I Am Not Offended (And If I Were...Who'd Care?)

I’m DEFINETLY a 1. Except I don’t say ‘please’.

Well, yeah, except the people you work for, and the people who buy your product. Don’t get caught, say, drunk off your ass, badmouthing Jews, when you work in a business where most of the major players are in fact Jews.

And when providing key evidence for a case in front of a mostly black jury, try real hard to hide those tapes where you explore in detail your fantasies about “killing niggers” who associate with white women.

And if your audience is mostly good old boys who believe (naively, blindly) that the commander in chief is a good old boy too, who would never lead their friends and loved ones into pointless slaughter, never ever exercise you free speech rights by criticizing the C in C in public.

The real lesson here is, only offend people who can’t get back at you.

Alan:

Like I said…”bad studio notes.”

Did I find what Mel Gibson said offensive? I don’t know. It was stupid and certainly factually inaccurate, but I don’t think I’m offended. I’ve said some pretty stupid crap when I was drunk.

And I think some terrible things, doncha know. :)

Consequences are certainly a reality of life. I’m not arguing that we should be able to call people bad names and then expect to not get punched in the face.

On the other hand, I wish people would just lighten up about all of it. All of it. I have no idea who can “get back at me” for the things I write on here, but I don’t care. More to the point, I just don’t want anyone presuming that if they are offended, then something’s gone wrong.

Maybe something has…or maybe something hasn’t. Life’s funny that way.

http://www.explosm.net/comics/39/

The vagina joke in question was easy, lazy, corny, groan-inducingly lame and not at all funny…

That is until someone was offended by it. And then once that person infected another person with offense, it got almost borderline funny in the fart-in-a-crowded-elevator sense. The kneejerk, First Wave Feminism-inspired outrage made it funny.

But I digress.

I was under the impression that this was a webiste frequented by writers. Most good writers deal with issues that are slightly-to-incredibly messy. That lack easy answers.

My point is as follows…

I would hate to read the work of someone who would be offended by a groan-inducing vagina joke. A joke, which, by the way, many people probably thought about, then dismissed as easy and simple.

I certainly would hate to read the work of someone who was moved to ad hominem attacks because of a lame joke.

Writers — scratch that, all reasonable adults — should not be afraid/offended of words. No matter how corny or lazy or dirty or offensive they are.

That’s just my two cents. If it helps in advance, I’ll offer some talking points for anyone who would like to respond:

I have acne, despite the fact that I am a grown man. I have manboobs. I have a receding hairline. My beard is patchy. I cut my own hair. My nose was smashed and mangled when I was a boxer years ago. I’m a premature ejaculator.

There ya go. Put me in my place. I am an insensitive twat.

You…cut your own hair????

Wow. Gross.

With a Flobee, cutting your own hair is simple.

[First time I’ve ever used html tags, so I hope this is readable.]

Hi Craig,

Based on some of my posts in your forum, you won’t be surprised that I disagree. :-)

You wrote: “Consequences are certainly a reality of life. I’m not arguing that we should be able to call people bad names and then expect to not
get punched in the face.”

Well, Craig, I think that when people say that they’re offended, that’s the civilized equivalent of punching the other person in the face. Moreover, some people are very obtuse and/or ignorant and simply have no idea that what they’re saying is offensive. Assuming they have some concern for other people’s feelings, they deserve to be informed so that at least any offense in the future will be intentional, not accidental.

I shudder to think where Jews, Blacks, women, gays, and any number of groups would be today if they’d thought, “Oh, I can’t complain because
I’m going to be dismissed as some whiny little person who’s ‘addicted to the heroin of victimhood.’” That’s total B.S. And what a clever way of robbing people of what may be the only weapon they have — the ability to protest.

As for the “missive,” I say, bravo, ADL. It was intelligent, nuanced, and addressed a real problem — the reinforcement of stereotypes. Since when is a civil rights organization required to put over its message like a stand-up comedian?

I also agree that the country should have been made fictional. Having read articles on Slate and other places that Borat’s Kazakhstan
bears little resemblance to the real place http://www.slate.com/id/2152789/;
http://www.slate.com/id/2152765/
the treatment seems very unfair. Where exactly is the amusement in making fun of some obscure little country (in terms of population — now that I’ve had to look up the damned place on Wikipedia, I’ve learned that it’s the ninth-largest country in the world in terms of landmass) that doesn’t actually have a history of anti-semitism? Considering that many American’s can’t quite grasp that Arnold Schwarzenegger wasn’t German, I wonder if they’ll understand the difference between stereotyped Eastern Europe and sterotyped Central Asia.

And how is expressing anger or distress at hurtful comments a form of “narcissism”? Further, how does it follow that because someone is complaining about one particular comment that s/he is saying that no person should ever make any subversive statement, and why do you assume that mere offensiveness, or vulgarity, or crudity
(which Borat has in spades) is subversive instead of just tasteless?

Sure, we all read things on the Internet that offend us. Sometimes, if we have the time, we should respond, especially if few other people are. That’s when it counts most.

Speaking of the Internet, I read a comment by someone who said that Borat is being used as a stupid litmus test: If you like it, you’re cool; if you don’t, you’re humorless and intellectually unsubtle.

It is stupid. What a lot of folks don’t seem to understand is that the people who dislike Borat fully understand the joke and they don’t want everything to written at the level of Sesame Street; they just don’t think this joke’s very funny.

See ya.

I loved Borat. It made me proud to be an American. It’s proof that we don’t lock up the stupid people — they have the freedom to hang themselves… and on camera!

Writer777:

I think your point is “different strokes for different foks.”

If so, where does an absolute sense of offense figure in to that?

Answer…it doesn’t.

Look, folks, be an absolutist or be a relativist, but don’t move back and forth depending on which is most convenient at the time.

elli:

“I certainly would hate to read the work of someone who was moved to ad hominem attacks because of a lame joke.”

nobody was. firstly, the ad hominem reference was regarding emails that were deleted, so i’m not sure why you feel inclined to comment (b.t.w. the most offensive, or should I say uncivil, word in those two emails was: “idiot”).

secondly, they were not written in response to jeff’s joke, but in response to the fact that miriama’s complaint about said joke was treated with less tolerance than the, apparently civil, joke itself.

so get your shhh….tuff straight, no offensive.

p.s. you SHOULD be afraid of words, especially in politics, law and relationships. on a blog, maybe not so much. unless it bears a swastika. point is: don’t generalize.

What a great post.

I couldn’t agree more. There’s nothing more annoying than people who feel the need to express their outrage over a joke.

Nothing.

“p.s. you SHOULD be afraid of words, especially in politics, law and relationships.”

Um…yeah. Of course that has nothing to do with expressing outrage over a joke.

kev, read elli’s post my hasty friend… and the point i’m making in my post scriptum, it’ll all come together.

Ethnic jokes do target certain ethnic groups, just as gender jokes target certain genders. That’s the nature of joking. You might be offended if you’re the butt of a joke. Like, if I was a woman, I might be offended with: “Why don’t women like skydiving.” Shurg shoulders. “Because they whistle all the way down.” Now, I might become offended, if I was a woman; but then I might draw that absurd picture in my head and even hear that improbable sound and be forced to laugh my head off.

The inability to laugh at a joke, which always makes someone the target, is close to the Lacanian definition of psychosis: the foreclosure of the signifier, or the inability to understand that signifier/signified structure of language. Comes from political correctness, or liberal psychosis.

Craig,

You wrote:

“Writer777:

I think your point is ‘different strokes for different folks.’

If so, where does an absolute sense of offense figure in to that?

Answer� It doesn’t.

Look, folks, be an absolutist or be a relativist, but don’t move back and forth depending on which is most convenient at the time.”

Actually, I don’t think that’s what I’m saying. I’ve never claimed to be an absolutist. I believe in looking at the context.

The following is what I think happens: People are hesitant about making judgments — which is a good thing — you should hesitate before making judgments about people and situations you’re not familiar with and you should also be prepared to revise your opinions when new information requires it.

This is hard and extremely tiresome.

To make things easier, there’s a drift to a position that has people saying, “If I say everything’s acceptable, nothing’s offensive, I’ll rid myself of the bother of having to make judgments or, in some cases, of the consequences of those judgments.”

I think that’s a ridiculous position. It also doesn’t work in the real world. Like it or not, we all make judgments and are ourselves judged. People who think we’re offensive are gonna complain. Although we may wish they’d shut up, that doesn’t actually make them narcissists. :-) And assuming they’re not barking crazy, villifying them as victimhood-addicts is neither fair nor helpful.

Civility’s a bitch.

Bye, and take care. :-)

“Ethnic jokes do target certain ethnic groups, just as gender jokes target certain genders. That�s the nature of joking. You might be offended if you�re the butt of a joke.”

—If this were an even-handed phenomenon, there’d be little room for complaint. It’s the fact that certain groups are made the target time and time again that prompts complaints. It’s simply ridiculous to think that complaints haven’t changed tastes over time. Try watching a really racist or sexist movie or cartoon from the past. Yes, people may always want to laugh at something; let them laugh at something else.

Just a reminder…I had to delete a recent comment because it didn’t pass my “civil” test.

People who think we’re offensive are gonna complain. Although we may wish they’d shut up, that doesn’t actually make them narcissists.

Yes. Yes it does. See, no one cares. If I walk into a house that I think is dirty, I don’t start talking about how the house is dirty. The people who live there made a choice. Now I’ll make my choice to stay or leave. The thought, however, that my disgust is enough to make them reconsider their cleanliness…well, yeah, that’s just narcisissism.

Announcing your offense at something is pointless and narcissistic 80% of the time…but there’s only a 40% chance of that.

I am pleased that the nigger jokes (sorry, yeah, there are also some about kikes with small penises who need to compensate for their sick oedipal complexes — I’m like the non-Jewish Sarah Silverman) I’ve been saving for a rainy day finally have a place to call home — as dirty as it is! Thanks Craig!

Love,

A Dot Head

Boy, that must have been some vagina joke. I wish I’d seen it.

“If I walk into a house that I think is dirty, I don’t start talking about how the house is dirty.”

The people I know are a helluva lot ruder. :-)

Craig, if I understand what happened, the more precise analogy might be that you, the host, invited some folks over to your house. While there, one of the guests said something that another guest found offensive and the latter complained to you, because, as you said, it’s your party. You think that Guest No. 2 is being overly sensitive.

I consider the comment above with the racial slurs to be gratuitously offensive. There is a line. You can’t expect people not to complain when they see things like that.

Okay, so now what?

Unless you can somehow go back in time and change Priya so that she doesn’t say those things or even want to say those things, the best you can hope for is that she’ll…

…what? Feel guilty about it or something?

Don’t you see that your complaining is impotent? That Priya thinks that certain things are funny, and your offended nature isn’t ever ever ever going to change that?

For the serious reply — intended with all due respect:

You said:

“Anything that is subversive is going to offend someone. Anything. When people write me angry emails, astonished that I do not care that they are offended, what they’re really saying is either one of two things:

1. I am a narcissist, so please adjust your world-view to my taste, or
2. I don’t believe anyone should ever make any subversive statement, because being offended is worse than being scared of offending people.”

I had a dinner party once. One of my guests (obviously, this was in my home) got pretty drunk and started making some kind of weird, oddly inappropriate racial jokes, apropros of nothing. Occasionally, they’d be on topic. For the most part not. This guest continued to drink. And, another guest took me into another room to talk to me about the drunk guest. It wasn’t out of order, I didn’t think them narcissistic. I thought them concerned about the evening devolving (even moreso than it had). Thing was, I was the host. So, it was up to me to deal with.

The same goes here. Miriama was offended. Meaning, a guest in your house was offended. You, as the host, can either choose to deal with it, or not. The whole falavar could have been avoided by you simply saying “Hey guys, keep it on topic.” But, you singled out Miriama, and the evening’s devolved.

In terms of narcissism, there’s nothing more narcissistic than having a private email debate with someone, then posting about the whole thing on your blog (which is a pretty narcissistic endeavor itself) in the hopes of starting a discussion about it.

Oh, you can pretend that you’re just informing the masses about your stance on not being offended by anything and why no one else will care if they are — which means that my post above, and any subsequent post I make about niggers, sand-niggers, kikes, ragheads, what-have-you, will remain in tact, right?

