Chris Rock versus Will Smith

[VoidCat]

I feel for will's wife. I've been in a situation where someone insulted me and someone decided to start a fight over it. This caused me to have a flashback to some trauma I had and it was all cuz someone couldn't just let an insult slide or confront it with words they had to start a fight. It is actually horrifying to watch someone start a fight over something like that. Not to mention my friend also felt terrible after that for scaring me so it made me feel terrible to see them feel terrible. Also a slap can kill someone. I wouldn't want a friend of mine risk killing someone over an insult no matter how horrible that insult was. And even if it isn't you can go to jail. She must've been terrified her husband would get charged with assualt..

Both men were in the wrong.

 

[Debater Slayer]

We know about how it affected Will, but how do you
know the effect on Jada?
Nonetheless, it is indeed for us to all consider how
appropriate his response to the level of insult intended
& inferred. This is not merely of social concern, but
also public policy, particularly when it results in assault.

Intended insult isn't the only factor to consider. Thoughtless or inappropriate words can come from a place of good intentions.

That Smith's reaction was inappropriate doesn't mean the joke was okay. Yes, there are much worse jokes, but this wasn't exactly benign either. It shouldn't be hard to avoid joking about certain things, including medical conditions, when you don't know your target's limits. Doing so means Chris Rock either didn't care or wasn't creative enough to come up with something else.

Comedy is pain, & inappropriate jokes are the best.
Woe unto a society that can no longer tolerate a
Chris Rock, Ricky Gervais, Triumph, Joel McHale,
The Dice Man, or Lenny Bruce.

That's a subjective preference. I say inappropriate jokes can be funny in some contexts where the target is okay with them and they don't generate laughter at the unwilling expense of someone else's struggles or personal limits.

Clearly, my sentiment is growing in prevalence judging by the response to Boomer and Gen X comedians who are now dealing with a very different landscape than they did in previous decades.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

As though significantly more consequential things aren't happening in the world.

I don't know... on the surface, your comment seems "right" in some way, because we are just talking about two celebrity-types and something that escalated when it was of very little significance, really. The joke was insignificant, and the resulting slap was only slightly less insignificant.

However, I feel like the issue surrounding this incident is actually a very important matter that I think the world should have more discussions about. And that is: "Is it acceptable for someone to take physical action against someone who has only said words to that other?" On the surface, one would obviously side with any grade-school level teacher and say that "no - it is not okay." However, there are still plenty of people who would pursue physical action if someone made fun of them, or used unsavory words about someone they cared about. Again... just words.

And this hearkens back even to The Bible, where we can see that the attitude of ancient people's certainly was that it was okay for things to escalate to physicality given an insult against one's self: Kings 2:24. Wherein someone could even claim to have "God's blessing" in raising a confrontation to a physical level when all that has been exchanged are words.

Since I found out about this this morning, I've actually been encouraged to find that the majority of feedback sides with the grade school teacher! "No" it isn't cool to physically assault someone who is doing nothing but hurling words your way.

Regardless, this is an issue that ranges far beyond "Chris Rock" and "Will Smith". They just happen to be the vehicle to bring it into the light, and onto the table for discussion. And I hope that the fallout leaves many of those who think it is okay to go about punching someone who is making fun of you to have second thoughts, and to take a look at the matter, and perform a bit of introspection more thoroughly.

 

[Revoltingest]

Intended insult isn't the only factor to consider. Thoughtless or inappropriate words can come from a place of good intentions.

That Smith's reaction was inappropriate doesn't mean the joke was okay. Yes, there are much worse jokes, but this wasn't exactly benign either. It shouldn't be hard to avoid joking about certain things, including medical conditions, when you don't know your target's limits. Doing so means Chris Rock either didn't care or wasn't creative enough to come up with something else.



That's a subjective preference. I say inappropriate jokes can be funny in some contexts where the target is okay with them and they don't generate laughter at the unwilling expense of someone else's struggles or personal limits.

