to delete complaints about tasteless jokes like these?
![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
Discussion is locked
Shame... that joke kills with the 5 to 8 year old demographic.![]()
what do you call a guy with no legs lying on the floor outside your front door?
Mat
taste is in the mouth, humour is 'different' ![]()
.,
Last time around, I saw a lot of sour grapes and complaints along the lines of Why does JP get to post stuff like this but all my friends get busted for it. When I pointed out that these weren't complaints about the jokes per se... I was called names for my accurate observation and suggestions.
No skin off of my nose. ![]()
Of course the comparisons were fallacious because JP is telling tasteless jokes and the others posts being used for comparison were about politics, religion, sexual preference... were Quote / unquote in regards to comments about "sub humans" and other totally reasonable subjects.
I am left wondering if it is the joke teller who raised the ire of some others. I saw no complaints about this thread... LINK. I have to wonder why some (admittedly I added a post to the thread) found a joke making fun of a little person acceptable but some bad jokes about blonds and marriage make for a cause-celeb test case used for complaining about previously deleted posts.
Sorry C1ay, but last time around I didn't see a whole lot of complaints about the actual jokes. I must have missed those posts amongst all the belly aching about other stuff. I give you credit for making a post that actually has something to do with the jokes in question (that is, if you're not insulted by my giving you a compliment).
BTW... whats up with post magnet? I go there every day but no one seems to want to talk there. Shame... I think it's a good forum.
& had a good giggle! At the jokes and the arguments,although those posts have now gone.
In my opinion they are funny & i doubt that Skunks or blondes would be offended,well im blonde & im not offended..
There is too much political correctness these days (in my opinion) but even in the UK i doubt that they would be considered politically incorrect. Maybe things are quite different in the US?
bev
the range of material that's either acceptable or dared to present for fear of offending someone. About the only "humor" that doesn't get backlash is smut. That's called "free speech". I am puzzled in discerning the difference. ![]()
educated person who reads in depth papers on the why & why not things are acceptable in the social climate. I just think that life is far too serious far too much of the time. I don't understand why people feel it necessary to be offended all the time and about everything. I think im just old school broad minded,others may call it ignorant or politically incorrect. But when you have witnessed daft goings on like hot cross bun's being removed from the school menu or nativity displays being banned & the like (just to name a few,which happen to be religious,there are others)its just out of control.
Don't get me wrong,some things are in bad taste & are not funny in the slightest,but i don't think jokes about skunks,blondes,married people,fat people,thin people,black,white,chinese,irish,christians or any other religion are offensive. What is or isn't offensive should be up to the individual & not society as a whole,or the government for that fact!
Just my personal opinion,not aimed at offending anyone..
Bev
"hey Sammy, what's your handicap?"
"i'm a one-eyd black jew, that's not enough?"![]()
.,
was a complaint about the jokes. Replies to his post were complaints about his complaint and yet his post was deleted. Ed's post was correct though. I find the joke about the skunk particularly tasteless and unfit for thuis forum yet it stands. Now we even have a mod posting in the thread instead of removing the whole thing which sets a new precedent for the standards here.
Sorry C1ay, but last time around I didn't see a whole lot of complaints about the actual jokes.
BTW... whats up with post magnet? I go there every day but no one seems to want to talk there. Shame... I think it's a good forum.
The traffic's just not there. ![]()
Three mice ran up the clock
The clock struck one,
The other 2 jumped out of the way.![]()
deleted my earlier post (probably the excuse about having to delete a whole thread rather than just the responses) and as it in NO WAY violates the ToS (as does the initial post) I am re-posting.
If someone makes ... - New!
by Edward ODaniel - 6/25/07 1:11 PM
In reply to: A smile perhaps a laugh by JP Bill
"offensive remarks" about sexual deviates y'all rant and rave about "homophobes" and demand deletions and bannings.
"Offensive remarks" about terrorists (usage of an accurate wo5rd picture describing them as SUB HUMAN) y'all rant and rave about "racists" and demand deletions and bannings.
What should we do about an obvious and repetitive misogynist?
(apparently "we" just let his obnoxious drivel remain)
I would hate to think that "we" not only allow the obnoxious drivel to remain but delete anything pointing out that the posts are those of an apparent misonegist (and surely that is not in bad form because DK himself has boldly placed the misogynist label on several of us who were not in full support of N.O.W.).
I find it HIGHLY OFFENSIVE that misogynistic postings are allowed to stand while members have been banned for stating their heartfelt conviction that terrorists are SUB-HUMAN (or that sexual DEVIATES are somehow "the norm" and inviolate).
poke fun at or otherwise demean women in their humor or actual behavior (boys will be boys syndrome) to be insulting to decent men...perhaps even more so than to women. A person with his/her head screwed on straight can "consider the source" and blow off that kind of insult. I have learned to never be offended by a person I cannot respect. It's a waste of precious time to do so.
Grim, I'm not sure I follow your reasoning about those links demonstrating misogyny. Misogyny is hatred of women, just for the fact that they are women. On the flip side is misandry, hating men just because they are men.
Say there was an organization that supported wearing helmets while driving a motorcycle. Showing a picture of a female member riding one without one would not be misogyny, nor would showing a picture of a male member riding one without one be misandry. The negative implication in those pictures depends not upon the sex of the rider, but their membership in the pro-helmet organization.
I'm glad you asked. ![]()
The first post I linked to was not complimentary of women's driving (how that connected to MADD I never figured out). I might add I have seen men drive just as poorly.
The other is a bizarre case in my mind... pondering why a man has to pay for treatment after being assaulted and injured but a woman should not be made to pay for evidence collection in situations of rape. This post seemingly overlooked the fact that evidence collection is not really medical treatment.
Now these posts were offensive to my sensibilities for one reason or another. Of course I didn't find a connection to posts of mine that have been pulled since I didn't respond like Edward did but... were they in bad taste? I would say so and I suspect some others might as well.
Were they said in jest or in all seriousness? If they were meant to be funny the arrow fell short of the bulls eye. Did they demonstrate misogyny? Ahhh, good question!
Edward has made a case for J.P.'s jokes being misogynistic. How so? They may have been in bad taste. They were certainly not presented as a serious remarks as the links I referred to apparently were. I'm not aware of J.P. (sorry to be talking about you as if you're not there JP) displaying a history of hateful comments about women. Consequently, if a few bad jokes are misogynistic then why aren't the links I pointed out?
You asked the question J so I'm asking you back... if the links I provided don't demonstrate misogyny - or DM's joke about the queen of england for that matter - then how do a few bad jokes do so? Perhaps you don't think JP's jokes were misogynistic but you were just puzzled by my post
Of course anyone can answer, but I'm interested in what J has to say. Pardon me if there are typos... I'm putting down a new bathroom floor right now and ripped this response off quickly.
You will notice I did not say the posts I linked to were misogynistic.
LOL the mastic fumes are getting to me.
you would see that in addition to being in poor taste they purposely devalue and demean women.
The links you indicated did not do so (matter of fact James SPECIFICALLY stated that while he saw no problem with women paying their own medical bill he would raqther have it paid out of tax monies than to see a perpetrator walk free.
You really need to understand what a misogynistic individual tends to say and do and the initial post in this thread is a fine example.
Your own postings here in view of an apparent inability to understand the meaning of misogenist and an inability to recognize signs of it would make fine representative links should we ever enter a discussion on "a person of the second order in a former classification of ..."
Ta.
Took you a couple days to come up with that one but it was worth it, wasn't it?