Poll: Which Group of People You Should Never Make Fun Of?

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

The answer to progressing forward is education, ignorance is not a reason to not do something. You don't just claim" oh we can;t do that because people are too stupid to do that" No, we educate people to the difference of course rather than try to do the wrong thing instead. Having shat thrown in your face at work, on the street, and everywhere else you go is not something one can avoid. you set the standard to what is and what is not acceptable and teach people rather than just say it is okay to be harmful/ toxic because people will not know the difference between that and constructive criticism. It has been proven actually harmful to ridicule people, and just like any other form of harm people responsible for causing that harm should be held accountable. If someone knocks you down on purpose and damages your brain, it is not only illegal, but you can sure them for damages as well, that should apply to any other injury just the same.

Maybe you should read the links I provided above:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-new-brain/201010/sticks-and-stones-hurtful-words-damage-the-brain
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/fulfillment-any-age/201407/the-one-emotion-really-hurts-your-brain
http://www.yourtango.com/experts/dr-hillary-goldsher/psychological-ramifcations-public-humiliation
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201408/the-psychology-humiliation

If it is harmful to others, it should not be considered " within your right" to impose upon others. Your rights end where another's begins. Just like you cannot go around kicking people, you should not go around ridiculing them.

Again, you're operating under the notion that everyone thinks alike, reasons alike. They don't. And not even education can help that. And education from what source, from what culture? There's cultures where seeking education is seen as blasphemy and punishable by death. Where young girls are murdered for seeking education.

Sure, it can be proven to be harmful to ridicule people. It can also be proven to not be harmful, seeing as not everyone reacts to ridicule in the same way. This is why your comparison to physical injury doesn't hold any water, since if you stab someone the outcome is the same no matter what. If you insult someone the outcome varies wildly. So you even suggesting you should be allowed to sue someone just for an insult is pretty baffling. Because again, what if someone finds a simple critique to be an insult? What if you find this post insulting for not agreeing with you?

You seem to think that if everyone and everything is a valid target in comedy that this means everyone will constantly be insulting and taking the piss out of everyone and everything. Most people commonly know there's a time and place for this type of thing. You didn't see people making 9/11 jokes during the actual attacks, and I'm sure you won't find many people who will make a cancer joke on someone's deathbed.

What is harmful differs from people to people. The fact that gay people exist is seen as harmful by a staggering amount of the world's population, and them expressing themselves seen as impossing it on others. See how this 'You should not ridicule others' doesn't work when applied to the whole world?

Why would everyone have to think alike? Of course they don't have to think alike and I am not operating under that false assumption and there is no reason to. Of course education will help differentiate the same way the law does now between being annoying and harassment. Clicking a pen is annoying but calling someone repeatedly after they told you to stop is harassment. They have been defining things for a very long time and no that is not an excuse to claim that it cannot be done because you think people will make mistakes.

" My ilk" is pretty funny, of course your assuming I am offended, rather than asking me if I am offended, and again thinking that one person from a group speaks for all. Would whether or not I am offended speak for ALL Native Americans? Belonging to a group does not make you an ambassador. Like I stated quite clearly above. Simply because you do not find something offensive, does not mean it will not offend someone else. I do not have to be offended to see WHY something is offensive.

Even though something does not bother you, you should not assume it does not bother others. The reason we treat everyone with respect is to make them feel comfortable and welcome and not excluded and ridiculed.

What is and is not offensive to people varies

Both of those statements I made above show clearly that I do not think people think the same. People do not have to think the same to have a basic default respect for everyone.

The worst part is assuming that if something does not offend you or "some guy you know" that you would then take and use them as a poster child to excuse being toxic to others. That is a pretty shitty thing to do to anyone. Some not being offended does not make it okay for those whose lives and health are affected by this. There are women who think that some women should be forced to be prostitutes and that women should not have rights and not vote, that does not mean in any way that we should allow them to " speak for" All women, and it is absurd to suggest such. Using people as a reason to treat others badly does not in any way excuse the toxic behavior.

