tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post1249959954080440240..comments2023-10-26T22:06:11.166+11:00Comments on Metamagician3000: A million laughs at the GACRussell Blackfordhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-66432734047484566952012-04-19T18:02:22.549+10:002012-04-19T18:02:22.549+10:00I think there was probably more comedy than was ne...I think there was probably more comedy than was necessary, and would have preferred some of those slots to go to non-comic speakers - either that or have one or two comedians that tend toward a more cerebral style than the ones we had to balance it out a bit.Jamiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15673076803280738814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-19020991558826776522012-04-18T09:00:55.706+10:002012-04-18T09:00:55.706+10:00@gerryorkin
No, Gerry. The rich, poor, powerful,...@gerryorkin<br /><br />No, Gerry. The rich, poor, powerful, powerless, men, women, christians, muslim, jewish, black, white, no one has the right to not be offended.<br /><br />I wonder, how many of you currently crying wolf came out in support of the Muslims right to not be offended when the prophet was caricatured? How many of you thought it was a serious problem to be remedied that artists are free to publish "offending" satire?<br /><br />One of the issues that bothers me most about religious intrusions into politics is the implicit assumption that the rules they hope to legislate presuppose that their religion will be the majority. However, rules and laws that oppress other viewpoints are double-edged swords; they are as like to cut you as to cut your enemy. The same applies to this reflexive push to smother views you don't agree with, not by social pressure but actual exclusion.<br /><br />The only way to ensure that you continue to have a voice at these things is to ensure that those who disagree with you also have a voice. Don't like what they're saying? Welcome to the free marketplace of ideas: hash it out like an adult.<br /><br />Oh, and this equivocation between a comedy routine and abuse of women is unprincipled nonsense. Either produce some evidence that Jefferies is abusing women, or can the libel.<br /><br />Hypocrisy like this is why I steer wide of the "freethought movement". You can't institutionalize skepticism any more than you can commercialize punk; the result is self-destructive in either case.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01807521208323669248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-29206640741524090172012-04-18T08:44:49.177+10:002012-04-18T08:44:49.177+10:00Anyone want to discuss the larger issue raised in ...Anyone want to discuss the larger issue raised in the original post? I.e. the balance of the sort of presentations at the GAC? Not that I know if there will even be a third one.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-41788900079799041942012-04-18T05:07:16.912+10:002012-04-18T05:07:16.912+10:00» Ophelia:
It's not an epithet if Joe tells J...» Ophelia:<br /><br /><i>It's not an epithet if Joe tells Jane she has a lovely cunt; it's not an epithet if Jane tells Joe her cunt is dripping.</i><br /><br />So, <b>in your own words</b>, Jeffries’ use is not as an epithet.<br /><br /><i>It's an epithet when someone on Twitter calls Jessica Ahlquist a worthless cunt who should be killed.</i><br /><br />Nobody here (heck, nobody in their right mind) argues this point.Konradnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-15586674724263598502012-04-18T03:00:05.533+10:002012-04-18T03:00:05.533+10:00"What is really hilarious, though, is the con..."What is really hilarious, though, is the congregation of uptight self-appointed moralists in the comments who get the vapours at the first mention of the word “cunt”. It’s hard to tell which is more psychologically revealing: being so incredibly repressed or wanting (needing, almost, it seems) to see misogyny in everything and anything."<br /><br />That's quite a misrepresentation. It's not "mention" - it's use as an epithet. I "mention" it all the time myself; it's not "uptight" or "vapours"; it's opposition to misogyny. There is a difference. It's not "repressed"; it's seeing misogyny in the use of the word "cunt" as an epithet. <i>As an epithet.</i> It's not an epithet if Joe tells Jane she has a lovely cunt; it's not an epithet if Jane tells Joe her cunt is dripping. It's an epithet when someone on Twitter calls Jessica Ahlquist a worthless cunt who should be killed.Ophelia Bensonhttp://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-86315803058567990562012-04-18T01:29:33.926+10:002012-04-18T01:29:33.926+10:00» Russell:
It seems that Jefferies uttered numerou...» Russell:<br /><i>It seems that Jefferies uttered numerous misogynist comments.</i><br /><br />Um, no, what does seem to be the case is that some people took Jefferies’s act to be misogynistic. As you haven’t seen the video, nothing else can really seem to be the case, I would submit. ;)<br /><br />Anyhow, if you (the generic you) don’t understand that a bit was not to be taken literally when the comedian <i>explicitly says</i> that it was meant to be an outragreous joke, then you shouldn’t be commenting on such things. Especially if you have to run for the smelling salts three minutes into the video and don’t watch to the end when the explanation is given.<br /><br />What is really hilarious, though, is the congregation of uptight self-appointed moralists in the comments who get the vapours at the first mention of the word “cunt”. It’s hard to tell which is more psychologically revealing: being so incredibly repressed or wanting (needing, almost, it seems) to see misogyny in everything and anything.