Clearly, my sentiment is growing in prevalence judging by the response to Boomer and Gen X comedians who are now dealing with a very different landscape than they did in previous decades.

These young whippersnappers are so easily triggered.
They must be broken in.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

That the joke was "tame" isn't for us to decide considering that it clearly didn't land well with its subject (Jada Smith): it wasn't made at our expense and didn't make fun on a global stage of a medical condition we struggled with.

Still just words. And I don't recall Jada Smith standing up and taking any action against the terrors that Chris Rock was so torturously projecting onto her. (spot the hyperbole in the last sentence, if you can).

Smith was wrong to become physical, but Chris Rock's joke was inappropriate as well. The idea that comedians should be able to say whatever they want without second thought is outdated and mistaken, and Chris Rock and some other older comedians from a less socially aware period are now increasingly finding this out.

Comedians should be able to say whatever they want, but yes, "second thoughts" should be in place, because if comedians are allowed whatever words they want, then the audience is allowed whatever reaction they want to have. That much should be obvious. It isn't, however, that comedians saying whatever they want is somehow a "mistaken" idea. Not at all. Freedom of Speech, if one prizes it, should see to it that comedians can say whatever they want, whenever they want to. However, that same freedom protects the VERBAL reactions of anyone else... who may ultimately spread the word that insensitive comedians aren't worth the time or money spent promoting them. That is exactly how this informal "system" should work, in my opinion. All Will Smith's reaction did, however, was insure that the insensitivity of the joke was far overshadowed by questions of whether or not it is okay to hit someone who is making fun of you. A question one would have thought a couple years in grade school should have answered. Apparently not for some.

 

[Debater Slayer]

These young whippersnappers are so easily triggered.
They must be broken in.

You see it that way. I see it as acknowledgement of nuance and the fact that different people have different boundaries.

It won't hurt anyone to pay more attention to their audience or the targets of their jokes.

 

[Revoltingest]

You see it that way. I see it as acknowledgement of nuance and the fact that different people have different boundaries.

It won't hurt anyone to pay more attention to their audience or the targets of their jokes.

But it will hurt to turn comedy into harmless pablum.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Still just words. And I don't recall Jada Smith standing up and taking any action against the terrors that Chris Rock was so torturously projecting onto her. (spot the hyperbole in the last sentence, if you can).

I think most agree that Will's reaction was inappropriate. However, "just words" doesn't mean Chris Rock wasn't in the wrong as well, albeit to a lesser extent than Will, who took things to a physical level.

Comedians should be able to say whatever they want, but yes, "second thoughts" should be in place, because if comedians are allowed whatever words they want, then the audience is allowed whatever reaction they want to have. That much should be obvious. It isn't, however, that comedians saying whatever they want is somehow a "mistaken" idea. Not at all. Freedom of Speech, if one prizes it, should see to it that comedians can say whatever they want, whenever they want to. However, that same freedom protects the VERBAL reactions of anyone else... who may ultimately spread the word that insensitive comedians aren't worth the time or money spent promoting them. That is exactly how this informal "system" should work, in my opinion. All Will Smith's reaction did, however, was insure that the insensitivity of the joke was far overshadowed by questions of whether or not it is okay to hit someone who is making fun of you. A question one would have thought a couple years in grade school should have answered. Apparently not for some.

A couple of years in grade school also teach most people that making fun of someone's appearance or medical conditions is a line you don't cross unless you know they would be okay with the joke.

Also, I don't think legal limits or anything of the sort should be imposed on a joke like Chris Rock's: by "shouldn't be able to say whatever they want without second thought," I mean that they should think their words and audience through instead of blurting out whatever comes to mind and expecting not to face any (non-physical) backlash for it.

And I'm not convinced that free speech applies to non-governmental entities either. When you're speaking at a privately hosted ceremony, no, you don't have the same level of free speech as someone who speaks in public or at a governmental facility.

 

[Debater Slayer]

But it will hurt to turn comedy into harmless pablum.