Societies have existed for thousands of years with a basic respect for all things and none of the imaginary issues you claim will occur if this happens. There is no legitimate reason to treat everyone around you like shat. there are however numerous reasons not to, including causing actual harm to those that are impacted by these things.

If it is harmful to others, it should not be considered " within your right" to impose upon others. Your rights end where another's begins. Just like you cannot go around kicking people, you should not go around ridiculing them.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

"Hypocrisy thy name is...." You, my friend, whatever name you are going with at the moment. I remember our previous conversation. You were being blatantly racist. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge it. You claim that white people's opinion about the justice system are invalid. Unless, those white people agree with you. Those white people are the good ones, because they know where their place should be.

Attitudes like yours is the reason why I respect openly bigoted people. I don't agree with bigots. At least, they are honest about their prejudices. People like you claim they are tolerant and concerned about equality. Then demonstrate that by being intolerant and pro-discrimination.

I guess what's the worst part of what you and your ilk are doing. You are getting offended about things you think other people should be offended about. When people of that group say they are not offended. You tell them to shut up. Obviously, those groups don't know enough to be offended at what you are offended about on their behalf.

Spare me ... I remember that 'argument' well, I didn't say that at all. In fact, I remember the argument being what was it like being black in America. Funnily enough, I thought black people probably had a better understanding about that and that one can always go to the primary source. Then you went off the rails and called me a racist for not considering a white person's perspective on what it's like to be a black person in America. Also, what prejudices? That I'm not entirely keen on people running their mouth, or pretending that running your mouth has stuff all to do with freedom of expression? That if you run your mouth you risk getting into a fight? That's not a prejudice, that's observation. It's the very opposite of prejudice. I saw it every other night when I was running a bar.

I didn't have bouncers to protect someone's 'free speech' when they started shit. I did it so that if patrons wanted to start shit, they can be 'reminded' to take it off my property. Moreover, where exactly in my post did I say that? What part? Are you merely inventing things you think I said? It wouldn't be the first.

(Edit)It's funny, the only two times I've been called a 'racist' in my life has been you, and inu-kun. I remember that other argument well, I made the argument that the West shouldn't involve itself in Syria (at all; no guns, no mercenaries, and no CIA operatives) ... even if you toppled Assad, chances are the Ba'ath party would stay in power, and whatever you were hoping to achieve by toppling him won't be realised. Apparently that deserved the term 'racist' thrown at me.

Is this suddenly a tactic, now? By 'ilk' in my case, I can only assume you mean ... what, other trans people? Or do you mean some vaguely ill-defined idea of 'SJW'? See, at least in my post I was quite direct with who I had a problem with. I thought my post made it patently clear ... I don't need to get offended on anybody else's behalf ... people will naturally be offended when your 'joke' is merely a thinly veiled viciousness that serves to ostracise, belittle, or insult.

It's just as likely when something is personal, someone might weather the occasional ribbing ... if they tell you to let it go, and you persist, don't complain when that; "Can we drop it, please? ..." becomes a; "If you have a problem, spill it... if not, shut the fuck up." Hell, when I was in the military, everybody would have a go at eachother. There was still that invisible line that if someone was PO'd or frustrated, you don't then give them a hard time. It's basic empathy... it's not 'oppression', 'censorship', or 'being an SJW'.

It's about knowing when someone has a large enough shit sandwich they have to work through that they don't need seconds. You know, being a thoughtful human being. Something you might want to examine if you can 'respect' the openly bigoted simply for being openly bigoted.

 

[Casual Shinji]

" My ilk" is pretty funny, of course your assuming I am offended, rather than asking me if I am offended, and again thinking that one person from a group speaks for all. Like I stated quite clearly above. Simply because you do not find something offensive, does not mean it will not offend someone else. I do not have to be offended to see WHY something is offensive.

