Social Roseanne tweets outrageously racist comment about former Obama staffer Valerie Jarrett

[Islam Imamate]

Concession accepted.

I wonder if conceding is what you've always meant when you use gif responses...

 

[essie]

I got you.

The difference between comedy and other arts is that while all of art is in the cultural context, and a reflection of either the culture or a juxtaposition with another culture (real or imagined), not all of art is ironic, and only a small subset of art is meant to cause laughter via cognitive dissonance. The key is that comedy is always made through conflict. Something is the wrong size, or in the wrong place, or saying the wrong thing. That's not necessarily subversive, and I have to give a little ground there, but only a sliver. A comic could in theory be a pro-regime mouthpiece and still make humorous observations. But there is a reason that there are basically no funny conservatives.

Roseanne is an interesting case because from minute to minute we don't know if she's going to be subversive or pro-regime, and that adds an interesting twist. I suspect at least some (not close to a majority) of the backlash is because she is pro-regime.

Yes, of course comedy can be subversive but almost exclusively as an exploration of physicality (the body or otherwise) as a political weapon. Charlie Chaplin, Keaton, Bugs Bunny, etc. I don't see this in the realm of stand up comedy.

 

[Fawlty]

LOL
Now that's comedy and fine argumentation in favor of the framework of a joke attempt.
Point conceded.
You're an excellent poster.

Is this a joke?

 

[Ultra O’Dia]

If you support Trump you're going to bat for a racist, bigoted, crybaby idiot man-child. Get used to being castigated because you're on the wrong side of history. This administration is nothing but an embarrassment and a con. It is a stain on our country's history and that is all it will be remembered as.

You have zero moral ground to stand on when you treat an entire group, who are in fact individuals, with one paintbrush.
You cannot then expect others to not do the same.
This is THE mentality that enables every single atrocity, whether it is in Rwanda, Germany, Yugoslavia, India or factory farms. Grouping, labelling and reducing that labelled group to not being worth consideration.
And it doesnt matter what you think you inherit with what you have labelled yourself as, you are acting more close-minded, tribe-minded, stubborn and ignorant than the group traits of the people you have both grouped and labelled.
It would be better, even with your extremely negative view of this administration, to work to find mutual understandings and keep things from escalating, and make the best of a what you feel is a bad situation for the next two and half years. Flaming the fires of division, ignorance and hatred does not make progress. It only makes war. And that is a real conclusion, it is the last step when the talking is done. It is relevant. If that is where you are, there is zero point being on a forum talking.

 

[HomerThompson]

I wonder if conceding what you've always meant when you use gif responses...

I don't gif response good arguments.

 

[nac386]

She obviously did not mean that an Egyptian Islamist organization and a sci-fi film had a baby since that's impossible. So off the bat we know it wasn't meant to be taken literally.

This is where semantics comes in. If I call you a fat piece of shit, am I really inferring that you are large fecal matter that came out of a human body? No.

So is that a joke? I might say it's a joke, and somebody else might agree that it was funny to see you insulted like that. You might disagree, and say I was not making joke, I was just calling you names based on you being overweight and useless, in my mind.

So arguing over whether what Roseanne said was a joke or not is the most pointless argument to be having. Labeling a comment as a joke, or labeling it as not a joke, has absolutely no effect on the comment itself. We know what she said, that's all that matters. It's meaningless debate in this context.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I don't gif response good arguments.

Alright buddy...

Fawlty explained it better than I could so I'll just quote him.

It has the bones and flesh of a joke. It's an established joke premise that is exclusively a joke structure. It has two layers of abstraction. It has irony (an organization and a concept cannot breed, or breed with each other). It has a punchline that's on the higher level of abstraction (misplaced, but it's there- "Planet of the Apes"). It evokes an impossible image that also (supposedly) shares features with the subject of the joke.

It doesn't just quack- it also has feathers and a bill and webbed feet and lives in a city pond and chases kids.

If you don't buy that then whatever, I don't really care to go at it with you on this topic anymore.

 

[SMillard]

I think if you're mad at that, you might have some issues.

Why is that necessarily making it about himself, or even a bad statement? Because they're accomplishments that happened under his watch? Who cares? He's talking about the state of the nation, and how the soldiers would be proud that their sacrifice was not in vain. The horror!

First off "Happy Memorial Day" is the equivalent of "Happy anniversary of the day your brother or sister died" it's not a "happy" day. As a veteran I'd rather they not even have the holiday if it's just going to be a day where everyone goes out gets drunk and has a BBQ.

Secondly, he's stating the people who died for the country would be so happy and proud of things he is touting as accomplishments of his administration. Pretty sure they'd be a whole lot happier if they were alive and with their families. The fact that the website that sells Trump merchandise had a "Memorial day sale" was pretty offensive too.

But like you said, I must have some issues if I'm mad at that. As a veteran and someone who knew people that died in the service of the country, I think they are pretty valid issues, but I'm sure you don't care either way.

 

[Islam Imamate]

This is where semantics comes in. If I call you a fat piece of shit, am I really inferring that you are large fecal matter that came out of a human body? No.

So is that a joke?

Seriously, arguing over whether it was a joke is the most pointless argument to be having. Labeling a comment as a joke, or labeling it as not a joke, has absolutely no effect on the comment itself. We know what she said, that's all that matters.

