[News] Daniel Tosh is an ass.

[strawman]

But I also don't go out looking for trouble and heckle shock comedians in the middle of their shows.

But if you did think of what you could handle afterwards! It'd be like exposing yourself to the worlds diseases so you can strengthen your immune system.

Someone could totally rip you a new one and you'd be all like, "cool story bro. Wanna beer?"

Conversely, some of the more successful comedians attribute some of their ability to the negative experiences they had earlier in life.

Perhaps by insulting others he's just trying to create more comedians?

I suppose the world just keeps going around and around.[DOUBLEPOST=1342132239][/DOUBLEPOST]

Please keep your genitalia outside of them though, unless you're posting in the NSFW forum.

I'll keep them covered, but they are staying right here with me, you understand?

 

[Necronic]

Eh.

I dunno. People already knew Tosh was offensive. Unless you're Ric Romero this ain't news. His response to the heckler was offensive, and possibly over the top, and really not that funny (way better ways to tell her to shut up while talking about anatomical stuff). But that woman was out of line for heckling as well. And if you don't think that was heckling then we're never going to be on the same page.

Hecklers get what they get, and comedians get the same. In this case the woman heckled him and got a nasty reply. Tosh's reply wasn't that funny, and so he lost the crowd.

Justice was served.

Now, let's get back to talking about his new thing I keep hearing about called "The Blogosphere".

 

[GasBandit]

Nope. People can react to things however they damn well choose. That's my entire point -- you have control over your reaction to things, for good or for ill.

But I also don't go out looking for trouble and heckle shock comedians in the middle of their shows.

So if someone were to randomly e-publish your home address, times you've been observed to arrive and depart and when you are most commonly home alone, those are just words, and you wouldn't be emotionally affected at all?

"Words are just words" is just a broken-psyche defense mechanism you've invented to deal with your pain (or perhaps, avoid dealing). If what you said was correct, there would be no such thing as libel, slander, fighting words or hate speech.

 

[Necronic]

What is your deal with taking a situation, reducing it to some fundamental concept, and then blowing it out to the most extreme situation you could?

Would you be happy about it if Han Solo and Chewie came to your door and told you that they hated you? They are just words.

 

[sixpackshaker]

Are you using the legal definition of threaten, the dictionary definition of threaten, or your own version of threaten?

Did he threaten her or did she perceive a threat in his words, or both according to your chosen definition?

Was there real motive, means and opportunity such that the threat was plausible, possible, likely, or a certainty?

I don't think anyone can argue that the environment - a comedy show - suggested that the stage performance was intended to be anything other than humor, and in fact your assertion that he asked for ideas, and then immediately used that idea suggests, if anything, only points towards this merely being part of his act.

But without video I don't think anyone not present can really make the claim you make, which is that Daniel Tosh threatened this audience member with gang rape.[DOUBLEPOST=1342130606][/DOUBLEPOST]

You've chosen a much better path than I have, that's for sure. I feel like I'm defending an idiot who probably could have handled a bully in his audience better, but can't exactly be faulted for bullying them right back.

Fine, he made it out that RAPE is A-OK it is funny for 5 men to beat and rape her because she dare put in her input when he asks for it.

Everything that is wrong with rape is held up in that joke, "wouldn't it be funny..." He took away the stigma for committing a vile act in a crowd.

It is a hostile situation, with the implication that violence will happen to her if she continues.

The threat is plausible and quite possible. Probably not likely, and nothing is certain but death and taxes.

 

[HowDroll]

Welp, this thread is going nowhere fast now.

Abandoning thread.

I think you have the right idea, my friend.

 

[GasBandit]

What is your deal with taking a situation, reducing it to some fundamental concept, and then blowing it out to the most extreme situation you could?

Would you be happy about it if Han Solo and Chewie came to your door and told you that they hated you? They are just words.

I'm not the one who asserted words only affect you if you let them. When you make an absolute assertion, as Droll has, you have to be prepared for that assertion to be put to the test. If it fails then it is unsound.

Also the Han and Chewie comparison makes no sense.

