--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, anon_couscous_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: <snip> > > > > At any rate, the shows you mention, partly because > > > > they're *shows*, are all in pretty much a different > > > > category than a piece of writing in which a group is > > > > demeaned without ever showing the group's positive side. > > > > > > Well South Park -- from what I have seen of it, pretty much demans > > > everyone -- does not show a positive side when doing so -- and is > > > hilarious. > > > > I don't watch "South Park," but I don't have any > > argument with your thesis that if a comedy demeans > > *everybody*, it's not bigoted. But that is a different > > point than the one I was making. > > Well as I understood you, you made a distinction between a comedian > or forum that pokes barbs at everyone (all agreed its ok) and when > such becomes demeaning of a particular groups -- even its all groups > (overtime). I was responding to the demeaing part of your arguemnt.
No, I never said that, sorry. To the contrary, I said I couldn't recall The Onion ever having demeaned Jews as a group or blacks as a group or Muslims as a group. You said you thought you recalled pieces along those lines but couldn't come up with any and brought forth a list of sitcoms and movies instead. Then I said (above) written satirical pieces and sitcoms/ movies are in different categories--and then you cited "South Park," which was a non sequitur as far as I can tell. > > > > One other point: When the unattractive characteristic > > > > is actually harmful, there's a lot more basis for > > > > holding it up to ridicule. The caste system in > > > > India is clearly harmful. I've heard the veneration of > > > > cows criticized as harmful--can't recall the reasons--but > > > > among the world's evils, it doesn't seem like such a > > > > big deal. And what on earth is harmful about cooking > > > > over a fire? > > > > > > > > Those two were just plain gratuitous, suggesting that > > > > Indians are basically uncivilized. Of course these > > > > things would be harmful *on a plane*, but nobody actually > > > > brings cows on a plane or tries to do their cooking over > > > > a fire on a plane. > > > > > > > > If they'd wanted to keep it consistent and inoffensive > > > > while still criticizing the caste system, they'd have > > > > thought of something that lower-caste people tend to > > > > do on planes that *isn't* harmful but is disdained by > > > > the higher castes, so that the criticism remained > > > > focused on those who are scornful of the lower castes, > > > > not those who are the object of the scorn. > > > > > > I think its pretty clear (to me) that if you tried your hand at > > > writing comedy, it would be political correct, inoffensive, and > > > not funny. > > > > I don't think I ever claimed to be a comedy writer, > > actually. But if a good comedy writer attempted what > > I suggested, I suspect the result could very well be > > inoffensive but quite funny (maybe not politically > > correct--that's a whole 'nother can of worms). > > > > > > I'm sure it wasn't intended to be bigoted, it was just > > > > not well thought out. > > > > > > My take on the two lines you found offensive in the piece are > > > different from yours. Why you don't find the satire (I didn't > > > say high satire) in the piece -- ridiculing stereotypes -- by > > > making such extreme and silly, is a bit mystifying. > > > > Where exactly did I say I didn't find the satire > > in the piece? I said to the contrary several times. > > I laughed out loud at the burlap bag bit. > > OK. But now Iam getting confused on your point. > > > I can't see where you actually addressed the points I > > made regarding those two lines and why they stuck out > > from the rest of the piece. > > As above, I thought you were saying that when a particular group is > demeaned its inappropriate. I countered (over several posts) that > while I agree that if the demeaining is limited to a particular > group -- for example, good ol' boys in the south in the 50's, 60's > with racial jokes, or the boys club in corp america in 70's-90's > with women jokes, then thats a social stratifying power thing. But > if the "demeaning" is broad-based its fair game. This is now so utterly confused and far from my original point that it's not worth trying to straighten out. > >Instead you set up a couple > > of straw men to knock down. > > Not on purpose. I have tried to address your points as I understood > them. You didn't address any of them. And you came up with yet another straw man above. Finis. If you aren't going to debate in good faith, forget it. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
