Poll: Daniel Tosh threatens Woman with Gang Rape

[Clearing the Eye]

"I don't like your words. The public should rise up against you and you should stop."

Hi, military dictator. I'm freedom. Have fun picking and choosing what is and isn't okay based off what you personally find moral. I'll be over there, in the free world ignoring things I don't like and letting others choose how to talk.

What are you even talking about?

You are trying to argue that it's not okay for someone to make jokes you dislike because, in your opinion, they are amoral. I compared you to a military dictatorship.

Keep up.

I can't remember if I was going to support your point or reject it... I just can't stop watching your damn avatar! @_@

That Pichu ass! <3

It's part of my master plan to take over the world.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

it shuts down and humiliates

This, I think, is where I get hung up.

Do we think it's okay to shut down and humiliate a woman by telling her we would be amused to see her gang-raped? Is that where we are as a society?

It's 100% okay. If you don't want it to be okay, you don't want free speech. You don't get to pick and choose what is and isn't okay--that defeats the entire purpose of freedom.

'Free speech' is a legal issue - the right of the people not to be silenced by the government. I'm talking about the moral and/or ethical climate that shrugs its shoulders and accepts vitriolic bullshit from morons instead of acting against it.

It's not 100% okay. It's not even .001% okay. Just because he has the right to speak without government sanction does not make it justifiable or acceptable or anything other than utterly reprehensible.

"I don't like your words. The public should rise up against you and you should stop."

Hi, military dictator. I'm freedom. Have fun picking and choosing what is and isn't okay based off what you personally find moral. I'll be over there, in the free world ignoring things I don't like and letting others choose how to talk.

You're not freedom, you're failure to understand. Since when does a military dictator say that it's fine legally and restrict himself to merely voicing disapproval?

It is so ridiculous when supposed defenders of free speech don't understand in so many cases that people aren't say that people should be stopped, just that they shouldn't do it. What's the deal with the rage at what amounts to finger wagging? Oh no they destroyed free speech and Christmas merely by saying people SHOULDN'T do something while allowing them to continue to do it!

Actually, they said it wasn't acceptable at all.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

"I don't like your words. The public should rise up against you and you should stop."

Hi, military dictator. I'm freedom. Have fun picking and choosing what is and isn't okay based off what you personally find moral. I'll be over there, in the free world ignoring things I don't like and letting others choose how to talk.

What are you even talking about?

You are trying to argue that it's not okay for someone to make jokes you dislike because, in your opinion, they are amoral. I compared you to a military dictatorship.

Keep up.

Not okay morally and ethically. He said it was fine legally. He never said someone should be prevented.

Keep up.

"Just because he has the right to speak without government sanction does not make it justifiable or acceptable or anything other than utterly reprehensible."

"I'm talking about the moral and/or ethical climate that shrugs its shoulders and accepts vitriolic bullshit from morons instead of acting against it."

You should probably look those words up and understand their meanings.

I accept your apology ^^

 

[MarlonBlazed]

I like Tosh's humor but saying that she should be raped by 5 guys wasn't. He should told her "to fuck off" and continue the show.

But he didn't say she should, all he said was "wouldn't it be funny", nothing about that sentence is as direct as these writers are trying to make it out to be...

Wouldn't it be awesome if China attacked North America and we all died. <- Sarcasm
China should attack North America and kill everyone. <- Real

I see a huge difference between these sentences.

The only argument here is about whether or not rape jokes are acceptable, besides since you like his material you yourself should know nothing he says is sincere.

 

[sluggyfreelancer]

Sat here with my popcorn, enjoying the show that is this thread.

Though I need to go to bed soon, wonder if this thread will still be kicking when I wake up. Or if the bias poll will be changed. Or if that thread title will be changed. Yeah.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

Maybe you should learn that saying that something isn't acceptable doesn't mean it should be illegal. I can say something is socially unacceptable. Doesn't mean I say someone should be thrown in prison. Your ability to misunderstand things is amazing. But then I do see lots of people who like to defend freedom of speech when there's nothing to defend it from.

And I do understand their meanings. Hint: None require that they make something illegal. Throw in context like him saying it's legally fine and never saying shit about making it illegal... well you don't seem all that bright so I have low expectations.

"Not acceptable;" something not to be tolerated or allowed.

"Reprehensible;" deserving of punishment.

"Act against;" behave in such a way as to hinder and prevent.

Words have meanings. Maybe think about them?

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

I think rape jokes, like any other horrifying thing, can be funny. I make them occasionally myself. The thing about dark humor is that it has less to do with whether or not the act is acceptable and much more to do with whether or not it is absurd. There are few things I can think of that are more absurd than rape.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

"Act against;" behave in such a way as to hinder and prevent.

This doesn't need to be using laws. Do I get a Nobel Prize for this apparently difficult realization?

Oohh. You would suggest the comment was to imply the public use non legal methods of preventing Daniel's speech.