 

[LittleSin]

If that were true then the penalties for rape would be worse than the penalties for murder. Society may say that rape is worse, but it's plainly obvious that it's not, or that society isn't willing to back up its words with actions.

No offense, Steinman, but this sounds monumentally stupid.

Ploicy and laws are put into pace by men. Most men have trouble comprehending what rape does to a person.

Society says it's worst...but the men in charge can't grasp that because, I believe, it takes a decent amount of cold heartedness to go into politics of any kind.

I may be of base..but this comment just rubs me the wrong way.

 

[sixpackshaker]

I never understand a fucking thing Chewie says, and Han mumbles too much.

 

[Adam]

Sticks and stones my hurt my bones, but words.... well... they can do a lifetime of harm.

That never made any sense to me, because sticks and stones do a lifetime of harm too!

 

[LittleSin]

I knew that when I wrote it, but it irks me whenever people say that words cannot hurt them.. Because well.. They are being untrue.

Indeed.

 

[sixpackshaker]

"If you journey through this life easily offended by other people's words I think it's best for everyone if you just kill yourself,"

It is nice to know that he would have a level head about the altercation.

 

[Bubble181]

No offense, Steinman, but this sounds monumentally stupid.

Ploicy and laws are put into pace by men. Most men have trouble comprehending what rape does to a person.

Society says it's worst...but the men in charge can't grasp that because, I believe, it takes a decent amount of cold heartedness to go into politics of any kind.

I may be of base..but this comment just rubs me the wrong way.

An easier, and less sexist (men don't understand rape) and/or anti-politics (you have to be a heartless asshole to go into politics) way to respond might've been "morals and laws don't always match up; legality and morality are separated and it's foolish to view local and man-made laws as a basis for a universal moral system". I have to say, I raised my eyebrows over that phrase of Stien's, too.

 

[Adam]

I knew that when I wrote it, but it irks me whenever people say that words cannot hurt them.. Because well.. They are being untrue.

If I can be a little insensitive, words only hurt you if you let them. However, not everyone has the wherewithal to withstand that brutality. It takes a very ...strange... kind of personality to be able to stand tall under a barrage of that nature and I have the utmost respect for those that even try.

 

[LittleSin]

An easier, and less sexist (men don't understand rape) and/or anti-politics (you have to be a heartless asshole to go into politics) way to respond might've been "morals and laws don't always match up; legality and morality are separated and it's foolish to view local and man-made laws as a basis for a universal moral system". I have to say, I raised my eyebrows over that phrase of Stien's, too.

Perhaps. I wasn't trying to be PC in my statement...though if I had to change one thing it would be implying that only men have a hand in law and policy. There are just as man socially distant women out there that just can't grasp certain things.

I'm not anti-politics either. I actually endorse a little bit od coldnes in my politicians. I don't want a guy to party with if we met up..I want a guy that looks at all facts and helps guide the body he's helping rule over in the direction that'll benefit most people. This ,however, does mean that such a candidate would be a little more tense when it comes to something so...personal.

 

[Bubble181]

If I can be a little insensitive, words only hurt you if you let them. However, not everyone has the wherewithal to withstand that brutality. It takes a very ...strange... kind of personality to be able to stand tall under a barrage of that nature and I have the utmost respect for those that even try.

"Guards! Kill this intruder!" are words that tend to be quite painful for most people, really

 

[HowDroll]

I never said that words don't affect me -- in fact, I specifically said that they can and do, if you read my earlier post. I'm not a robot, and you all are blowing what I said way out of context (which is very a propos for this thread.) If my boyfriend walked up to me and said "I'm breaking up with you, you stupid bitch," of course his words would hurt me. If I got into it with some random douche on the street and he called me a cunt -- widely regarded as the worst thing you can call a woman -- I might be angry or upset, but I'd eventually come to the conclusion that the incident reflects on him being an insensitive asshole with a skewed view of human relations rather than anything about me specifically.

