8 ms·

What do you think is the fundamental joke the article is making? The only joke I see is "a trans person exists". The article isn't about her policies, her per

by slg 4y ago

What do you think is the fundamental joke the article is making? The only joke I see is "a trans person exists". The article isn't about her policies, her performance in her job, or even complexities in our evolving definition of either sex or gender like you are implying. The joke is that this person is trans. The message of that joke is the existence of a trans person in public is worthy of mockery. Therefore the only way to stop the mockery is to stop being trans or retreat from public life. I think refusing to stop that mockery until the target does one of those two things qualifies as harassment.

catiopatio 4y ago
> What do you think is the fundamental joke the article is making? That a man was voted “Woman of the Year”. By any non-tautological definition of “woman” and “man”, that’s objectively true. Are we not allowed to point out obvious truths when people claim the opposite?
- jl6 4y ago
  Generally we consider jokes to be cruel when they mock an affliction that someone didn’t choose to have. You can just about get away with making such jokes about the abstract idea of an affliction, but when you name someone directly it crosses a line. Whether you think this particular example was cruel depends ultimately on whether you think it is targeting the individual’s gender dysphoria (the thing they didn’t choose to have), or whether it is targeting their claim to be something they objectively are not. One might argue that there is no difference, if one believes that gender affirmation is the only treatment for gender dysphoria, and that everyone is obliged to participate in that treatment, and to do otherwise amounts to mockery of the unchosen affliction. Personally I think it’s wrong to joke about people with schizophrenia, but equally wrong to tell them the voices in their head are real.
  - catiopatio 4y ago
    I take your point, but would suggest the joke is more pointedly aimed at society generally, and the magazine specifically. What makes the joke funny and culturally relevant — as opposed trivial cruelty — is that it represents a simple, forbidden truth for which one will be subject to severe public censure and deplatforming. Comedy is a final bulwark against uncritical thinking, and can be used to deflate ludicrous ideas that are otherwise culturally unassailable.
    - cmh89 4y ago
      >Comedy is a final bulwark against uncritical thinking, and can be used to deflate ludicrous ideas that are otherwise culturally unassailable. Comedy can inspire thoughfullness and push back against societal norms. Comedy can also be a way to normalize bullying marginalized people. Being a troll and saying 'But wait, I'm being funny!' still makes you a troll. It's not like the account in question was trying to generate thoughtful discussion. Punch-down comedy is just dressed up hatefullness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8yV8xUorQ8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8yV8xUorQ8
      - catiopatio 4y ago
        You’re not punching down when the near entirety of all cultural institutions, journalists, and technology platforms have mobilized to protect your target from all question and criticism. When you can be censured, deplatformed, and even lose your job for stating an objective truth like “men cannot get pregnant”, your words, by any possible definition, are punching up.
        cmh89 4y ago
        >You’re not punching down when the near entirety of all cultural institutions, journalists, and technology platforms have mobilized to protect your target from all question and criticism. Unfortunately that isn't really true. Trans folks, especially trans women face discrimination and violence on a daily basis in society. You see, they actually exist in the real world and somehow Twitter mods can't keep people from saying and doing terrible things in real life. >When you can be censured, deplatformed, and even lose your job for stating an objective truth like “men cannot get pregnant”, your words, by any possible definition, are punching up. Spare me and your culture war nonsense. I'm sure you believe that white men are under attack and marginalized.
      - hunchle 4y ago
        The wider philosophical point is, if a man has gender dysphoria, does that mean he is a woman, or just wants to be a woman? If the latter, there should be no issue in a satirical publication making the point that a man who wants to be a woman getting awarded a "Woman of the Year" accolade is nonsensical.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
panarky 4y ago
It's cool how HN discussions predictably get distracted from the main point. The main point was that the claims made by the new owner are demonstrably false. The new owner claimed that unbanning decisions would be made by a new moderation council. While he was saying this, a slew of right-wing and conspiracy accounts were reinstated even though the council does not yet exist. Meanwhile here we are, debating gender and sexuality.
- catiopatio 4y ago
  Babylon Bee has not been reinstated. They remain locked out of their account until they agree to delete a tweet about the story we’re discussing, which they’ve refused to do.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lelanthran 4y ago
> he only joke I see is "a trans person exists". The article isn't about her policies, her performance in her job, or even complexities in our evolving definition of either sex or gender like you are implying. The joke is that this person is trans. The message of that joke is the existence of a trans person in public is worthy of mockery. Therefore the only way to stop the mockery is to stop being trans or retreat from public life. I think refusing to stop that mockery until the target does one of those two things qualifies as harassment. meh. Twitter allowed much worse things that joking about someones self-identified gender. It's a satire site: it's exactly what it says on the tin. If you leave political affiliation out of it, then, yes, twitter has been taking sides.
partiallypro 4y ago
The joke of the article was that she was named "Woman of the Year," so they named her "Man of the Year" to point out the ridiculousness of such an award for her. You can disagree with that, or you can agree with that, but it's still a very tame joke. I don't think the debate on transsexualism is a closed case in many regards. There are important topics to discuss on it; and satire, even if you don't find it funny, is important to that debate. I mean the idea that a trans-woman could actually feel and experience the challenges a biological woman faces...is pretty controversial; or the fact that many base their identity on media stereotypes rather than the very diverse experiences of womanhood, also is a pretty important debate, especially among feminists. We can't just close the debate off and disallow any discussion on it (or jokes about it), and call anything against it a hate crime. That's not how things work. It could also have massive political fallout if Progressives are unwilling to join in the debate and stifle any attempts at it.
- slg 4y ago
  >The joke of the article was that she was named "Woman of the Year," so they named her "Man of the Year" to point out the ridiculousness of such an award for her. The award is only ridiculous if you think trans people shouldn't exist in public as openly trans. I mean you even referred to her as "her" so you seemingly recognize that her being eligible for "Woman of the Year" is more appropriate than "Man of the Year". The perceived ridiculousness comes from the same fundamental concept underlying the joke, the existence of trans people is funny and their desire to simply live their life as they see fit is worthy of mockery. >I mean the idea that a tran-woman could actually feel and experience the challenges a biological woman faces...is pretty controversial; or the fact that many base their identity on media stereotypes rather than the very diverse experiences of womanhood, also is a pretty important debate, especially among feminists. No one is arguing that here. This is a person identifying as a woman and being recognized in public as a women. That is the only political statement being challenged. You are free to continue debating whether trans women and cis women have the same experience or whatever, but neither the USA Today or the Babylon Bee was making a statement in that debate. >We can't just close the debate off and disallow any discussion on it (or jokes about it), and call anything against it a hate crime. That's not how things work. It could also have massive political fallout if Progressives are unwilling to join in the debate and stifle any attempts at it. I don't know why this is framed as progressives shutting down the debate on the topic. The conservatives viewpoint that the Babylon Bee seems to subscribe to is that gender and sex are they same thing and they are binary. There is no way to debate against that viewpoint. There is no possible compromise position. It denies the very existence of someone like Levine. There is nothing Levine could have said to the Babylon Bee to stop them from targeting her specifically because they weren't criticizing any of her beliefs or actions. They were criticizing an innate quality of her being.
tomcam 4y ago
No court in the USA would confuse mockery, or in this case satire, with harrassment. Obviously it’s very different in places like England.

