search results matching tag: cosby

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (83)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (11)     Comments (192)   

Spacey (Member Profile)

John Oliver - Republican Reactions to the Lewd Remarks

Khufu says...

The problem here is not that he said some dirty, piggish shit about women... it's that he said he touches them and kisses them without their consent. HUGE difference... he admitted to sexual assault and said they let him do it because he's famous. The only Bill that he should be comparing himself to is Bill Cosby.

bobknight33 said:

As far a president moral fiber We can go back to Kennedy and Clinton both banning chicks left and right. SEX is SEX . I'm sure Bush would have like some babes backing up on him but don't think it happened. Reagan and Romney seemed to carry a higher moral fiber with regards to women and random sex.

If I would put Christian values above the candidates this election then non would get my vote. That would be a bad choice. One is clearly more destructive for America than the other.

Clinton is clearly wrong choice for leadership. Since 50% ish seem to think otherwise I have not choice but to try to block her by voting Trump. Will I hold my noise and bull the leaver You bet. Slowing down Americans moral decline ( as apposed to Clinton) is a fair reason to vote for Trump. Getting jobs creation going is a reason for a Trump vote.


If this was 30 years ago and Trump ( Bush Clinton) was running , do you think the media would have put it out? not a chance in hell? No network president would allow it.

This country has lowered it moral standard to a new low . And that is why this video was put out.

Sithstress (Member Profile)

John Oliver: Charter Schools

poolcleaner says...

What did Jello ever do to you, huh? Poor guy... stealing his band's royalties and hiding it, then admitting in court he knew about it and just didn't know what to do about it, losing the rights to his own band and now having difficulty keeping Alternative Records afloat. But what do you expect from a dude who doesn't give a fuck about money?

Oh wait... jello, as in J-E-L-L-O and Fat Albert and the chicken heart and raping women -- what's his name...? OH -- Bill Cosby? Oh. Yeah, fuck that guy. Insipid comedian who criticized other black comedians and black culture in general, meanwhile he was raping women. Pillar of the community, that man. Family man.

Oh wait... this is about charter schools?! I'm only 2 minutes in and it's completely derailed me!!!

Most Lives Matter | Full Frontal with Samantha Bee

ChaosEngine says...

Well, first off, the part about sterilising and killing was pretty obviously tongue in cheek, although I take your point that some Trump supporters might make the same point seriously.

That said, I have an expectation that the people on this site are smart enough to read what I said as comic hyperbole. As for it being in poor taste, that's up to the listener. I certainly found it in much better taste than Jim Jeffries bit on Bill Cosby, but as you quoted Reginald D Hunter "take it from the rest of us who did laugh--it was fuckin' funny."

All comedy aside, I was being 100% serious when I said that if you really believe in something so much that no evidence will change your mind, then you shouldn't be voting let alone running for office.

As for getting the same response at the DNC.... you're almost certainly right. It would be about different issues (probably vaccines, GMOs and the like), but they would be just as wrong as the Republicans.

That anger is real and not at all misguided. Woolly thinking has held the human race back for millennia and caused untold suffering and horror: racism/slavery, sexism, homophobia, the "war on drugs", climate change, alternative medicine.... do I need to go on?

I'm not saying you can't have a firmly held belief, and I'm not even saying that everything you believe must be fully supported by evidence, but everyone (myself included) should be willing to at least question their own dogma.

"Would you reconsider in the face of new evidence?" should be the simplest question to answer for anyone.

SDGundamX said:

stuff

Jim Jefferies on Bill Cosby and Rape Jokes

SDGundamX says...

Wow, didn't expect to see the comments section explode like this. Seems like some people took what he was saying seriously in spite of the multiple disclaimers he gives the audience that this whole bit is a joke.

I could absolutely see why someone who is an actual Cosby rape victim and takes Jefferies's words seriously would be offended. I could absolutely see someone not being able to transcend their own personal pain in order to see the irony in this bit. But this seems like a wholly different kind of joke from the one Dave Tosh allegedly made in which it was really unclear whether he was joking or not about inviting audience members to rape a woman for daring to heckle him during a set. I don't see any malice in this routine whatsoever.

