Vulgarity in humor is nothing new. One might even call it cliché. Whether in Shakespearean plays, on Vaudeville stages or on Comedy Central, offensive humor is everywhere. While it is nearly impossible to define exactly what makes people laugh, blatant and/or intentional offensiveness is often so different from normal behavior that it comes off as funny. Creating laughter seems harmless enough, but disrespectful jokes, though intended to be humorous, are often vilified when their content involves especially taboo subjects.
It wouldn’t make sense to argue that off-color jokes are “right” or “wrong,” since such categories are incredibly subjective. A quip about someone’s mother could deeply offend one person and crack up another. A joke about rape, the Holocaust or race, on the other hand, presents a much more skewed scale. The offense involved with subjects such as these is not easily brushed off. Without a doubt, offensive jokes can be oppressive or hurtful, but this does not have to be the case. In an intentionally comedic setting, like a comedy show or a stand-up club, the goal of these jokes is not to deride or degrade those who are on the receiving ends. Rather, the jokes purposefully present a hypothetical scenario that the audience finds funny, as such a scenario seems absurd when one imagines it actually taking place. Thus, it is critical to separate a bit of humor from advocacy or approval of the offensive scenario itself. Casting off offensive material as forbidden for fear of hurting others does not minimize but rather strengthens the negative subjects.
In many cases, such as formerly popular blackface performances, or jokes about Jews circulated by hardcore Nazis, humor with abhorrent content lampoons groups in order to intentionally reinforce a hateful notion. These instances, however, are distinct from comedic performances as a form of expression. Expressive performances use offense to create humor, which is different from using humor to communicate or mask bigotry. Even if a hateful person attempted to hide offensive beliefs through a “humorous” performance, he or she would be simply using humor rather than creating it. This dividing line, though narrow, is critical to understanding offensive jokes. Deliberate performances, such as those on national television or in famous comedy clubs are intended, above all, to make people laugh, as opposed to spreading harmful diatribes. One should strive to recognize this intent before trying to silence performers for supposedly having intolerant or insensitive sentiments.
Offensive humor in these settings is not harmless, but those who cast comedians as hatemongers or proponents of ghastly concepts are misunderstood. These accusations, in fact, miss the point of a joke entirely. For instance, the humor website thingx.tv published a piece, ““Thing X Apologizes”:http://www.thingx.tv/articles/thing-x-apologizes-2287/index.html,” which included sarcastic bits such as “We’d also like to say ‘we are sorry’ to the dozens of schoolchildren we accidentally released nerve gas on in our testing chambers the year we released our Christmas album.” Certainly, that quote contains dark subjects, but the casual manner in which murdering children is discussed is the essence of the joke, rather than the act itself. To say that this joke was, at its core, anything more than a concocted idea — albeit a terrifying one — would strip it of all its humorous character. Doing so turns entertainment into dreadful encouragement, a blatant error. Separating the essence of a joke from the offensive notion itself is, of course, more difficult in less overstated examples, such as a joke about a woman’s “place” being the kitchen. Despite the dividing line between humor and pure insult being blurred, describing a scenario in which a woman is perpetually and unquestioningly bound to cooking and cleaning is still absurd, making the situation a jest, instead of a hope of the joke teller.
Some suggest that crass jokes have a more sinister, hidden effect on people in that they create a subconscious approval or acceptance of offensive behavior among those who tell the jokes and those who laugh at them. In today’s society, where things like sexism, racism, and sexual abuse are discouraged yet regrettably present, jokes about these taboos may seem to perpetuate their existence. This notion, in many cases, ignores the nature of the offensive joke in an explicitly expressive performance. Comedian John Mulaney plays with racial stereotypes in his stand-up by, for example, claiming to date a Jewish woman “on purpose” because he doesn’t “have to guess what she’s thinking.” The joke is inherently based off of a stereotype, but the humor derives from the idea that it is ridiculous that Mulaney would accept that all Jewish women are naturally frank and babbling and date one for that reason. Instead of reinforcing the stereotype, Mulaney makes it an absurdity — quite the opposite of making racism an acceptable social norm.
I do not mean to say that this kind of humor is harmless. Often, as with comedian Daniel Tosh’s quote, in reference to a heckler “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by, like, five guys right now? Like right now?,” what is intended to be humorous is lazy and repugnant instead — “wouldn’t it be funny” could easily be replaced with “it would be unexpected” in Tosh’s quote for a slightly better comic effect.
In addition, offensive jokes, by definition, involve horrible concepts. Telling these jokes could simply remind an audience of something painful instead of making them laugh. A joke about a dead baby would fall horribly flat if told to parents who had suffered that kind of tragedy. That being said, jokes of all sorts involve a degree of creativity. Attempting to paint this creativity, no matter how it takes form, as bad, or somehow not allowed, does nothing to mitigate the offensive character of the subject matter. Rather, it is my belief that censoring offense gives taboos more power, preventing them from being lampooned or brought into greater awareness.
Because every person has a distinct sense of humor, attempting to impose a limit on how offensive jokes should be would limit expression more than it would curtail potential harm. Still, comedians must keep in mind that some jokes are best left told to particular groups who will appreciate them as opposed to the huge audiences associated with famous performances that are bound to have some easily upset members. But all in all, it is far better to be offensive than to be silenced, and what better way to be offensive than by making others laugh?
Walter Keady is a Viewpoint writer for The Cavalier Daily.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 2 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 4 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | April 25, 2024Instead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