There is a HUGE difference between words meant to hurt or humiliate and the sort of overblown things GB was talking about. Sorry, but I don't buy for a second that Tosh's words put the woman's safety in jeopardy for a moment. If the sort of psychopath that would rape a woman as a response to Tosh's "lol wouldn't it be funny if ...?" question was sitting in the audience, yeah, I don't think Tosh's words would really have made much of a difference.

 

[Bubble181]

Perhaps. I wasn't trying to be PC in my statement...though if I had to change one thing it would be implying that only men have a hand in law and policy. There are just as man socially distant women out there that just can't grasp certain things.

I'm not anti-politics either. I actually endorse a little bit od coldnes in my politicians. I don't want a guy to party with if we met up..I want a guy that looks at all facts and helps guide the body he's helping rule over in the direction that'll benefit most people. This ,however, does mean that such a candidate would be a little more tense when it comes to something so...personal.

I know. I was pretty sure you didn't mean it as either sexist or anti-political, judging from previous posts.

Laws formed by committee never reflect what "the people" or even "the group of people in the committee" think about things, though. It's one of the big problems with compromises and decisions by committee: you get a compromise between two stupid extremes, which lands smack in the middle of nobody's-happy-valley.

 

[Adam]

Deja vu.

Simply being in the LGBT spectrum makes you an instant target for a lot of hate. Not even having done anything that would justify such actions and vitriol. People will go from liking you to hating you once they find out you are gay or whatever. Often it's also met with more than words (which further exemplifies how much is still wrong in these oh so 'tolerant' countries), but (to get back on track) even just the words can do serious damage and eventually lead to suicide (as illustrated by our very own HowDroll). This happens daily. It happens for countless people and it may happen to your children. I would not teach my kids "words don't hurt (with an implied: so stop crying about it)" because I would be lying. They can, do, and will hurt millions of people of every color, faith and gender every single day.

It's not the words that are hurting you, it's the ignorance and stupidity. If I called you a lazy American, you'd laugh and point out that you're 1) not American and 2) not lazy. If some random stranger came up to you and called you a lazy American, your response would be different.

The implication behind 'words can hurt' misses context. Ignorance and stupidity ignore context completely.

 

[Hailey Knight]

What I don't understand about this thread is why people keep referring to Tosh as a comedian.

 

[Necronic]

I'm not the one who asserted words only affect you if you let them. When you make an absolute assertion, as Droll has, you have to be prepared for that assertion to be put to the test. If it fails then it is unsound.

Ok, I'm going to draw from a strange playbook here. Word's don't hurt, not if you have a strong ego. If someone can say something and make you question your own value then you have a weak ego. They did not hurt you, you were already flawed. If someone told me "You're a rapist" it wouldn't hurt because I KNOW I'm not a rapist. If someone said "You're lazy and a fraud" then it would hurt, because my ego is weak on those things. But the words don't create reality, they only put light on reality.

You're example is different. Broadcasting personal details like that is dangerous because it leads to dangerous actions. But it's not the personal details that hurt. It's the dude showing up with a pipe.

The point is that words, unlike physical violence, don't create or change reality. If someone were to falsely accuse me of a crime that does not mean I did the crime. It may land me in jail. But it was not the words so much as the choice of the police to listen to them and arrest me that changes reality (or the person who said the words also leaving physical evidence to frame me, or tricking me into supplying my own circumstantial evidence.)

Also the Han and Chewie comparison makes no sense.

Dude it totally makes sense. That would suck. And it would suck because it would expose to me a reality where I couldn't hang out with Han and Chewie and where they thought I sucked. The words don't change that reality or create it, they just expose something that was already there.

Words are information. Information only describes (or attempts to hide) reality. They never change it.

 

[Bubble181]

But the words don't create reality, they only put light on reality.

I honestly can't tell whether this post is meant as trolling or serious. If serious, you really need to re-evaluate your views. Words don't change reality, but they change perception of reality. Both yours, and that of other people. People telling you you are worthless will make you feel worthless. This will give you a worse self-image, leading to being "weaker", to being more concerned about yourself, etc etc. People telling others you are worthless will make those others look at you in a lesser light, make a worse assessment of you, and so on. People telling you that you are [insert typical insecurity here], when you're already insecure on this topic, will further increase your sensitivity to this issue, thus causing (possibly over-)reactions.
To take a very stereotypical example: teenage girls who are insecure about their looks/weight, get picked on for being fat, go on diets and end up anorexic. Don't start about anorexia b eing a disease and not brought on by bullying - if you really want to argue that, I'll just put in another example; I can think of dozens.