<br /><br />(Which I would have said over there if Ophelia hadn’t banned me for even milder criticisms of her over-reactions.)Peter Beattienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-25522854336566856252012-04-17T22:43:56.638+10:002012-04-17T22:43:56.638+10:00I think Alf Garnett would be the appropriate compa...I think Alf Garnett would be the appropriate comparison rather than Louis CK. Perhaps Al Murray, but I think The Pub Landlord is toned right down (compared to some London landlords I've met!)<br /><br />If you strip the words used out of that clip, the ideas themselves are not offensive or malicious: Sex is a two way thing; men are much easier than women to turn on; men often get the blame for bad sex; and the payoff - women need a load of foreplay to be ready for sex, men only require to see a woman naked hence it's men that take the relationship seriously. The only part that was borderline was that women should look uncomfortable (while giving) oral sex.<br /><br />I am a great believer in over-using words so that they lose their power. If we can do this with racist and/or sexist words then that's all to the good, or you can take the approach that they're best avoided and hope they'll go away.March Harehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13116034158087704885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-25941121208712330662012-04-17T22:22:49.646+10:002012-04-17T22:22:49.646+10:00@March Check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?feat...@March Check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rNRHPr7Gabk.<br /><br />Seems just like an average Aussie bloke inadvertently using politically incorrect language while having no actual malice toward women to me.Gerryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02795981394416663851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-13472294693573145882012-04-17T21:46:17.082+10:002012-04-17T21:46:17.082+10:00His appropriateness at the GAC is something for th...His appropriateness at the GAC is something for the organisers and attendees to discuss, I am neither so won't comment.<br /><br />Jeffries himself, whether an act or not, appears to be a caricature of the typical Australian bloke, one slowly coming to terms with equal rights for women and finding himself completely lacking any sort of vocabulary to get his points across.<br /><br />Many of his jokes are misogynist only due to the terms he uses, the actual content is often fairly equality-based.<br /><br />Someone asked if we'd be comfortable if similar humour was aimed at blacks or Jews (aimed is a loaded term here) and I think he's the perfect character to do just that. An Aussie bloke, seeing his worldview turned upside down (blacks are just like us white blokes?) and not having the vocabulary to cope, constantly talking about us and them and making standard observational comedy about the differences between stereotypical black and white people but inadvertently using politically incorrect language while having no actual malice.March Harehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13116034158087704885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-3722629112627649822012-04-17T15:28:59.643+10:002012-04-17T15:28:59.643+10:00@ Lee
So there really is no difference between jo...@ Lee<br /><br />So there really is no difference between jokes made at the expense of the rich and powerful and those made at the expense of the abused and disadvantaged? It's just a neutral, level playing field where everyone will eventually be offended in turn, and that's just the way things are?Gerryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02795981394416663851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-78227866283489903972012-04-17T14:25:20.986+10:002012-04-17T14:25:20.986+10:00Looking at a few of his videos online I see no obv...Looking at a few of his videos online I see no obvious signals of ironic impersonation; contrast that with someone like Louis CK, whose glances and body language make it clear that his offensive jokes are actually mocking those who say or do such offensive things in the real world.<br /><br />But perhaps Jeffries is just crap at ironic impersonation. Either way, I agree with Russell that in booking him the organisers made a strategic error and with Ej about how this choice undermined what we had hoped was a genuine effort to be more inclusive of women.Gerryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02795981394416663851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-44618205944244773972012-04-17T14:15:51.708+10:002012-04-17T14:15:51.708+10:00@freckles;
