The Politically Incorrect Larrikin's Thread.

Post Reply New Topic

The one about peeing. Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Q: What do you call someone who is for free speech?
A: Someone who is NOT a progressive.

For goodness sake.
Don't make me defend Bradleigh.

This is a Politically Correctness free zone.

Time will tell if Bradleigh is trying to get this thread blocked.
It *has* been done many times before,
And always from those on the left side of politics, to my knowledge.

Erm,
Why is that mod coming our way?
And why does the mod have a padlock?

May I suggest,
Instead of locking the thread,
The over-the-line off comments are simply deleted/ammended?

This is supposed to be where you make a joke about avocado toast (I hate avocados) and say that I don't know what a book is. Really lean into that boomer humour. Say that those mean millennials and zoomers should not be allowed to say "Ok Boomer" because it makes it feel like you are not being listened to.

Then you complain about not being allowed to squint your eyes and say "ching chong" to the guy at the local Chinese restaurant. Then you can pull a Paul Hogan Crocodile Dundee and sexually harass a trans woman, if we really want to be a larrikin.
(Edit: even I think these past two are a bit mean, and wonder if at least remove one of them)

Last edited by Bradleigh on 18 Jun 2020, 2:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

I can assure you that I won't say anything racist or sexist, the sort of things that get threads blocked.
I am just going to prove a point that conservatives don't have a monopoly of being humour nor using political incorrectness. And I won't punch down, being a boomer I presume don't count due to their on average economic privilege and habit to act like the younger and more progressive generation is destroying society.

Also that I repeat that all of this sort of humour is super low brow and there can be better humour that is more socially aware.

Boomer and economic privilege: Now THERE is a great joke.

Then again, I imagine every generation considers that previous ones have some sort of "advantage".

Thanks for the laugh, BTW.

I must not get what is so funny about so much of my generation having things like home ownership so out of their reach and thus needing to live with parents, and that we are by in large overqualified and under payed compared to the earlier generations.

A racist, a child molester and a well-known con artist approaches the Oval Office.
The security guard says Good morning Mr. President and lets him in.

Neil Gorsuch


That’s exactly what everyone who has participated in this thread has done.

Over "schooled", yes...Over "qualified", that is questionable.

The problem you have is you are comparing certain aspects of your condition now, with other selected aspects of the "boomer" generation.

For example:
They had a smaller population, leading to lower demand for housing or employment - Would you wish to reverse the population change (and hence immigration levels) for this?
There was a limited number of jobs available\open to females at the time, with many being "stay at home" mothers (and so, again, lower competition for jobs) - Do you feel that we should return to this?
They had limited travel options (international and interstate travel was rare and costly), with holidays being generally car/caravan, or bus- Would you like this to return (although it may, with current global health situation).
There was loyalty shown by workers and employers (job for life) - Would you be willing to forsake the opportunity to switch jobs on a whim in order to work for the same employer for life?
There were high intrest rates (18%+) - would you be willing to have this?
There was a limited range of "dining out" options, with most food prepared at home - Would you be willing to forgo this and only eat food you prepare yourself (with minimal imports, so only locally grown)?
University education was either through scholarship, or "full fee", rather than "Austudy" - Would you be willing to pay these costs (or go without and learn "on the job")?
Jobs generally started from a menial level, where you progressed up as you learnt\gained experience (no entering a new role as "manager" fresh out of school...Office boy, doing the running around for the more experineced staff was the entry point) - Would you be willing to start in a role such as this?

The situation they live in now is as a result of the circumstances through which they lived, not the circumstances under which you live...Unless you are prepared to live (and work) under ALL those circumstances (and more that I couldn't be bothered adding), criticism of (or comparison to) their present state is not valid.

Hence my seeing your comment as a humourous contribution to the thread.

Except me. <irony>

I was hoping the thread was going to be more playful than caustic.
Time will tell.

And that is your "Punchline"?
I don't get the joke.

My appologies...I probably should have finished it with a "Bring back the 60's" type line, but I wasn't around then to know if that is a good idea or not...

Edit: And I'm not sure how many who lived through that time could remember accurately, either...For various reasons.

I too thought the idea that having to live with your parents in perpetuity rather than working to purchase your own home because the challenges put forth by society are insurmountable was very funny.

Q: What do you call a snowflake that’s been pissed on?

A: Mr President.

Why would a politician hire a hooker?

To stimulate his deficit.