Reality is ultimately quite unimportant in most cases. Perception is much more important, and this can easily be changed by words. Words have power.

 

[strawman]

No offense, Steinman, but this sounds monumentally stupid.

Many monuments could be built to my stupidity, but no one ever bothers to actually build one. I remain an unrecognized genius of stupidity.

I suspect the reason why this statement rubs people the wrong way is that both are horrifyingly terrible things, and the reality is that we're really comparing things so far at the other end of the spectrum from happy happy joy joy that they might as well be the same and being that close at the end it's disingenuous to compare them, especially since there are examples of rapes that are clearly worse than some murders, and examples of murders that are clearly worse than some rapes.

You can't generalize, as I did, that "murder is worse than rape" because that's not going to be true for every instance of murder and rape.

However, the law does take into account, to some degree, the severity of the act in either case and thus there are some rapists that get worse punishment than some murderers.

But strictly speaking, comparing one count of rape against one count of murder with no extenuating factors, no pre-meditiation in either case, etc, the punishment for murder is generally more severe, and I don't think it's because lawmakers can't know, or don't know, or haven't taken into account the trauma that rape can inflict.

So, very generally speaking, I don't think our society holds rape to quite the severity as murder. I don't think the law is far from what the majority actually believe the punishment should be. I think that if people want to punish rapists more harshly than murders, generally, then society will have to change to believe that rape is a worse crime than murder. I don't think it's the other way around.

 

[Soliloquy]

Many monuments could be built to my stupidity, but no one ever bothers to actually build one. I remain an unrecognized genius of stupidity.

I suspect the reason why this statement rubs people the wrong way is that both are horrifyingly terrible things, and the reality is that we're really comparing things so far at the other end of the spectrum from happy happy joy joy that they might as well be the same and being that close at the end it's disingenuous to compare them, especially since there are examples of rapes that are clearly worse than some murders, and examples of murders that are clearly worse than some rapes.

You can't generalize, as I did, that "murder is worse than rape" because that's not going to be true for every instance of murder and rape.

However, the law does take into account, to some degree, the severity of the act in either case and thus there are some rapists that get worse punishment than some murderers.

But strictly speaking, comparing one count of rape against one count of murder with no extenuating factors, no pre-meditiation in either case, etc, the punishment for murder is generally more severe, and I don't think it's because lawmakers can't know, or don't know, or haven't taken into account the trauma that rape can inflict.

So, very generally speaking, I don't think our society holds rape to quite the severity as murder. I don't think the law is far from what the majority actually believe the punishment should be. I think that if people want to punish rapists more harshly than murders, generally, then society will have to change to believe that rape is a worse crime than murder. I don't think it's the other way around.

Stienman, I understand what you're trying to say, but it's my sincere advice that you stop talking and leave this thread before you lose the respect of every forum member involved in this argument.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Stienman, I understand what you're trying to say, but it's my sincere advice that you stop talking and leave this thread before you lose the respect of every forum member involved in this argument.

Yeah, it's coming across as "the law is correct because it's the law".

And I'm wishing Shego was here, so bad.

 

[Bubble181]

I don't think the law is far from what the majority actually believe the punishment should be.

I'm pretty sure most people would like both to be sentenced quite a lot more harshly than they are at the moment. Heck, both rape and murder will usualyl get you less than 10 years in prison in Belgium - not because "we, the people" choose it to be so, but because practically anything will be "downgraded" from requiring a jury to being judged only by a judge. However, judges can give a maximum of 5 years in prison, not counting pre-arrest and such - giving you a max of around 10 years. Saves money on juries and on prisons, you know.

 

[sixpackshaker]

And Bubble your nation's culture is nowhere near as violent as ours.