But, if you pretend you’re just informing the masses, why then use this specific example, that’s quite clearly been weighing on your mind when the email exchange took place a few days ago?

If you’re truly that objective, you’d have just made a blanket statement about the matter. But, no, this was something you’d been thinking about, and you needed affirmation. Well, as the posters above mostly agree with you, you’ve gotten your validation. I disagree about how it was handled. But, as you’ve said, it’s your house, you’re the host, and I’m truly looking forward to being able to make the most offensive comments I can think up, because you’ve clearly stated that it’s a-okay on this site — as long as it’s civil to other members.

P

writer777, for the record, I’m not a racist, I don’t use those slurs. I posted that wondering if there was a line. Thank you for saying there is, because I believe so, too. Craig does not.

Um, Craig. You do understand that Borat is a satire, right? I mean, it’s whole purpose is to expose and hold up to ridicule the prejudical behavior you are defending here on your site.

Well, I honestly don’t mind if someone pulls me aside and complains. For instance, writer777 pulled me aside in the forum and complained about something, and I handled it.

The way you did at your party.

On the other hand, Miriama decided to take on that issue herself. Hopefully you see the difference.

I’m sure there are few things more narcissistic than my current post. And no, if you think my stance is that nothing offends me, then you didn’t read the post carefully enough.

Lots of things offend me…and I said as much above.

What I don’t do is bitch about it.

Nothing’s entirely objective. Of course my exchange with Miriama triggered this post. I’m not sure why that invalidates anything I’ve said. If you’re accusing me of using my bully pulpit, well, guilty as charged. For $15 a month, you can get your own and go nuts on me at a URL of your choosing.

I don’t need affirmation. I am self-affirmed on this issue. The whole world could disagree with me, and I won’t change my mind. I don’t blog here to seek affirmation, Priya. I blog here to influence people. Hopefully I have.

As for your experimental litany of offensive words, I’m sorry if I blew your point by not deleting it…but hey…what can I say?

I’m actually consistent.

Of course, I do believe there’s a line. The line is civility.

Intent weighs on that.

I didn’t think your racist slur comment was a challenge. I actually made the mistake of thinking you were being defiantly proud of your right to free speech, and so were making exaggerated claims with racist language.

Either way, you weren’t intending to harm other posters with cruelty, so I left it.

Whereas another poster referred to other posters as “morons,” and so I deleted that.

Love,

Your Friendly Neighborhood Small-Dicked Kike,

C.

Um, Craig. You do understand that Borat is a satire, right? I mean, it’s whole purpose is to expose and hold up to ridicule the prejudical behavior you are defending here on your site.

Yes, I am aware. I am also aware that any philosophy that claims that “being offended” means that the speech in question is automatically “offensive” can be just as easily applied to a satire like Borat as it can to a stupid pussy joke.

I’m not defending “prejudicial” behavior. I’m defending the right of Americans to make jokes about vaginas, okay? Hopefully good ones. I make my living, in part, by telling jokes. Some of the jokes I tell are OFFENSIVE to people.

Some of them aren’t satirical. Some of them have no point. Some of them are as stupid and silly as, say, a skinny man and an obese man have a nude fight on a bed.

I’m sure that offended someone. And I don’t care.

Craig,

You didn’t blow my point at all, it wasn’t a challenge, it was a litmus test. I wanted to see where your line was, and your line is at being uncivil to other people (I could make the point that my post was pretty uncivil toward people of various flavors, myself included); the bonus was getting to see you being a hypocrite.

You claim you’re all for free speech, and that you’ll let extremely offensive words fly, but you draw the line at someone being uncivil towards someone else? Where’s the free speech in that? By deleting someone’s post calling people morons, you’ve effectively shoved a gag in that person’s mouth. Come on, if you’re going to defend free speech, that means ALL free speech. That means not having this restraining disclaimer: “We encourage comments and debate, but please keep the tone civil. The publishers will not edit your comments for content but do reserve the right to delete any comment deemed inappropriate for this forum.” Free speech is free speech. Not free speech with caveats.

As for getting my own blog (didn’t you tell Olsen to do that when he disagreed with you? Glad to be lumped in to an esteemed club) so that I can rail against Craig, I don’t need to — I can do it here, on your dime. ;)

Geez. Do you guys even read my posts?

I quote from the post…

Ergo, I censor.

Kind of takes the wind out of your “you’re against free speech” point, hmm?

Yes, I censor. No, I’m not for free speech here on my site.

I’ll say it again, cuz it’s not sinking in.

What I am against are people protesting that because they are offended by someone else’s speech, that someone else has necessarily done something wrong.

Oh, and just to be clear, the whole “get your own blog” thing isn’t about saying, “Shut up and go away,” but rather a reasoned response to anyone who thinks they’re entitled to something at this one.

But, Craig. Of course, I did something wrong. I even said so above.

And, I do read your posts: “I actually made the mistake of thinking you were being defiantly proud of your right to free speech, and so were making exaggerated claims with racist language.” I took that to mean exercising my rights to free speech on this site. Because if I’d said something inappropriate for this forum (which I did), surely it would have been deleted, right?

No, I don’t really care if you exercise your rights to free speech on this site, per se. It only comes in to play as a question of your intention.

For instance, if someone says, “Look, let’s not call each other morons. Hell, we’re all morons.”

that’s different than

“Shut up, moron!”

I look at the intention of the comments, and determine if the intention is to be uncivil. In other words…I guess.

So yes, if you had said something that I thought was meant to be intentionally uncivil, then I would have deleted it. As it so happens, I was right that your “racist” comment wasn’t intended to be uncivil. I was just wrong in my guess as to how it was intended…but that’s really irrelevant.

But, why delete something intentionally uncivil? The only reason I can think of is that it’s offensive to the moron in question. Please disabuse me if I’m incorrect.

You are incorrect. You can find the answer to your question in the post.

You delete something intentionally uncivil, because you like civil discussions in your household, got it. And, you take people to task for “complaining” about being offended, because you don’t “complain” when you’re offended.

If Miriama had “pulled you aside” would that have sat better with you? Instead of her “complaining” about being offended?

Okay, y’all take a cold shower, preferably together, go down to the drugstore and buy a big bottle of chill pills. This whole spiel (save for the inciting post by Mr. Mazin) has been one huge-ass boring read. People are dying, starving, getting blown up, and y’all think this discussion makes an ant’s twat bit of difference to anyone? At all? Civilization is itself a narcissistic concept perpetuated by the folks making money at it, and the idiots who believe that pretending to be part of this group or that protects them from the bogeyman or at least makes them less lonely. Offended? Well whoopdee do.

Craig,

Love this post. At any point if I get teed off about something you wrote here that I completely disagree with (and hey, you have and probably will in the future) then I will come back, read this and fall in love again.

I don’t understand why folks don’t get it - basically, Craig is saying you can discuss offensive & uncivil topics, but not direct offensive or uncivil posts to each other, specifically or personally …

Yes, some topics may be offensive to you personally, but if it’s not directed at your person, it’s up for grabs, right?

Exactly, Joshua. I can talk about niggers* forever and ever, and it will always be okay. But, I cannot call an esteemed member of the community a nigger, unless my intention is of a jovial nature.

Just like everyone can talk about towelheads and dotheads all they want, but they cannot call me a dothead unless it’s jovial in nature!

And I can talk about the non-existence of the holocaust, because I might not believe it happened. ** And, I can talk about how the kikes are just whining about a bunch of shit that never happened. But, far be it from me to call Craig a kike, unless I’m just kidding around.

And the best thing is? Craig will do nothing about it. And, if anyone says anything, he’ll just call them a bunch of whiners.

Does that about sum it up, Craig?

The reality is this is your house, this is your party, Craig. But, when someone pukes on the carpet and passes out? The person who points out the puke isn’t a whiner. And, it’s not his job to clean it up. You own the house, you clean it up.

• This is an awful word and I hope people complain about me continually using it. And, I like Kevin.

** I believe the holocaust happened.

Craig,

I opted for Babel this weekend - now that was amazing!! I kinda shrugged off Borat - although my brothers noted I should wear a diaper to Borat - it was off their seat hysterical.

Anyway, to the point, I was reading a commentary and one journalist noted Cohen to be a ‘genius’?

I had to stop reading as per that was way too heavy a title - I thought……….

I came across your post last night in winding down from a full day of clients and found myself enwraptured by the below phrase inside a very poignant post - I must have read it in awe seven times - truly prodigious! :)

“Of course, there are a lot of people who find Cohen’s comedy offensive. These are the kinds of people who are so addicted to the heroin of victimhood, they hate themselves for laughing.”

Jesus, YOU RULE SIRE Mazin, and the writing gods are in full agreement!

Now that is wicked genius - you can actually ‘see’ your words swirl off the page.

DAMN!! Thanks.

xoxoLL

Craig, you’re wrong about one thing.

That passage from the ADL? Absurd blather? I think not. It’s a hilarious joke. C’mon — five paragraphs explaining to the “unsophisticated audience” why Borat is funny? That’s brilliant!

It’s a put-on. I don’t know how you missed it. Nobody can be as humorless as the character who wrote that?

Could they?

Craig,

There’s funny and then there’s dumb. Borat is funny. Soul Plane is dumb. Now, your own narrow perspective may condemn those who have a longer historical view of movies like the Soul Planes of the world (Stepin Fetchit movies come to mind) to this fallacious “heroin of victimhood”theory you’ve devised, but I find that you’ve come up with a trite and cheap way to dismiss a legitimate viewpoint. It is well within my right to be offended by something and express that. And if enough people feel the same thing, perhaps future decisions about what is made and what is not made will take in consideration my offense. You’re patently wrong when you say that no one cares. Anyone who has to bankroll a project cares. Speaking of that, has anyone seen that Soul Plane II sequel?

What I don’t understand is why Priya continues jabbing at Craig? You don’t agree. Big deal. Why continue? You’re not going to get the answer you want.

In fact, what seems to be oozing from your words is some kind of unsettled anger.

It seems the point of the post has been lost, tails have been chased (namely you chasing yours) and anger is flaring (once again, yours).

You may not like a comment made, that’s fine. That’s your right. But if the comment wasn’t directed at you, then you have no right to silence that person.

However, if a comment zeroes-in to specifically offend you, Craig as the MODERATOR of this site, has a right to censor it.

He can’t have anarchy here, no matter how much you want that to happen.

I guess I would ask what the point of complaining is.

Going back to the example of the joke that started this all, what did the complaint accomplish? Was anyone’s mind changed? Will people not make jokes like that in the future? (And is the site better if they don’t?) Or did all that happen was our attention was drawn to the complainer and her moral outrage?

Personally, I don’t want this site or any other I spend time at to devolve into a constant back-and-forth of comments followed by statements of moral outrage. And I guarantee that if we all start posting our offense every time we’re offended, that’s what it’s going to end up being. Nearly everything is offensive to someone.

What I don’t understand is why Priya continues jabbing at Craig?

It’s called a debate. No anger, no nothing. Just a debate. And, for the record, I was one of the few who thought the joke was funny. But, a friend was not okay with the joke. She addressed the poster and was admonished for doing so. And was basically told to quit complaining (which she wasn’t). That’s where the spirit in my debate comes from.

However, if a comment zeroes-in to specifically offend you, Craig as the MODERATOR of this site, has a right to censor it.

It offended Miriama. That was enough for me. I’m not saying delete the post. I’m not saying Jeff should be drawn and quartered. I’m just saying Miriama shouldn’t have been singled out for pointing out something that affronted her. Instead a simple “Keep it on topic, guys” would have sufficed for everyone.

Yes, the argument has devolved. But, I still find it interesting to note that I’m saying pretty offensve things here. Like, criminally offensive things, and Craig [and apparently you] is [are] going to defend my right to say those things as long as it isn’t directed at a specific member of this public forum. There’s just something off about that.

But, you’re right, it’s gone on long enough.

I think the point Priya is making is that there are certain words/jokes that are never funny… “nigger jokes” falling into that category.

(If someone can point out a situation in which a “nigger joke” is funny, knock yourself out.)