The worst part is assuming that if something does not offend you or "some guy you know" that you would then take and use them as a poster child to excuse being toxic to others. That is a pretty shitty thing to do to anyone. Some not being offended does not make it okay for those whose lives and health are affected by this. There are women who think that some women should be forced to be prostitutes and that women should not have rights and not vote, that does not mean in any way that we should allow them to " speak for" All women, and it is absurd to suggest such. Using people as a reason to treat others badly does not in any way excuse the toxic behavior.

I think you're injecting comments from others into a post directed at me, because I don't know where you're getting any of this from what I said.

Societies have existed for thousands of years with a basic respect for all things and none of the imaginary issues you claim will occur if this happens. There is no legitimate reason to treat everyone around you like shat. there are however numerous reasons not to, including causing actual harm to those that are impacted by these things.

Again (again) assuming that an "anything goes" mentality to comedy will result in everyone treating everyone around them like shit. Societies have also existed for thousands of years under extremely strict, religious laws, and were taught to respect that unquestionably (some still do), until many people decided to lighten up and not take everything so serious. When they learned to poke fun at things previously thought of as untouchable for comedy. *cough* Life of Brian

You make some things okay for comedy and some things off limits and you create a hierachy... A hierarchy to comedy.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

" My ilk" is pretty funny, of course your assuming I am offended, rather than asking me if I am offended, and again thinking that one person from a group speaks for all. Like I stated quite clearly above. Simply because you do not find something offensive, does not mean it will not offend someone else. I do not have to be offended to see WHY something is offensive.

The worst part is assuming that if something does not offend you or "some guy you know" that you would then take and use them as a poster child to excuse being toxic to others. That is a pretty shitty thing to do to anyone. Some not being offended does not make it okay for those whose lives and health are affected by this. There are women who think that some women should be forced to be prostitutes and that women should not have rights and not vote, that does not mean in any way that we should allow them to " speak for" All women, and it is absurd to suggest such. Using people as a reason to treat others badly does not in any way excuse the toxic behavior.

I think you're injecting comments from others into a post directed at me, because I don't know where you're getting any of this from what I said.

Societies have existed for thousands of years with a basic respect for all things and none of the imaginary issues you claim will occur if this happens. There is no legitimate reason to treat everyone around you like shat. there are however numerous reasons not to, including causing actual harm to those that are impacted by these things.

Again (again) assuming that an "anything goes" mentality to comedy will result in everyone treating everyone around them like shit. Societies have also existed for thousands of years under extremely strict, religious laws, and were taught to respect that unquestionably (some still do), until many people decided to lighten up and not take everything so serious. When they learned to poke fun at things previously thought of as untouchable for comedy. *cough* Life of Brian

You make some things okay for comedy and some things off limits and you create a hierachy... A hierarchy to comedy.

Yes, sorry I somehow had the quoting messed up earlier. They already have some things okay and some things not okay for comedy, they already have a "hierarchy" that ALREADY exists, it is just a matter of determine what that should be. It is already not okay to incite violence with comedy or make death threats with comedy. Claiming something as comedy does not give it a free pass to do whatever the hell they want to do. saying " just joking" does not really change that. Reminds me of when this Karaoke DJ t here thought it would be funny to tell them his karaoke equipment was a bomb at the Atlanta airport while there and they proceed to beat and mace the crap out of him and charge him for doing so. Yea, claiming " just joking" does not suddenly excuse everything you do, the world does not work that way, nor should it.

You can already go to jail for a joke, you can already get sued for a joke. That is because not everything is funny.