I see nothing to indicate that he resp...@freckles;<br /><br />I see nothing to indicate that he respects religion in his routines, either. Yet this is not a problem. The bits that are offensive to you are unacceptable, but the bits that are not offensive to you are acceptable. Once again, I must ask: who determines what is acceptable at these conferences?<br /><br />@gerry;<br /><br />Same as above. You "found his act hysterical in parts" and yet you do not seem to recognize that his entire act is offensive to one or another group. Should you, perhaps, "get out more" so you can "put "jokes" such as [the ones that did not offend you] into a broader context"? <br /><br />Of course, the true irony here is that he is being <i>deliberately</i> offensive as part of an act tailor-made to create humor, and, lo and behold, you find yourself sometimes entertained and sometimes "offended". All I can say is, cool story bro; you don't have the right not to be offended.<br /><br />Where do you think the justification for Blasphemy Laws originates? The more I think about the kerfluffle around this guy's act, the more I think that his was the most important message of the whole conference.<br /><br />Lee.Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01807521208323669248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-21553192407506579012012-04-17T12:59:09.480+10:002012-04-17T12:59:09.480+10:00I found his act hysterical in parts but I found hi...I found his act hysterical in parts but I found his misogyny deeply distressing. Would those who were not so bothered be so comfortable if it were blacks or gays he was making fun of?<br /><br />Perhaps all the nice middle class people at the convention need to get out more so they can put "jokes" such at these into a broader context. I hear stuff like this from men locked up for battering women, from hyper masculine sportsmen and from ordinary men in pubs. They reflect a real hatred of women among some significantly large groups of men. For those of us working at the sharp end of men's violence against women, this shit isn't funny. <br /><br />I look forward to his ironic jokes about the Iranian massacre of atheists.<br /><br />GerryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-38218361221471916132012-04-17T12:55:10.410+10:002012-04-17T12:55:10.410+10:00I found Jim offensive and nasty. His comic timing...I found Jim offensive and nasty. His comic timing was excellent, but having gone off and looked more at his other work, I see nothing at all that indicates that he respects women.<br /><br />But let's think about the context in which he was presented. Two years ago, the GAC came roundly under fire for having only token women's representation, a women's panel, and two featured speakers across two days. They have clearly worked hard and had many more women thinkers presenting.<br /><br />However, this was marred by the opening night. What we had was two men making dick jokes, the fabulous Stella Young, and then a misogynist rant, with a few insults to religious folk thrown in. It didn't come across as a great way to welcome and celebrate women's contribution to atheism. It didn't make me feel comfortable or welcome. It put me on the defensive from the get go.<br /><br />And this isn't his nastiest stuff. Have a look around youtube, you'll find gems such as "women are like toilets, they're all dirty except the disabled ones". And "If I go out with a religious chick, one day she'll come home and find me raping her mother and I'll tell her I'm being mysterious". <br /><br />He might appeal to some audiences, but he's not a good choice for a diverse crowd in a movement that is still proving it can welcome, honour and celebrate women.Ej Freckleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02642949677261804868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-84204852273044772292012-04-17T12:54:46.496+10:002012-04-17T12:54:46.496+10:00This comment has been removed by the author.Ej Freckleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02642949677261804868noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-35618453088800970952012-04-17T09:28:03.765+10:002012-04-17T09:28:03.765+10:00Jacques - it seems odd to me that Graham Oppy wasn...Jacques - it seems odd to me that Graham Oppy wasn't on the program on either occasion. He's a good speaker and one of the world's leading philosophers of religion. And he's an atheist. And on the gripping hand, he lives in Melbourne so there wouldn't even be any significant expenses.<br /><br />If you were choosing just one Australian speaker for such a convention, Graham would be the obvious choice - certainly well ahead of me (though with FREEDOM OF RELIGION AND THE SECULAR STATE now published I may have caught up, well, <i>slightly</i>). Indeed, he'd be the obvious choice over almost anyone from overseas.<br /><br />That said, I should also say that I am grateful to the organisers for providing what were, on balance, very good collections of speakers on both occasions. Any suggestions or criticisms coming from me are intended to be read in that context.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-23286529433354978082012-04-17T09:26:10.970+10:002012-04-17T09:26:10.970+10:00Watch the embedded video in Ophelia's post to ...Watch the embedded video in Ophelia's post to the end, as she has apparently been unable to do. Frankly, I think if she could manage to finish it, she would probably rethink her position. Then again, having browsed the first 30 or so comments on her blog, probably not.<br /><br />Comedy is about style and timing. You don't become successful as a comedian without having a unique style. This is his, and to be honest, Jefferies is downright tame compared to others (Doug Stanhope comes to mind). If, as has been reported, he drew storms of laughter, <i>he's doing it right</i>; further, whoever booked him knew what they were doing too.<br /><br />Lets assume for a moment that his act is a straight up representation of his personal views on the matter. I find it so ironic that atheists make such a fuss about how the term 'atheist' does not imply anything further than disbelief in theism, and yet a Global "ATHEIST" Convention hosts a comedian like Jefferies and suddenly this is an affront to atheism and skepticism. Huh? Since when did atheism and skepticism entail puritanism?