If you don't find it funny, that's fine. Every joke doesn't have to be funny to every single person on the planet. And if you don't approve of rape jokes, that's fine too. Like Reginald D. Hunter says, go ahead and withhold your laughter. "But take it from the rest of us who did laugh--it was fuckin' funny."

Jim Jefferies on Vaccinating his child (autism Prequel)

Jim Jefferies on Vaccinating his child (autism Prequel)

Jim Jefferies on Bill Cosby and Rape Jokes

Chairman_woo says...

I fear you have misunderstood what I was getting at.

He talks for full minute about the ironic idea of the victims hypothetically having a sense of cognitive dissonance about the experience (done from his perspective).

Timestamp: 3:40ish to 4:50ish

I don't for a moment think he is suggesting they actually did, but the juxtaposition of that can be funny for the reasons I already outlined.
i.e. it is a common phenomenon in other areas of our experience, with people we idolise. By associating it with an experience in which we presume most people wouldn't or didn't feel that way, we have more strings of that irony thrown into the comedy orchestra.

Cosby is famous and loved and his fans presumably find him funny. There is therefore humour in the ridiculous idea that there might be some starstruck joy in being violated by said idol.

I think the bit worked perfectly if one can detach oneself from ideological prejudices.

As I already said, Louis's bits about paedophilia don't appear to be doing anything different here and thus far you have failed to explain how they actually differ, other than using the unqualified term "truthful".

Louis talks about their desires and relates them in a way universal to the human condition. This is precisely what much of Jim routine is clearly doing. "think about the thing you really love to do, well that's how Bill feels about rape" (paraphrased).

I can't see a distinction right now other than you appear to be much more emotionally sensitive to the rape thing. This is understandable, but I'm not seeing the lack of equivalence between the two comics here in terms of composition and implied meaning?

This whole bit felt deeply multi stranded and was tackling many disparate concepts at once. The gradation of rape was merely one of them and I think it's unfair to break it down to only one, or to deny the "truthfulness" hiding behind the sham.

Without that "truthfulness" the whole bit doesn't work, the assumption that the audience recognises the reality beneath the sham is unavoidable. Unless of course you think the audience and or Jim to be genuinely callous and misogynistic (which you've made clear you do not).

I guess my whole point is that the two bits are functionally almost identical. The only difference I can really see is a different style of delivery and subject matter.

I notice you appear to have dodged the comparisons to his war jokes?

Is there no moral equivalence there? If anything there is far less empathy and personal "truth" being explored. The "little cunt" just dies, Jim never attempts to humanise him or relate the kids experience in an ironic way.

By your logic that routine should be far more offensive surely? (especially when we consider that life and subsequent brutal death in a warzone is quite possibly a more horrible experience than most rapes, especially the kind being discussed here)

bareboards2 said:

@Chairman_woo

"Presumably it's the other thread that's proving challenging, i.e. the masochistic idea of enjoying ones abuse?"

I scanned the comment thread and didn't see anything about this. Are you saying that is what the comedy bit is saying?

I would suggest that you misunderstood his comedic point, like, entirely. Not that I thought it was funny, but I thought he was trying to point up that rape is terrible and that it is "funny" to give different types of rapes grades to bring that point home.

After all, he says repeatedly, I hate rape. I believed him.

I thought it was poorly constructed and not "truthful" like Louis CK gets to the truth of horrible things. But whatever. Not everyone is as brilliant as Louis CK.

However. If you think the joke was some women actually enjoy being digitally raped because they like the idea of being taken against their will in their sexual fantasies, then, to me, you are proving my point that this bit doesn't work.

Of course, it is possible that was indeed the "joke." If it is, then I actively detest this bit and how it actively supports rape culture in our society.

