0
0

Jeff Davis Rape (self.Harmontown)

[deleted] が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]jrf_1973 10ポイント11ポイント  (11子コメント)

It's a fucking ROLE playing game. He's a barbarian. He's playing a role. Hilariously I might add.

If you and your faux-concern for "oh my triggers!!!" can't stand the show, don't listen to it. It really is that simple.

[–]trejdeksnis 3ポイント4ポイント  (10子コメント)

I don't know why you assume that it's faux-concern, and I don't know why the reaction has to be "take it or leave it" instead of a dialogue about how or if we should change the show.

You think it's hilarious, but others don't, and the fact that it's role-playing is kind of irrelevant. If someone went up there and role-played being a boring accountant, we're entitled to criticize and say "hey that's boring do something else" and no one would say "but it's ROLE playing, he's playing the role of the accountant PERFECTLY!" No one's saying that Jeff is actually raping anyone, we know it's a role. I just don't like that role and I'd rather not see it as part of Harmontown.

[–]jrf_1973 -3ポイント-2ポイント  (9子コメント)

His job is to be entertaining- if he was boring, yes we'd be entitled to criticise. But he's not being boring. He IS being entertaining. And no one in the world is born with the inherent right to go through life without being offended.

[–]trejdeksnis 2ポイント3ポイント  (8子コメント)

By that logic, I'm not entertained, so I'm entitled to criticize what I perceive as a boring bit.

To clarify my perspective - I'm not at all saying that anyone has a right not to be offended. I am not advocating for forcibly censoring anyone. What I want is for individuals to make the decision to selectively censor themselves out of empathy for their community - to fully understand the negative impact of their words so they can hopefully decide it outweighs the benefit.

[–]jrf_1973 -1ポイント0ポイント  (7子コメント)

For better or worse, the majority of the community doesn't have a problem with his jokes. I don't see why the majority should have less laughs, just because YOU don't think something is funny.

[–]trejdeksnis 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

What I said above - does the benefit outweigh the negative impact? Does the majority's collective joy outweigh the minority's pain? Are the laughs worth hurting the people who are made very uncomfortable by these jokes? Everyone's got to decide this for themselves, and in order to do so you need to understand the value of humor and the magnitude of harm it causes. In this case, I don't think these type of rape jokes are that valuable. It's juvenile humor and not very smart or edgy comedy, it's not changing the world or anything. So I'm more willing to give it up when I find out someone's hurt by it. I don't think my few seconds of laughing is really worth someone being really affected by it. Then to take a look at the hurt - is it just a mild "oh that joke was annoying?" or is it an intense discomfort, feeling attacked or unsafe or not belonging? is it possible that the rape joke contributes to the idea that rape is inherently funny and that does general social harm? To me, I understand that discomfort very well. That combined with not thinking the joke is great to begin with, makes me judge that no, we shouldn't value the majority's laughs over the minority's pain. If you're interested I could go more into why I think jokes like this are hurtful to individuals and to society.

[–]jrf_1973 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

I believe in freedom of speech. When the solution to someones discomfort is either for them to leave and choose more appropriate entertainment, or to restrict everyone elses right to say and hear what they choose, guess which one I am ALWAYS going to side with?

[–]trejdeksnis -1ポイント0ポイント  (4子コメント)

You're missing my point. I also believe in freedom of speech. Nothing I have said is contrary to that. I'm against censorship, everyone can keep saying whatever they want.

Let's say every time Dan says the word "jello" half the room experiences a few seconds of crippling pain. Per your comment, the solution is either for those people to stop coming to the show, or for Dan to make his own choice to stop saying "jello". If saying "jello" is really super duper important to Dan, he would keep saying it and tell that half the audience "too bad, this is who I am". But if saying "jello" isn't really that important, then he decides okay, I'll stop saying it and everyone can keep coming. That isn't anyone restricting him. That isn't him losing any freedom of speech. That isn't anyone in the audience losing any freedoms, either. If you're an audience member who really enjoyed jello-related comedy, it might be a bummer to you, but you can probably find other people who make jello jokes.

Now just replace jello with rape jokes and maybe my point will be more clear?

[–]jrf_1973 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

If you're an audience member who really enjoyed jello-related comedy, it might be a bummer to you, but you can probably find other people who make jello jokes.

Why should I have to?

maybe my point will be more clear?

Your point was never not clear. I just think it's crap.