I also don’t see any evidence that Priya wants “anarchy”… that’s kind of a silly conclusion.

Ryan got it right when he posted that “nearly everything is offensive to someone”… more generally, I’d like to suggest that:

Nearly everything is not funny to someone.

I tried to watch THE ARISTOCRATS, a few weeks ago. Got 20 minutes in and turned it off.

Dadburn, but that film is a turd.

Not because some parts were offensive to me, but because the predominantly “for the sake of shock” humor that is the point of the whole “aristocrats” joke is, on the whole, boring.

Boring, boring, boring.

And here’s where I channel Don Rumsfeld, ‘cause he needs the work:

Was I bored by the film?

Yes, I was.

Would I recommend it?

Hell no, I would not.

I was bored to tears, waiting for the movie to get funny.

Shock humor is lower than the pun.

(shrug)

Some folks get off on it, though.

Or maybe you just have to be a comedy writer to feel the way Craig does, that anything goes, as long as it doesn’t get personal.

Back to what I think Priya’s point was… some jokes are personal, no matter if they are directed at an individual, or not.

(Okay, that’s prolly enough of me second-guessing Priya’s thinking… I’m gonna go find more uses for my Don Rumsfeld-like Q&A sessions.)

What happened to the Craig Mazin Punch In The Face Rule?

“If you think saying something in person would get you punched in the face, then don’t say it online, okay?”

Clearly many comments on this thread and on the previous mentioned thread would result in face-punching if said in person.

Hey Priya,

If you wish to use racial epitephs to support your point of argument regarding a film or writing philosophy, I don’t care and I don’t think Kevin would care, either - he’d probably just giggle - it’s the point that counts -

If your point is to demean Kevin specifically, he probably would care (and still giggle, but that’s how Kevin rolls, I bet) and take issue with it. And has.

If you state something ridiculous like, the holocaust doesn’t work or trickle-down economics works great, or something equally ridiculous, you’ll either get A) lots of sourced repudiation or B) ignored for making idiotic statements, but to ban all idiotic statements is a hard call in a room full of writers.

Get it?

Poor Jeff’s joke insulted only two people, his girlfriend and, in a way, himself - his girlfriend (if, indeed, such a person exists) isn’t a participant in this discussion. I’m sure, whereever she is, she can stand up for herself, too.

Jeff did damage to himself by making an easy, rude joke that wasn’t really that funny.

Would the people who did object to Jeff’s joke have been upset if Jeff had made a joke about his boyfriends anus?

Why not, if all offenses are equal?

The thing that I find very humorous about this whole deal is people complaining to the writer of Scary Movie 3 and 4 about a bad vagina joke on his site … I mean, come on!

Well, your solution of “Keep it on topic, guys” assumes that Craig (or the rest of us) want a site that’s entirely on-topic.

And if the site is entirely on-topic, where’s Tim Talbott going to post?

“Yes, the argument has devolved. But, I still find it interesting to note that I’m saying pretty offensve things here. Like, criminally offensive things, and Craig [and apparently you] is [are] going to defend my right to say those things as long as it isn’t directed at a specific member of this public forum. There’s just something off about that.”

What’s off about us not wanting to be the language police? I find all sorts of things offensive, I just choose to ignore them rather than drawing attention to myself by publically or privately complaining or calling the offensive post out. I don’t have to publically acknowledge something to be against it.

I also think some people might be expecting too much to want a comedy writer who sometimes writes offensive jokes to get on to people for making jokes that might be offensive.

Oh, well, sure… I try to answer for Priya and she goes and does something nutty, like answer for herself.

Strike my previous post.

Except the stuff about THE ARISTOCRATS.

That movie still blows.

The Aristcrats rocked, and the audience I saw it with in New York City would agree …

And I thought the “dead nigger storage” bit in Pulp Fiction was pretty funny when I saw in three times at the movies - though since I’m white, mayhap my opinion doesn’t matter, but I saw it out in Queens with an audience full of color and they all howled along with me, so I’ll go with the flow on that one.

Chris Rock has a wonderful and funny bit about how he hates “niggers” and loves black people, which if you haven’t heard, you must. Rock is a genius.

I think it’s the height of arrogance to say there is no decent joke about any subject. There is, and will be, I believe.

“p.s. you SHOULD be afraid of words, especially in politics, law and relationships. on a blog, maybe not so much. unless it bears a swastika. point is: don?t generalize.”

Okay, I guess I mispoke.

You should not be afraid to use or be exposed to words. Even those you find distasteful. Is that better?

I’m not going to deny that words, when used in tandem with symbols, charismatic/hypnotic public speakers, pre-existing fears and prejudices, mob mentality and the unrelenting repetition of catchphrases and talking points can create a very scary and effective spectacle — one that can move people to act in ways they normally wouldn’t. Words are a small part of that equation. When I hear “cut and run” or “stay the course” I laugh because those words seem desperate and ridiculous.

As far as law goes, I’m not really sure what you’re getting at. Although it uses a lot of Latin, and I’ll cop to the fact Latin is a hellafied hard language to learn. I’m guessing you mean the manipulation of words, which is something attorneys get paid a lot of money for.

And then you lost me on the relationships thing. What kind of relationships are we talking about? Personal? Professional?

But here again, even if I was wrong to generalize, I can say that there is no word or idea that I find myself particularly frightened of. And if those words did ever frighten me, I would react with my own words. That’s how freedom of speech works: You combat words and ideas you don’t agree with/like with words and ideas you do.

Abraham Lincoln once said that “If you’re a racist, I will attack you with the North” and these are the principles I carry with me on this board.

Well, your solution of “Keep it on topic, guys” assumes that Craig (or the rest of us) want a site that’s entirely on-topic.

Or, it’s, you know, not dissimilar to what Craig said to Miriama (exact quote: “It wasn’t to your taste, but let’s not get off topic.”).

Ronson, you said it just fine, sir. I needn’t have posted.

It seems pretty simple folks. Craig’s not going to allow personal flame wars. Craig will allow offensive speech. No one but Craig is allowed to be the filter that decides which is which.

The point of his post is not whether you have the right to be offended or complain. It is about the futility of believing that others need to respect your personal limits of what is offensive. Sure there are times when we have an interest in respecting certain individual’s limits, but as a general rule for the whole of the world’s population — that’s unrealistic and does imply an attitude that your viewpoint is correct regardless of someone else’s, and therefore is the only one that matters.

Craig’s point of contention deals with the expectation that your personal limits of offense need always be respected by default no matter where you are, what the situation is, or who you are talking to.

“I think it’s the height of arrogance to say there is no decent joke about any subject. There is, and will be, I believe.”

Joshua,

Your optimism offends me.

;)

Here’s the thing that rings false to me about Craig’s original post…

“No one cares if you’re offended. Ever.”

Yet clearly in the comments of this thread it has been shown that a lot of people actually do care if someone else is offended. Thus, there seems to be a subset of humanity who does care when other people are offended. I’m not sure I’m one of those people, but that this group exists shows that Craig’s original statement is provably false.

The more accurate statement is that Craig doesn’t care if you’re offended. Ever. (Apparently unless the offense is via a direct personal attack.)

I’m also not really sure why we keep using the house party analogy. I have never been to a house party where I’ve been told that all comments should be “on topic”. Since we’re supposed to be “on topic” that leads me think this is more like a discussion group.

If I were in a discussion group about screenwriting, and someone stood up to say “My girlfriend’s vagina is larger the rift between Sunnis and Shiites.” I would be pretty confused.

If someone else then stood up to say “Should we really be talking about just how gaping this man’s girlfriend’s vagina is? That seems off topic and offensive.” I wouldn’t be as confused.

What would be most surprising is if the moderator of the discussion decided to chastise the second person.

“Or, it’s, you know, not dissimilar to what Craig said to Miriama (exact quote: “It wasn’t to your taste, but let’s not get off topic.”).”

No, except that it expands the request from a request not to make it into a thread about complaining/defending the joke to a request that both the jokes and the complaints not be made.

“My girlfriend’s vagina is larger the rift between Sunnis and Shiites.”

Now, THAT’S comedy.

Jcardella’s explanation makes the most sense to me.

I’m offended that I didn’t make it.

So, it all comes down to “what craig’s assumed intention of your potentially uncivil comment is”.

Fair enough.

What’s odd is craig’s stance on complaining, or bitching as he calls it, about people who express they were offended. I mean, WHAT DO YOU CARE? Let one guy say vagina and the next girl say that was lame. What’s the big deal?

Again, none of this would have developed into a debate if you hadn’t singled out Miriama for complaining by telling her to stay “on-topic” - a point you could’ve easily made about Jeff’s joke, but no, jokes are fine, complaining about jokes isn’t, we got it:

You don’t like when people say they’re offended!

It’s almost like you were, dare I say, offended by it…

p.s. keith: nice analogy, good stuff!

“Let one guy say vagina and the next girl say that was lame. What’s the big deal?”

Because one is making a joke, the other is essentially telling someone what they should or shouldn’t say. And I could see where the owner of the site wouldn’t want users to tell other users what they should or shouldn’t say.

Then I won’t mention my lame vagina

My favorite comment in all of this is the guy who berates us all for talking about this while there are wars going on in the world or something.

I call that the “My Perspective Is Bigger” argument, aka HEAT DEATH. :) One of my favorites. It’s not convincing, but someone always trots it out. Goes like this (in extreme):

“Hey, who cares about something as small and petty as war on the planet Earth when supernovas are swallowing multiple planets and the universe is rushing endlessly toward the inevitable and horrific result of incessent entropy: heat death!

How can we talk about the children when we all face HEAT DEATH????”

So, there. I have trumped your war concerns with my HEAT DEATH!

All good comments and good discussion. And no, I don’t think I would punch anyone in the face yet.

One comment to call out…

It is well within my right to be offended by something and express that.

I agree. Absolutely within your right. I don’t even care so much when a neutral statement of “I am offended” is made. It’s the “and therefore, I want an apology or redress” that bothers me, because the presumption is that a state of offendedness is equivalent to a state of victimization.

Yes, you might be a victim. Or, possibly, you might be oversensitive and wrong.

And now, for today’s reading pleasure…

The year is 1929. A guy walks into a bar in Germany and sees a slightly deranged man with a little moustache sitting at the bar and writing furiously in a notebook. He sits down next to the guy and says, “Whatcha working on?” The guy says, “My name is Adolf Hitler, and I am creating a Master Plan to kill six million Jews…and one clown.” The first guy asks, “Why one clown?” And Hitler slams his hand down on the bar and says, “See? No one cares about the Jews!”

Hi Writer777!

I knew I would find you here.

How are you?

Craig, true or false…

In your opinion, mel calling the female officer ‘sweet tits’ was the most objectionable thing he did, saying ‘the jews started all wars’ was okay, but for the jewish community to complain about the second remark was narcissistic.

?

Joshua:

You pegged me dead on. Especially about all the giggling.

I think this is the real point. In this forum, if someone is offended by a joke, Craig doesn’t give a fuck. If I was running this forum and someone was offended by a joke, I wouldn’t give a fuck.

I understand all the arguments back and forth and what not but everyone does understand that this isn’t a government forum, right? It’s a screenwriting forum. Yeah, yeah, words hurt, nigger this, spic that, and if I heard these words come out of my State Senators mouth, you better believe I’d want her outta there.

But this is a Screenwriter’s Forum.

So, seriously…who gives a fuck if you’re offended by a joke? Everyone can extrapolate different theories and hypothetical situations but we’re talking about being offended by a joke. On a Screenwriter’s Forum!

Recently, I’ve just been hired to direct a sitcom. At our production meeting yesterday it got so raucous and outrageous, the paint started to peel. But if someone in that production meeting made a point of telling me or the show’s creator that they were offended by one of the jokes I damn sure wouldn’t want to work with that person. If you get offended by a joke (which doesn’t necessarily mean you’re wrong) just keep it to yourself. This isn’t about invalidating someone’s feelings. You can feel a certain way about anything. But once you deem it necessary to tell someone else, who isn’t your friend or lover, that you’ve been offended…about a joke…it’s just a waste.

Again, Miriama isn’t wrong for feeling offended.

She isn’t even necessarily wrong for telling Craig.

But Craig isn’t wrong for not giving a fuck either.

