boot.

[Better Midlands]

"Generations of people have grown up in societies that have found terms like "crazy" "psycho" "schizo" "loonie" and "nutter" acceptable.  We must change this."

I'd agree that using psycho or schizo is in bad taste now as they are shortened versions of specific conditions and unfair on people who are suffering from them, the rest I don't have a problem with really.

[imitationleather]

I'd agree that using psycho or schizo is in bad taste now as they are shortened versions of specific conditions and unfair on people who are suffering from them, the rest I don't have a problem with really.

We're feeling sorry for psychopaths now?!

Or is psycho short for "psychologically disturbed"? In which case fair enough I guess.

[Better Midlands]

We're feeling sorry for psychopaths now?!

Or is psycho short for "psychologically disturbed"? In which case fair enough I guess.

I was thinking of psychotic.

[imitationleather]

Oh yeah. I'd forgotten that one.

[Jumblegraws]

Well it's not quite that simple again because a joke/comment that offends you might not offend me, and vice versa, unless you want to expand that to 'all jokes are potentially offensive to someone' and conclude that getting offended by jokes is a waste of energy, and possibly even a prerogative of privilege to boot.

You're the one being simplistic here. You've stuffed all jokes into a vacuum marked "comedy" and are proceeding on the basis that this starting point is to be taken for granted. Yet the lived experience of many people is that ostensive "jokes" are very much capable of mobilising extant strains of prejudice. Historical precedence favours this view, refer to the prominence of cartoons in Der Strumer, to take an extreme example that is nonetheless the tip of the iceberg in the marrying of comedy with prejudiced ideals.

No, we mustn't. The radical hypersensitive policing of language, encouraging more people to be disturbed by syllables, turning lighthearted everyday euphemisms into unsayable taboos, these don't sound like great useful ideas in reality.

ETA: Your assertion here that the (ill-defined) "policing of language" will lead to some sort of (again, ill-defined) undesirable consequence seems to be inconsistent with your assertion that jokes, as a mode of expression, are too remote from real life actions to warrant censure.

[Autopsy Turvey]

Historical precedence favours this view, refer to the prominence of cartoons in Der Strumer, to take an extreme example that is nonetheless the tip of the iceberg in the marrying of comedy with prejudiced ideals.

Those weren't actually jokes, surely, the intentions were far from comedic?

]Your assertion here that the (ill-defined) "policing of language"

Well it's not up to me to define the sort of language policing that needs to take place if Britain is to change into a place where jocular terms describing mad people have become unacceptable taboos.

will lead to some sort of (again, ill-defined) undesirable consequence

Undesirable consequences include ordinary folk feeling too confused or frightened of censure to express themselves freely, a society on eggshells, a deadening humourless authoritarian pall falling over another six or seven pages of the thesaurus, to placate the most hysterically sensitive minority.

seems to be inconsistent with your assertion that jokes, as a mode of expression, are too remote from real life actions to warrant censure.

No sorry I confess you've lost me here.

[jobotic]

Which of the minorities is the most hysterically sensitive I wonder?

[DrGreggles]

Which of the minorities is the most hysterically sensitive I wonder?

Glinner

[poodlefaker]

David Baddiel should apologise, certainly; in person, going door-to-door, firstly across London and then the country as a whole. He could probably make a series out of it:"David Baddiel Apologises." The unfunny cunt.

[Autopsy Turvey]

Which of the minorities is the most hysterically sensitive I wonder?

That minority of scattered souls trying to stop the vast majority of the public expressing themselves freely!

[Famous Mortimer]

That minority of scattered souls trying to stop the vast majority of the public expressing themselves freely!

I'm sorry, I don't understand what point you're trying to make. Could you explain yourself a bit please?

[Jumblegraws]

Those weren't actually jokes, surely, the intentions were far from comedic?

This a completely ad hoc definition of "joke". If you think humour can never be imbued with serious intentions, I suggest familiarising yourself with a concept known as "satire".

Well it's not up to me to define the sort of language policing that needs to take place if Britain is to change into a place where jocular terms describing mad people have become unacceptable taboos.

It is if you claim it's a real and present threat

Undesirable consequences include ordinary folk feeling too confused or frightened of censure to express themselves freely, a society on eggshells, a deadening humourless authoritarian pall falling over another six or seven pages of the thesaurus, to placate the most hysterically sensitive minority.

Cry me a fucking river. That you can inflate fear of censure to such urgency but rubbish the anxieties of minorities as "hysterically sensitive" in the same sentence exposes you for the insipid chauvinist that you are, except that everyone knew this from all your weird Tommy Robinson apologism anyway.

No sorry I confess you've lost me here.

Good, stay lost.

[Autopsy Turvey]

This a completely ad hoc definition of "joke". If you think humour can never be imbued with serious intentions, I suggest familiarising yourself with a concept known as "satire".

I'm just disputing that Der Sturmer cartoons have any humour in them, and suddenly I'm the bastard!

It is if you claim it's a real and present threat

I mean it's not urgent, the effects will take a while, it'll be protracted and messy and there'll be more anger, more confusion, more sanctimony, more resentment.

rubbish the anxieties of minorities as "hysterically sensitive" in the same sentence

I should clarify the minority whose anxieties I'm rubbishing: the small number of folk who enjoy going round social media and other media and schools and corporations ticking everyone off for using words that are now deemed 'not on', who claim to speak on behalf of a group whose consensus has not been established.

Of course nobody likes being called names, but words like 'crazy', 'loony', 'mental', 'nutter', 'fruitcake' and 'wackjob' are so ingrained in everyday English speech, to try and reduce them to hateful nasty taboo unsayables might just increase resentment and confusion, and encourage more young people to be needlessly devastated by them.

[Autopsy Turvey]

all your weird Tommy Robinson apologism anyway.

It's a dangerous sport for the sedentary, but if I'm in a room full of people slagging someone off, I'll be the one saying "Ah he might not be so bad". I like to think it's the Rumpole in me.

[Cold Meat Platter]

That Hitler guy's an absolute cunt. A real wanker.

[Autopsy Turvey]

Well I mean I don't think his watercolours are as bad as everyone says

[Cold Meat Platter]

Is this the "Rumpole" we were promised?

[Autopsy Turvey]

You have to choose your cases.

[chveik]

I'm just disputing that Der Sturmer cartoons have any humour in them, and suddenly I'm the bastard!

that's not the point, they were intended as humourous.

[Alternative Carpark]

Should comedians apologise?

If they're genuinely sorry about whatever it is, yes, and if not, no.  Same as anyone.

[Urinal Cake]

No. But don't bitch about blowback either.

[Jim Bob]

Should comedians apologise?

If they're genuinely sorry about whatever it is, yes, and if not, no.  Same as anyone.

Indeed.

[Brundle-Fly]

Where does the panel stand about this comedian's rant/ plea? A staunch socialist BTW.  I don't have his WC credentials or entirely acquiesce but yet, grist to the mill?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUGmeOe1zkU