Quote: Tim Walker @ May 16 2011, 12:25 AM BSTI'm always a little confused as to how Carr has managed to shrug off any real debate regarding some of his truly horrible gags.
He seemed to gain immunity after those disabled ex-servicemen supported his jokes about them.
Nogget You have to survive and LIVE with the violence.
Quote: dellas @ May 16 2011, 6:30 AM BST
So you'd prefer to be murdered?
Yes, life is too hard to cope with emotional physical damage.
Quote: Nogget @ May 16 2011, 6:28 AM BSTHe seemed to gain immunity after those disabled ex-servicemen supported his jokes about them.
a crutch to rely on?
Quote: Nogget @ May 16 2011, 6:25 AM BSTI wonder why some people think that certain subjects are taboo, while other, more heinous subjects, aren't? Murder is generally accepted as being a worse crime than rape, but you'd be far safer joking about murder than rape. And away from comedy, a drama could feature murder repeatedly, but never do the same with rape.
Can you imagine 'Midsomer Rapes'?
I guess it's because murder has always been a bad thing. Thou shalt not kill, but your wife is your property so do what you like with her.
It's the same as it being acceptable to take the piss out of ginger people, but not black people. Both mocking somebody for their physical appearance, but one has a history of oppression and discrimination, and one just gets mild teasing.
That's my take on it, anyway.
Somebody who can't differentiate between comedy & reality shouldn't be used as a reason for certain strands of humour not to exist, or be accepted. These people who think 'women deserve rape for dressing provocatively' etc. choose to ignore the numerous reports of rape, criminal convictions etc. in the news on a daily basis, because basically they have trouble with their own thoughts & urges. It's not really comedian's problem, it is societY's.
If everyone found guilty of rape was given a 15 year sentence & chemical/physical castration, I'm sure a different light would be cast on the whole debate.
Personally I find that I have much more admiration for comedians who can make me laugh without having to resort to shock material. I can & have come up with some of the sickest jokes possible, to prove a point to friends & demonstrate the mechanics of humour, but at present I'm building up to do stand-up & am 100% certain the jokes I use won't try & leave a sour taste in peoples' minds.
Quote: BuryBob @ May 16 2011, 8:49 AM BSTSomebody who can't differentiate between comedy & reality shouldn't be used as a reason for certain strands of humour not to exist, or be accepted.
That's naive. If you don't think comedians and humour can influence opinion, then why would the advertising industry be worth billions? They often use well known comedians in their adverts, knowing that an endorsement from them will change people's behaviour and attitudes regarding their product.
Quote: BuryBob @ May 16 2011, 8:49 AM BSTIf everyone found guilty of rape was given a 15 year sentence & chemical/physical castration, I'm sure a different light would be cast on the whole debate.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here; but regardless, even if "everyone found guilty of rape" were dealt with that way, most rapists would still be unaffected:
"According to a news report on BBC One presented in 12 November 2007, there were 85,000 women raped in the UK in the previous year/.../ 800 persons were convicted in rape crimes that same year."
Quote: JoLaw @ May 16 2011, 9:02 AM BSTThat's naive. If you don't think comedians and humour can influence opinion, then why would the advertising industry be worth billions? They often use well known comedians in their adverts, knowing that an endorsement from them will change people's behaviour and attitudes regarding their product.
Not naive at all. The point I made is that people "choose" not see the difference.
A comedian advertising a product has a financial agenda. A comedian on stage has a different agenda. The point is education, and changing thinking. Look at how racial humour disappeared from mainstream television in the 70s/80s. Yet race crime is still a huge societal problem. Is this down to a hardcore of comedians perpetuating racist humour in clubs, or are there just a section of deviant wankers in society?
Quote: JoLaw @ May 16 2011, 9:02 AM BSTThat's naive. If you don't think comedians and humour can influence opinion, then why would the advertising industry be worth billions? They often use well known comedians in their adverts, knowing that an endorsement from them will change people's behaviour and attitudes regarding their product.
Lots of comedians, including Stephen Fry with his millions of Twitter followers, supported AV and encouraged other to do the same and look what happened there.
I think the ability of comedians to influence people is often over-exaggerated although I do feel that there is a gradual drip-drip effect of certain subjects and opinions being reinforced into people's brain because of the hundreds of comedians joking about them.
Quote: Nogget @ May 16 2011, 9:05 AM BSTI'm not sure what you're getting at here; but regardless, even if "everyone found guilty of rape" were dealt with that way, most rapists would still be unaffected:
"According to a news report on BBC One presented in 12 November 2007, there were 85,000 women raped in the UK in the previous year/.../ 800 persons were convicted in rape crimes that same year."
You seem to imply that a much harsher sentence wouldn't be a deterrent, I wholly disagree.
Last year, won't give the whole raft of statistics as it will be appearing in a book probably in October, the real joke about rape is the way it is dealt with by the judicial system.
'Only 15% of serious sexual offences against people 16 and over are reported to the police and of the rape offences that are reported, fewer than 6% result in an offender being convicted of this offence. '
From the RAPECRISIS ENGLAND& WALES WEBSITE 2010
Think of those numbers and translate the crime into say Murder and I wonder what the jokes would be like. At the heart of everything if you analyse what the target of the joke is then I guess you can make a judgement on why the joke is being told. On a separate note do many women make jokes about rape?
Quote: BuryBob @ May 16 2011, 9:14 AM BSTYou seem to imply that a much harsher sentence wouldn't be a deterrent, I wholly disagree.
Not sure that harsher sentencing is enough in itself, if that were the case then US state with the death penalty would have lower murder rates than those without, something which is not the case.
The best deterrent is the knowledge that there's a good chance that the rapist will be caught, at the moment the conviction rate is pitifully low (something like 3%) which means that potential rapists know that there's a good chance they'll get away with it.
Improve the conviction rate and it'd make a big difference to the number of rapes.
On the 'she was asking for it' point, I know women who say this. And I know men, including myself, who have been teased mercilessly by women wanting just to taunt them with their sexuality for fun. Women, many women, do use their sexuality as a kind of weapon against males, believe it or not. At some point in the rape debate someone is going to have to ask those uncomfortable questions of some women. As lawyers do.
I believe this has had a bearing on the collapse of many rape trials. 'Should it have done?' Is a fair question also, but the judges seemed to think so.
Many women get off on the power their sexuality gives them over men, and this is a problem in many rape cases, because, as much as feminists hate it, the law cannot make special allowances for one type of crime. It has to be consistent. This also explains why some judges do take into account the way the woman was dressed. It is a big problem that needs clarifying in law, or adjusting for rape cases and lawyers are always on about it.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ May 16 2011, 9:31 AM BSTOn the 'she was asking for it' point, I know women who say this. And I know men, including myself, who have been teased mercilessly by women wanting just to taunt them with their sexuality for fun. Women, many women, do use their sexuality as a kind of weapon against males, believe it or not. At some point in the rape debate someone is going to have to ask those uncomfortable questions of some women. As lawyers do.
I believe this has had a bearing on the collapse of many rape trials. 'Should it have done?' Is a fair question also, but the judges seemed to think so.
Many women get off on the power their sexuality gives them over men, and this is a problem in many rape cases, because, as much as feminists hate it, the law cannot make special allowances for one type of crime. It has to be consistent. This also explains why some judges do take into account the way the woman was dressed. It is a big problem that needs clarifying in law, or adjusting for rape cases and lawyers are always on about it.
This makes for quite scary reading.