Jesus Christ

By the way, it’s “Mariama”. And she hasn’t been wading in at all on this thread simply because, since the rules of the site have been made clear, she has decided not to hang out here any more. Her choice.

The bottom line is that it is Craig’s site, and he makes the rules. Are some of these rules not to everyone’s liking? Obviously. Are some of them arguable? Absolutely.

But at least they are out there, and it’s up to you whether this is somewhere you want to hang out. But that’s fair — again, it’s Craig’s party, and his parameters.

Though I disagree that no one cares if you are offended by comments. There are a long line of sexual harassment suits in the workplace, for one thing, that show this to be untrue. Plus, if I say something that offends someone, I want to know about it. Maybe it won’t make me change my mind about what was said… but maybe it will.

“In your opinion, mel calling the female officer ‘sweet tits’ was the most objectionable thing he did, saying ‘the jews started all wars’ was okay, but for the jewish community to complain about the second remark was narcissistic.”

This is a Screenwriter’s Forum.

How many more hypotheticals that have NOTHING to do with this specific situation do we have to sit through?

Why don’t we just ask Craig how he felt about Danny Bonaduce ramming his head through a bathroom stall door? Were you offended by that Craig?

Hey Craig,

Are you offended by Reality Shows?

Are you offended by The Knicks?

Are you offended by the color blue?

Are you offended by seagulls?

dear Craig, your write:

“…I don’t even care so much when a neutral statement of “I am offended” is made. It’s the “and therefore, I want an apology or redress” that bothers me…”

not to beat a horse that’s on its last fading gasp, but I just re-read Mariama’s original post, all it said was she was ticked off, no demand for an apology, not even to have the post removed. So… why did you get down on her?

p.s. I said GET not GO so holster the joke guns, people… geez. ;)

kevin, just for you… it was obviously a rhetorical question, an anaolgy phrased as a question if you will.

What I find scary are concepts like “hurtful comments” (whatever happened to sticks and stones?) and “criminally offensive” (the idea that someone being offended amounts to an actual crime is the sort of insanity that Craig’s original post addressed).

Does anyone truly not understand the difference between comments that might be deemed offensive and comments made as a personal attack against a specific person?

BTW, does that public official being fired for using the word “niggardly” count as a funny “nigger” joke?

-The Other Funny Silverman

Actually, Kevin, this is a thread about whether people care about offensive comments. Talking about screenwriting is off-topic, and should be avoided at all cost.

And yes, I am offended by seagulls. One of them stole a churro from my hands at Sea World when I was a child, and I have since sworn a genocide on their entire avian-flu-carrying species.

Applause to Craig for the post, jcardella for the explanation, and keith for the BRILLIANT continuation of the vagina jokes. I’m glad this post was put up, because I was annoyed by Miriama all day yesterday. After reading all the comments, I felt the need to put in my take: It’s not that the joke was made, it’s not whether or not you thought it was funny, it’s not even that someone was offended. It’s that the person who was offended had a pole up their butt and chose to be offended on behalf of all womankind. I, personally, do not find vagina jokes at all offensive—I can confidently state that I have laughed heartily at all manner of cavernous echo imitations, hamburger analogies and fish references, even when directed specifically at me. Does it matter that I think they’re funny? Only as much as it matters that others don’t. What matters, and the reason the Offended One got called out instead of the Jokester, is that the manner of protest was superior and condescending. A post that said “Do you mind staying on topic? Some people don’t like crude humor” would most likely not have been met with nearly as much ridicule and annoyance as the “How Dare You, Sir!” that is, as Craig noted, blatantly narcisstic. “My opinion holds far more weight than your opinion because I Care About People’s Feelings!” And for the record, I think the particular beauty of the mildly amusing one-liner and the reason this argument got so stupid in the first place is that he referenced his girlfriend, a specific person none of us know. Someone making a racist joke with a generic stereotypical character=usually crosses the line. Someone making a joke about their particular friend of color=possibly also crosses the line, but usually gets a laugh. That’s why Borat is from Kazahk—specificity is funny.

Kevin,

I need to get something off my chest that’s probably bothering me a lot more than it is you. In a post, I was going to use you as an example. Then I put the little asterisk thingy next to it, and the notation at the bottom saying that I like you. I decided that it would be unfair of me to single you out in that post, since you probably have no idea who I am, and it would just seem, well, weird.

So, uh, I deleted your name. Posted. Realized that I’d forgotten to take out the “and I like Kevin.” I emailed Craig immediately and asked him to please take it out of my post. I don’t think he got the email before other people commented on it.

In any event, I’m very sorry that I singled you out, even in jest, given the subject matter of my posts.

I realize that I’m probably bothered by this a lot more than you. But, in case you were offended…

I am sorry.

Priya,

I’m just happy that someone likes me.

I honestly thought you were going to write:

“I need to get something off my chest that’s probably bothering me a lot more than it is you…kill yourself”

In any case, the explanation of your post was funny and non-offensive.

Like a wizard’s sleeve.

Well, I wrote that, but emailed Craig to change it. Thankfully he got to it in time.

I knew it!

lol

Back to the debate…

Jeff made a joke. Miriama berated him. Craig berated her for berating him and told her to stay on topic, when Jeff’s the guy who went off topic originally. Craig then posts that, essentially, saying you’re offended about something is akin to bitching and whining. Also, that no one cares if you’re offended.

A. Miriama NEVER said she was offended.

B. Being offended and stating that isn’t aking to bitching and whining. And, it’s definitely not complaining if one’s offended.

C. People DO care if you’re offended. And, some even want to know if they have offended you so they can rectify it.

D. I think that Craig could make a much better argument saying that those of us who worry that we personally are offending people are much more narcissistic than our “bitching and whining” counterparts.

Important Announcement:

Mel endearment was “Sugar Tits” not “Sweet Tits.”

Please continue.

Mr. Insufferable

Tits by any other name…

I am utterly fascinated by this. I must admit I didn’t read all the comments (I’ve got writing to do!!! Though clearly not now since here I am, hahaha). Craig, I totally agree with everything you said and am amused by the person who asked where Blacks, Jews, etc… would be if people had said that “offensive” speech was okay. Well, okay, I”m not a Jew. though some of my best friends are Jews — hopefully you can tell this is a joke, maybe it’s even ironic, given that I’m black (and the aforementioned is a rif on the annoying comment “some of my best friends are Black.” For the record, we’d all be just fine. The Civil Rights movement or the Abolitionist movement before it were not about nasty speech, they were about tangible problems like Slavery and Jim Crow. Quiet as it’s kept, though these institutions have been abolished, racism lives on. You can’t control what people think and you can’t fix racism or anti-Semitism, or sexism or anything else by controlling what people say. Also, bottom line, this is Craig’s site. He can run it however he wants. The KKK also gets to have their very own website, which they can run however they choose (which I’m betting would offend me). What they cannot do is come to my house and lynch me.

honestly, i think Priya, whose point of view generally I agree with, is now quibbling a little bit….

Craig, in case you missed my question earlier, when you say:

“…I don’t even care so much when a neutral statement of “I am offended” is made. It’s the “and therefore, I want an apology or redress” that bothers me…”

when did she do that? not to beat a horse that’s on its last fading gasp, but I just re-read Mariama’s original post, all it said was she was ticked off, no demand for an apology, not even to have the post removed. or was they way she expressed she was offended not “neutral” enough? Or did her original post make you assume she wanted an apology? Is that it?! Then what in her comment made you assume that?

I thought I had your stance on it all figured out, please help me understand!

Wow. My dumb, predictable, puerile, off-the-dome joke created a stir?

What I don’t understand is how people can be offended by shit like that. Mind-boggling, I say.

BTW, I frequently check the site but rarely ever read the comments section, so you can imagine my surprise reading this post.

Sounds like this Miriam chick really let me have it. :(

P.S. Yes, some people do know if they’ve offended you. In my actual life (i.e. offline), when I’m having an actual relationship (i.e. offline), I care. But this is a public forum. The whole idea of free speech has to do with the public discourse. The rules of private relationship do not apply. The purpose of having a free and open public discourse (in the town square or on this website) is to allow the kind of free exchange of ideas. The purpose of caring about the feelings of those you talk to in your private life is to nurture the relationships. Both goals are valid, just don’t get it twisted. This is the town square, not a love affair. The guy who wrote the vagina joke doesn’t even know you. Of course he doesn’t care about your feelings.

Was Mel calling the officer “sugar tits” worse than suggesting the Jews start all of the world’s wars?

I dunno on any absolute scale. It would be worse in here, that’s for sure. In here, ideas aren’t censored. Personal attacks are.

It’s obvious that some people care about offending others. So let me amend my statement.

Those of us who don’t care if people are offended also don’t care about the caring by other people for people who are offended. :)

Johnny:

I got a mailbox-full from her after I asked her to stay on topic.

Okay, so now I have a question for Priya and Johnny:

Should a writer express that they’ve been offended by a joke in a writing session?

Note: This may be a trick question…

Craig:

you also told her, and i quote:

“Feel free to email me at admin@artfulwriter.com if you’re offended. I take all complaints seriously.”

anway, horse is dead.

Joshua, said:

“Poor Jeff’s joke insulted only two people, his girlfriend and, in a way, himself.”

How did I offend myself, Joshua? If her vagina was like a widening chasm it would mean I have a very large penis.

Because honestly, I’m the only one tapping that. :)

… I think. :(

Paula,

Well, okay, I”m not a Jew. though some of my best friends are Jews — hopefully you can tell this is a joke, maybe it’s even ironic, given that I’m black (and the aforementioned is a rif on the annoying comment “some of my best friends are Black.”

I’ll be one of your best friends if you’ll be one of mine.

Should a writer express that they’ve been offended by a joke in a writing session?

Only through interpretive dance.

Craig said, “…don’t ever say the words “I’m offended” and expect anyone other than a college R.A. or your mommy to give a good sweet damn.”

Dang.

It occurs to me that my entire view on this was put in motion, long ago, by the fact that I actually was a college RA.

All those wanting someone to give a good sweet damn, please email me.

I have a line on some primo good sweet damn.

This is honestly some of the most retarded internet I’ve ever read.

Did I offend any retards just now? Good. I hate the retarded.

Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too.
~Voltaire

The populist authoritarianism that is the downside of political correctness means that anyone, sometimes it seems like everyone, can proclaim their grief and have it acknowledged. The victim culture, every sufferer grasping for their own Holocaust, ensures that anyone who feels offended can call for moderation, for dilution, and in the end, as is all too often the case, for censorship.

I think that Hegel was right in as much as he saw the great moral battles between men as being less a case of who was “right” and who was “wrong”, and more of an endless circle of who was “RIGHT” and who was “RIGHT”. I don’t have the strength to fuel any of this, but I would like to say that Mr. Craig Mazin is in exceptionally good company (as follows):

If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.
~Noam Chomsky

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
~Voltaire

If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.
~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

We have a natural right to make use of our pens as of our tongue, at our peril, risk and hazard.
~Voltaire, Dictionnaire Philosophique, 1764

The only valid censorship of ideas is the right of people not to listen.
~Tommy Smothers

Aaron,

I’ll be your best black friend if you tell me how to do that “big quote” thing.

Putting aside considerations of morality, cynicism and juvenalia for the moment, I believe that…

— Mariama has the right to be offended by the joke, and to express her opinion.

— Craig has the right not to care.

— Mariama has the right to decide that she doesn’t like his attitude, and the rules, and to complain about it, and to leave.

— Craig has the right not to care.

I can’t see that anyone’s rights have been violated, though I don’t really like the suggestion that Mariama’s original complaint isn’t valid. I think she has every right to make it, just as Craig has every right to disregard it if he chooses.

Because honestly, I’m the only one tapping that. :)

… I think. :(

I rest. My case.

If I recall, Scott, Mariama expressed displeasure on behalf of WOMEN, not just herself … it’s the validity of that statement I take issue with … again, Jeff’s comment wasn’t directed at her, nor was it directed at women everywhere, just his poor girlfriend.

That’s the distinction. Would she had had the same reaction had Jeff made the same joke about his boyfriend’s anus?

