I'm sure everyone has heard of the recent controversy with Tosh making a joke about rape during a performance. What actually transpired is unclear, but he did say a phrase mentioning rape in there. I see many people up in arms about this event saying that "rape is never funny" or "some things should never be joked about". I feel like they simultaneously miss the essence of comedy and unfairly apply the ethical principle they are standing upon. Before I get into the ethical principle part though I want to speak about the essence of comedy in general.
What is it about comedy that makes us laugh? One commonly held theory I'll be focusing on deals with incongruity; as we are told a story, our brain starts to follow it and we consciously or subconsciously have predictions for where the story is going to go. When the story suddenly diverts onto a different path, this forces us to laugh. But then you may ask, if this were the case, why doesn't everyone find the same jokes funny? In other words, why is it that I can listen to how the comedian crafts his joke, follow it to the end, and not laugh despite others around me laughing at it? This is where perception plays a large role in our "laugh response" to humor as I'll informally call it. There are many theories on what factors go into this, but I don't want to go into much more detail here for the purpose of this entry. I want to emphasize that one primary way that comedy produces laughter is by saying something that listeners follow and that has an abrupt shift from the expected path. A short, simple example:
(Unknown author) A man walks into a bar and says 'ow'.
The reason this joke works for many people is likely because we all have heard plenty of jokes that start with some people walking into bar, and then it continues from there. This joke leads you down that predictable path into expecting the continuation of the story. Instead, it unexpectedly has no follow up. This abrupt diversion from the expected makes some people laugh, or find the joke "funny". (It also is a play on the English language with "walking into" something)
Now, back at the topic of the ethical principles implied by saying that "rape is not funny", or in a normative context "some things should never be joked about". Some of them are claiming that joking about rape implies that one enjoys or approves of rape, or that by telling it to others you encourage them to rape other people or to not consider rape a serious matter. The major objection I have is that comedy isn't about the topics you are discussing, rather it is about the journey or path you take to get to the unexpected result. I'll give some examples of jokes that I think most people will agree do not suggest approval of the actions within the words of the joke.
(Unknown author) Two hunters are out in the woods when one of them collapses. He doesn't seem to be breathing and his eyes are glazed. The other man pulls out his cell phone and calls emergency services. He gasps to the operator, "My friend is dead! What can I do?" The operator in a calm, soothing voice replies, "Take it easy. I can help. First, let's make sure he's dead." There is a silence, then a shot is heard.
... Back on the phone, the hunter says, "OK, now what?"
Most of us will agree that someone innocent being killed is a serious issue and do not encourage or approve of killing innocent people. Here the joke is making clever usage of the vagueness in the English language with "let's make sure he's dead". In the context, we are led down the path of believing the operator is saying it out of concern for the man who collapsed, and wants the hunter on the phone to check on his friend's condition. Instead, we are taken away from this predictable path, and the hunter ends up killing his friend. Another example, this time from Rodney Dangerfield:
"When I was born, I was so ugly that the doctor slapped my mother."
This joke is not suggesting encouragement or approval of slapping or striking a woman. I think that should be clear to most of us. This is a short simple joke that relies on the unexpected again. For a final joke, and one more relevant to the topic at hand, I'll include one from Sarah Silverman:
"I was raped by a doctor... which is, you know, so bittersweet for a Jewish girl."
This joke is a juxtaposition of stereotypes, racism, and the serious matter of rape. We hear the first line and many of us may initially be shocked, but then she unexpectedly leads us down a different path of her being "okay" with it, and then finally ends with leading us down another unexpected path by bring up the issues of Jewish stereotypes.
Stepping back from the examples, I want to get back to my main objection. Why should it be that certain jokes are taken as showing approval, enjoyment, or encouragement of unethical acts, while other jokes are not? This is the main crux of my argument: the principles are only selectively applied when it fits them.
On the issue of topics that supposedly should not be used as topics in jokes, I'll quote the creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone: "Either everything is okay to make fun of, or nothing is."
Just as joking about the hunter shooting his friend, or the doctor slapping the mother after the baby is born are not endorsing or condoning those unethical acts, neither are jokes about rape. If you are offended, then ignore it, turn it off, or walk away. But just like the KKK and God-Hates-Fags groups have their rights to say things that may offend others, comedians also have this right known as the freedom of speech.
As Voltaire puts it: "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
edit: Thank you Roe, for suggesting George Carlin's take on the issue of "things you can't joke about":
Michael Valentine Smith: I grok people. I am people… so now I can say it in people talk. I've found out why people laugh. They laugh because it hurts so much… because it's the only thing that'll make it stop hurting. I had thought — I had been told — that a 'funny' thing is a thing of a goodness. It isn't. Not ever is it funny to the person it happens to. Like that sheriff without his pants. The goodness is in the laughing itself. I grok it is a bravery . . . and a sharing… against pain and sorrow and defeat.
