Validity of the claim that Will Smith "could've killed" Chris Rock

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

If you stopped wearing her shoes, she'd probably stop mocking your toes. 

 

Is her joking about my toes different than joking about someone's hair?

[Phi for All]

16 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Is her joking about my toes different than joking about someone's hair?

Are your toes short because of some medical condition? Are you self-conscious about them because they're obviously not what society considers "normal", and now they're on display in front of millions of people, including some very close friends and peers? Have your shortened toes ever stopped you from getting work? Are they ever used to judge whether you're attractive or not? Did your wife film a documentary about how men like you struggle every day with short toe syndrome, then make you the butt of a short toe joke in front of your friends, peers, and fanbase?

When you first mentioned this, you said bald jokes were kind of a cheap shot and weren't particularly funny to you. Are the toe jokes the same? They may not bother you, or cause you any embarrassment, but is it safe to say you'd prefer your wife doesn't make fun of physical conditions you have no control over, even though you know she's only joking and doesn't mean anything by it?

[zapatos]

3 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

is it safe to say you'd prefer your wife doesn't make fun of physical conditions you have no control over, even though you know she's only joking and doesn't mean anything by it?

No. I'd much rather we tease and joke around with each other. We laugh all the time and I like that. I'd much rather she joke about things I have no control over because, well, I have no control. If she jokes about something I have control over there is the chance I could feel bad that I didn't do better. But my toes? Go for it! Wasting energy on something I have no control over is not something I generally do.

What I fail to grasp is how anyone can suggest these jokes are out of line, period, when so many people don't mind.

[Phi for All]

37 minutes ago, zapatos said:

What I fail to grasp is how anyone can suggest these jokes are out of line, period, when so many people don't mind.

Will Smith shouldn't have hit Chris Rock.

Chris Rock produced a documentary called Good Hair, specifically about what hair means to black women, and then made a bald joke about a black woman with alopecia in front of her peers. He shouldn't have used the joke, and it has nothing to do with how many people don't mind his humor.

Would it be out of line for Jon Stewart to make emphysema jokes at the expense of a 9/11 first responder? I haven't seen Seth Rogen's Hilarity for Charity Variety Show, but I'm willing to bet they don't make fun of Alzheimer's patients. Will Ferrell doesn't joke about college kids with cancer, and I would imagine Bob Saget didn't tell jokes about scleroderma after his sister died of it (probably hard to raise $25M for research if you're being insensitive about it).

[zapatos]

20 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Will Smith shouldn't have hit Chris Rock.

Chris Rock produced a documentary called Good Hair, specifically about what hair means to black women, and then made a bald joke about a black woman with alopecia in front of her peers. He shouldn't have used the joke, and it has nothing to do with how many people don't mind his humor.

 

That didn't help me understand why it should never be done; only why Chris Rock shouldn't have done this particular joke. 

I was watching a Modern Family episode and they made a joke about an adoptive 7 year old Asian daughter crashing her toy car, saying "we always knew there was a good chance she'd be a bad driver". 

A Saturday Night Live skit made fun of Trump's small hands.

I'll have to pay more attention to check, but I'm not sure there are any comics or comedy shows that do not poke fun at one person/group or another.

Quote

Would it be out of line for Jon Stewart to make emphysema jokes at the expense of a 9/11 first responder? I haven't seen Seth Rogen's Hilarity for Charity Variety Show, but I'm willing to bet they don't make fun of Alzheimer's patients. Will Ferrell doesn't joke about college kids with cancer, and I would imagine Bob Saget didn't tell jokes about scleroderma after his sister died of it (probably hard to raise $25M for research if you're being insensitive about it).

Can't say that I see many jokes like you describe here. Sounds like you are fighting an enemy that doesn't exist to any great degree.

[Sensei]

..I already know what they will be joking about at the next 10+ Oscars..

Don't slap the presenter..

..or the next presenter will be Arnold S. (he wouldn't dare make such a joke in the first place), or Jean Claude van Damme..

..or they will "hire" Jean Claude van Damme as bodyguard (enough funny!), to "protect the presenter against slappers"..

(then the presenter will start mocking of Jean Claude van Damme.. and the answer will be: "I'm a professional at work, I can't kick his ass on air, but the broadcast won't last forever".... )

Edited March 31, 2022 by Sensei

[mistermack]

19 hours ago, Peterkin said:

AFAIK, no other member of the academy was ridiculed for their physical shortcomings. 

Would you like to explain, or point to the ridicule in Chris Rock's words? That's what I seem to be missing, so your help would be appreciated. If he did ridicule Jada then he deserved a slap, but I don't seem to be able to find it. 