Why so condescending? From trying (and failing) to call me an idiot, to just lazy and sardonic. It's just a forum. No need to attack people and treat posts like personal issues. That's why mods hammer people. Chillax.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

You are trying to argue that it's not okay for someone to make jokes you dislike because, in your opinion, they are amoral. I compared you to a military dictatorship.

Keep up.

Your comparison makes no sense whatsoever. It's moronic.

People have the legal right to say horrible and stupid things. But that does not make it acceptable. If someone says something horrible or stupid, they need to be called on it, and corrected through judicious application of reason, and thus we can decrease, over time, the net total of horrible and stupid things that exist in this world. There is nothing in this opinion that is militaristic or totalitarian. It's a matter of wanting collective enlightenment rather than accepting collective boorishness.

Or, to use an outlandish metaphor (because apparently those appeal to some people) just because you have the right to save all of your feces in your refrigerator does not mean that the best thing you can do is save all of your feces in your refrigerator. It doesn't make it wrong for your roommates to start complaining about the smell. It doesn't make them fascists to ask you to flush it down the toilet like everybody else.

See, if you had spoken of legality in the first place, I'd have had no need to call you out. You can't state that things are not acceptable and suggest they need be stopped without giving greater context and expect your thoughts to be perfectly translatable. As you can see, suggesting something is in need of an end is quite fairly considered a legal remark; such as saying we shouldn't accept gay people. How do you interrupt that? Does it mean they should be killed at the stake? Shunned? Made illegal to act upon their urges?

 

[Clearing the Eye]

I didn't try to call you an idiot.

You don't seem all that bright so I have low expectations.

Maybe you need a break, lol.

 

[geK0]

We should start arresting people who say bad things in a stand up act! We need to protect the rights of the people who are having their feelings hurt.

Any politically incorrect comedy act is just COMPLETELY UNACCEPTABLE in today's society! this is the 21st century! Any comedian who tries to get cheap laughs with offensive speech is complete scum and should be locked up for life, regardless of whether the remark was intended to be ironic! Joking about rape is JUST AS BAD as committing rape; I'm sure that Daniel Tosh was genuine when he said that woman should be raped, I bet that he planned to do it later himself! DISGUSTING!

You're right instead we need to start running around being as rude as possible to everyone and beating up everyone who takes offense! That's clearly what people like you want just like it's clear that people want humor like Tosh's to be against the law.

I wasn't implying that anyone wanted to illegalize Tosh's comedy, that was an exaggeration : \
I just find it kind of pointless to get uptight over a comic act which is intentionally offensive; I'm not saying it was a good joke (Tosh's style of comedy is a little blunt for me most of the time), I'm just saying that this really isn't that big a deal. It's sort of like 'dead baby' jokes in a way, the point is to make a joke that is obscene and offensive in order to provoke a strong a strong reaction; sometimes the reaction is "OMG that's terrible LOL" other times it's "This is offensive and I will not stand for it!".

 

[him over there]

You are trying to argue that it's not okay for someone to make jokes you dislike because, in your opinion, they are amoral. I compared you to a military dictatorship.

Keep up.

Your comparison makes no sense whatsoever. It's moronic.

People have the legal right to say horrible and stupid things. But that does not make it acceptable. If someone says something horrible or stupid, they need to be called on it, and corrected through judicious application of reason, and thus we can decrease, over time, the net total of horrible and stupid things that exist in this world. There is nothing in this opinion that is militaristic or totalitarian. It's a matter of wanting collective enlightenment rather than accepting collective boorishness.

Or, to use an outlandish metaphor (because apparently those appeal to some people) just because you have the right to save all of your feces in your refrigerator does not mean that the best thing you can do is save all of your feces in your refrigerator. It doesn't make it wrong for your roommates to start complaining about the smell. It doesn't make them fascists to ask you to flush it down the toilet like everybody else.

I'm not going to step into this free speech bullshit because everything that can be said has been said. However I think what Tosh said is both good and bad in regards to two different contexts.

The first context is that somebody is heckling his show. He is a dark, condescending, sarcastic and sometimes hateful comedian who took a pot shot at a disruptive attendant that was in line with his act. The joke itself lacked subtlety and set up but that's really Tosh being a terrible comedian more than anything. He could of done something better with it like:
Tosh: wouldn't it be funny if you were raped?
audience member:NO!
Tosh: stop raping my fucking performance then.
At least that would have been a proper set up and punchline. Also if I could borrow this:

Wouldn't it be awesome if China attacked North America and we all died. <- Sarcasm
China should attack North America and kill everyone. <- Real

I see a huge difference between these sentences.

The other context that works against him is a societal comtext. He's a man telling a rape joke about a woman. A privileged member of society making a joke about a crime at the expense of a group who are most often victims of this crime. This creates an undercurrent of misogyny that wouldn't be there if perhaps he wasn't a man, or she wasn't a woman or even if we simply lived in a society where genders had equal rights, or at least where rape isn't nearly exclusively a crime against women.

In conclusion Tosh made a mean spirited joke that is benefited by one context and demonized by another, the complication coming from the fact that both are present at the same time.