There has been a lot of buzz on the internet recently about the incident between comedian Daniel Tosh and a female audience member who was offended by one of his jokes. While I am not an avid user of social networking websites, I do try to keep abreast of the goings-on around me, so I was aware of the uproar. My initial reaction to this was to let it quietly fade into the mists of time, never to be remembered 6 weeks from now.
However, a Facebook post from a friend of mine has prompted this post. He pointed out that I, co-host to a comedy podcast and self-proclaimed comedy theory nerd, and my two cohorts might find it to be an interesting topic of conversation on a future episode.
For better or for worse, I feel that I should break my silence to weigh in on this topic.
It might not be the answer anyone was looking for, though.
My stance on this particular topic is as follows: This is a non-issue, and I legitimately can’t understand why we are talking about it in the first place.
Now, I urge those people who are already three paragraphs into an angry reply filled with typos and ALL CAPS to hear me out before hitting the reply button. If you still disagree with me at the end of this essay, that is your right. That’s part of my point.
The points and counterpoints that are flying throughout cyberspace have a common theme in my eyes: Who was in the wrong? Conversely, if someone was wrong, who was in the right? Was Daniel justified in his comedy, and she needs to deal with it, or is he a bad man who offended a woman who had every right to be offended.
I’ll give you a hint. They are both right. Daniel made a joke. That’s his right. She was offended. That’s her right. Both of their feelings in this matter are legitimate. She’s allowed to be offended, and he’s allowed to feel that he didn’t cross a line. They don’t have to agree. That doesn’t mean that one or the other is wrong. In their own viewpoint, they are right. That is what I meant two paragraphs ago when I said it is your right to disagree with me. We can agree to disagree.
Why was this even brought up in the first place? A comedian said something spur-of-the-moment (which I will get to in a minute) and someone was offended? I have a secret for you: Most comedians offend people. Especially comedians who do edgy comedy. In my decade-long career as an (and I kinda hate the term, but I’ll run with it) “edgy” comedian, I have offended people. I have offended strangers. I have offended my wife. I have offended my parents. It’s not because I’m a bad person, or a bad comedian, it’s that an audience isn’t an amorphous blob of “audience”, an audience is comprised of multiple persons who each have their own unique opinions and senses of humor. I have seen a priest in a church insert humor into his sermon in an attempt to liven up Mass, and later heard little old ladies complain that he “shouldn’t make fun of Jesus”. Is the priest a bad man? No.
Someone being offended at a comedy show happens. It is a fact of life. The only difference in this situation is that instead of going home, complaining about the douchebag comedian to her roommate, and moving on, somehow the media got involved. I am willing to put money down that if news outlets hadn’t gotten a hold of that story, the offended party would have already moved on with her life. And so should we.
Addressing my earlier comment, this joke wasn’t even a part of his set. It was an ad lib in response to a heckler. I feel that this is an important point that has been glossed over. Have you ever come up with the perfect response to a situation five minutes after the person has already left? Why? Because sometimes you don’t think of the right thing to say at that moment. Daniel Tosh said something in response to a heckler (or who he perceived to be a heckler, but I don’t want to get into that). Who’s to say that, five minutes after he got off the stage, he didn’t say to himself “Oh, I should have said THIS, because that thing I said wasn’t funny”? No one.
To close, I restate my thesis: This is a non-issue. It is an unnecessarily combative reaction to a common occurrence which was sparked by an offhanded comment.
Now, anyone who still thinks that I am siding with either Tosh or the audience member has obviously not read a word I wrote. I’m siding with no one. There are NO SIDES.
Can’t we just go back to talking about things that actually ARE important?
In discussions this past week, I found myself crystalizing these few points on the matter:
1.) People are really concerned about blaming Tosh for the feelings of discomfort they have on this topic, instead of investigating their feelings or taking any responsibility for their choice to feel them.
2.) People are really a lot more concerned about the above sentiment than actual rape occurring in reality and that disparity ought to tell you something about why people should be making more rape jokes, because as a good friend said best “Not talking about it sure hasn’t been working.”
3.) Comedy formulaically is (Tragedy + Time). I think rape classifies as tragedy, nuff said.
Food for thought, how do you think this entire exchange would have gone if the heckler had been male and Tosh made the same exact joke? Would that same group that is upset now still be incensed or, would they have instead all laughed at the idea of some poor guy getting buggered by 5 dudes for saying rape isn’t funny?
As to how this exchange would have gone if the heckler had been male:
This isn’t about whether she was male or female. It was about the individual. Every single person on this planet has a slightly different viewpoint and sense of humor. It could have been a different person, male OR female, and the effect would have been different. I don’t want to get into speculation about what ifs and maybes. We don’t know. We never will.
Nits to pick because I’m like that, actual thought out stuff will be immediately after these:
“I have a secret for you: Most comedians offend people. (…)”
Is != ought.