Treating people with respect=\= oppression.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Yes, sorry I somehow had the quoting messed up earlier. They already have some things okay and some things not okay for comedy, they already have a "hierarchy" that ALREADY exists, it is just a matter of determine what that should be. It is already not okay to incite violence with comedy or make death threats with comedy. Claiming something as comedy does not give it a free pass to do whatever the hell they want to do. saying " just joking" does not really change that. Reminds me of when this Karaoke DJ t here thought it would be funny to tell them his karaoke equipment was a bomb at the Atlanta airport while there and they proceed to beat and mace the crap out of him and charge him for doing so. Yea, claiming " just joking" does not suddenly excuse everything you do, the world does not work that way, nor should it.

You can already go to jail for a joke, you can already get sued for a joke. That is because not everything is funny.

Treating people with respect=\= oppression.

Then that's not comedy, that's threatening. Bringing common knowledge back into this; you don't go yelling you have a bomb at an airport, you can however make a joke about an airport bombing when doing stand-up. One is a joke (comedy), the other is inciting a riot based on a legitimate fear.

Comedy ironically is the safe space where we can laugh at all the things we otherwise couldn't, like death, violence, rape, genocide, mental illness, sexual orientation etc. And nothing should be excluded from that.

 

[Thaluikhain]

If the "Black Olives Matter" kerfuffle is anything to go by, you are certainly not allowed to make fun of BLM.

I agree. Any group of people that will accuse people of being racist because they said "All Lives Matters". That demonstrates a lack of perspective and sensibility.

Oh yeah, nothing suspicious about saying something to try and shut down talk about black people getting shot by police.

 

[The Lunatic]

Oh yeah, nothing suspicious about saying something to try and shut down talk about black people getting shot by police.

To be fair, I don't think anyone is trying to shut down talk about black people getting shot by police.

Just specifically stating that a group which uses rioting, violence, blocking ambulances and so on as a means to further their aims is worthy of some criticism.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Oh yeah, nothing suspicious about saying something to try and shut down talk about black people getting shot by police.

To be fair, I don't think anyone is trying to shut down talk about black people getting shot by police.

I don't buy that. Sure, there are legitimate concerns about BLM, as there are with any group, and some of them would even be raised by people who aren't just concern trolling, but to say that nobody is trying to shut down talk about black people getting shot by police? I don't buy that for a moment.

EDIT: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/mike-pence-police-shootings-racism-228537

Mike Pence doesn't seem to want people to talk about it (at least in a meaningful sense), and he's running for VP for the GOP.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

For me it's always about context. In art, comedy, drama and works of fiction I have absolutely no issue with anyone being made fun of. I've seen comedians make jokes about men, women, kids, the elderly, different faiths, different races and different sexual orientations. I personally wouldn't find jokes at the expense of the disabled too amusing, I don't laugh when people fall over, I don't care for crass, toilet humour but that's personal preference.

No artist, actor or comedian should be afraid of being silenced by offended people with too-thin skins. It's their job to challenge, to entertain, to amuse and to be free to express their ideas. The very moment you say group X is off limits, you are censoring the populace and crossing a dangerous line. It is further NOT the job of an artist/actor/performer to preserve the precious sensitivities of these thin-skinned snowflakes who are offended by everything. It's up to them to be offended or not and not up to everyone else not to offend.

 

[KissingSunlight]

If the "Black Olives Matter" kerfuffle is anything to go by, you are certainly not allowed to make fun of BLM.

I agree. Any group of people that will accuse people of being racist because they said "All Lives Matters". That demonstrates a lack of perspective and sensibility.

Oh yeah, nothing suspicious about saying something to try and shut down talk about black people getting shot by police.

When a group is suppose to be about excessive force and other police misconduct, then chastise other races for sharing their experiences about the issues. It wasn't about "silencing". BLM are not being honest about their agenda.

 

[KissingSunlight]

"Hypocrisy thy name is...." You, my friend, whatever name you are going with at the moment. I remember our previous conversation. You were being blatantly racist. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge it. You claim that white people's opinion about the justice system are invalid. Unless, those white people agree with you. Those white people are the good ones, because they know where their place should be.

