4 ms·

> "It is humour, whether or not it is taken as such is a different issue, when Bill Hicks gets up on stage and repeatedly tells people in advertising to kill th

by polemic 14y ago

> "It is humour, whether or not it is taken as such is a different issue, when Bill Hicks gets up on stage and repeatedly tells people in advertising to kill themselves, he's not actually serious. Some might take that seriously but he's a comedian and it's humor." Firstly, the standard of conduct for the moderator of a corporate event is not the same as for a comedian working his routine in a club. Secondly, Bill Hicks used outrageous punch-lines to underscore a biting social commentary to his paying audience. This guy used weak jokes to push misogyny onto a captive audience. I'm pretty sure Bill Hicks would have been less than impressed with you equating the two. > "however to actually take the content of the comedy literally and seriously and be offended by it is just completely missing the point." This is more misdirection ("oh, I didn't literally mean it, lighten up - I suggest you read this: http://therealkatie.net/blog/2012/mar/21/lighten-up/ http://therealkatie.net/blog/2012/mar/21/lighten-up/). I take the intent of the message seriously, and I find it offensive. It is not missing the point, but until you recognise the directly destructive effect of telling women they shouldn't even be there, even in jest, from the pulpit, you will won't get it either.

etherael 14y ago
"This guy was not funny" is a different criticism to "This guy engaged in straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary" is a different criticism to "This guy should not have been hired for this particular venue". The only thing I have a problem with is the statement "This guy engaged in straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary". And that is a large portion of the criticism here, it's missing the point.
- fusiongyro 14y ago
  > "This guy engaged in straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary" is a different criticism to "This guy should not have been hired for this particular venue". Actually, in this case, in America, the former implies the latter. This kind of rhetoric simply isn't appropriate in this kind of venue, whether it's meant comedically or not.
  - chives 14y ago
    After reading the chain of comments above, I can't help but find your comment inappropriate. A) Someone gave a back story, that this guys is a actually a comedian. Do I get upset when a comedian makes fun of fat people? No, whether people laugh or not, it is quite obvious that it was a joke. Granted, it sounds like this guy was not funny despite females getting tossed under the proverbial bus, leading to point B) When its your company you can choose which ever speaker you like. Until then, your just going to have to settle with your opinion, which is frankly is neither relevant nor funny. And not a fuck was given.
    - fusiongyro 14y ago
      It's amusing to me that you construe my comment as inappropriate, but not this guy telling a room full of technical conference goers to tell their wives "Shut up, bitch!" I haven't even use a swear word yet. Of course this comic has the right to say this. Of course the company has a right to hire him. What I'm saying is that, in America, if a company did this, they would face the consequences. If people are offended because your company appears to support misogyny, you will lose business and "but he's a comedian!" will not suffice as an apology. At least, if you have been projecting an image of corporate neutrality. I suppose if your brand identity is, we're a bunch of brogrammer morons, it probably would help your image. But we're not talking about a company like that, we're talking about Dell.
- dspeyer 14y ago
  It's hard to be sure without a full transcript, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual humor. Or plausible attempt at humor. Just serious sexism in a flippant tone. Why would people laugh at this? There are three possibilities: * Classic Flippancy: The idea of women outside the kitchen is absurd to the point of humor. * Self-Parody: This level of sexism is absurd, and we're laughing at the character with the microphone. This is Sacha Baron Cohen's "Borat" schtick and it's very hard to pull off because of Poe's Law. * Commonality/Relief: This is what we've all been thinking but can't say because of the PC police. It's such a relief to be in a safe space where we can say it. This is the how most "observational humor" functions. Options 1 and 3 are seriously misogynistic even (especially) if the audience laughs.
  - etherael 14y ago
    I agree, I am just saying it's abundantly clear that it's option 2. Look at the guy's website if nothing else.

by polemic 14y ago

etherael 14y ago

"This guy was not funny" is a different criticism to "This guy engaged in straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary" is a different criticism to "This guy should not have been hired for this particular venue". The only thing I have a problem with is the statement "This guy engaged in straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary". And that is a large portion of the criticism here, it's missing the point.

fusiongyro 14y ago
> "This guy engaged in straightfaced serious misogynistic commentary" is a different criticism to "This guy should not have been hired for this particular venue". Actually, in this case, in America, the former implies the latter. This kind of rhetoric simply isn't appropriate in this kind of venue, whether it's meant comedically or not.
- chives 14y ago
  After reading the chain of comments above, I can't help but find your comment inappropriate. A) Someone gave a back story, that this guys is a actually a comedian. Do I get upset when a comedian makes fun of fat people? No, whether people laugh or not, it is quite obvious that it was a joke. Granted, it sounds like this guy was not funny despite females getting tossed under the proverbial bus, leading to point B) When its your company you can choose which ever speaker you like. Until then, your just going to have to settle with your opinion, which is frankly is neither relevant nor funny. And not a fuck was given.
  - fusiongyro 14y ago
    It's amusing to me that you construe my comment as inappropriate, but not this guy telling a room full of technical conference goers to tell their wives "Shut up, bitch!" I haven't even use a swear word yet. Of course this comic has the right to say this. Of course the company has a right to hire him. What I'm saying is that, in America, if a company did this, they would face the consequences. If people are offended because your company appears to support misogyny, you will lose business and "but he's a comedian!" will not suffice as an apology. At least, if you have been projecting an image of corporate neutrality. I suppose if your brand identity is, we're a bunch of brogrammer morons, it probably would help your image. But we're not talking about a company like that, we're talking about Dell.
dspeyer 14y ago
It's hard to be sure without a full transcript, but there doesn't seem to have been any actual humor. Or plausible attempt at humor. Just serious sexism in a flippant tone. Why would people laugh at this? There are three possibilities: * Classic Flippancy: The idea of women outside the kitchen is absurd to the point of humor. * Self-Parody: This level of sexism is absurd, and we're laughing at the character with the microphone. This is Sacha Baron Cohen's "Borat" schtick and it's very hard to pull off because of Poe's Law. * Commonality/Relief: This is what we've all been thinking but can't say because of the PC police. It's such a relief to be in a safe space where we can say it. This is the how most "observational humor" functions. Options 1 and 3 are seriously misogynistic even (especially) if the audience laughs.
- etherael 14y ago
  I agree, I am just saying it's abundantly clear that it's option 2. Look at the guy's website if nothing else.