Not quite the same point, but any discussion about what is ok and what is not ok to joke about reminds me of this.
very nice write-up! I couldn't agree more. It creates a slippery slope when some topics are deemed "unacceptable" to joke about. That quote by trey parker and matt stone is spot on
Right to free speech is a two way street. You can joke about whatever you want, but if I don't like it I can speak out against you and try to convince others to stop supporting you.
Dude, don't bring up Voltaire. Don't ever bring up Voltaire. If he was alive in our times, I bet he would start killing free spoken idiots with a chainsaw.
On topic, I think there are some things you can't joke about. What the germans, italians and japanese did 70 years ago, what americans did on vietnam and afghanistan, the twin towers, abortion, rape, murder. No, you don't have that right.
I'll quote the creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone: "Either everything is okay to make fun of, or nothing is."
Reminds me of an important quote from Letters to a young contrarian
Film was the special medium of the Cuban revolution and he assured us that it was unfettered. Completely unfettered? Well, he said with a slight laugh, there is on thing that is not done. No satirical portrayal of the Leader will be permitted. (The slight laugh was at the very idea that anyone would even dream of proposing such a thing.) I said, quite simply, that if the main subject of Castro was off-limits then, in effect, there could be no real satire or criticism at all.
On July 14 2012 06:01 Steveling wrote: On topic, I think there are some things you can't joke about. What the germans, italians and japanese did 70 years ago, what americans did on vietnam and afghanistan, the twin towers, abortion, rape, murder. No, you don't have that right.
Wait, are you being serious? I don't want to actually reply in case I'm getting trolled...I honestly can't tell.
I think you're perfectly free to joke about whatever you want. However, other people are perfectly free to be offended or find you unfunny as a result. I personally don't find men joking about rape funny, just in the same way I don't find white people saying "nigger" funny. That doesn't mean comedians can't do it-- it just means I'll be more offended than pleased, and if their act is mostly stuff I don't like, I won't watch them.
If it brings them success and popularity with others it's not my place to say what they can or can't say. It is my place to not watch people who make such jokes, however.
Nice post; very well thought out. However, I'm curious about how you apply these ideas to Tosh's joke. From what I've heard, he basically said "Wouldn't it be funny if this women was raped right now." Are we missing some context that makes that funny? Or do his remarks still cross some line?
Also, to elaborate on what Steveling is saying about the Voltaire thing. Free speech implies the right to make a statement. It doesn't imply freedom from criticism (indeed, free speech also implies the freedom to criticise others). It also doesn't imply the right to a platform for making those statements, except in certain limited situations (for example, a government shouldn't provide a platform for a non-government entity to speak on an issue, without providing the opportunity to the whole community). So somebody could strongly criticise Tosh, up to the point of trying to get his show cancelled, without violating his free speech rights.
On July 14 2012 06:26 munchmunch wrote: Also, to elaborate on what Steveling is saying about the Voltaire thing. Free speech implies the right to make a statement. It doesn't imply freedom from criticism (indeed, free speech also implies the freedom to criticise others). It also doesn't imply the right to a platform for making those statements, except in certain limited situations (for example, a government shouldn't provide a platform for a non-government entity to speak on an issue, without providing the opportunity to the whole community). So somebody could strongly criticise Tosh, up to the point of trying to get his show cancelled, without violating his free speech rights.
Oh, yes, of course. And I don't think Tosh is a dumb guy or anything. He realized he wants to be popular and get money, and that his joke was a bit off-color, and very offensive to some viewers he didn't want to alienate, so he apologized. Smart move.
I just don't get why people go to see an obviously "offensive" comedian specifically to get offended. And even if you to go see a comedian, and you do get offended.. Why not just leave?
Also if you heckle a comedian and they make fun of you back, you deserve it. You're basically interrupting someone doing their job. You're being a dick.
On July 14 2012 06:23 Blazinghand wrote: I think you're perfectly free to joke about whatever you want. However, other people are perfectly free to be offended or find you unfunny as a result. I personally don't find men joking about rape funny, just in the same way I don't find white people saying "nigger" funny. That doesn't mean comedians can't do it-- it just means I'll be more offended than pleased, and if their act is mostly stuff I don't like, I won't watch them.
If it brings them success and popularity with others it's not my place to say what they can or can't say. It is my place to not watch people who make such jokes, however.
Completely agreed. It's okay if you find a joke distasteful or offensive. If you don't like it or find it funny even, then tune out. It's also perfectly fine to express your distaste to your friends and family.
On July 14 2012 06:26 munchmunch wrote: Nice post; very well thought out. However, I'm curious about how you apply these ideas to Tosh's joke. From what I've heard, he basically said "Wouldn't it be funny if this women was raped right now." Are we missing some context that makes that funny? Or do his remarks still cross some line?
Also, to elaborate on what Steveling is saying about the Voltaire thing. Free speech implies the right to make a statement. It doesn't imply freedom from criticism (indeed, free speech also implies the freedom to criticise others). It also doesn't imply the right to a platform for making those statements, except in certain limited situations (for example, a government shouldn't provide a platform for a non-government entity to speak on an issue, without providing the opportunity to the whole community). So somebody could strongly criticise Tosh, up to the point of trying to get his show cancelled, without violating his free speech rights.
