Women's College Cancels The Vagina Monologues So Transgenders Won't Be Offended — Page 2

What the hell are you two babbling on about? Shut it. The political correctness here is f*cking stupid and should be condemned by all. Art, and theatre in particular, need not be burdened with political correctness.

"What the hell are you two babbling on about? Shut it. The political correctness here is f*cking stupid and should be condemned by all. Art, and theatre in particular, need not be burdened with political correctness. "

That's rich.

"Count me in. I'd hardly call this "Women who have penises have feelings too, you know," innocuous. Unnecessary, yes. Ignorant, definitely. Innocuous? Far from it. "

It's not ignorant at all. It's sarcasm aimed at people who think women without a vagina would be offended by women speaking about vaginas (which is ignorant), which NoName even explained for people who didn't get it the first time. This is what he (she?) meant by reading comprehension.

I now understand why Jerry Seinfeld doesn't perform at colleges anymore. Too much PC nonsense. I feel like the more progress and acceptance that transgendered people receive, the less we're able to talk about them.

Incidentally, "transsexual" is not an offensive word. It simply means someone who has transitioned from one sex to another. Sex and gender are not the same thing, so we need these different words. Of course, it depends on how you use the word. It could also mean exactly the same thing as "transgender," in which case it's definitely not offensive.

Updated On: 7/26/15 at 06:37 PM

Right, he's a reactionary. He's the Jewish Hitler.

Paul Lynde thought the song was offensive as well and even wrote about it. It's like when Dave Chappelle stopped humoring people with his satirical humor as well. It gets to a point where the intent is lost and the actual impact is that people are laughing a little too hard at things.

I think for people who complain that people are too sensitive and should just take it, well maybe you should ask who is speaking out and ask why they are speaking out, and have they historically spoken out before?

As for Seinfeld, he can't have it both ways. He can't complain about not going to colleges (as if he actually would have done that) because he feels censored when he wants to suppress people's true reactions. As Colin Quinn respectfully said (and he's still friends with Jerry Seinfeld and they're working together):

"“Look,” Quinn said, “people still have a sense of humor, but it depends on where you’re coming from. You can’t just [throw your hands in the air] and say, ‘it’s just jokes,’ because it’s not a free pass.'"

Comics need thick skin, and if your humor fails to transcend people's reactions, then the fault lies with the humor. If you want to stick with your guns, then get a thick skin (like all comics do) if you want to play with crowds who grew up differently than you did, or maybe you should realize your humor isn't relevant to certain populations anymore and pander to ones that get you (not every comic is universally liked and play to their own crowds), but don't blame evolving society that no longer thinks that what was funny 20-30 years ago is funny now. It's not that things are more boring, it's that humor has evolved and will always evolve. I'm sure people resisted when people complained about minstrel shows or when Asian-Americans started saying Mickey Rooney wasn't funny in Breakfast at Tiffany's. That's a problem with an art form that requires relevancy and to be on the pulse of pop culture, it changes with the times.

That's the thing, though. He doesn't want to perform for crowds who grew up differently than he did. And why should he? Why would he want to perform for people who don't find him funny? He's perfectly right not to. He's not looking to suppress people's reactions, he just doesn't want to hear them, if they're negative. What comedian does? Comedians want laughs, period. They don't want to be told "That's not funny!" So they play where they will get those laughs.

You don't go to a Mormon church to perform Hedwig. You go where your audience is.

Of course, I'm of the mindset that with comedy, anything goes. But apparently that's no longer a popular attitude.

What church should one go to perform Hedwig?

And it's all over a lazy gay joke!

You're a gem, kad.

People should be able to say whatever the hell they want to say, but I don't understand this notion that just because they can say it, they should say it. Or the notion that if they do say it, that somehow makes it immune to consequences. OR the notion that dismissing someone's opinion as "political correctness" is some kind of mulligan that automatically shuts down a discussion.

Is this one old story about trannies (who never get angry about ANYTHING ever) ridiculous? Sure. But I don't think it speaks to a larger public menace of "political correctness" ruining comedy or art or college or life or whatever. The trannies (I learned from BWW I don't need to consider if that's even my word to use, because eff political correctness!) didn't ask for this, this was a preemptive move by the administration. Like how nothing actually happened to Jerry on a college campus for him to have an opinon about college campuses, except for what Chris Rock told him. It's also like that liberal professor who was internet famous for a hot second when he boohooed about college campuses being a liberal hivemind that suppresses any "political incorrect" thought. But nothing had actually happened to him personally, save for a brief anecdote from his early days a teacher, when a conservative student challenged him.

While this probably deserves its own thread, I've really been enjoying the sh:tshow that Gawker has become, over that godawful post about the CFO and the gay escort. I've always had a love/hate relationship with that site's BS, but watching them go for nastiness for the sake of nastiness, and then doubling down on it, as though there was some kind of duty to queen and country to out seemingly harmless married straight dudes for no reason other than because they simply could, just really turned me off for good.

I bring this up because that whole brouhaha made me feel the same way that I feel when the anti-"PC Police" people go on and on about someone's right to celebrate when a comedian makes a roomful of people laugh because the gist of the joke is "Fags, amirite?" or "God, that woman is fat!" or "I wanna rape that bitch" or "I'd kill my son if he were gay" or [fill in whatever it is that you could live without]. If that's the hill you want to die on, super. But dial back your offense about your perception of my offense.

Updated On: 7/26/15 at 10:15 PM

The fact is: no one is being silenced.

We are living in a world in which, thanks to the Internet, people who were previously without much of a voice now have one. We are living in a wider, more interconnected world, in which it's actually fairly easy to see the ripples something can make. We can see the effect of a casually bigoted joke. And most people just would like others to see that effect, and have it give them pause to think, "is this right to say? is a laugh, or applause, worth it?"

It's just- have consciousness of the world you're living in and the people you're sharing it with because you have no excuse not to anymore.

And if you are given an opportunity to see the effects the things you say at others' expense have, and still decide to go on as you've been doing, then... fine. You're allowed. You're an asshole, and will be called an asshole, but you're allowed.

"SJW" is usually a snarky, sarcastic term used against people whom one believes to be "too PC." From what I've seen, it's generally supposed to be an insult.

I'm gay, and I have no problem with that gay French king joke (other than it just not being a very good joke). This is what Seinfeld is talking about (I'm not sure how this thread evolved into me defending Jerry Seinfeld, a comedian I don't even particularly like, but there it is): it's getting harder to make certain kinds of jokes because people have grown so terrified of insulting certain socially disadvantaged segments of the populace (whether they actually are insulted or not). It's how this whole discussion came about, because NoName made a joke about trans women (not even a joke aimed at them, but merely one involving them) and folks instinctively took offense to it without actually thinking about what was being said.

And this whole Vagina Monologues brouhaha is clearly a symptom of that. As Phyllis said, it was a preemptive move. It wasn't even the result of any actual outrage, it came about solely because of a (completely misguided) fear of outrage.

Whether Seinfeld actually wants to play at colleges is irrelevant. He makes a valid point. Nobody's saying you should be able to say anything you want without consequences. But you've got to pick your battles. Learn to separate the stuff from the stuff. Everyone is the butt of some joke, somewhere. I'm a big fan of Family Guy, and I laugh at their gay jokes (and there are a lot of them) as much as I laugh at their jokes about blacks, Jews, women (well, not so much women ... they can get pretty crass), Latinos, Arabs, Russians, etc. If something's funny, it's funny. There's a difference between Michael Richards going off on a racist tirade and Jerry Seinfeld teasing gay men about their hand gestures. What's worrying is the seemingly increasing number of people who don't see the difference.

As a side note (and this requires me to defend Seinfeld yet again), I have a problem with Andy Kindler's (whoever that is) notion that it takes growing up in a racially divisive community to understand what racism is, rather than simply applying rational, critical thinking skills.