Ever see how Trump supporters behave? But it’s more than that. People are unduly offended. Nobody likes to be the butt of a joke, but being one provides an opportunity for introspection. I’m a straight, White, male. I laugh at the straight, White townspeople in Blazing Saddles; just as I assume Jewish people laugh Mel Brooks’ ‘Jewish jokes’. Could Blazing Saddles be made today? Of course not; everyone would be offended. So, yeah. We’ve lost the ability to laugh at ourselves.
Of course it could. You aren’t being oppressed.
fwiw, the moderators have discussed this, and agreed that people like actors, whose job and public persona are significantly tied to their personal appearance, are also fair game for posters to comment on their attractiveness. Politicians, scientists, and other public figures, not so much.
Good point.
Could I get away with quoting Paul Begala:
Politics is show business for ugly people.
?
The problem is, your examples involve people losing the ability to laugh at other people. I defy you to find any group that doesn’t poke fun at themselves. What folks have never appreciated is when someone else–especially someone with more power than them–makes jokes at their expense.
I read an article today about “Black Twitter” and a series of Black History Month posts someone was making, like showing a picture of a pan of potato salad and asking, “What questions will be asked about this?” The answer was something like, “Who made this?” and the author thought it was hilarious.
I am 100% on the out-group of this joke, can barely even understand why it’s funny. It was obviously some “laugh at ourselves” humor. And if I started making some joke about how Black people are all about who made the potato salad at the after church barbecue, it’d be real weird and I’d catch some side-eye.
People can laugh at themselves no problem. A lot of folks no longer see the need to put up with your laughing at them.
Mel has said that he actually couldn’t make it then. He’d film stuff; the producers would see it and demand he take out the controversial parts; he’d agree, but he left it in anyway, hoping it would be a big enough hit to overrride the producers’ ire.
Most of the complaints I see are from people who want to laugh at somebody else.
There are numerous “modern” films that almost certainly could not be made today in their classic form, including “Blazing Saddles” and even “Airplane”.
I’m not sure how far the pendulum has swung in terms of protecting various groups from public mockery, or how detrimental the consequences may be.
When in doubt though, remember that while it may basically be no-holds-barred when it comes to members of a group engaging in self-mockery, the stink-eye will reflexively fasten on outsiders making such jokes.
No, you are wrong. You are out of touch.
I know you get the sweet dopamine hit from believing you’re part of some oppressed group, but you simply aren’t.
I think that “punching up” is a really good way to vet your own jokes on a message board. It’s why lawyer jokes are okay – even if you offend some lawyer, they are going to be offended all the way to the bank, so who cares. The reason jokes involving dumb women, putting down women, and worse, are offensive, is that, despite what many men wish to believe, women are vulnerable second class citizens. Same with many other groups.
On first read I agreed with that “punching up” guidance but on consideration it doesn’t quite work.
Let’s just give one quick example - a Black comic may feel it is “punching up” to make a joke that references anti-Semitic tropes, especially if in reference to a particular Jew who is rich and influential, but even in general, as the Black comic may believe that Blacks are treated as vulnerable second class citizens and they perceive Jews as White and upper middle class or above, or may even believe the tropes. It’s perceived as “punching up” so it’s okay? Not.
Even self-deprecating self-mockery is potentially problematic - an actor in a sitcom of a minority group playing sterotypical comedic tropes would not be automatically okay just because the actor is of the group.
Sometimes jokes are hurtful and sometimes they are hurtful by intent. A joke can be an effective weapon. “Can be”; not always is. It may just be enough to consider if, the joke is likely hurtful*, and if the group the weapon being aimed at is a group you feel deserves to be aimed at before you fire, and be prepared for the wrath of those who disagree. Sometimes when “punching up” you intend to be wielding a weapon.
Lawyers won’t too frequently have wrath at the sharks giving professional courtesy (etc.) joke. If they did then maybe you should care, even if you perceive them as wealthy. Unless you actually did want to insult and hurt members of the group.
Using the weapons of jokes a a means of speaking truth to power is fine. But following it up with - “It’s just a joke!” is disingenuous.
I will also put out there that there are jokes that rely on discomfort and inappropriateness. The anxiety and surprise of the taboo, of saying the unsaid out loud, is what gets channelled into the laugh. Those are best left to the professionals and not attempted on a messageboard.
*Not so difficult to do. Would you get annoyed at repetitive jokes that implied that those with your group membership were [fill in the blank, stupid, greedy, thought mostly as objects, some stereotype, whatever]?
Fantasize away.
There’s no perceived “oppression”, nor do I care whether we’ve seen the last of movies of that type.
Moderator Note
Treat others with respect in this forum. Focus on the actual issue being discussed. Do not turn this into a personal issue between the two of you.
If you want to take swipes at each other, you know where the Pit is.
The main reason the film would be too offensive to make today is the gratuitous use of the n-word. That’s not about a cultural group making fun of themselves. Satirizing white racists is still done today, as are Jewish people making Jewish jokes.
What has changed is that people are less tolerant of letting something racist or otherwise bigoted get by because it was put into a joke or even part of a “good message.” With the n-word specifically, we’ve learned that a lot of black people see it as white people trying to see how many times they can get away with it, and we find there is merit to that argument.
Though the bigger reason that Blazing Saddles can’t be made today is that it said what it needed to say, and we’ve moved on. We don’t need to use comedy to push the uncomfortable truth that the era depicted wasn’t nearly so glamorous as Westerns portrayed. Inasmuch as we cover it, we can do so seriously, without offending people.
That’s part of the reason for satire: to make uncomfortable truths more palatable through humor. It should never cross into making bad things like racism/sexism/etc more palatable. That’s the stuff that causes “offense.”
It very much is not people laughing at themselves.
I would not be quick to make that assumption.
I had to look this up to understand the joke. Potato salad screams white middle/lower class people to me. Kind of like hotdish or casserole. I’m white, but have a huge extended black family because two of my brothers are black. I don’t think I have ever heard anything about potato salads and blacks being related. The only thing I can say I noticed about potato salad is that you either like it or you don’t, which seems to go against the “who made this” line. I wonder if this is a regional thing. Learn something new every day.
Come on man, cowboy up! You’re laughing all the way to the bank so it’s okay. @Ulfreida says so. Even when you’ve heard the shark joke a million times, just roll with it and think about all the millions you have stashed in the bank.
(sarcasm intended)
Here’s the article. These are not jokes I’m in the group for.
Huh. Well I’ve never been in a room in which that wrath was expressed. Eye rolling sure because they are all so unoriginal and done to death jokes, very dated. I’ve heard one respond with a judge joke but I don’t remember it. I think you had to be a lawyer to really appreciate it.
Linguist John McWhorter on distinguishing “using the n-word” from “referring to the n-word.” A propos food for thought, I think: