LogFAQs > #907107815

Zeus posted...

No, he's squarely in the latter. Squarely, sir.

Except, you know, no.



Zeus posted...

You don't have to defend a reprobate simply because you like his work. You can condemn the man and enjoy his work, mostly because you're not a SJW.

I never feel the need to defend people on those grounds, because I'm very much able to separate artists from their art, especially when whatever they're accused of doesn't directly effect me.

For instance, I still enjoy the X-Men movies and The Usual Suspects, but I'd never dispute that Bryan Singer probably has done sexually inappropriate things with underage males (since enough people have come forward to support the idea that it starts to seem plausible). I also wouldn't try to defend Harvey Weinstein, since people have been hinting at his shenanigans for like 20 years at this point, and apparently pretty much everyone who's ever met him openly admits its probably true at this point. But Miramax has still put out a lot of quality content that probably wouldn't have existed without him.

Hell, I'm one of the people who's always said I don't necessarily think people should try to erase Chris Benoit or his matches from history in spite of the fact that he killed his wife and son (or, to a lesser extent, people trying to sterilize Hulk Hogan out of current wrestling because he said racist things, and not in a joking manner).

But I'm also sane and rational enough to assume that someone is capable of joking about something without having to secretly harbor deep-seated pathological urges of their own. Especially since even a basic understanding of human psychology tells us that black humor and morbid humor tends to be something of a defense mechanism - if anything, we're more likely to joke about things that make us uncomfortable or disgusted than we are things that secretly turn us on.

I've commented on this board in the past that I'm so sexually desensitized by the proliferation of porn on the Internet that I'm no longer able to have an erection unless I'm looking at porn of a midget fisting a woman dressed like a nun, but that's never even remotely been true, and I generally say it on the assumption that most people here are intelligent enough to detect the humor/sarcasm.

Though granted, assuming people on the Internet are intelligent is often wishful thinking.



Zeus posted...

You're suggesting that he do that, not that you want to do that. Start discussing in graphic detail how you want to hurt his kids and see how long he maintains a nonchalant attitude >_>

To be fair, I've openly made jokes about beating his kids in front of him (and in front of the kids themselves), yet at no point did he automatically assume I am a bundle of barely-suppressed rage that must constantly try and control my urge to bludgeon his kids with a tire iron.

I've also made jokes in the past that when his daughter grows up and is in high school I'm going to hit on her friends, yet no one has felt the need to keep an eye on me or put me on any lists, because most people are capable of understanding that people can make jokes about things that they don't actually mean, nor is every joke a secret cry for help revealing someone's innermost desires.

Sometimes a joke is just a joke.

And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.


---

"Wall of Text'D!" --- oldskoolplayr76
"POwned again." --- blight family