“Can’t we just go back to talking about things that actually ARE important?”
You don’t get to decide what others feel as important.
Now, onto the meat of the issue(as I see from my ivory tower): what Tosh said was not a joke, but a bullying dismissal of someone’s objection to an offensive (to the woman in question) thing he said. As you say, he has a right to joke as he may and she has a right to feel offended. This is not he issue. The problem is how Tosh responded.
Tosh makes his money making fun of people doing stupid things to themselves. That’s all well and good, and a kind of humor I find hilarious myself. Saying “wouldn’t it be funny if this bitch was gang raped” is not a joke. It is a humiliating, dehumanizing, and awful form of misogynistic bullying. Laughing at the expense of others when they bring harm or embarrassment to themselves is one thing. Laughing at the prospect of someone being the victim of rape is an entirely different one. In one case the victim brought it upon themselves, in the other, I really shouldn’t have to get into it.
That and his not-pology was “it was just a joke” bullying bullshit.
First of all, thank you for your comment. I’m not saying that in a sarcastic way. I’m legitimately saying thank you. The beauty of this situation is that we are allowed to disagree. I find that wonderful.
As I stated in my post, this is my opinion. Do I get to actually decide what people feel is important. No. You are right in that. But, I DO get to decide what I THINK that others should feel is important. I’m not forcing you adhere to my words. I’m just voicing my opinion.
(For the record, I hate the phrase “You don’t get to…”, because you are doing exactly what you are preventing me from doing: telling me what I can and can’t do.)
I reiterate, I am not defending Daniel Tosh. It is obvious that you feel that Daniel Tosh is in the wrong, and that is a perfectly legitimate opinion. I will not defend him now. What I WILL say is why are we even discussing this? Why do we need to get angry and re-angry about something that has happened uncountable times in the past and will happen innumerable times in the future. If you are upset with me because you think that my attitude is cavalier and uncaring, then I accept your critique. But, if you are upset with Daniel Tosh for what he did, then I am the wrong person to discuss this with. Because, again, I’m not taking sides. Because I don’t care.
Ummm…. so, I feel really embarrassed by this, by the way, but…
I don’t know what “Is != ought.” means.
I’m not really a cyber-savvy person, (I know, right?) and assume this is some sort of shorthand? Could someone help me out?
It’s “Is does not equal ought.” Just because something is, it doesn’t necessarily follow that it should be, or that it is the best way for things to be. Just an argumentative pet peeve of mine that I let myself get too worked up over, and it’s not relevant to the more interesting stuff in the post above. Speaking of which:
I see your point on “You don’t get to…” and I concede that the language I chose was poor. The point I was trying to get across is that if the issue isn’t important to you, that’s totally fine, but it is very entitled of you to say “can we just get over this and talk about things I want to talk about” when you’re not the one involved. It is a rare opportunity to play disinterested observer in something like this, but I think your “I’m just voicing my opinion” and “Because, again, I’m not taking sides. Because I don’t care.” come off as privileged things a bully says when they’re called out for behaving like a bully.
I am not accusing you of being a bully (getting things across via text is rough enough without me using loaded language like that). I’ve heard you discuss weighty things with clarity and compassion countless times with and against Matt and Jena, and you’ve never before used the conversation-stoppers above. I think you’re selling yourself short here, Salsa.
It may be an entitled thing to try to change the topic when I’m not involved, but it is just as entitled to try to continue talking about it when you aren’t involved. Only two people were involved, and my opinion has been for us all to leave it with them. They are the only ones who have any entitlement in this issue. Which is why I feel the rest of us should leave it be. It’s none of our business. We weren’t involved.
I understand that sometimes you have to get involved in things that don’t pertain to you for the greater good, but I simply don’t think that this is one of those times.
I completely understand your frustration with the written word, too. I didn’t want to use conversation-stoppers, it’s true. I was trying to make a point, and it unfortunately didn’t come across. Upon rereading what I wrote, I understand what you mean, and I apologize for the lack of clarity in my argument. I’m trying.
Heckling is shitty, that lady was wrong; wishing rape on someone is shitty, Tosh was wrong.
It does sound like he was working on his act in front of a small crowd, and took a new bit to a point that crossed from funny to bad, which prompted an inappropriate response from an audience member. He was thrown off his game and reacted poorly. The woman stayed until the end of the show and spoke to the manager, basically saying how not-cool the bit was, and the manager gave her some tickets for future shows. She tells the story of the evening to a friend who VASTLY overreacts and posts a blog with about 1/3 the information and zero background on how comedians develop acts. Twitter explodes. Everyone in the story is a douche, especially the blog poster and the early commenters.
p.s. When did Dane Cook start being funny?
http://kateharding.info/2012/07/13/15-rape-jokes-that-work/
Dane Cook is not funny, but even a broken clock tells the right time twice a day…
Listen to The Greg Proops episode of Nerdist from this week. It says things really well.