Well yeah and that's what I've said multiple times. It being a joke isn't a defense of the tweet, its just pointing out the obvious reality of the tweet. But from there you could still argue that behind the joke there is malicious intent based on her other tweets and statements. That's fine, I was just objecting to the Jordan Peterson logic of "its not a joke, its propaganda!"

 

[Strychnine]

Just pulling up random pics of Valerie from the interwebs, with the first pic from her facebook profile. Would anyone think she's black from these? She look like a mix of Persian/Asian?

It's still a moronic tweet to post, but If Rosanne is saying she didn't think she was black, I can see why and believe her. Why was she posting anything about her anyways? Rosanne shouldn't be mocking anyone's appearance lol.

She looks Black to me but then again, I'm Black and my older sister is her exact skin complexion.

And no I won't post a pic of her for you morAns to fap to.

 

[nac386]

Well yeah and that's what I've said multiple times. It being a joke isn't a defense of the tweet, its just pointing out the obvious reality of the tweet. But from there you could still argue that behind the joke there is malicious intent based on her other tweets and statements. That's fine, I was just objecting to the Jordan Peterson logic of "its not a joke, its propaganda!"

It's both. You can say something, partially to amuse people, and partially to spread lies. Those intents are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Strychnine]

Didn't she though? According to Rogan she said she didn't know she was black. I don't even like her, and if she tweeted racist shit before, than it's karma paying her back

Make stupid tweets, get your @$$ canned.

I don't understand why some people just don't get that.

 

[Trotsky]

This thread sucks.

"Jews are subhuman rats to be exterminated ASAP."

"JOKING, guys - OBVIOUSLY I don't think Jewish people are actually rats. No one could possibly confuse a human for a rodent! Therefore JOKE."

Trump thinks being called a racist for being a racist is as bad being called an ape for being black. Sums him up nicely.

 

[FacePunch]

You have zero moral ground to stand on when you treat an entire group, who are in fact individuals, with one paintbrush.
You cannot then expect others to not do the same.
This is THE mentality that enables every single atrocity, whether it is in Rwanda, Germany, Yugoslavia, India or factory farms. Grouping, labelling and reducing that labelled group to not being worth consideration.
And it doesnt matter what you think you inherit with what you have labelled yourself as, you are acting more close-minded, tribe-minded, stubborn and ignorant than the group traits of the people you have both grouped and labelled.
It would be better, even with your extremely negative view of this administration, to work to find mutual understandings and keep things from escalating, and make the best of a what you feel is a bad situation for the next two and half years. Flaming the fires of division, ignorance and hatred does not make progress. It only makes war. And that is a real conclusion, it is the last step when the talking is done. It is relevant. If that is where you are, there is zero point being on a forum talking.

LMAO at this trash post coming from a disgusting person like you. Get a grip, go back and look at your dogshit post history, and quit smelling your own farts and pretending you smell like roses.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Is this a joke?

Nope.
Your post was on point.

 

[Islam Imamate]

It's both. You can say something, partially to amuse people, and partially to spread lies. Those intents are not mutually exclusive.

I agree, which is why I objected to the statement. If anything propaganda is more effective when it also has merit as art, whether as a comedy or tragedy or what have you. Which is why I don't buy the mutually exclusive distinction between art and propaganda.

 

[Fawlty]

For example, I could call somebody a fat Irish piece of shit to make people laugh at him, is that a joke? Sure, I guess you could say that, since I wanted somebody to laugh. Does that mean I didn't mean it and that it was not meant to be harmful? Of course not.

That's a good case and I'd be happy to write for about a hundred years about it. The crux of this is whether we can divine the intent of the joke teller. The first order is structure. Is this a joke structure? No, there is no joke framework in "fat Irish piece of shit." This is why Roseanne's example is trivial- we don't even need to get into these weeds- it was a joke because it was a Joke. Self-evident, self-consistent. But fat Irish piece of shit is more difficult.

If you call a skinny Scot a fat Irish piece of shit, that is a joke.
If you call a fat person who thinks he is not fat, and claims to be three-quarters Scotish a fat Irish piece of shit, that is a joke.
If you call a person a fat Irish piece of shit at a stuffy, formal function, that is a joke.

Those three examples are enough to make the point. In the first example, it's just straight up cognitive dissonance. The person is not fat or Irish, so it's funny.

The second example is a layer deeper, because you're exposing the false belief of the fat Irish piece of shit, and it has the inverse of the features of the first example. This one has to be handled with a little more care. The audience has to share common knowledge with the joke teller that the guy is really a fat Irish piece of shit, or the joke has to be revelatory to the audience or the subject to that end.

In the third example it doesn't matter as much what the reality of the subject's appearance is, because the joke is that you're saying something inappropriate for the occasion. That requires skill too, because you have to let the audience in on the joke somehow.


You could go as far into the weeds as you want on these sorts of examples, and explore different levels of abstraction, irony, and common knowledge, and probably write a book about it. But I hope that illustrates the difference between the Roseanne joke and things that are actually less obviously jokes, where intent, skill, and audience perception matter more.

 

[Fawlty]

Nope.
Your post was on point.

I was joking goddammit!!

 

[Strychnine]

Is this a joke?

Naw.

You are a good poster.

 

[The Diplomat]

LOL
Now that's comedy and fine argumentation in favor of the framework of a joke attempt.
Point conceded.
You're an excellent poster.

Sawlty Fawlty stepping his game up in this thread.