<br /><br />I'm an atheist, and I think Jim Jefferies is hilarious. Who defines what is acceptable at these conventions?Leehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01807521208323669248noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-89138438002443663722012-04-17T04:42:03.049+10:002012-04-17T04:42:03.049+10:00There seems to be a fair amount of sentiment that ...There seems to be a fair amount of sentiment that Jeffries should never been in the conference and those that invited him should be taken to task.<br /><br />Given that the 2012 Global Atheist Convention program has been available for some time is it reasonable to ask why the outrage after the fact ?<br /><br />And if the organizers are to be taken to task, in the future should there be a mechanism in place so this sort of thing can avoided ?<br /><br />And should such a mechanism be implemented should it apply only to stand up comedians or should it apply to all the speakers and panels in the conference ?<br /><br />You can probably see where I'm going with this, does this sort of thing become a tyranny of those who take offense, where you end up with no events or speakers that could possibly offend some group of people ?steve oberskinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-32176893501184051682012-04-16T23:41:28.157+10:002012-04-16T23:41:28.157+10:00It looks to me like the guy is just an all around ...It looks to me like the guy is just an all around misanthrope--happy to spew hatred in all directions. For example, have a look at this--<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TynFaEQj_Ys<br /><br />I think that's what we're supposed to find funny--all the stepping over the bounds. Ha ha! Other people are good at that (like Russell Brand), but I'm not about to join this guy's fan club.Jean Kazezhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06297159994901018071noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-73517286832543245642012-04-16T23:08:40.149+10:002012-04-16T23:08:40.149+10:00On the substantive point, Russell, I agree that it...On the substantive point, Russell, I agree that it would have been preferable to have a lower proportion of comedy. The non-comedic presentations were (in general) of a very high standard, and more of those would have made a very good conference even better. Hell, given Maddox's comments on the panel, a talk by her would have been interesting - not to mention you or Ophelia.Jacques Rousseauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07061757728481610205noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-64474486973279806402012-04-16T23:03:15.263+10:002012-04-16T23:03:15.263+10:00Sorry, Neil. Thanks, Russel. Somehow skipped that ...Sorry, Neil. Thanks, Russel. Somehow skipped that one comment.Mitch Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05150656713929667509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-79149110247318592322012-04-16T22:58:37.217+10:002012-04-16T22:58:37.217+10:00Neil actually clarified that he meant no sane woma...Neil actually clarified that he meant no sane woman would <i>not</i> have been made uncomfortable - just a point of information.Russell Blackfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431324430596809958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-9978996710869614432012-04-16T22:52:18.684+10:002012-04-16T22:52:18.684+10:00I saw the routine. I'm not a huge fan, to be h...I saw the routine. I'm not a huge fan, to be honest. I thought the repetitious misogyny, ironic or otherwise, became unfunny. Some of this other content was, indeed, funny to me. People's mileage clearly varies, and that's great, epsecially in light of the point I want to make:<br /><br />Just because YOU found it funny does not preclude the reactions of others. Brian says anyone who didn't like it has no business calling themself a critical thinker. Neil said any woman who felt uncomfortable could not be sane. <br /><br />I'm sorry, but that is preposterous. To have an opinion on the routine yourself is fine. To prescribe your point of view across an entire group - especially one to which you do not belong - is, to be charitable, ignorant and, to be up front, stupid.<br /><br />I'm not here to tell anyone how they should interpret Jeffries and I've put my own opinion on his act aside. But it seems that what we have here is a failure to understand that opinions <i>legitimately</i> vary about these things. Those who didn't like the routine were not insane simpletons.<br /><br />Thanks for starting the discussion, Russel.Mitch Sullivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05150656713929667509noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-36028759828464956352012-04-16T21:41:23.250+10:002012-04-16T21:41:23.250+10:00Russell, most of Jefferies' material isn't...Russell, most of Jefferies' material isn't new, so you can go to youtube and view and decide for yourself. Personally I thought it was very funny. I was just moaning last week that many of the acts at the comedy festival weren't edgy enough, and Jefferies made up for it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24761391.post-16640337872802824652012-04-16T21:41:01.897+10:002012-04-16T21:41:01.897+10:00Russell, most of Jefferies' material isn't...Russell, most of Jefferies' material isn't new, so you can go to youtube and view and decide for yourself. Personally I thought it was very funny. I was just moaning last week that many of the acts at the comedy festival weren't edgy enough, and Jefferies made up for it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com