by slg 4y ago

catiopatio 4y ago

> What do you think is the fundamental joke the article is making? That a man was voted “Woman of the Year”. By any non-tautological definition of “woman” and “man”, that’s objectively true. Are we not allowed to point out obvious truths when people claim the opposite?

jl6 4y ago
Generally we consider jokes to be cruel when they mock an affliction that someone didn’t choose to have. You can just about get away with making such jokes about the abstract idea of an affliction, but when you name someone directly it crosses a line. Whether you think this particular example was cruel depends ultimately on whether you think it is targeting the individual’s gender dysphoria (the thing they didn’t choose to have), or whether it is targeting their claim to be something they objectively are not. One might argue that there is no difference, if one believes that gender affirmation is the only treatment for gender dysphoria, and that everyone is obliged to participate in that treatment, and to do otherwise amounts to mockery of the unchosen affliction. Personally I think it’s wrong to joke about people with schizophrenia, but equally wrong to tell them the voices in their head are real.
- catiopatio 4y ago
  I take your point, but would suggest the joke is more pointedly aimed at society generally, and the magazine specifically. What makes the joke funny and culturally relevant — as opposed trivial cruelty — is that it represents a simple, forbidden truth for which one will be subject to severe public censure and deplatforming. Comedy is a final bulwark against uncritical thinking, and can be used to deflate ludicrous ideas that are otherwise culturally unassailable.
  - cmh89 4y ago
    >Comedy is a final bulwark against uncritical thinking, and can be used to deflate ludicrous ideas that are otherwise culturally unassailable. Comedy can inspire thoughfullness and push back against societal norms. Comedy can also be a way to normalize bullying marginalized people. Being a troll and saying 'But wait, I'm being funny!' still makes you a troll. It's not like the account in question was trying to generate thoughtful discussion. Punch-down comedy is just dressed up hatefullness. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8yV8xUorQ8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8yV8xUorQ8
    - catiopatio 4y ago
      You’re not punching down when the near entirety of all cultural institutions, journalists, and technology platforms have mobilized to protect your target from all question and criticism. When you can be censured, deplatformed, and even lose your job for stating an objective truth like “men cannot get pregnant”, your words, by any possible definition, are punching up.
      - cmh89 4y ago
        >You’re not punching down when the near entirety of all cultural institutions, journalists, and technology platforms have mobilized to protect your target from all question and criticism. Unfortunately that isn't really true. Trans folks, especially trans women face discrimination and violence on a daily basis in society. You see, they actually exist in the real world and somehow Twitter mods can't keep people from saying and doing terrible things in real life. >When you can be censured, deplatformed, and even lose your job for stating an objective truth like “men cannot get pregnant”, your words, by any possible definition, are punching up. Spare me and your culture war nonsense. I'm sure you believe that white men are under attack and marginalized.
    - hunchle 4y ago
      The wider philosophical point is, if a man has gender dysphoria, does that mean he is a woman, or just wants to be a woman? If the latter, there should be no issue in a satirical publication making the point that a man who wants to be a woman getting awarded a "Woman of the Year" accolade is nonsensical.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

