BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

I am glad I didn't see it. It really is a shitty thing to say, but I realize that He is one of those comedians that says horrible things about everything just to push the limit. Ugh.

I've been a Howard Stern fan for more than fifteen years. Every once in a while, he ridicules something that I am into. That doesn't make him any less funny, it makes him an equal opportunity offender.

I felt the same way when that clip was played on Tosh.0

Eh, yeah. Gray area here, as tosh is all about shock. He's a raw version of Larry the Cable Guy.

If Larry the Cable Guy was actually funny, that is.

"ridiculing something you are into" is showing a picture of a guy on a bike and saying .

making a joke like that about a drunk asshole slamming their car into 100 cyclists is something competely different.

it's certainly tempting to apply a double standard to people i otherwise like, like tosh, vs jackasses like pintek, kornheiser, etc. i know there's a distinction to be drawn, or at least you can probably rationalize a distinction to yourself - but if it went down like nick described it, that's over the line.

It would be a double-standard for me to take it so seriously. I have been entertained by far too-many people on that show who were probably just as upset as Nick that they were showing their offensive clip.

Edit: "accidentally" went political.

To me it wasn't just an offensive clip. I used to love the show and I have no problem laughing at myself. However, this wasn't just an offensive clip with some shock comedy commentary.

If they showed a video of a kid walking into a school in shooting a gun into a crowd of 100 people and hitting 40 of them, along with a comment to the likes of, "We all wish we could do this," would you still classify Daniel Tosh as a "equal opportunity offender"?

How is this any different? [Beside that idea that it is socially acceptable to joke about hurting or killing people based solely on the fact they are on a bicycle.]

Me, personally? Yes. I would feel like a hypocrite otherwise. But you are entitled to your feelings and opinions, and I would never judge them.

Edit: That doesn't mean I would think it was funny. Funny is subjective. Offensive is also subjective.

If you are going to stand by that, good for you, and I'll respect that.

The thing is, I have a feeling that you are one of very few who would stand by a statement like that defending someone poking fun at an event where a single person purposely attacked 100 people with intentions of hurting them.

I might have defended him poking fun if it was funny (I think I stated that I didn't think it was funny). I am quite happy to be in a minority when it comes to defending the freedom of entertainers to use whatever ideas they may have to elicit emotion from their audience. It doesn't mean I agree with them.

Nick I'm glad you called it out as you see it. Stating your objection and refusing to watch the show is not the same as censorship.

Another thread started this morning was entitled "Pittsburgh to Washington DC — Has the TSA started train-raping yet?" That's pretty offensive to anyone who has actually been raped or known someone who has, or who has been subjected to some of the more severe interrogation techniques the US has used as part of the "war on terror," or who has been subjected to rape as an instrument of war (Libya, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Sudan, Germany, etc), or a means of gender oppression within the troops (US).

Being allowed to state that one takes offense is just as important to "freedom of speech" as protecting the speech of those with whom we disagree.

@Pseudacris - I agree with everything you just said. Well stated.

The term rape/raping can upset a person, as can calling something "retarded." Personally, I try to always put things in context and not get upset over words because I have found that I often misunderstand the meaning/intent of another person. That's not to say that we shouldn't be sensitive to how we use words. In fact, I believe it is healthy to be reminded that some people do take offense to something that we may personally hold trivial (abuse of the word, not the action, that is). Thank you Pseudacris for that reminder.

What Tosh said is on a different level. There is no misunderstanding. Yes, he is a comic at others' expanse but there is always some truth hidden in humor. I'm not going to accuse Tosh himself of having bitterness towards bicyclists (and in fairness he may not have perceived the slight as a big deal at the time), but who ever wrote that line most certainly has a problem with bicyclists.

Also, I'm sorry but I can't resist: Have a Roethlis-burger, it'll rape your taste buds!

Would you consider the above example offensive? I believe it is. However, it is intentionally offensive in order to get a point across and to shame the player. In a similar light, I'm not sure that I find the other thread title offensive because many people have voiced that they actually do feel violated by TSA procedures...

Irony and Sarcasm require a shared sense of meaning and context in order to work as forms of humor. So, using your example, I would have to have some familiarity and alignment with your views about sexual assault & whether R'burger is guilty of it in order to find the joke critical of him. Otherwise, I'd presume it was foremost a tasteless play on words, not political commentary.