It doesn’t matter if her complaint is valid for everyone; she felt strongly enough about it to post, with her sole motivation being to express her feelings about what she had just read.

And I think she has the right to do that. What’s really up for debate is whether or not she has the right to expect that anything be done about her complaint. And given the nature of this site, the answer is no, probably not.

But I think she should still be allowed to express her feelings on the point. To me, the process worked; she made her feelings clear, Craig responded, she made the decision not to stay.

Where the trouble starts, I think, is to start picking at the process, to say that she shouldn’t have been allowed to make her comment, or that somehow her comment is more egregious than the joke. Again, it’s fine that posters have no expectation of their being offended actually creating change, but I think people have the right to raise their hand if something bothers them.

I don’t disagree with that, Scott - people should always raise their hands when something bothers them - it’s why I defended a lame vagina joke I didn’t think was funny … because I don’t think it was offensive to women (and if my being male disqualfies me, I know a few female comedians I can trot in her who will back that up) everywhere, nor do I believe we should censure lame jokes that border the offensive, whether they’re funny or not, because that does bother me.

I don’t think I maintained she shouldn’t or couldn’t say what she wanted, just that I believed her point was wrong - I think it’s fine that she says she is offended and says something about it.

But as Craig mentioned above … it could be that you were offended, and it could be you’re simply over-sensitive.

Kevin,

A magician never reveals his secrets. Schlubs like me, on the other hand, are all too happy to share. Use the “blockquote” HTML tag to do the “big quote” thing.

Congratulations on being my new BBF! (Now if I can just get Paula on board, I can say “some of my best friends are black.”)

…and the circle continues…

Scott,

Where the trouble starts, I think, is to start picking at the process, to say that she shouldn’t have been allowed to make her comment, or that somehow her comment is more egregious than the joke. Again, it’s fine that posters have no expectation of their being offended actually creating change, but I think people have the right to raise their hand if something bothers them.

It sounds to me as though Craig was mainly perturbed by private emails he received from Mariana, as opposed to what she posted here.

Kevin,

No. The writers’ room is sacred. This is a public forum. Albeit a screenwriting forum, but we’re not trying to break a story here. Just Craig’s brain.

Johnny,

“Quibbling?” I’m so offended!

Also, poor Jeff. Well, at least he has his sense of humor.

;)

In the end, the original “joke” the guy made was a reference to his girlfriend’s vagina as it equated to Craig’s title of the “Widening Chasm.”

He didn’t say any one’s specific vagina was wide. Or a chasm. He just said his girlfriend’s was. And the girlfriend, as far as we know, is an imaginary devise used to make people laugh.

And now look at all the posts we’ve wasted here stemming back to some guy saying something about his girlfriend’s vagina.

Putting the joke back into perspective: could anyone truly, really, really, really, truly be offended? Really? Because then I say our literary hands are tied. What’s the use in being able to think and write if we worry we “may” offend someone?

If there was a bullseye on anyone’s head and a comment was directed at them in regards to their privates, then the issue is relevant.

But otherwise…

I’m a woman. If anyone needs to do any vagina-mockery, I hereby volunteer mine.

Thank you, Priya. Very effective. You understood my point; people DO draw lines, and in some cases it’s perfectly appropriate and decent for them to do so.

I hope it was noticed that all I did was register my protest against the comments; I DID NOT ask Craig to take it down; that was up to him, and no, I don’t think objecting to the obviously objectionable is wrong even when it isn’t in my power to change something in the present. That’s not impotence in my book.

To Paula: Back in the Sixties, when Blacks were trying to take advantage of long-overdue changes in the legal system that finally gave or returned to them rights to the franchise, education, and employment, it was common for parents to tell their kids “Sticks and stones may break my bones …”

They don’t say that any more. Why? Because we’re in a different phase and people know full well that words DO HURT. No, you can’t control people’s thoughts, but if enough people realize that there are negative consequences to expressing or acting on those thoughts they may change, or perhaps their children will.

The following is a very well-argued piece by a conservative English journalist on the problems with “Borat.” He makes a big point of saying that he’s no “PC liberal” :-)

“Excuse me while I don’t laugh.”

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/peter_franklin/2006/11/what_if_borat_was_from_pakista.html

Craig, just to clarify, I wrote you privately to ask if my post had gone through because it hadn’t shown up; I never asked you to remove any posts.

I forgot to add my name, but I was the one who posted this comment:

Boy, that must have been some vagina joke. I wish I’d seen it.

“If I walk into a house that I think is dirty, I don’t start talking about how the house is dirty.”

The people I know are a helluva lot ruder. :-)

Craig, if I understand what happened, the more precise analogy might be that you, the host, invited some folks over to your house. While there, one of the guests said something that another guest found offensive and the latter complained to you, because, as you said, it’s your party. You think that Guest No. 2 is being overly sensitive. Posted by: Anonymous at November 14, 2006 11:51 PM

<”>No. The writers’ room is sacred. This is a public forum. Albeit a screenwriting forum, but we’re not trying to break a story here. Just Craig’s brain.

But isn’t this also a place where someone comes to learn how to function in the screenwriting world? Because honestly, would you want to work with or for someone who gets offended by a joke?

Dammit! I did the block quote thing wrong!

Aaron,

Do you actually write “blockquote” with the html tag?

Yeah, Miriama also thought my defense of the vagina joke (which wasn’t really a defense) was tantamount to me getting out there with Bull Connor and hosing down the Freedom Marchers.

‘Nuff said.

Kevin,

It’s never really been about Miriama’s being affronted. It’s been about Craig’s response to her being affronted. I don’t know that this is necessarily where one goes to learn how to function in the screenwriting world. I don’t know where that place is, but if pressed I’d direct someone to wordplayer, a forum that’s heavily moderated, but fraught with incredible screenwriting information and views posted by many pros. Not to say this place doesn’t have its moments, but, yeah. I’d definitely say for that purpose wordplayer is more in tune.

In the room, I don’t believe Miriama would have said a word. This is not the room.

So the bottom line is — being offensive is OK — but being offended isn’t.

That is a pretty strange stance.

SECURITY GUARD How do Mr. Mazin?

CRAIG stops, turns, stares haggardly at the SECURITY GUARD.

CRAIG (mad as a loon) I must make my whitness!

SECURITY GUARD Sure thing Mr. Mazin.

INT. STUDIO CONTROL ROOM worried looks on those present.

CRAIG (on monitor) “In the nearly two years I’ve been running this site, I don’t think I’ve been quite as annoyed as I was a few days ago.”

“I don’t have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. We know the air’s unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat, and we sit and check out our blogs while some local host tells us today we had fifteen protests and sixty-three violent rants, as if that’s the way it’s supposed to be. We all know things are bad. Worse than bad. They’re crazy.”

“In the comment section of a recent article, a reader of the site made a joke. A joke about vaginas. Was it funny? Who cares? What’s more important is that another commenter felt it was absolutely necessary to take him to task for his offensive comment.”

“So we don’t say anything any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we live in gets smaller, and smaller, and all we ask is please, at least leave us alone in our own living rooms. Let me have my iPod and my Tivo and my hair-dryer and my steel-belted radials, and I won’t say anything, just leave us alone. Well, I’m not going to leave you alone. I want you to get mad —”

“I say this to you all, but doubly and triply if you’re in college or a recent graduate of college: no one cares if you’re offended… Ever.”

“So I want you to get up now. I want you to get out of your chairs and go to the window. Right now. I want you to go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell. I want you to yell: “I don’t care if you’re offended! I don’t give a fiddler’s damn!”

;-)

I said this before, but evidently it was missed … but you all DO see the IRONY of a person complaining about a lame vagina joke to the screenwriter of SCARY MOVIE 3 and 4 on his own damn WEBSITE… does not anyone else SEE THAT?

MY GOD, PEOPLE!

I don’t think I’ve ever argued this long and hard (insert bad penis joke here) on the SAME side as Craig and Kevin EVER since I began attending this site. I bet even Olson would agree.

I cannot believe this. Holy shit.

“I said this before, but evidently it was missed � but you all DO see the IRONY of a person complaining about a lame vagina joke to the screenwriter of SCARY MOVIE 3 and 4 on his own damn WEBSITE� does not anyone else SEE THAT?”

Yes, that actually did occur to me. But Craig’s opening sally was very broad. He has a good mind and likes a spirited argument.

I also don’t assume that people are only what they write and get paid for — not that there’s anything wrong with collecting what I assume is a handsome paycheck from send-up movies.

The best compliment you can pay someone is to take him or her seriously.

I can’t believe I read all that…

If I am interpreting Craig’s point correctly, it is one I agree with:

It is not that being offended is wrong.

It is not even that voicing that offense is wrong.

What he seems to be taking issue with is the belief that anyone being offended means that the offending comment is, as a direct and definitive result, bad or wrong.

Ding ding ding ding!

awright, the horse’s been resurrected by the sweet ring of a bell…

craig, time for full disclosure. you keep referring to emails only you, and Mariama, have read. It’s like witholdoing evidence but expecting the court to take your word for it. how about levelling the playing field?

“I understand, of course, that many people find smoking objectionable. That is their right. I would, I assure you, be the very last to criticize the annoyed. I myself find many—even most—things objectionable. Being offended is that natural consequence of leaving one’s home. I do not like after-shave lotion, adults who roller-skate, children who speak French, or anyone who is unduly tan. I do not, however, go around enacting legislation and putting up signs. In private I avoid such people; in public they have the run of the place. I stay at home as much as possible, and so should they. When it is necessary, however, to go out of the house, they must be prepared, as am I, to deal with the unpleasant personal habits of others. That is what “public” means. If you can’t stand the heat, get back in the kitchen”

-Fran Lebowitz “When Smoke Gets In Your Eyes…Shut Them”

“But isn’t this also a place where someone comes to learn how to function in the screenwriting world? Because honestly, would you want to work with or for someone who gets offended by a joke?”

How do you learn how to function in the screenwriting world? Screenwriters are kinda crazy. How can you learn to function around crazy?

Come to think of it, how could anyone learn to function in the movie business?

Actors: Crazy Agents: VERY Crazy Producers: You want narcissism?

Sheesh…it’s a scary world out there, people. That’s why I’m going with Directors. Directors… not one teensy bit crazy, those folks.

Susan

Again, to put things in perspective:

“To Paula: Back in the Sixties, when Blacks were trying to take advantage of long-overdue changes in the legal system that finally gave or returned to them rights to the franchise, education, and employment, it was common for parents to tell their kids “Sticks and stones may break my bones …””

Okay.

Everyone read that? Now read this:

This whole thing started over a pussy joke.

There…is…a…difference.

“craig, time for full disclosure. you keep referring to emails only you, and Mariama, have read. It’s like witholdoing evidence but expecting the court to take your word for it. how about levelling the playing field?”

If one of Miriama’s e-mails actually stated “…was tantamount to me getting out there with Bull Connor and hosing down the Freedom Marchers.” he obviously did her a favor.

Point: Women and minorities are equal to 3/4’s of a non-minority man (i.e., otherwise known as second class citizens).

Counterpoint: Women and minorities have fought for that last 1/4 over the last half-century and beyond.

Question: What part of the body were non-minority men not counting in their equation?

Am I off topic?

All this from a vagina joke? No, all this from a narrow, literalist way of misunderstanding comedy. Racial slurs are racial slurs. They are not jokes. It is not comedy. Ethnic or racial jokes may target ethinic groups, but not to destroy or harm, but to self-efface in the social effort to create laughter. Some of the best ethnic stand-up comedy is performed by comediens who share that ethnicity. Jewish comedians slam Jewishness. Black comedians slam being Black. And White male comedians are great at ridiculing white men trying to dance.

Craig’s indifference to those who take offense at jokes means that he gives no serious consideration to those who cannot appreciate a good joke.

I like the one that initially appears to slam one gender, and then reverses: “Why don’t women have brains?” Shurg. “Because they don’t have a penis to keep it in.”

Wait…white comedians make fun of how white people dance?

‘Was Mel calling the officer �sugar tits� worse than suggesting the Jews start all of the world�s wars?’

I can’t help but be amused that of all the things to be upset at, those were chosen over something like drunk driving. Regardless of what came out of the mans mouth, he put his and other peoples lives at risk with that stunt. How that gets less play than inconsequential rambling is astounding.

