Offensive poster!

Post Reply New Topic

I watch Frankie Boyle on Mock the Week with dara O'brien (who is awesome) and I don't like him, it's not necessarily because i think he goes to far, I like Jimmy Carr and he makes jokes about all those subjects and I found it very funny, maybe it's because Frankie Boyle just doesn't seem like someone I'd like to meet, versus Jimmy Carr who seems to be a really nice chap in person, and he's made it clear "there jokes, nothing more" and I agree, jokes about taboo subjects help destigmatise the subject.

I too agree, it's funny how it's still ok to openly disparage some groups. My oldest son was diagnosed with Tourettes at age 13, and all these years later, to hear instructors and students make jokes about that condition really blows my mind. The same people that wouldn't dream of making fun of someone with other difficulties still think some things are open to jokes. Last summer an instructor said something he shouldn't have, then made the joke that he had Tourettes, then a few days later a student did the same thing. I so wanted to lay into her and point out that making a joke of an entire group of people was insensitive. Really what I wanted to do was make fun of her ignorant country 40 year old large self wearing tube tops, (that image is burned into my brain forever) but alas, all I did was say "my son was diagnosed with Tourettes when he was 13, and glared.

A funny AS related demotivational for you all. But the original engrish.com picture is better, because it takes a second to notice it.

It's meant to be offensive.

It is an inappropriate poster.

Not only is it inappropriate, I don't see anything that suggests being an a**hole in the picture on the poster. It's supposed to be funny and it fails at that, too.

Yes, the poster is offensive. That's the joke. See, Scott Adams (the guy behind Dilbert) once wrote that there are six elements of humor, and a joke needs at least two of them to be funny. The more of them the joke has, the funnier it will be. I haven't been able to find a solid counterexample yet (and the first thing I did when I found the rule was try to prove it wrong by thinking of a seventh element or a joke that succeeds using only one). The six elements of humor are witty, naughty, cruel, bizarre, recognizable, and cute. The poster at start relies on being cruel (obvious) and bizarre. The notion of autists just being a**holes with a diagnosis is bizarre, and this is the crux of the joke.

Of course, the joke can work just as well by swapping out the "bizarre" element with the "recognizable" element...But so? It works off of whatever belief the person already has, and doesn't do much to propagate anything. Besides which, what's the audience for this poster, anyway? The number of people who'll see this is probably no higher than five or six digits (keep in mind, most nations have a population of at least 20,000,000), and that's being generous.

I'm all for being wary of threatening propaganda campaigns against any group that can't easily defend themselves, including the one I'm apart of, but this piece of "propaganda" simply isn't threatening.

Cruel isn't funny. Cruel is just cruel.