panarky 4y ago

It's cool how HN discussions predictably get distracted from the main point. The main point was that the claims made by the new owner are demonstrably false. The new owner claimed that unbanning decisions would be made by a new moderation council. While he was saying this, a slew of right-wing and conspiracy accounts were reinstated even though the council does not yet exist. Meanwhile here we are, debating gender and sexuality.

catiopatio 4y ago
Babylon Bee has not been reinstated. They remain locked out of their account until they agree to delete a tweet about the story we’re discussing, which they’ve refused to do.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

lelanthran 4y ago

> he only joke I see is "a trans person exists". The article isn't about her policies, her performance in her job, or even complexities in our evolving definition of either sex or gender like you are implying. The joke is that this person is trans. The message of that joke is the existence of a trans person in public is worthy of mockery. Therefore the only way to stop the mockery is to stop being trans or retreat from public life. I think refusing to stop that mockery until the target does one of those two things qualifies as harassment. meh. Twitter allowed much worse things that joking about someones self-identified gender. It's a satire site: it's exactly what it says on the tin. If you leave political affiliation out of it, then, yes, twitter has been taking sides.

partiallypro 4y ago

The joke of the article was that she was named "Woman of the Year," so they named her "Man of the Year" to point out the ridiculousness of such an award for her. You can disagree with that, or you can agree with that, but it's still a very tame joke. I don't think the debate on transsexualism is a closed case in many regards. There are important topics to discuss on it; and satire, even if you don't find it funny, is important to that debate. I mean the idea that a trans-woman could actually feel and experience the challenges a biological woman faces...is pretty controversial; or the fact that many base their identity on media stereotypes rather than the very diverse experiences of womanhood, also is a pretty important debate, especially among feminists. We can't just close the debate off and disallow any discussion on it (or jokes about it), and call anything against it a hate crime. That's not how things work. It could also have massive political fallout if Progressives are unwilling to join in the debate and stifle any attempts at it.

slg 4y ago
>The joke of the article was that she was named "Woman of the Year," so they named her "Man of the Year" to point out the ridiculousness of such an award for her. The award is only ridiculous if you think trans people shouldn't exist in public as openly trans. I mean you even referred to her as "her" so you seemingly recognize that her being eligible for "Woman of the Year" is more appropriate than "Man of the Year". The perceived ridiculousness comes from the same fundamental concept underlying the joke, the existence of trans people is funny and their desire to simply live their life as they see fit is worthy of mockery. >I mean the idea that a tran-woman could actually feel and experience the challenges a biological woman faces...is pretty controversial; or the fact that many base their identity on media stereotypes rather than the very diverse experiences of womanhood, also is a pretty important debate, especially among feminists. No one is arguing that here. This is a person identifying as a woman and being recognized in public as a women. That is the only political statement being challenged. You are free to continue debating whether trans women and cis women have the same experience or whatever, but neither the USA Today or the Babylon Bee was making a statement in that debate. >We can't just close the debate off and disallow any discussion on it (or jokes about it), and call anything against it a hate crime. That's not how things work. It could also have massive political fallout if Progressives are unwilling to join in the debate and stifle any attempts at it. I don't know why this is framed as progressives shutting down the debate on the topic. The conservatives viewpoint that the Babylon Bee seems to subscribe to is that gender and sex are they same thing and they are binary. There is no way to debate against that viewpoint. There is no possible compromise position. It denies the very existence of someone like Levine. There is nothing Levine could have said to the Babylon Bee to stop them from targeting her specifically because they weren't criticizing any of her beliefs or actions. They were criticizing an innate quality of her being.

tomcam 4y ago

No court in the USA would confuse mockery, or in this case satire, with harrassment. Obviously it’s very different in places like England.