15 hours ago, beecee said:

Quite a large varience of opinions being expressed here...the mind boggles!😏

You need to remember that quite a lot of people are born without a sense of humour. If you drain the humour out of any quip, you will probably be left with something you could portray as offensive. There's little difference between being having no sense of humour and having cerebral palsy or Type 1 diabetes. Not much the person can do about these things, so best not to make fun of humourless people, you could end up getting slapped !!

[dimreepr]

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

Would you like to explain, or point to the ridicule in Chris Rock's words? That's what I seem to be missing, so your help would be appreciated. If he did ridicule Jada then he deserved a slap, but I don't seem to be able to find it. 

Today, we'll do the measurements, tomorrow we do the cutting.

If Jada was so sensitive, why no wig?

I'm not trying to blame the victim, just asking why she chose to be one

[swansont]

7 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Today, we'll do the measurements, tomorrow we do the cutting.

If Jada was so sensitive, why no wig?

I'm not trying to blame the victim, just asking why she chose to be one

I'm having difficulty figuring out why not wearing a wig makes someone a victim.

Does one have to conform to some arbitrary expectations of normalcy to be free from mockery?

 

1 hour ago, mistermack said:

Would you like to explain, or point to the ridicule in Chris Rock's words? That's what I seem to be missing, so your help would be appreciated. If he did ridicule Jada then he deserved a slap, but I don't seem to be able to find it. 

Is that a fair assessment: to you a joke about someone's lack of hair (which could be any physical difference that's being pointed out) contains no ridicule?

What was Mr. Rock making fun of, if not a physical difference/shortcoming? I think we're all an in agreement that he was plying his craft and it was meant to be funny, i.e. a joke.

[mistermack]

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

Is that a fair assessment: to you a joke about someone's lack of hair (which could be any physical difference that's being pointed out) contains no ridicule?

What was Mr. Rock making fun of, if not a physical difference/shortcoming? I think we're all an in agreement that he was plying his craft and it was meant to be funny, i.e. a joke.

You answer a question with a question. I asked where was the ridicule. In reply, you ask ME to explain his joke. Can you not point out the ridicule, or are you just ASSUMING that a joke must contain ridicule.

[dimreepr]

19 minutes ago, swansont said:

Does one have to conform to some arbitrary expectations of normalcy to be free from mockery?

Yes, measure twice, cut once...

[Peterkin]

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

Would you like to explain, or point to the ridicule in Chris Rock's words?

The particular words "GI Jane" are neither mocking nor humorous. The appeal is to an association that people are expected to make to a familiar image. The objective is to draw attention to a physical feature which is somehow remarkable and worthy of special notice. Is that explained enough yet?

BTW, the sentence you quoted "AFAIK, no other member of the academy was ridiculed for their physical shortcomings."

was in response to a statement that she's fair game, due to membership in the Academy; many members of that august body have august bodies which were not centered out for public attention; she was only targeted for being the spouse of a nominee.  

 

[mistermack]

29 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

The objective is to draw attention to a physical feature which is somehow remarkable and worthy of special notice. Is that explained enough yet?

Jada did that herself, with a video that already had had two million hits. So that's clearly not ridicule. So no, that's not explained enough, it's not explained at all. You still haven't pointed to the ridicule. I can only assume that you can't, because there isn't any. 

[iNow]

It seems clear mistermack holds the opinion that the joke was not offensive. It also seems clear that others hold different opinions.

Perhaps move on in the recognition that both positions are equally valid. 

[zapatos]

11 minutes ago, iNow said:

Perhaps move on in the recognition that both positions are equally valid. 

Precisely. Humor is in the eye of the beholder. I doubt Chris Rock thought he'd crossed a line, but he clearly didn't read his audience well enough to avoid a large reaction.

[Peterkin]

42 minutes ago, mistermack said:

So that's clearly not ridicule. So no, that's not explained enough, it's not explained at all. You still haven't pointed to the ridicule.

Okay. I didn't say those specific words were ridicule; I earlier had considered the joke itself very mild. What I said was that being a member of the academy is not in itself sufficient reason for ridicule. Context matters, in all communication, including homourous banter. That's why you can say things to your spouse in the privacy of your home that neither of you would say in front of your friends, and things that can be said among friends that would not be appropriate to say in the workplace, and things that would be acceptable subjects in the lunchroom, but not from the pulpit. It's not only the words themselves that can hurt, but who utters them, in what style, with that intent, to whom, in what situation and from what platform, an the effect they have on other people.   

It you call attention to yourself (as I mentioned regarding two comedians who made fun of their physical peculiarities in performance), you are in control of the situation, how you are presented and regarded. Someone else making an entire room, plus cameras and by extension, the entire world, stare at you when you're unprepared, that can be unwelcome and  uncomfortable.