I never get why the existence of a show is enough to get people to try to cancel it when they don't even watch the show.
On July 14 2012 06:23 Blazinghand wrote: I think you're perfectly free to joke about whatever you want. However, other people are perfectly free to be offended or find you unfunny as a result. I personally don't find men joking about rape funny, just in the same way I don't find white people saying "nigger" funny. That doesn't mean comedians can't do it-- it just means I'll be more offended than pleased, and if their act is mostly stuff I don't like, I won't watch them.
If it brings them success and popularity with others it's not my place to say what they can or can't say. It is my place to not watch people who make such jokes, however.
Completely agreed. It's okay if you find a joke distasteful or offensive. If you don't like it or find it funny even, then tune out. It's also perfectly fine to express your distaste to your friends and family.
I'd even go so far as to say it's fine to express your distaste to the comedian, or to whoever. Just because the comedian finds your distaste distasteful, that doesn't mean he should be allowed to prevent you from expressing it. Going onto web forums and complaining, or using a platform you control such as a TV show or a blog to call him out is also perfectly acceptable.
On July 14 2012 06:26 munchmunch wrote: Nice post; very well thought out. However, I'm curious about how you apply these ideas to Tosh's joke. From what I've heard, he basically said "Wouldn't it be funny if this women was raped right now." Are we missing some context that makes that funny? Or do his remarks still cross some line?
Also, to elaborate on what Steveling is saying about the Voltaire thing. Free speech implies the right to make a statement. It doesn't imply freedom from criticism (indeed, free speech also implies the freedom to criticise others). It also doesn't imply the right to a platform for making those statements, except in certain limited situations (for example, a government shouldn't provide a platform for a non-government entity to speak on an issue, without providing the opportunity to the whole community). So somebody could strongly criticise Tosh, up to the point of trying to get his show cancelled, without violating his free speech rights.
I didn't find Tosh's joke funny either to be frank. To the best of my knowledge, no one recorded what happened, and there are multiple versions on what actually transpired, for sake of context. Staff members at the Laugh Factory where it occurred say it did not happen like the blogger in the audience represented the case. She has her side of the story as well. Some have even said he was responding to a heckler. Either way, there were people who laughed at the joke, so it's tough to say if the joke was funny or not. There are other popular theories on why comedy makes us laugh that can explain situations like this, such as a release of psychological tension (sorta similar to nervous laughter).
I agree freedom of speech does not imply freedom from criticism. People also have the freedom to criticize Tosh for what he said. What I'm saying is, when they are trying to make a normative statement and persuade others with it, I believe they have failed. As I explained, they are not applying the principles to other jokes in a similar fashion, they are only doing it in jokes they personally find distasteful.
People also can write to the networks, etc, voicing their disapproval of what Tosh said and did. That's perfectly within their rights. I'm just saying their argument to persuade others is faulty.
Well I mean, it doesn't matter whether or not people laughed-- it's not illegal to be unfunny. Whether or not Tosh's joke was actually a good joke shouldn't factor into a judgement here. If his joke legitimately should be censored, it being funny shouldn't exempt it. And if his joke legitimately should be allowed to be said, it being unfunny shouldn't make it illegal, imo.
Tosh's joke was pretty fucking bad, quite frankly. If he was intelligent (which I don't think he is) he would give a real apology. Because it sounds like the girl very much took the joke in a threatening manner, triggering a fight-or-flight response. This was probably not Tosh's intention, so he should give an actual apology because he did not mean to come off that way. That's what a normal, understanding person would do. Be like "it came out wrong, I was just trying to play off a heckler, but I didn't mean for you to take it that way." It's not like it takes effort to apologize, sheesh.
He doesn't have to stop making rape jokes, though if he continues, he should probably make sure they're actually funny.
Comedians should just be able to make jokes, and then the people who think the jokes are funny can listen to the comedians. There are tons of jokes famous people have made about rape, 9/11, murder, negative stereotypes and such. Most of them aren't publicly castigated by a few self-righteous assholes who think that because they don't like the joke, NO ONE should be able to hear jokes from this guy ever again. Honestly, if you're offended, then don't watch the comedian's show or contribute to his business. Really simple. That's how it should work.
Part of being a comedian also is dealing with hecklers. Some of them just ignore it, while others respond to it, which can often take things too far. An example off the top of my head is from a standup performance Bill Hicks did:
I think Bill's response, though vulgar and distasteful to some, still fit in okay with his performance. And his reflections afterwards were very natural as well.
And then of course there was the famous Michael Richards case where he said to a black man who heckled him that "20 years ago you would he hanging from a tree". Many said he went too far there.
Point being, all comedians have ways of dealing with hecklers. When they do respond, it usually is a quick reaction where they are not considering all the consequences and let their emotions get the best of them. Some comedians do it very seamlessly so it works well with their act. Others take it too far and should apologize afterwards if the heckler shows they were threatened or offended by it.
EPT