Attitudes like yours is the reason why I respect openly bigoted people. I don't agree with bigots. At least, they are honest about their prejudices. People like you claim they are tolerant and concerned about equality. Then demonstrate that by being intolerant and pro-discrimination.

I guess what's the worst part of what you and your ilk are doing. You are getting offended about things you think other people should be offended about. When people of that group say they are not offended. You tell them to shut up. Obviously, those groups don't know enough to be offended at what you are offended about on their behalf.

Spare me ... I remember that 'argument' well, I didn't say that at all. In fact, I remember the argument being what was it like being black in America. Funnily enough, I thought black people probably had a better understanding about that and that one can always go to the primary source. Then you went off the rails and called me a racist for not considering a white person's perspective on what it's like to be a black person in America. Also, what prejudices? That I'm not entirely keen on people running their mouth, or pretending that running your mouth has stuff all to do with freedom of expression? That if you run your mouth you risk getting into a fight? That's not a prejudice, that's observation. It's the very opposite of prejudice. I saw it every other night when I was running a bar.

I didn't have bouncers to protect someone's 'free speech' when they started shit. I did it so that if patrons wanted to start shit, they can be 'reminded' to take it off my property. Moreover, where exactly in my post did I say that? What part? Are you merely inventing things you think I said? It wouldn't be the first.

(Edit)It's funny, the only two times I've been called a 'racist' in my life has been you, and inu-kun. I remember that other argument well, I made the argument that the West shouldn't involve itself in Syria (at all; no guns, no mercenaries, and no CIA operatives) ... even if you toppled Assad, chances are the Ba'ath party would stay in power, and whatever you were hoping to achieve by toppling him won't be realised. Apparently that deserved the term 'racist' thrown at me.

Is this suddenly a tactic, now? By 'ilk' in my case, I can only assume you mean ... what, other trans people? Or do you mean some vaguely ill-defined idea of 'SJW'? See, at least in my post I was quite direct with who I had a problem with. I thought my post made it patently clear ... I don't need to get offended on anybody else's behalf ... people will naturally be offended when your 'joke' is merely a thinly veiled viciousness that serves to ostracise, belittle, or insult.

It's just as likely when something is personal, someone might weather the occasional ribbing ... if they tell you to let it go, and you persist, don't complain when that; "Can we drop it, please? ..." becomes a; "If you have a problem, spill it... if not, shut the fuck up." Hell, when I was in the military, everybody would have a go at eachother. There was still that invisible line that if someone was PO'd or frustrated, you don't then give them a hard time. It's basic empathy... it's not 'oppression', 'censorship', or 'being an SJW'.

It's about knowing when someone has a large enough shit sandwich they have to work through that they don't need seconds. You know, being a thoughtful human being. Something you might want to examine if you can 'respect' the openly bigoted simply for being openly bigoted.

So, in your imagination, only black people are affected by the justice system in the U.S.

I don't think I need to say anymore. Except for that you are not racist. You are clueless. You obviously do not know what you are talking about. You have no personal experience about the subject. Yet, you like to come online and pontificate to people that you are an expert on social justice.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

So, in your imagination, only black people are affected by the justice system in the U.S.

Where did I write that? In fact, in that thread, I think even wrote about the fact that a public defender has an average of 25 minutes to meet with their client, organise a defence based on their condition (though that might have been another thread).

Which is a condition everybody too poor to afford proper legal counsel faces.

I don't think I need to say anymore. Except for that you are not racist. You are clueless. You obviously do not know what you are talking about. You have no personal experience about the subject. Yet, you like to come online and pontificate to people that you are an expert on social justice.

Basically if you have ever worked in the public sector in any advisory or research position for which has to do with equality of outcomes, wealth distribution, education, private interest meeting the public good, and trying to elevate the standard of living for all, you have had a job in social justice. Where have I professed to be an 'expert' on the entirety of social justice? I have fuck all understanding of, say, how special regulatory bodies investigate political corruption, or corporate crime, or even consumer law enforcement.

