fohl@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Fohl) (01/27/86)
Qrne Se. Wbua Jbbyyrl (fc?),
Ertneqvat lbhe negvpyrf 1482, rg ny., va wbxrf.q: url, guvf vf urnil fuvg
sbe gur wbxr argjbex. Vs fbzrbar qbrfa'g yvxr lbhe wbxr (naq vg pna'g or zhpu
bs n wbxr vs FBZRBAR qbrfa'g yvxr vg), gryy gurz gb shpx bss, gura cbfg nabgure
wbxr. Ybbfra hc; yrg gur bgure sbyxf qb gur synzvat. Oryvrir vg be abg, rira
V'ir orra bssraqrq ol pregnva wbxrf. Ohg url, jung gur uryy. Whfg fxvc ba gb
gur arkg.
Ab punetr sbe gur nqivpr.
Sbuyfxv
Vg vf orggre gb or cvffrq
bss guna cvffrq ba.
dyer@dec-vaxuum.UUCP (01/29/86)
Re: traditional values - offensive to Extremists of any sort______
The issue isn't whether the joke is offensive or not. I
get the feeling that many who would defend the joke are viewing
those who oppose the joke as prudes who object to sexual referen-
ces (despite the fact that many sex-oriented jokes appear in
net.jokes without inspiring the commentary this one has).
The issue isn't sex, or prostitution, but the fact that it
characterizes accusations of rape as something that a woman (or a
"lowly" woman, as most people view prostitutes) does trivially or
capriciously. What's funny about that?
Woolley defended his joke by claiming that the humor lies
in the realization that the woman is a prostitute. I doubt it.
Consider the following joke:
IRS Auditor: I'm sorry, but you can't deduct your
bed as a business expense.
Woman: You can when you're in my line of work.
Even though we can gather from this joke that the woman is a
prostitute, it's not funny.
No, the "humorous" aspect of Woolley's joke is that the
woman off-handedly makes a false accusation of rape. I imagine
that those who can't handle the reality about rape might find some
relief - perhaps some comic relief - in a joke that promotes myths
that some would prefer to hang on to.
<_Jym_>
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::' :: `:::: Jym Dyer ::::' :: `::::
::' :: `:: Dracut, Massachusetts ::' :: `::
:: :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :: ::
:: .::::. :: DYER%VAXUUM.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA :: .::::. ::
::..:' :: `:..:: {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|ucbvax} ::..:' :: `:..::
::::. :: .:::: decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-vaxuum!dyer ::::' :: `::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::whitehur@tymix.UUCP (Pamela K. Whitehurst) (01/30/86)
In article <793@decwrl.DEC.COM> dyer@dec-vaxuum.UUCP writes: > Woolley defended his joke by claiming that the humor lies >in the realization that the woman is a prostitute. I doubt it. >Consider the following joke: > > IRS Auditor: I'm sorry, but you can't deduct your > bed as a business expense. > Woman: You can when you're in my line of work. > >Even though we can gather from this joke that the woman is a >prostitute, it's not funny. I think Jym's joke is just as funny as the comics that portray people claiming pets as dependents. It raises the question - can the IRS deny business expenses in areas where prostitution is legal? IRS Auditor: I'm sorry, but you can't deduct your bed as a business expense. Woman (or Man): You can in this city. -- +-------------------------------------------------------+ | General Disclaimer: The above opinions are my own and | | do not necessarily reflect the opinions | | of McDonnell Douglas Corporation. | +-------------------------------------------------------+ PKW hplabs!oliveb!tymix!whitehur
jeffw@midas.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (02/02/86)
In article <793@decwrl.DEC.COM> dyer@dec-vaxuum.UUCP writes: >Re: traditional values - offensive to Extremists of any sort______ > > The issue isn't sex, or prostitution, but the fact that it >characterizes accusations of rape as something that a woman (or a >"lowly" woman, as most people view prostitutes) does trivially or >capriciously. What's funny about that? Nothing is funny if it strikes too close to home. I suspect that your work in this area, with its attendant knowledge of all of the very unfunny things that are part of rape, makes it far too close to home for you. > Woolley defended his joke by claiming that the humor lies >in the realization that the woman is a prostitute. I doubt it. >Consider the following joke: > > IRS Auditor: I'm sorry, but you can't deduct your > bed as a business expense. > Woman: You can when you're in my line of work. > >Even though we can gather from this joke that the woman is a >prostitute, it's not funny. But it *is* funny! Never have I seen anyone so brilliantly disprove their own point. > No, the "humorous" aspect of Woolley's joke is that the >woman off-handedly makes a false accusation of rape. I imagine >that those who can't handle the reality about rape might find some >relief - perhaps some comic relief - in a joke that promotes myths >that some would prefer to hang on to. Since you don't think the joke is funny, you are uniquely unqualified to say where the humor in it lies. I found it moderately funny, because of the sudden realization that the woman is a prostitute; it bothered me also, *because of the false accusation angle*. Therefore, I think it highly unlikely that the humor in the joke is anything like you describe. Actually, the real problem here is that people on the net just can't get used to the idea that net.jokes is a totally open house. Didn't think something you saw on it was funny? Tough. Don't read it then. Jokes which might be offensive are supposed to be rotated to minimize the mismatching of tastes, and this one definitely should have been, but if it wasn't, that is the *only* cause *anyone* has for *public* complaint. [change in address occurs here] I agree with Fohlski - don't defend yourself from people who don't like your jokes. Post another instead - but consider rotating it. Jeff Winslow
nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA) (02/06/86)
> Actually, the real problem here is that people on the net just can't get > used to the idea that net.jokes is a totally open house. Oh? "Totally open" except for comments about the offensiveness of some jokes? > Didn't think > something you saw on it was funny? Tough. Don't read it then. Would you be among those that also advocate that if blacks (or women, or whatever) don't like discriminatory behavior directed against them, they should stay away from places and people where it is found (i.e., stay in their place)? Nancy Parsons
goudreau@dg_rtp.UUCP (Bob Goudreau) (02/10/86)
In article <1094@druxo.UUCP> nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA) writes: >> Actually, the real problem here is that people on the net just can't get >> used to the idea that net.jokes is a totally open house. > >Oh? "Totally open" except for comments about the offensiveness of some >jokes? No, "Totally open" for *JOKES*. Of all (including offensive) sorts. The place for comments about offensiveness is here, net.jokes.d. Bob Goudreau
jeffw@midas.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (02/13/86)
And now, for a mild response to a insulting article: In article <1094@druxo.UUCP> nap@druxo.UUCP (ParsonsNA) writes: >> Actually, the real problem here is that people on the net just can't get >> used to the idea that net.jokes is a totally open house. > >Oh? "Totally open" except for comments about the offensiveness of some >jokes? The newsgroup is titled "net.jokes". That means it's for jokes. Within that one, minor restriction, it's a totally open house. The forum for comments about the offensiveness of jokes is net.jokes.d. No one's expression is being limited. If you insist on reading my statements without realizing their context, you will never make sense of them. Don't you *want* to understand what I mean? >> Didn't think >> something you saw on it was funny? Tough. Don't read it then. > >Would you be among those that also advocate that if blacks (or women, or >whatever) don't like discriminatory behavior directed against them, they >should stay away from places and people where it is found (i.e., stay in >their place)? No. I'm still trying to figure out what this apparently gratuitous insult has to do with the content of net.jokes. Jeff Winslow "Why do you hate the Socratic method?"