There are numerous forms of satire and edgy comedy that don't rely on making fun of individuals struggling with issues such as medical conditions or traumatic experiences.

I don't believe that being more mindful of one's jokes has hurt or will hurt comedy. Quite the contrary, if anything.

 

[Revoltingest]

There are numerous forms of satire and edgy comedy that don't rely on making fun of individuals struggling with issues such as medical conditions or traumatic experiences.

I don't believe that being more mindful of one's jokes has hurt or will hurt comedy. Quite the contrary, if anything.

People who can't take personal humor should then
segregate themselves from threatening venues.
Avoid the Golden Globes, that's for sure.
And don't watch....
Life's too short.
Married With Children
The Boondocks
The Shield
The Honeymooners
The Simpsons
Amos'n Andy
Preacher
Family Guy

There are more, but you get the idea.

 

[Watchmen]

You see it that way. I see it as acknowledgement of nuance and the fact that different people have different boundaries.

It won't hurt anyone to pay more attention to their audience or the targets of their jokes.

And it won’t hurt the recipients to understand it’s a J O K E.

 

[Debater Slayer]

People who can't take personal humor should then
segregate themselves from threatening venues.
Avoid the Golden Globes, that's for sure.
And don't watch....
Life's too short.
Married With Children
The Boondocks
The Honeymooners
The Simpsons
Amos'n Andy
Preacher
Family Guy

That depends on what type of personal humor it is. Also, Family Guy is made by another comedian in his late 50s. He's from an era when such humor wasn't as scrutinized as it is now.

It seems to me that it shouldn't be hard to remain tactful and adjust one's jokes per the audience, context, and setting instead of asking others to segregate themselves to accommodate those who don't want to be bothered with observing tact and personal limits.

 

[Debater Slayer]

And it won’t hurt the recipients to understand it’s a J O K E.

That designation doesn't necessarily give inappropriate comments a free pass.

Why do we (at least most of us) teach children not to laugh at someone else's illness instead of telling them "it's just a joke"?

 

[Revoltingest]

That depends on what type of personal humor it is. Also, Family Guy is made by another comedian in his late 50s. He's from an era when such humor wasn't as scrutinized as it is now.

It seems to me that it shouldn't be hard to remain tactful and adjust one's jokes per the audience, context, and setting instead of asking others to segregate themselves to accommodate those who don't want to be bothered with observing tact and personal limits.

I am thankful that there are people who push the boundaries.

 

[Watchmen]

That designation doesn't necessarily give inappropriate comments a free pass.

Why do we (at least most of us) teach children not to laugh at someone else's illness instead of telling them "it's just a joke"?

Context is king.

 

[Twilight Hue]

BTW, Mel is a boor, but dang...his Apocalypto is one
heckuva movie.

I loved Air America starring Gibson.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I suspect Will Smith is really bothered by his wife's lack of hair.

I like to think concerned would be more applicable and sensitive to her feelings. After all it's the woman he loves.

 

[Revoltingest]

I loved Air America starring Gibson.

I don't recall it.

 

[Nakosis]

I like to think concerned would be more applicable and sensitive to her feelings. After all it's the woman he loves.

Perhaps but I suspect if so, he would have reacted differently.
Jada seems to have made peace with it.
Will still seems to have issues to deal with, imo.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Comedy is pain, & inappropriate jokes are the best.
Woe unto a society that can no longer tolerate a
Chris Rock, Ricky Gervais, Triumph, Joel McHale,
The Dice Man, or Lenny Bruce.

Comedy is context, and therefore subjective. Woe to the comedians unable to adapt.

Good comedy is an art; it takes a balancing act that has to tremendously factor in the audience.

I almost always use this quote when this issue comes up, but I agree with Terry Pratchett: "Satire is meant to ridicule power. If you are laughing at people who are hurting, it's not satire, it's bullying." Satire is its own beast, but the sentiment is the same. Comedy that purposely hurts is no better than bullying.