Zero experience in that regards. Labour laws, public education, yeah ... I have about 9 years of experience. More so the latter than the former.

How about you address the points in the posts? After all, it's plain to see you've done nothing but evade the arguments brought against you. Even when directly confronted about stuff you've written elsewhere on the topic. Why exactly is it bullying in schools, but not bullying or 'being a special snowflake' when it's in the workplace or on the street? Should people just simply suffer insult without returning it? Is hiding behind comedy sufficient when you are merely simply trying undermine someone because you're an arsehole?

Let's say I was working in the Department of Education, again. My superior keeps making jokes about me being trans. He doesn't do it to anybody else, and he does it publicly, as if thinking it's okay, even when it's clear I just want to focus on the task at hand. What if he saddles me with an unfair workload, and then passes me over for advancement? I don't know what the punchline to that joke is, precisely because it's no longer a joke. Am I being a 'special snowflake' suddenly when I tell him, in no short words; "I'd rather we maintain a professional relationship. If you can't, should I bring this inability to someone above you?"

Hell ... why not add recently divorced/divorcing parent as a 'group'? If you knew a co-worker was struggling meeting legal bills, custody rights of children, having to work multiple jobs to be seen as a fit parent that can provide for their kids ... does that somehow become blameless ammunition for jokes which lead to a scuffle (verbal or otherwise)? Is it beyond you why such antagonism might lead to poor circumstances?

What a special snowflake they are for snapping at you after the third time you've made the joke about their partner shacking up with someone else and their kids now calling them mum/dad!

People should own their words like they own any other of their actions. Just like you should own the fact that you're doing nothing but evading the question.

But hey, maybe I am being 'clueless' about how maybe I should expect a verbal or physical confrontation when I continue to antagonise, solely to antagonise. I mean, where in reality has antagonism ever lead to conflict? [/sarc]

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

I voted "No Sacred Cows". I don't think anything should be out of bounds. i think to treat these groups as untouchable is excluding them from the fun. them

All that said, watching an episode of Family Guy and then thinking acting as offensively as possible is the height of wit is just plain classless.

 

[LawAndChaos]

I don't see how it matters.

Everyone looks down their nose at everyone else anyway nowadays (even here to the point where I wonder why some even bother) so everything and anything said as a joke is going to be misconstrued as an attack regardless of intent.

A joke is offensive if it crosses the line but can't make it back across that line from offensive to funny.

If you make a bad offensive joke, you're not a bad person. You just made a really shitty joke, and if you offended you apologize. Some people are too proud to admit their jokes are shit, so they try to act like they don't owe one.

Insults can be jokes, that's why roasts exist, but there has to be a joke there. People should be able to laugh at themselves too; no one is perfect.

When you create sacred cows, you basically create the notion of a "protected group" within social interaction and media. It becomes a taboo.

You can't equate making jokes to bullying and mindless ridicule. Humor, even offensive humor, relies on cleverness and wit to be truly funny, and even if the joke is offensive, the intent is just as important as the content.

Bullying is just putting someone down to elevate oneself. Few are going to make some elaborate effort to make someone feel worthless when they can just repeat "you're worthless" over and over like some mantra until the victim believes it.
And while insults CAN be jokes, that does not suddenly mean all insults ARE jokes.

Like someone made an offensive joke so now they're a bully. I guess we should've crucified Michael Richards when we had the chance.

 

[xmbts]

Maliciously, none.

Everyone could use a good ribbing every now and again though.

 

[KissingSunlight]

So, in your imagination, only black people are affected by the justice system in the U.S.

Where did I write that?

Spare me ... I remember that 'argument' well, I didn't say that at all. In fact, I remember the argument being what was it like being black in America. Funnily enough, I thought black people probably had a better understanding about that and that one can always go to the primary source.

So, that was something else that you didn't say.