…well, see, the driving could’ve injured or killed people, maybe, but his remarks did offend people, for sure. which is why, in CONTEXT, that part of the affair was relevant to this debate, while the dui, ain’t. cheers.

craig,

no disclosure, huh?

horsekiller…

it’s been a fun ride. cheers!

We are to go to session now. Our Prof. LL was telling story of how she went for walk today and was ‘stopped cold’ because bus advertisement said a Manet Exhibition was at MoMA and she has much love for all that.

Then we told her on our journey on LIRR to her Lounge we saw here mentioned Chomsky, Voltaire, and Mill and she thought we pulled her leg - she came on, had to see for self - she said,

“Really? That would be soo on topic - good for them.”

p.s. Vagina joke make us all laugh outloud - even Prof. LL!!

Yuri

My only litmus test for offensive jokes is that they must be hilarious.

1. What does a vgin look like after sex?

Like a bulldog’s face after eating an entire jar of mayonnaise.

1. True story: A woman went to her OB-GYN for a pap smear. The OB-GYN, a notorious whistler, was busily working his craft when out of the blue, the woman started laughing hysterically. Startled, the OB-GYN stopped and asked her what was so funny. She said his whistling. “Offended”, he replied that it never seemed to bother any of his other patients. To which she countered, “Isn’t that the Oscar Meyer theme song?”

Yuri:

I’m extremely proud of my site, which manages to seamlessly mix philosophy with vaginas. Glad your class is still enjoying (and good use of “pulled her leg”…idioms are the hardest part of learning a new language).

Raging Case:

Re: the bulldog…..

Gross dude. Ew. Jesus.

For the record…

Craig stole “Ding ding ding ding!” from me.

I am contemplating whether or not to take appropriate action.

*posted by Craig Mazin:

Raging Case:

Re: the bulldog…..

Gross dude. Ew. Jesus.*

Might not be to your taste, Craig. Let’s stay on topic.

I (sort of) admire your pluck, but if you can’t tell the difference between an “ewww” and a “how dare you!” then I can’t help ya, kiddo. :)

See, we cretins like to praise each other with our own nausea. Come spend some time in a writing room. It’s gross-tastic.

You should probably spend less time trying to play gotcha with me. I’m not gotchable on this one. Other things, most likely.

But not this one.

Oh, you love me and you know it.

As for telling the difference between the two, I totally can (and I agree with you, as I threw up in my mouth a little after reading the bulldog thing) and I’m pretty sure you know that, too — but, you have to admit (sort of) that my post was kind of funny.

And, I’m willing to bet, in a writers’ room, I could out-gross you. On a screenwriting forum — or, your house — I really have no inclination to exercise my kick ass gross-out abilities.

In terms of you worrying about how I spend my time. I’ve been stuck in bed with the flu, so have plenty o’ time on my hands. Thanks for looking out.

;)

‘wordplayer is fraught with incredible screenwriting info’…

whitness…

maybe you guys should stop bitching about stupid inconsequential things and take up some refreshers on language and spelling…

dorks

Actually, I couldn’t give a hoot about Heat Death. I was talking about actual people. Yes, there is a bigger picture. It’s fun to semantic each other to death over trifles, it’s (IMO) absurd to think it matters.

I also agree that the country should have been made fictional. Having read articles on Slate and other places that Borat’s Kazakhstan bears little resemblance to the real place

As an American living in Buenos Aires for the moment I completely disagree. I believe the movie is making more fun of American attitudes towards other cultures than it is making fun of Kazakhstan. See, most Americans have never left the U.S. and if they have it’s been to some tourist prepared place in Mexico or the Caribbean, certainly nowhere in the Middle East, Asia or Latin America outside of an all exclusive (i.e. tourist sanitized) resort.

IMHO, there is a strong possibility that what’s funny about Kazakhstan being a real country is that many in the audience won’t realize that this particular joke is on them. That, in fact, Kazakhstan is not that backward. No place is; not Iran, not Afghanistan, no place.

It would still have been a joke had he used a fictional place but it would not have been the same joke, and it most certainly would have been less Sacha-esque.

I must say I found this series of commments very funny from a sociological perspective.

David, isn’t that what the point of Craig’s post was, that even if you are offended, it’s absurd to think matters? Or haven’t you been paying attention?

Joshua, I understand Craig’s point. I guess I’m somewhat offended by the perception that I would use “the big picture” to somehow arbitrarily upstage the importance of vaginas that look like bulldogs…

Humor is funny. What people laugh at has no connection at all to the content of the gag. They just laugh. Whatever. This thread is flapping in the breeze at this point…

IMHO, there is a strong possibility that what’s funny about Kazakhstan being a real country is that many in the audience won’t realize that this particular joke is on them. That, in fact, Kazakhstan is not that backward. No place is; not Iran, not Afghanistan, no place.

When you consider the size of our population and the influence of American culture on the rest of the world, that’s troubling. In addition to my earlier comments, the arguments in the Guardian article I linked to above, “Excuse me while I don’t laugh,” are very powerful. For different reasons, Sacha Baron Cohen didn’t pick Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan (not countries whose populations have a great sense of humor), or some obscure African country (presumably the racism and/or xenophobia would have been too apparent).

And the idea that I can laugh because other people are stupid is not very comforting to me. You may have noticed that stupid people have managed to do a lot of damage in the past.

The final line of defence is that the film can’t possibly be racist because it’s funny. I’d like to know when “funny” became a synonym for “morally acceptable” as in the phrase “I’m sorry, but that’s not funny”. It should be obvious that humour has a disturbingly cruel side - one which can easily draw strength from racism and xenophobia.

Borat enables us to get a little bit closer to this forbidden source of laughter, reassuring ourselves that it’s OK, that actually we’re only laughing at ourselves as we delight in the ever more elaborate mockery of a foreign land. In much the same way, many comedians think its OK to poke fun at Heather Mills’ disability. After all, we’re only laughing at her not disabled people generally - even if it is her leg that’s the butt of the joke.

—Peter Franklin, “Excuse me if I don’t laugh,” Guardian Unlimited.

I’m extremely proud of my site, which manages to seamlessly mix philosophy with vaginas.

Any philosophy that doesn’t consider vaginas isn’t any philosophy at all.

Kevin,

Oopsie, my bad — no quotation marks in the HTML tag. Just the word blockquote.

Comedy and satire in particular has a long tradition of poking fun at attitudes that the comedian or cartoonist does not agree with or condone. This is often done in an attempt to get the audience to first laugh yes, but then perhaps to think about why it is that we do have these attitudes and to even go so far as to wonder whether they really make sense.

And the idea that I can laugh because other people are stupid is not very comforting to me. You may have noticed that stupid people have managed to do a lot of damage in the past.

I don’t find American attitudes particularly comforting either but I don’t see how Sacha Baron Cohen has done anything here to further American ignorance or exacerbate the problem itself. I am of the opposite opinion: that raising an issue in the public consciousness is one of the best ways to begin to change those attitudes.

I happen to believe that if one can imagine—as I suspect even the most ignorant Americans can—that no place in the world has an age of consent of 8 years, nor is nearly as incestuous or tolerant of rape as Borat would have us believe, that this idea is ridiculous to the point of being funny; then perhaps it might follow that the idea that it is also ridiculous to assume we understand the culture of a place we have never been.

I see no harm in this; quite the contrary.

I don’t know where the spurious “that the idea” came from in the penultimate sentence. Sorry for the adding confusion to what was already an overly complex sentence.

I swear I did not type that “the” in the last sentence either.

jcardella,

What’s the issue with your quote there?

Only typo I see is, “whitness.”

Unless I’m missing something that I wrote. In which case, I plead flu. Also, if this is the case, will you proofread my next script?

Thanks,

Me

I don’t know where the spurious “that the idea” came from in the penultimate sentence. Sorry for the adding confusion to what was already an overly complex sentence.

Inflector, I’m not sure that I understand your point. But, when people say things like, “Only idiots would take Borat seriously,” they are suggesting that idiots are harmless. They are not. That’s not spurious.

I didn’t change the language of your quote.

…then perhaps it might follow that the idea that it is also ridiculous to assume we understand the culture of a place we have never been.

should have been:

…then perhaps it might follow that it is also ridiculous to assume we understand the culture of a place we have never been.

of perhaps:

…then perhaps it might follow that to assume we understand the culture of a place we have never been is also ridiculous.

It’s also been pointed out that while SBC is happy to show negative stereotypes of New Yorkers, Southerners, Blacks, gunsellers, and frat boys, he doesn’t show any of Jews. The lack of even-handedness weakens the point that he just wants everyone to take a good look at themselves.

Exactly how is it revealing and educational to find out that New Yorkers are rude in the presence of crazy people and Southerners are racist?

Earlier, I tried to post a comment with a link to an account of how he manipulated people — the case involved one of the few people who came off well — the hotelier who was called “Vanilla Face.” I don’t know what happened to it.

I agree with aaron, philosophy and vaginas have everything in common… both get dry unless you dig deeper.

“For different reasons, Sacha Baron Cohen didn’t pick […] some obscure African country (presumably the racism and/or xenophobia would have been too apparent).”

Hmm. Interesting theory on why he didn’t pick Africa as the place where he was born and raised and where his family lived.

I have another one for you: He’s not black.

Writer777:

Borat tells a real estate agent that he needs a cage to put his wife into. He also wants to know the house comes with a metal door because his retard brother has superhuman strength.

It’s called satire.

Borat is a satire of a man from a slavic country.

Ali G is a satire of a black man.

Bruno is a satire of a gay man.

It’s not real. The characters absurd. Ali G isn’t meant to show how stupid black people/the hip hop culture is. It’s satire.

I’m really confused how a writer doesn’t recognize satire.

For different reasons, Sacha Baron Cohen didn’t pick Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan (not countries whose populations have a great sense of humor), or some obscure African country (presumably the racism and/or xenophobia would have been too apparent).

Hmmm. I’m guessing Sascha Baron Cohen didn’t pick Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, of some obscure African country because there’s no way in the world he could’ve passed as a native from those countries.

It’s also been pointed out that while SBC is happy to show negative stereotypes of New Yorkers, Southerners, Blacks, gunsellers, and frat boys, he doesn’t show any of Jews. The lack of even-handedness weakens the point that he just wants everyone to take a good look at themselves.

You’re…you’re not serious, are you? Why do I feel like you haven’t really watched his show or seen the movie?

You’ve seen the movie, right? Please tell me you don’t have this point of you and haven’t seen the movie.

All this talk, debate, discussion, bloody flame war stemmed from a simple vagina joke? I’ve heard of the saying “making a mountain out of a molehill” but I’ve never seen a mountain this big. It’s Mt. bloody Everest.

I’m offended.

I’ve actually had long discussions about how Political Correctness would eventually divide America.

It’s gotten so bad that I regularly watch white people trip over their tongues trying to refer to black people as either, “Black” or “African American”. A white female acquaintance of mine got so exasperated that she actually said, “colored”. She doesn’t have a racist bone in her body but the politically correct climate we live in usually makes people sound like idiots or clinical scientists.

We use terms like “reverse racism”, which by the way doesn’t exist. When a black person is racist against a white person, they call it “reverse racism”.

Excuse me?

Since when is the definition of racism—White person who hates Black people?

How in the world has our society gotten so ridiculous? It’s this narrow view of the world, our oversensitivity, and look but don’t touch attitude that will eventually separate us all.

writer777, did you miss the ‘running of the jew’ segment?

It’s also been pointed out that while SBC is happy to show negative stereotypes of New Yorkers, Southerners, Blacks, gunsellers, and frat boys, he doesn’t show any of Jews. The lack of even-handedness weakens the point that he just wants everyone to take a good look at themselves.

I didn’t intend to be the Sacha Baron Cohen defender but this is just plain incorrect. Take a look at the documentary on Ali G at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5KXFL0SWWA

The sketch “The Leaning Team” from 1996, about 5 minutes into the documentary, features a troupe of dancing rabbis moving and leaning in unison on top of a star of David.