I'm not judging sexual fantasies -- they are what they are. There is, however, a deep difference between sexual fantasies and sexual play and actually, literally, being raped. (I recommend reading Dan Savage's sex advice column. This topic comes up a lot.)

I don't think that is what he meant though. I think the joke is just poorly constructed and he needs to work on it more.

Jim Jefferies on Bill Cosby and Rape Jokes

Chairman_woo says...

I guess that's where we differ.

I find it funny precisely because such things really happen.

In a world where no such cruelty exists, I think this kind of material would then become empty and pointless. Comedy thrives on the defiance of our misery.

I dare say it would get less of a laugh in Sweden for this very reason.

I'm clearly in the minority here, but then I suspect few people have developed the same sense of cynical detachment I have (working with the severely mentally I'll and dieing will do that to you).

The humour is definitely there, I guess you just need a suitably fucked up perspective to appreciate it.

Out of curiosity, did you find Jim's old bit about the child getting shot when he was in Iraq funny? I might suggest that is an even more cruel and fucked up situation than the subject matter being discussed here.

Would that only become funny when children are no longer victims of wars? Or is it funny precisely because of the incomprehensible cruelty and misfortune underlying it?

Perhaps you have an easier time detaching yourself from something that isn't as likely to happen to you? This seems reasonable, but I don't see how it precludes such material from being funny, only more challenging for one to engage with. (and thus more powerful if one can do so)

To bring in a thread from another reply "And this is the brilliance of Louis -- that he lays bare the humanity of even pedophiles. The truth of pedophiles."

In what sense is Jim not doing the same thing here? He is flippantly exploring Cosby's desire to victimise women, we all have desires and sometimes act on those impulses when we shouldn't.
Rape is an extreme example, but the thought process is ultimately the same thing writ large. "I want a thing I can't have, but I'm doing it anyway".
I might argue he is laying bare the universal human condition in just the same way, albeit with something closer to home for most people than paedophilia.

Presumably it's the other thread that's proving challenging, i.e. the masochistic idea of enjoying ones abuse? And again, there is something deeply fucked up at the heat of the human condition here. Deriving pleasure from victim hood, or having messed up priorities about fame and opportunity.
Stockholm syndrome, abused partners loving their spouses, groupies allowing themselves to be abused just to be near their idols.

We are really that fucked up as a species sometimes, cognitive dissonance is almost a way of life for most of us in our own little ways. It's clearly a deeply risque subject, but there is something dark at the core of the human condition there none the less.

The actual victims don't need to have the kind of mixed up priorities Jim is alluding to, we only have to recognise that we posses the capacity for that dissonance ourselves. (The joke being at the expense of our own inherent hypocrisies, not specific victims)

The only big difference I can really see is that child rape is much rarer than the kind being discussed here. (and thus I suppose easier for most to detach themselves from)

Is it really any less horrific? Surely if anything it is far more terrible for most victims and usually seems to cause more damage to their lives.

How does Louis's material on Child rape remain funny in a world where children are raped, yet Jim's material about women being raped only become funny in a world where they do not get raped?

Paedophiles have a culture too. They form groups, exchange materials, praise each others work etc. etc. Not to mention grooming rings and other such reprehensible things.

I understand that a particular subject can strike too close to home, but for me that was my failing to rise above my own fears and traumas. When I finally got to a place where I could laugh at my own victim hood, it was one of the most liberating experiences of my life. (Don't get me wrong, that shit never completely goes away)

bareboards2 said:

@Chairman_woo

If you read my original comment, that says it all about how I feel about this particular "rape joke."

It'll get funny when we don't live in a world where women are fingered while passed out and teenage boys take video of the assault instead of stopping it. Like those Swedish bicyclists did.

Maybe these jokes are funnier in Sweden, where sexual assault isn't the norm.

Reginald D Hunter - Women Drivers and "F" You Movies

Jim Jefferies is Autistic

Jim Jefferies is Autistic

Jim Jefferies on Donald Trump

Jim Jefferies on Donald Trump



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon