LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 126
0 members and 126 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 03-12-2015, 01:00 PM   #2225
ThurgreedMarshall
[intentionally omitted]
 
ThurgreedMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 18,597
Patton (no, not that one)

This is an interesting article. I generally love Patton Oswalt and I think he gets a lot right in this piece. But there are instances where he is entirely way too inside his own experience.

The fact that he thinks humor is always more effective than outrage and shaming is colored by the fact that he's a comedian. The fact that he brushes off points about racists, anti-science types, misogynist, homophobic, ignorant assholes running things because it's so easy to laugh at them is said from a position which is not subject to the everyday oppression those assholes impose.

I also don't like this idea that every joke should be permissible, but someone's reaction to that joke should be tempered. Fuck outta here. I don't think we should be trying to keep people from joking about whole topics. But how is a truly offensive joke--made for the purpose of being offensive--any different than making an offensive slur? Go ahead and make your joke. But just like all things--even speech--there may be consequences to your actions. And I have every fucking right to call you out on your offensiveness.

Finally, his points about white men getting great late-night job offers because they are actually the most talented out there is interesting to me. Seems to me he is conflating "best" with "most successful." Those things don't always match. When it comes to those jobs, the people making the decisions are basing it on the ability to build the affluent white following that sponsors so covet. Does that mean they aren't brilliant? No. But it may mean that other types of people (women, minorities) aren't given the shot because the assumption is they aren't marketable. So, when Patton essentially says, "Why add something about how another white man is getting a great opportunity to a review about how good that white man is," I think, so what? What's the harm being done John Oliver? He is being diminished because we recognize the fact that he may have opportunities others have not? Again, that doesn't mean he shouldn't have a show or that he doesn't deserve one. But it does make you think about the issue a little more (although, I suppose the people who wouldn't take it as an insult to Oliver are already inclined to have the thought on their own).

Anyway, interesting read.

http://www.salon.com/2015/03/11/salo..._peace_summit/
ThurgreedMarshall is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:07 AM.