Accountability in Entertainment • Page 48

"This could be offensive so maybe use one of the hundreds of other things you can say about this shitty person instead, so as to avoid potentially hurting the feelings of people with a similar condition."
"No."

 

But you have to admit that it's easily understandable that someone unrelated who's missing an eye could be offended by their appearance being compared to that, right? Like, that's the entire point of the last two pages.

 

Did he become a different race in this war, where he's killing people and then using it to run for office?

You keep removing the entire context here of what was said and who this is to try and make universal point. I'm saying specifically that context matters to me in this case.

 

Did they lose the eye basically being a hitman and then run for office to harm people partially on being said hitman and being injured while doing it? I'm not going to speak for other people, I'm saying I draw a distinction based upon this specific case and don't think it's about every person that's missing an eye.

 

You're purposefully ignoring the point that I'm and some others are making.

Never mind.

 

the joke isnt "haha he lost an eye" its "this is an entirely ridiculous and comically evil person."

 

There are two different arguments being made here. What I and others have a problem with is the specific use of ableist jokes being acceptable based on the context of who someone is when similar jokes if they were racist or sexist or homophobic or transphobic would never be tolerated in here for any reason. “I didn’t say ALL black people are terrible, I said THIS black person is terrible AND made a joke based on his race,” would be absolutely ripped to shreds as it should. The joke shouldn’t BE the disability, that’s what is ableist.

Someone mentioned the racism against immigrants that seems to go unchecked online, and that’s a pretty similar idea. Someone calling out Trump by saying “Who will be your maids or gardeners?” is still being racist even if they are being negative to the person you hate and that racism isn’t ok just because they claim to be for the same things you are. It’s like the same thing from a different angle.

 

You are saying that you are perfectly fine with an ableist joke because of your disdain for Dan Crenshaw. You've always seemed like a nice guy and not the type to make jokes about people in wheelchairs or with one arm or eye, or to laugh at jokes like that, but in this case it's fine. So if ableism is fine I was asking about racism or homophobia following that logic, even if it didn't fit the specific facts of this case.

How about if he were a woman and Pete Davidson made a misogynistic joke, is that seen as fine here because of who Dan Crenshaw is?

 

No, I understand your universal point, and if this was a different scenario where a joke was made about how all people with eye patches looked like a "porno hitman" it would be a different conversation. However, this isn't a different scenario. It's about someone that was part of a Pizzagate Facebook group with some of the worst bigots ... and is running for office wrapped in his time in the military. So we don't have to talk about a different scenario or "what ifs" we can talk specifically about this guy.

 

I'm just going to copy and paste what I said before, because it's the same answer:

Did he become a different race in this war, where he's killing people and then using it to run for office?

You keep removing the entire context here of what was said and who this is to try and make universal point. I'm saying specifically that context matters to me in this case.

And to be clear, again: I think you can speak specifically about this guy without making it about everyone. That you have turned this into some statement that I make jokes about people in wheelchairs is just strange.

 

I'd buy that more if the joke/delivery had anything to do with that, but the whole “I’m sorry, I know he lost his eye in war or whatever,” he said as he laughed. “Whatever" makes it seem pretty lazy IMO.

 

it would do people well to avoid falling into the trap of validating bad-faith right wing outrage by buying into the kernel of a legitimate left wing complaint that they pretend is at the basis of it. it never is.

 

I feel like if he had made a funny joke this wouldn't be an argument.

 

That's well said and the other half of all of this that we haven't even gotten into.

 

Funny or at least more reverent than just "dude has an eye-path because of war haha" Paraphrasing obviously. If this dude has wacko pizzagate shit, why not bring that up instead? A war injury just seems pretty cheap when those cards are there as well.

 

this is like a cernovich accusation except instead of cernovich its a bunch of middle aged TCOTs, the only people on the planet who have the energy to get mad at SNL in 2018

 

You keep hiding behind context but won't answer my question. I would say ableist jokes are wrong regardless of context but apparently you are fine with with them if they are directed at a republican who you really don't want to get elected.

I feel like you would be reacting very differently if Trump had made the same joke about a democratic candidate with an eye patch, even if they had obtained the injury in the same war.

 

To be equivalent the 'joke' would have to be based on an action the person took to 'cause their race.' Because the specificity here is going abroad to kill brown people, being injured, and then running on said time killing people/being injured. A joke about someone's race doesn't track 1:1 about this situation. Which, again, is why I am saying we can talk about this specific thing without needing to make it about race, or gender, or anything else. Because the hypotheticals being floated do not line-up with this specific.

 

ie: the McCain family.

 

I think my stance and distain for the US military is pretty well documented at this point.

I think Trump wrapping himself in the flag and military while denigrating it is hypocritical and those that fall for it are stupid. But I have pretty strong feelings that our military is morally wrong and has been for a long time. (I'm the one that still argues we had no reason to drop the atomic bomb.)

I am not hiding behind context when I say the context is specifically why I think something. You want me to make a universal statement, and I'm not doing that because I do not believe it's able to be universally applied. I've said that specifically: "No, I understand your universal point, and if this was a different scenario where a joke was made about how all people with eye patches looked like a "porno hitman" it would be a different conversation. "

 

to be honest one of the other things bugging me about this is that, at least in the comedy thread, somebody like gabrus says something worse than that every other minute on a given podcast appearance and there's never been a 3 page argument over it. so, i guess the overlap with that thread and this one must be pretty small, but i also think in general that the joke doesn't really push the boundaries of what's accepted in even liberal comedy circles. which makes me come back to: don't get mad at things just because right wingers are pretending to be mad at them and calling you a hypocrite for not

 

Literally not being mad at the joke at all. This entire thing is about the reaction to the joke. The idea that "hey this could be offensive" is met with "hey, i don't care" just because the person it's directed at is shitty is just not cool.

My experience with this joke is also from this thread and this thread alone. I don't even know who Pete Davidson is.

 

I’ve never checked the comedy thread, but I read this one all the time.

 

Watching this become weaponized in real-time over the past 18 months has been terrifying. This is just the start. They're getting better at it.

 

As mentioned by @Wharf Rat early, I think that was part of the 'entire comically evil Bond villain' portion.