It’s punching down because the misogyny and the abuse of a power relationship AND no comeuppance for the cops.
It’s like watching scenes of German soldiers harass Jewish prisoners in Schindler’s List.
Sure Cops aren’t Nazis…but I didn’t say Nazis…I said German soldiers. Even if that solider didn’t personally hate Jews, their position would allow them to murder without consequence. It should be taken into account that any one of those cops could have murdered that man and it’s a real life possibility that nothing. would. have. happened. to. that. cop.
BUT if there was a comeuppance for the cops there’d be a righting of the scales.
Cops crash into each other, get pulled over by Sheriff’s department, etc. there’s room for a catharsis.
The consequence is they look like fools to the audience. The audience is thinking what idiots and jerks the cops are. It’s in no was equivalent to Nazi harassing Jews in Schindler’s list!
I’m the audience, and I’m not sure it’s so clear-cut. But thanks for trying to explain how I’m supposed to think. The presence of any humor resulting from the cops being idiots and jerks isn’t so clear-cut either. Not sure how a group of armed police officers pointing guns at a man until he cries for no reason other than to mock his masculinity is funny. “Ha-ha, look how feminine and childish he is! What a little girl. Listens to NPR too!”
Har-dee-har-har.
I think I would’ve been less pissed at it if it had been “Where’s the little boy?!” Still would’ve been un-funny, but at least it wouldn’t have been mocking his masculinity and equating fear and crying and weakness with being a girl.
You’re right- I didn’t use all the wiggle words in my specific reply about their being no consequence. For goodness sakes, no one is depriving you of thinking it is stupid or not funny. No one is telling you what is or isn’t funny. My point was that there didn’t have to be consequences in narrative for there to be consequences.
I should have said “In mine, and only my opinion, it seems to me, and only me, that there actually is a consequence in that a generic audience (excluding anyone who may feel differently), in that the cops are being portrayed as ridiculous”.
This, i don’t quite know how to respond to. The protagonists looking like fools vs not looking like fools seems like a big difference to me (and only me). You can think whatever you like, of course.
Don’t get huffy with me because you didn’t communicate well. How the hell else are we supposed to know what you mean other than the damn words you use? You’re saying the audience is thinking this and that…well, no. Apparently they’re not. That’s why this thread isn’t a chorus of “Ha-ha! That’s hilarious! Thanks for sharing!”
My words were clear. That you saw them as a prohibition of every single person in the audience from having their own opinions and being forced into group-think was not predictable. It was clearly referencing a generic “audience”, giving my opinion on what the the video was aiming to get across to that generic audience.
That you chose to both take it as a specific comment to you and to be rude about expressing yourself is not my fault.
Good grief, I didn’t see your words as a prohibition of anything. I read your words thusly: “this is what the audience is thinking after watching this video [i.e. this is why it’s funny], therefore you [Push You Down] are wrong about your German soldier comparison.”
I believe PYD’s point was that an abuse of power (whether German soldiers… or a harassing CEO, cops with guns drawn, an abusive parent) isn’t funny when that’s the punchline to the joke, which seems to be what you’re implying here. And that this “generic audience” finds humor in the fact that the cops are fools/jerks/idiots.
That being said, again, my issue with this video isn’t the abuse of power, per se, it’s the implication that being a girl is a weakness.
The cops made him cry. He’s the little girl. Buh dum dum. I love this sort of dumb, over-the-top humor, and I completely wasn’t expecting that punchline. It’s sort of shaggy dog story humor. Either you love it, or you don’t.
Look, it’s a fucking joke.
A joke that perpetuates the stereotypical macho male cop. Of course they’re going to use the phrase “little girl.”. That’s part of the joke.
It’s like the scene in Airplane! when Joey asks the girl how she likes her coffee, and she says “Black, just like my men.”
It’s funny because it’s unexpected and shocking. If you don’t get it that’s fine. It not a knee-slappingly hilarious, but it is unexpected and funny.
Not every joke is funny to everybody. Sometimes jokes come to seem less funny when they’re blatantly denigrating a particular group of people.
[QUOTE=Leaffan]
It’s like the scene in Airplane! when Joey asks the girl how she likes her coffee, and she says “Black, just like my men.”
[/quote]
Somehow I suspect that if she’d replied “Nigger-brown, just like my men”, you wouldn’t be so eager to defend its risibility. Making a pun on the word “black” (black coffee, black men) isn’t the same thing as using an actual derogatory slur. And “little girl” as a term of contempt for a man who’s upset is a derogatory slur.
Glad you enjoyed it. Other people who didn’t find it funny have explained why. I’m not sure why you feel it’s either useful or appropriate to go on scolding them for not reacting in the way you consider correct.
Many of us have already explained why we don’t think it’s funny. It’s bullshit that “girl” is used as a fucking insult or a punchline. Is it acceptable to use racial stereotypes as “unexpected” punchlines? Is a woman saying she likes black men an insult to black men?
Is the joke making fun of “stereotypical macho male cop?” Or is it making fun of the guy being made to cry?
That’s really where the debate is isn’t?
Cops force a man to cry at gunpoint for their own amusement. The punchline of the joke is at the crying man’s expense.