Following that you’ll see a sketch called “Shvitzen”, Yiddish for sweat, from 1998 BBC show Comedy Nation. It features Sacha dressed up as a rabbi with his brother similarly dressed singing about how hot it is in those long black outfits and then proceeding to disrobe to his underwear all the while continuing to sing “Shvitzen”.

You might not think it funny, but he’s sure as hell is poking fun at Jews in some of his earliest efforts.

writer777, did you miss the “running of the jew” segment?

I knew someone was going to say that. That was fake Kazakhstanis making fun of Jews. That wasn’t a negative stereotype of Jews themselves.

When the yahoos go after the Jews, or Borat acts like a crazy man around the very nice Jewish bed and breakfast owners, he looks like an idiot.

As noted, this was someone’s else’s insight. But it is true that he treats Jews differently, presenting them as victims. In a truly even-handed comedy, that would not be the case.

I�ve actually had long discussions about how Political Correctness would eventually divide America.

Gosh, I love it when people attack political correctness instead of racism, sexism and general insensitivity. What is political correctness to some people is basic decency and respect to others.

Obviously, I’m not talking about people who are manipulative about it.

Borat doesn’t need to be dissected.

Let funny be funny, dammit.

Can I just say…anyone who corrects other commenters’ writing or spelling is probably higher on my list of People That Annoy Me than people who angrily announce that something has offended them.

Especially when they make typos or errors in their corrective comments.

Okay, so…this is a pretty good discussion, actually, the Heat Death haters aside.

Writer777:

I think the reason you find people attacking oppressive niceness (another word for PC) instead of racism and sexism.

No one credible is in our face trying to argue that racism and sexism are morally superior value systems.

However, there’s a world full of apparently respected academics and people-at-large who apparently and honestly believe that not comparing a vagina to a bulldog’s mouth is morally preferable to making the comparison.

I think those people are wrong. I think they’re dead wrong.

If someone came in here and starting fervently arguing that the Jews are parasites who eat at the heart of pure culture and bring it down, I’m fairly certain there would be some outrage.

That’s not what happens in here, though, because we’re all pretty cool people who just want to write movies.

Maybe movies with dialogue this this:

Mooj: This is a great tv, nothing beats a plasma

Jay: What are you doing that’s my customer

Mooj: It certainly is not; when I came upon her she was unattended

Jay: no no Das my…she was unattended because I went to the back to get the brochure she requested

Mooj: I apologize but it’s too late the transaction is completedddd

Jay: Than you gunna give me half the commissioooon

Mooj: You will receive none of the commission

Jay: I need to talk to Paula, this is crazy man

Mooj: This is bullshit every time I make a sale you go crying to Paula, how about, how about Jesse Jackson, oh Jesse he needs a call

Jay: I’m sick of you poaching my customers

Mooj: I’m sick of your cry baby bullshit

Jay: You wanna take this shit outside just take it outside and squash it

Mooj: Let’s stay inside so everybody can see what a pussy you have ok because when I remove the blade that I keep in my boot from its sheath I cannot return it until it has split blooood

Jay: Listen listen, you are fucking with the wrong nigga

Mooj: Hey hey you are fucking with the wrong sand nigga ok

Jay: I will hang your old ass by your turban

Mooj: Oh, turban now! Do you see any fucking turban here? Do I talk like a turban guy? Do I say ‘Hey Jay, you want a slurpee? You wanna slurpee?’ Fuck you, okay? I was born in Brooklyn, Brooklyn, okay? My accent is a fucking Brooklyn accent, okay? Okay?

Wow. Talk about your racism and general insensitivity.

Oh, but reeeeeeally funny.

I’m glad Apatow and Carrell aren’t afraid to write like that.

Exactly how is it revealing and educational to find out that New Yorkers are rude in the presence of crazy people and Southerners are racist?

Who cares? The important question is: how is it funny?

I think those people are wrong. I think they’re dead wrong.

HEAT dead wrong!

If someone came in here and starting fervently arguing that the Jews are parasites who eat at the heart of pure culture and bring it down, I’m fairly certain there would be some outrage.

I shall leave it as an exercise for the Reader to determine whether the fact that I am a parasite who eats at the heart of pure culture and brings it down is because I am Jewish.

Exactly how is it revealing and educational to find out that New Yorkers are rude in the presence of crazy people and Southerners are racist?

[Response]Who cares? The important question is: how is it funny?

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t find stupid-ass obviousness humorous — especially when a lot of it is staged. And I keep reading how this is such a “smart” movie for “smart people.”

At the heart of this whole debate is really the question of society, and power.

We all want to live in a world, and be in situations, where we are comfortable. The problem, of course, is that exactly what this means varies greatly from person to person.

Mariama experienced something in here that made her uncomfortable; whether it made anyone else uncomfortable is really not as relevant. The point is that she took steps to try to ease her discomfort, by complaining about it.

She tried to use what little power she had to change the situation.

What Craig did, essentially, was tell her that she had no power to determine the world-view in here — and in that aspect he’s right. From his POV, he’s offended that she’s trying to control something, to change something, that in his view doesn’t need to be controlled or changed. She’d disagree, but on this website it is Craig with the power.

Mariama, of course, is miffed, because no one likes to be reminded that they have no power, or that “being offended” doesn’t carry any power in here.

In society, there are places where we have a certain expectation of control over our environment, and there are places where being offended might give you power. Certainly laws regarding behavior in the workplace have helped alleviate problems there.

But I think the whole basic point here is that this is Craig’s blog, and that in this world being offended by something like a vagina joke gives you no power at all.

Mariama’s power is not to come here, just like in the world, one can exercise power by not going to see Borat, or even in trying to argue the pluses and the minuses of whether the humor in the film is funny or insulting.

But it’s all about knowing where you have power, and where you don’t, and not overreacting just because you’ve realized you are powerless in a situation where you really shouldn’t have much power anyway.

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t find stupid-ass obviousness humorous — especially when a lot of it is staged. And I keep reading how this is such a “smart” movie for “smart people.”

Yes. It’s just you. It’s always just you. Your opinion will forevermore be just you in all circumstances and situations.

Scott:

All true, but for one word. She didn’t offend me. I felt no moral outrage. I was just annoyed.

[O]ne can exercise power … in trying to argue the pluses and the minuses of whether the humor in the film is funny or insulting.

That’s all I’ve been trying to do. Good post.

Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t find stupid-ass obviousness humorous — especially when a lot of it is staged. And I keep reading how this is such a “smart” movie for “smart people.”

First of all, Craig beat me to the punch.

Second of all, you have a certain taste in movies and you’re entitled to them. Lord knows there are people out there that like White Chicks and/or Little Man and it’s this style of comedy that I absolutely hate.

But it’s impossible to dissect what is or isn’t funny about comedy. It’s all just personal taste.

But when you start talking about society, I find Political Correctness to be, for the most part, useless and one-sided. With the exception of the few black politicians, no black person I know describes themselves as “African-Americans” to other black people. The people who are so interested in being politically correct are usually the ones that have never spent 5 minutes alone with a black person unless they’re sharing the same subway car. Political Correctness is an elitist invention that’s only made interracial casual communication much more complicated and rare.

If a society really wants to move forward as a whole, we might want to spend some more time truly communicating rather than catering to the few and oversensitive.

I’m sorry you don’t like Borat. I’m sorry you don’t like Sascha Baron Cohen. But rather than just say that you don’t find that type of comedy to your liking, instead you turn it into a case of racism. Which is truly silly. As an African/Latino American, I’d love to discuss with you what real racism is. Because when you cite a Borat movie for a case of racism, it’s just a sad commentary of how little society understands and comprehends what racism is.

P.S. It sure as shit ain’t Crash.

kevin figured out the blockmark quotes, god help us…

What do you mean?

exactly :)

Re. the BORAT debate, has nobody figured out that Sacha’s portrayal is mirroring how (he thinks, and he’s spot on) americans see middle eastern cultures? Hence, it’s all wrong. Because we know shit about these people. Irag, kazahstan, belgium… all the same. People wear turbans and pray to walls. All we have is a set prejudices which we throw around. He’s making us laugh at our own ignorance (which is why his comedy is more enlightening than bang your head and fart humor). That’s the genius of it!

Basically, Borat is how we see muslims. Hence folks complaining about cultural accurancy etc. in the film are way off the rocker, because they missed the entire point. He’s not making fun of jews, he’s making fun of how we see them. Get it?

Johnny:

Exactamundo.

With the exception of the few black politicians, no black person I know describes themselves as “African-Americans” to other black people.

We obviously know different black people. All of the ones I know — and I know quite a few — use “A-A” and/or “Black.” (In many cases, I think that they think A-A is not much of a solution, as Africa is a big continent. If you called someone “European-American” that wouldn’t be very descriptive, either.)

Since we’re on the topic of Black people we have known:

None of them uses the “N-word” to describe other Black people, either.

A lot of them can’t stand hip-hop.

Although some are poor, none is a prostitute with a heart of gold.

Writer777, are you white or black?

I think Kevin’s point was that A-A isn’t used between black folks, just between black and white folks, so if your black friends use A-A, that wouldn’t really disprove his point.

I understood Kevin’s point perfectly.

Could have fooled me.

If I can go off topic for a moment, have the rest of you heard about the UCLA student who was tasered by security guards because he was in the library and unable to produce his ID card? The whole thing was caught on camera.

See, I told you that stupid people are scary. :-)

http://www.defamer.com/

Could have fooled me.

That’s why you shouldn’t make assumptions about people.

Kevin,

“She doesn’t have a racist bone in her body ..” Yeh, uh huh, it/she doesn’t exist.

Writer777

“None of them uses the “N-word” to describe other Black people, either.” Yeh, uh huh, that doesn’t exist either.

Writer777:

You really missed my point entirely. For the most part, when talking to other black people, we don’t say, “African-American”.

The point is, Political Correctness, especially in terms of race, breeds clinical unfamiliarity between people of different races.

African-American, Italian-American, Chinese-American, blah, blah, blah, it’s ridiculous. Generally speaking, I can tell you that Black People don’t go around saying Africa-American to each other. The times that I’ve been called an African-American is by white people. And if I hear someone say, “That African-American guy over there is Kevin…”, I can pretty much sum up that we really won’t ever be friends.

That’s why you shouldn’t make assumptions about people.

Ooo, snap, got me there, anon.

Oh when, WHEN will I ever achieve the witty and snide heights of sophisticated ridicule anonymous so easily wields?

Oh woe is me.

Craig,

“I think Kevin’s point was that A-A isn’t used between black folks, just between black and white folks, so if your black friends use A-A, that wouldn’t really disprove his point.”

eh, actually, it would.

Byt the way, just saw that you were disgusted by the mention of virgin sludge. It’s quite natural, you know. And rather tasty.

As noted, I understood Kevin’s point, and I refer anyone interested to my original comment.

None of them uses the “N-word” to describe other Black people, either.

Yeh, uh huh, that doesn’t exist either.

I believe I made it clear that I was talking about black people I know, not all black people.

I believe this is the longest non-Olson comment thread ever!

Kevin,

You think the African American/Black thing is confusing?

I tell people I’m Indian, they ask, “what tribe?” I say, “the big one in Asia.”

So, what are we supposed to call the Indians now that they’re okay with being called Indian again. Which is great for them. Not so great for the Indians from the big tribe in Asia.

Hell, even I’m confused.

Kevin — small thing (from a long way back): Ali G isn’t a satire of black people, it’s a satire of white people (or, at a pinch, English Asian people) acting like black people …

“I believe I made it clear that I was talking about black people I know, not all black people.”

ya know what man, ya know what’s offensive is the possibility that you actually may believe your words - number 1.

number two, you post and we are supposed to believe you?

puuuleeeze.

now THAT smack is offensive.

J. King,

yeh, finally someone who actually has watched Ali G and got it. not decided to comment on it because Cohen is now in the spotlight and they saw a quick reference to him on entertainment tonight.

nice goin’ brother.

J. King:

You’re right. I stand corrected.

As craig points out, people CHOOSE to be offended. One black guy says nigga to another, and it’s not a big deal. If a white guy says it, they’re prejudice. If my friend calls me an asshole, I’m generally not offended. However, if a stranger does, I may feel offended. That’s just how it goes. The only ‘nigger’ joke I’ve retold was one that was told to me in the service by a black guy I knew. I admit that it was funnier with him telling it than when I do.