You can try to distract and derail what I have already proven. It still doesn't change the fact that you constantly say one thing and deny it when someone calls you on it.

Remember the previous conversation started when you disagreed with me that you shouldn't discriminate against anyone, including white men. So, spare me your self-righteousness in this thread.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

So, that was something else that you didn't say.

You can try to distract and derail what I have already proven. It still doesn't change the fact that you constantly say one thing and deny it when someone calls you on it.

I'm the one derailing? You called me a racist for calling you out on your hypocritical nonsense. You still haven't even pretended to write something with a lick of sense.

Remember the previous conversation started when you disagreed with me that you shouldn't discriminate anyone, including white men. So, spare me your self-righteousness in this thread.

Actually, I totally didn't say that. Link the thread. I made the argument people should actively employ discrimination in the cause of examining an issue. As in any academic discipline one must determine the importance of specific information and their sources. Average white guy is not an authoritative source on black people in America. Not all opinions are equal and none should be considered as such when seeking some form of resolution of a hypothesis.

So how about you answer the fucking question, now?

 

[Thaluikhain]

So, in your imagination, only black people are affected by the justice system in the U.S.

Where did I write that?

Spare me ... I remember that 'argument' well, I didn't say that at all. In fact, I remember the argument being what was it like being black in America. Funnily enough, I thought black people probably had a better understanding about that and that one can always go to the primary source.

So, that was something else that you didn't say.

Um...given that what you just quoted has nothing to do with what you claimed they'd said...yes?

You can try to distract and derail what I have already proven.

Not unless you actually prove it.

 

[KissingSunlight]

So, that was something else that you didn't say.

You can try to distract and derail what I have already proven. It still doesn't change the fact that you constantly say one thing and deny it when someone calls you on it.

I'm the one derailing? You called me a racist for calling you out on your hypocritical nonsense. You still haven't even pretended to write something with a lick of sense.

Remember the previous conversation started when you disagreed with me that you shouldn't discriminate anyone, including white men. So, spare me your self-righteousness in this thread.

Actually, I totally didn't say that. Link the thread. I made the argument people should actively employ discrimination in the cause of examining an issue. As in any academic discipline one must determine the importance of specific information and their sources. Average white guy is not an authoritative source on black people in America. Not all opinions are equal and none should be considered as such when seeking some form of resolution of a hypothesis.

So how about you answer the fucking question, now?

I really don't need to link the thread. You just confirmed what I said about you. You disagree with me about not discriminating against people on the basis of their race. Also, you had just confirmed, once again, only black people are affected by the justice system in the U.S. Nice try, leaving the part about the justice system out of this post. So, you can have some wiggle room to avoid accountability of what you are saying.

Do you actually read you own posts?

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

No one should be off limits. No one. No man, no woman, no transgender, gay, black, white, old, young, sexy, ugly, european, african, american, colombian, people with cauliflower ear etc. No one.

How-ever! The vital point is to make fun of them as people, not as their gender, sexuality, ethnicity or anything like that. As in, to not make fun of qualities they have not chosen themselves and have no control over, and to judge them on the basis of their actions and character. I've been thinking for a while that the english language (and any other language I speak for that matter) lacks a word for bigotry based on qualities people have no choice or control over. And like people have said, context, and IMO more specifically, familiarity with the target of the jokes, is vital. I wouldn't say "Yo, what up ma hood nigga, you been bangin' em big ass bitches lately?" to a black man whom I've just met. If I knew someone for years, knew their sense of humor could take such hits, hell yeah I'd let loose.

What obfuscates the issue is people's desire to see the world in absolutes and single qualities, and it's never that simple. Let's say for example that we have a cancer patient. Not usually considered cool to make fun of them, right? Well let's add that he's also an old, white rich man. By those qualities he should be free to make fun of. However, let's also add that he's disabled from the waist down. Not cool to make fun of. But he was a douchebag Bieber-esque popstar in his youth! Completely free! And so on.