I feel violated by TSA procedures, but they are not performed without my consent. For the record, I fly a lot, including internationally, and I have never been raped by TSA or had them put their hands in my pants. "Cavity searches" in the prisons are widespread in the US, even if you are incarcerated prior to conviction. With TSA, I can opt not to fly.

Back to the OP: I hope that regular viewers of the show (I am not one) will write letters of complaint. Maybe the show doesn't need to be banned, but at least the comedian should know that his fan base includes cyclists who took offense at his dismissiveness.

" a shared sense of meaning and context "

That's more or less what I was trying to say... I think. :p

I think sometimes we just take it for granted that everyone is on the same page, until WHAM! We once again make an arse out of ourselves.

+1 on writing letters. It would probably be most effective to contact the parent corporation but until I stumble upon some better contacts, you can leave a message at http://www.comedycentral.com/help/questionsCC.jhtml

showed a video of a kid walking into a school in shooting a gun into a crowd of 100 people and hitting 40 of them, along with a comment to the likes of, "We all wish we could do this," would you still classify Daniel Tosh as a "equal opportunity offender"?

Depends. What grade?

@Pseudacris - while I wouldn't speak for everyone, my own experience with sexual assault leads me to object more to the TSA's practices than it does to the use of the term rape to describe them. I guess it also leads me not to mind wisecracks about school shootings.

edit again: "not mind" is not the right phrasing either. Never mind, it's complicated.

I'm not a parent - thanks for the laugh!

Wow.

I read a story in "The Week" about advice fathers give to sons. One anecdote dealt with a son who did not respond when a friend was called nigger. The boy was Jewish, and the father basically said: "every time you hear nigger, hear "dirty jew." Every time you hear spic, fag or dyke, hear "dirty jew." And take it personally."

I ride a bicycle, and I have kids, so when people make jokes about hurting or killing them, I take it personally. I think it's called empathy - the ability to put yourself in the other person's shoes.

Whether our country gives someone the right to say these things is beside the point. Whether we laugh at it, whether we fail to condemn it. That is the issue.

My call: not funny. Not acceptable.

Canned laughter. People seriously watch this crap & think it's funny? Every time I've accidentally run across the show, I've wondered who the target audience is & thought, most likely, southwestern US meth addicts.

Separate the bikes from the people on them. Is there some snide pleasure in mowing down a few dozen unmanned bicycles? Is there some snide pleasure in mowing down a few dozen people who do not that moment happen to be standing next to bicycles?

I, too, don't understand what's supposed to be funny here, and would employ a take-no-prisoners approach to anyone who even hinted at snickering about this afterward.

Much like the new lock thread, I don't have a good place to carry a gavel on my bike so I'll try not to make judgements.

I ride a bicycle, I have kids (who love me), and I think for myself. As soon as you tell me what is funny or what I should think is acceptable, I'm out of the conversation.

No matter how strongly you believe in your opinion, it will not become an absolute fact. If you express your opinion in a public forum, don't expect everyone else to agree with it.

i have refrained from posting about the use of the word raping in the train raping thread... but, i was a bit upset to see that language there. the thread seemed to go fine and i was personally torn about bringing up use of the term because i feel like i have to do it every so often, and dont really like to have to have an argument about it

I suspect "reluctantly consensual groping" would be a better term, in the context of the TSA (and how/why does one rape a train, anyway?)

I'm not one to get worked up over most insensitive/careless/inappropriate use of offensive language. I do have to admit that this does hit a particular linguistic/cultural hot button of mine, however: the use of language with strong implications and connotations in ways that cheapen or trivialize the original concept.

For example,referring to the hijacking of one's Facebook account as "fraping" or "I've been fraped" insinuates that the degree of violation experienced because someone messed with your FB status is somehow akin to that experienced when someone is sexually assaulted. Uh, no, sorry...

Who here participated in the Viking ride?

in other news, a friend posted a great article about biking on her fb account, and tagged several cyclist friends in it. then, a non cyclist friend of hers advocated violence against cyclists, using a car mounted firebombing device. so of course, many of the folks in the post got in her (internet) face about advocating violence against people who were, first and foremost, humans....who could be her daughter's doctor, her coworkers, a neighbor, etc. So, it wasn't cool. And I dont think it is cool when any mainstream person does it either. I have another issue with tosh.0 that i could air here but it isnt bike related. so ill keep it to myself...