As for BORAT…

The trailer let it be known clearly that it was going to be filled with base humor, especially ethnic. I just have to say, as I said when I first saw the trailer: There’s a guy who will never be welcome in Kazakhstan.

After seeing the trailer, I just CHOSE not to pay to see a movie that I’d probably find offensive. Most people go so they CAN be offended and then say they have something to complain about. That’s what this country is devolving to, a nation of people who want to complain about things, but not do anything about it.

“I think Kevin’s point was that A-A isn’t used between black folks, just between black and white folks, so if your black friends use A-A, that wouldn’t really disprove his point.”

“eh, actually, it would.”

Huh? Um, no it wouldn’t.

Racial humor is funny, End of story.

So if a white person says to his friend (white or black or brown or Indian red), “What’s up, nigger?” it’s automatically racist?

What if there’s no malicious intent? A friendly, “Hey, nigger” can be like a friendly, “Hey, fuckface”, or, for the easily offended, “Hey, man. That’s a keen Kirkland Signature polo shirt!”

It’s not the word. It’s how the word is used.

If someone is truly my friend, I already KNOW that they’re not a racist. I have a totally mixed bag of friends, Skittles if you will, and we say heinous things to each other all the time. I’d rather hang out with someone who jokes about how they have to hide their wallet when I come around rather than some guy who is so uncomfortable around me that they feel compelled to call me an African-American.

Think about it. If a white guy is hanging out with other white guys, do they call each other Caucasians? No, only someone who isn’t Caucasian would even say Caucasian. And Black people don’t go around calling each other African-Americans either.

Generally speaking.

So if a white person says to his friend (white or black or brown or Indian red), “What’s up, nigger?� it’s automatically racist?

What if there’s no malicious intent? A friendly, “Hey, nigger� can be like a friendly, “Hey, fuckface”, or, for the easily offended, “Hey, man. That’s a keen Kirkland Signature polo shirt!”

It’s not the word. It’s how the word is used.

You’re kidding, right?

A “friendly” greeting of “Hey, nigger?”

Okay, for one thing, the word black folks are using 99 percent of the time in greeting is “nigga” not “nigger”… you know there’s a difference, right?

One word has 400 years of hate behind it, the other is the result of a group of people removing the power from that hated word and making it their own.

“Fuckface” has no power.

“Honky” has no power. (Not to this one, anyway.)

“Nigger” has power.

Dang… I’m gonna drop this, because the more I think about it, the more certain I am that I’ve just been had.

Right?

Yikes. First three ‘graphs of my above post should all be italized… as in, Jeff’s words, not mine.

And, to answer Jeff’s question:

No, a friendly “Hey, nigger!” from a white fella to anyone else isn’t automatically racist.

Just stupid.

Think about it. If a white guy is hanging out with other white guys, do they call each other Caucasians?

Yes. Yes we do. That’s part of our Secret World, Kevin.

to me the funniest thing in over 200 posts has to be:

“One word has 400 years of hate behind it, the other is the result of a group of people removing the power from that hated word and making it their own.”

i love Hitla!

The Secret World of Caucasians. by Craig Mazin

to me the funniest thing in over 200 posts has to be:

“One word has 400 years of hate behind it, the other is the result of a group of people removing the power from that hated word and making it their own.”

i love Hitla!

Whoa, Nelly!

I done been rebutted!

Or, not so much, but I want Johnny to feel good about himself, silly as he may sound.

Kevin,

I promise to never refer to you as an African-American if you promise to always refer to me as “My Yidda.”

“Yes. Yes we do. That’s part of our Secret World…”

“i love Hitla!”

“if you promise to always refer to me as “My Yidda.”

Now this is funny - I am rolling - thx!

xoxoLL :)

Ronson said:

““Honky” has no power. (Not to this one, anyway.)”

And this reminded me of something my ex-husband said years ago.

I’m a Latina/Mexican-American. My ex is a Caucasian-American of Anglo/Germanic ancestry.

Apparently, I referred to White People as…White People and he took offense to this; so he asked me to stop. Or, more precisely, he asked me why I refer to, er, Caucasian people as white and THEN asked me to stop.

What’s funny about this is he’s not what I’d call a sensitive person in the least. Ergo…le divorce. But, in this instance, he was sensitive. Go figure. :-)

susan, sounds like your ex-hubby was just trying to pick a quarrel… I think I speak for ALL white people when I say calling us caucasian in an informal conversation is idiotic. Larry David anybody… “I’m yo’ Caucasian, nigga.” Funny stuff.

“Nigger” will be debated until the end of time.

I don’t expect you to agree with me, Ronson, or anybody, but to me, it’s the context that defines the word.

And no word should be off limits. None.

And no word should be off limits.” None.

Secular Progessive. I hate that word.

I don’t expect you to agree with me, Ronson, or anybody, but to me, it’s the context that defines the word.

I actually do agree that context, in part, defines a word, but I believe the origins of some words are just too powerful to erase with context alone.

And no word should be off limits. None.

In theory, that might be true, and I certainly hold it to be true, when I’m writing a story or script…

I dunno, Jeff… if you think you can disarm racial epithets with frequent, friendly use — a cheery “Hey nigger!” to the stranger on the street — be my guest.

Just let me know where to send the wreath.

Whoops. That’s me, replying to Jeff, above.

Since I teach high school in LAUSD, the pit, I’m used to students race baiting. “You’re racist.” I reply, “No, I’m not. I’m a misanthrope. I hate everyone equally.” Of course, that’s a joke with a teaching point, but they don’t get it.

I believe the origins of some words are just too powerful to erase with context alone.

Like “swell” and “so’s your old man.”

Like “swell” and “so’s your old man.”

“Swell.”

“So’s your old man.”

“Nigger.”

All together now…

One of these things is not like the other…

Folks — more specifically, some of you stubborn white boys — y’all can want and want and really, really want to toss around the word “nigger” all you’d like and wish it to be okay… but that ain’t gonna happen.

Not in this lifetime.

Dude, you need more musical theater in your life (and no, I’m not talking about Showboat).

;)

I know I’ve been blocking out “The Music Man” since making the mistake of watching the Ferris Bueller version on TV a couple of years ago.

Dude, you need more musical theater in your life (and no, I’m not talking about Showboat).

How’s about I meet you halfway with some community theatre?

I love those little Productions-That-Could.

Promise never to mention Bueller’s alter ego and you’ve got a deal.

(BTW, Steven Weber was great as Leo Bloom.)

What a sublime article. Thank you for summing this topic up in a way I never could.

I think Emerson summed it up perfectly. He said, “We’re no so trivial as when we take ourselves seriously.” On the subject of taking offense. We live in a society of many TV babies. Rather than take the time to read or invest in their intellect, these social drones simply parrot what they see on programs such as Oprah and Dr. Phil and the like. In the drones limited capacity, he/she viwes such programs as “high intellect.” Dr Phil is just another Oprah, with a degree! These “offense takers” in society are simply a herd of phonies attempting to appear enlightened and above it all on issues they’ve been taught to find offensive. This is what the media has done. Unfortunately, the media fails to teach people to think. For instance, how the hell does anybody make a case for free speech, while endorsing political correctness, which is simply a self imposed form of censorship? Back to those who feign offense. It would seem that anyone claiming to be offended to the point of umbridge, based on an unfeeling remark or joke about a certain minority group is, without admitting it, claiming to be prejudice free. This would have to be the case in order to lend credibility to the indignation the offended person has chosen to make known. After all, how can a person be upset about a comment regarding Jews, when that same person is down on Mexicans or some other group of people? Everybody is down on somebody, period! We all have our prejudices about some group of people and find them or their behavior to be substandard to our own alleged values.. The phonies in life are those who refuse to admit this is so. We all have human frailties. Another example of this same mentalitiy resides in the “unconditional love” crowd. They insist real love is unconditional. Bunk! Unconditional means, no matter what! This is beyond the capacity of all of us. I don’t care who a person claims to love unconditionally, that loved person could do something (in many cases certainly it would have to be extreme) to make themselves no longer loveable. Furthermore, if we accept a persons position that their love for someone is unconditional, then it would seem that it necessarily follows that this capacity of unconditional love would have to be extended to all of huamanity, since we all came from one source, whether you’re a creationist or endorse evolution. It would also seem to be illogical to pass out unconditional love conditions only to the members of an immediate family. Where does the unconditional love designation these people claim to have stop? You do love unconditionally or you don’t, you can’t have it both ways. Based on this, I would like to hear anybody from the unconditional love camp explain their unconditional love for Adolph Hitler and other sadists history abounds with. Better yet, after they have qualified their unconditional love for Hitler, I would like them to send a copy of their intellectually fraudulent position to the JDL. I’m sure it will be warmly received by all.

The quote from Emeson should read, “We’re never so trivial as when we take ourselves seriously.” Sorry.

is anyone watching Studio 60?

i think they’re doing a mostly fantastic job of dealing with debates like this one in a way that engages an audience in the conversation. granted, they go about the art of engagement in a markedly different way than SBC does with Borat. but in both cases, the invitiation to debate is there.

i think what some people here are failing to realize, even though it’s been said a thousand times a thousand different ways, is most talk surrounding the issue of political correctness comes off like a knock at the door during dinner. nobody wants to be sold something, least of all when it interrupts their life. but, when you find ways to be subversive with the presentation – to make it entertaining - those same people who wouldn’t answer the door at dinner will rearrange the time and place they eat to hear what you have to say. and, who knows, you might even convince them into a closer evaluation of where they stand on the matter.

i think that’s what got this whole beast of a thread going. somebody knocked on Craig’s door during dinner to sell him something he wasn’t interested in. Borat espoused similar ideas, yet Craig gladly paid 12 bucks for the lecture.

Hmmm….maybe in addition to your mom or your R.A. you should add RUPERT MURDOCH to the list of people who care if you are offended:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954272.html?categoryid=14&cs=1

I don’t think Murdoch cares about anyone being offended. I think he cares about losing money. Even his own employes (e.g. O’Reilly) were threatening boycotts, and a number of affiliates were refusing to air the special.

Wow.

We’re all psychics.

Michael Richards, anyone?

http://us.video.aol.com/video.index.adp?mode=1&pmmsid=1772645

Yeah, old Kramer’s truly lost it, hmmm?

Pretty shocking stuff.

Did you catch his appology on Letterman tonight? I hadn’t head about what he did before seeing the appology, so at first I (and it seemed the Letterman audience) took it as a bit… definately not a bit. That was an awkward 5 minutes of television.

Furthermore, if we accept a persons position that their love for someone is unconditional, then it would seem that it necessarily follows that this capacity of unconditional love would have to be extended to all of huamanity, since we all came from one source, whether you’re a creationist or endorse evolution.

We must all express unconditional love for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

My ears are bleeding from the irony of this Michael Richards incident occuring just a couple of days before the release of Seinfeld Season 7 on DVD. Sony must be thrilled.

(It’s a great season, too.)

Bravo, Craig.

Well stated.

By the way. You’re a jerk.

;)

look to the cookie, people, look to the cookie!

OK, I’m sitting on the fence with the whole vagina joke debate. I don’t especially like that kind of humor, but many people do, so what the hell.

But has it occurred to anyone here on this thread, that possibly, just possibly, freedom of speech is guaranteed in our constitution not so people can freely call each other names and make debasing jokes, but so our citizens will be able to discuss, without fear of government reprisal, the most important issues that affect our lives? That we are guaranteed freedom of speech so we can hold our government accountable for its actions?

It seems to me that the freedom of speech debate has gotten sillier and sillier, and real incursions are being staged against it in terms of things like the Patriot Act, head-to-head shouting matches on TV that pass for journalism, and proclamations by governing officials that those who protest against current issues (like the war in Iraq, or the spiralling national debt, etc.) are un-American.

I don’t care who calls who what, but please don’t hide your bad manners behind the Constitution, like some child squealing “not fair” to his mommy.

Anyway, I thought this was a screenwriting forum.

By the way, it may be noted by some others that this post is not funny. That’s because I’m not joking.

Seriously—a brilliant post..Your post can also serve as a strong rejoiner to the Imus fiasco, and all it’s hypocritical trappings..