 

[Jay]

Yeah, it's coming across as "the law is correct because it's the law".

And I'm wishing Shego was here, so bad.

Maybe she was in the theater....

 

[Bubble181]

And Bubble your nation's culture is nowhere near as violent as ours.

True - and I'll add that the more violent varieties tend to still get tried before a jury and get higher sentences. Still, even a fairly non-violent rape deserves more than 5 or 6 years, to me.

 

[Hailey Knight]

Maybe she was in the theater....

Wouldn't it be funny if when Tosh left, Shego came up behind him with a giant dildo and...



HAR HAR JUST A JOKE U MAD BROS DERP DERP

 

[Silent Bob]

https://www.halforums.com/threads/daniel-tosh-is-an-ass.27978/#post-966635

He posted about 10 videos in total to make his point, while missing the point.

Now that's not fair at all. I get the point. And I get that Daniel Tosh is an ass for his comments. I think you're missing my point that what he was originally doing before getting heckled was not so out of the ordinary for comedy (hence all the videos).[DOUBLEPOST=1342140588][/DOUBLEPOST]

You make a compelling point, but it turns out that to some people that's funny. That is merely another type of humor for them. Off-ending people. They believe its funny to annoy and upset others. To tip and trip them up, make them feel uncomfortable, and cause them to question their assumptions and beliefs.

To some degree it's a bit like sarcasm. Some people will never find it funny, and can't possibly understand why others would find it funny.

But the reality is that people view things from fundamentally different perspectives. Something that would offend me might not offend you. If you don't find it offensive, you might find it funny because you know me to some degree, and therefore it becomes an inside joke.

Well known inside jokes that are offensive to some might include racist jokes like certain ethnicities/races preferring fried chicken, or other ethnicities/races being known as penny pinchers.

So then the question is not whether being offensive is the objective and thus the "bad" type of comedy, but whether the intended audience accepts it as a joke at the expense of those that would become offended.

If we got rid of all the jokes in the world which can only occur at the expense of another human, I think we'd eliminate most jokes. It's often when we identify our own foibles and poke fun at them that some humor occurs. I particularly enjoy self deprecating comedians, but that doesn't mean I don't laugh at the jokes at the expense of law enforcement, TSA workers, and programmers.

It's not funny that he suggested rape as the answer to her heckling.

It's funny that with one single sequence of words he was able to completely shut her down and get her to high tail it out of there.

He didn't threaten her. He didn't punch her. He didn't do anything but use his words.

And people laughed not because they were all imagining her getting raped. They laughed because she started a fight and lost so completely that she fled. She didn't flee in fear, she fled due to complete humiliation.

And once she found a safe spot away from him behind the Internet and the specter of rape culture, she renewed her attack and said he was a bad comedian for humiliating her so badly she couldn't keep her resolve and she fled with her tail between her legs.

She's not trying to stop rape culture, she's trying to get back at the guy that humiliated her in front of a few hundred people so badly that they laughed at her on the way out the door.

That was awesome.[DOUBLEPOST=1342140830][/DOUBLEPOST]

See, the humour here is a bit what you said yourself: this is funny because she's humiliated. That's humour at the level of bullying and thinking it's funny to hang the nerd up the flagpole by his underwear. That's not humour, that's humiliating/degrading someone. A comedian whose schtick it is to bully and humiliate people isn't a very good comedian. He's an ass, and a bully.

Yeah, but the lady essentially was dangling her lunch money in front of the bully and then got crazy surprised that he took it and shoved her in the mud in the process.

Moral of the story: Don't heckle a guy who's profession is making fun of people.

 

[sixpackshaker]

The moral of the story is there is nothing fun about rape, unless you are the rapist.

 

[Silent Bob]

The moral of the story is there is nothing fun about rape, unless you are the rapist.

Climbing in yo windows, snatching yo people up?

 

[checkeredhat]

Yeah, but the lady essentially was dangling her lunch money in front of the bully and then got crazy surprised that he took it and shoved her in the mud in the process.

That's what rapists tend to say about rape victims.

 

[Hailey Knight]