Humour is a subtile beastie; its deployment has variations and nuances. Not everybody perceives it in the same way. Evidently Will Smith perceived it differently from Chris Rock, as I perceived it differently from you.   

Edited March 31, 2022 by Peterkin

[swansont]

2 hours ago, mistermack said:

You answer a question with a question. I asked where was the ridicule. In reply, you ask ME to explain his joke. Can you not point out the ridicule, or are you just ASSUMING that a joke must contain ridicule.

In asking where was the ridicule you are tacitly admitting you don't see it.

I am asking how you could miss it.

I am not assuming that a joke must contain ridicule. That's far too broad. I am saying that a joke made at the expense of another's physical condition contains some amount of ridicule.

(ridicule being the basis for ridiculous, which means laughable. So yeah, this literally means that such a joke is ridicule) 

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Yes, measure twice, cut once...

I don't see how this is relevant. 

[StringJunky]

This all assumes Chris Rock knew she had alopecia. I don't think it would be hard to spontaneously come up with an association and make  that joke.

[mistermack]

43 minutes ago, iNow said:

It seems clear mistermack holds the opinion that the joke was not offensive. It also seems clear that others hold different opinions.

Perhaps move on in the recognition that both positions are equally valid. 

Sorry but I think that's rubbish. The Oscars has apologised to Chris Rock. They wouldn't do that if his joke was offensive. Will Smith has apologised to Chris Rock. He wouldn't have had to do that, if the joke was offensive. Finding a few people who don't get it doesn't make both positions equally valid. Very few poeple around the world found the joke offensive. The slap proves nothing about the joke, it just sadly says a lot about Will Smith. He took exception to a joke being made about his "property". 

 

12 minutes ago, swansont said:

I am saying that a joke made at the expense of another's physical condition contains some amount of ridicule.

So you can presumably point to where the joke was "at the expense of" Jada's shaved head. As opposed to just referring to it. Really, you're just substituting words to dodge the question. 

[iNow]

8 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Sorry but I think that's rubbish

I disagree, but yet again… since we’re operating now in the realm of opinion… both of our positions are equally valid. 

[zapatos]

10 minutes ago, mistermack said:

Will Smith has apologised to Chris Rock. He wouldn't have had to do that, if the joke was offensive.

I think Will's response speaks to whether or not he felt the joke was offensive. Not to mention his apology, where he stated 

"Jokes at my expense are a part of the job, but a joke about Jada's medical condition was too much for me to bear and I reacted emotionally,"

[mistermack]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

I disagree, but yet again… since we’re operating now in the realm of opinion… both of our positions are equally valid. 

Teach the controversy, you mean?? 

Where did I hear THAT before???

[swansont]

17 minutes ago, mistermack said:

So you can presumably point to where the joke was "at the expense of" Jada's shaved head. As opposed to just referring to it. Really, you're just substituting words to dodge the question. 

If you're going to be this obtuse let's just drop it. I'm not going to change your mind and at this point it's just wrestling with a pig territory.

But...

Quote

Sorry but I think that's rubbish. The Oscars has apologised to Chris Rock. They wouldn't do that if his joke was offensive. Will Smith has apologised to Chris Rock. He wouldn't have had to do that, if the joke was offensive.

"offensive" isn't an objective assessment. It's subjective. And a characterization of the joke as "offensive" was largely absent until you made it. You're moving the goalposts.

 

[zapatos]

12 minutes ago, mistermack said:

The Oscars has apologised to Chris Rock. They wouldn't do that if his joke was offensive.

That's quite a stretch. They apologized for him being struck, which was unacceptable under any circumstances, and independent of the quality of the joke.

I doubt the Oscars might have said,  "Well, it was an offensive joke, so him striking you was acceptable to us."

[mistermack]

Just for the record, this kind of joke is standard fare in comedy, and the root of the joke is actually at the expense of the comedian, but if you have no sense of humour, I don't expect you to get it.

The humour in the joke, is the teller's naiive assumption that having a shaved head is all you need to get the GI Jane part. These jokes always rely on a silly mistaken assumption by the joke teller. 

If I said to Zapatos, "hey, they are auditioning for the Yul Brynner part in the remake of The King and I, you should go and apply" it's not ridiculing his bald head, the joke is my assumption that a bald head is all it takes to get the part. 

An old staple stand up joke is when the comedian takes a thick pair of specs from an audience member, and says, "you must have great eyesight to see through these ! "   The humour isn't the mockery of his eyesight, it's the daft conclusion by the joke teller. There are thousands of similar jokes, and the root is always the same. A totally wrong bit of logic by the teller. 

Chris Rock's joke was exactly like thousands of others, the joke is on the joke teller, and that's why it's not offensive. Unless you have no sense of humour and don't get it.