Rummy Posted October 22, 2011 Author Share Posted October 22, 2011 by saying lame aren't you offending people who are affected by that particular condition as well? Just sayin... Such an excellent post! Hadn't considered it! He posted a picture of himself looking like an idiot/moron/stupid, and said "share this with all the mongs you know". The point is that idiot/moron/whatever is a part of our language that has no power to directly offend any party at all. however, 'mong' is still a word that is in limbo. Generally speaking, nobody has used the world for nearly a decade, so while he argues that his use is similar to 'moron', the fact is that the last popular use of the word was still derogative, while words like imbecile, idiot, moron, etc have made the transition from an actual labelling term to a floundering word for mindlessness in some form or another. Gervais is actually arguing that the word is already without any negative meaning. He refuses to accept that it may still have some root in offense. Generally I believe that offense is something often felt but rarely intended, however there is an element of sensitivity about offense, and I do just think that Gervais has misunderstood just how word meanings change. Just because a word hasn't been used for a decade does not mean it immediately shifts to an inoffensive term. Too bleh to communicate effectively. ultiamtely I think Gervais did not explain himself properly, did not show proper understanding of the shifting meaning of words/ Bleh. Is that actually his reasoning? That no one uses the word any more? Tbh I don't think I do, but mong IS a fantastic word. I'm all the more tempted to use it more now too. What if the reason the word hasn't been used for so long is because it last had negative connotations, hence it was moved away from for ten years, doesn't that sort of mean it could be used now in a non-that-way? Whens long enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamishmash Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I find words like "mong" and "retard" not personally offensive, but insultingly unimaginative and unnecessary. And I'm someone who champions free-speech and the like but when you know those kind of words not only offend people, but people who really, really don't deserve offending, there are so many other words you could use. He uses the word "gay" as an example which is a little silly. Yes it used to mean "happy", but it didn't naturally become a word for "homosexual"... it was chosen because of the positive connotations. And the word is changing still, due to homophobic uses of it, to mean "rubbish, disgusting, etc". I just think... yeah, he's a comedian, we're not really supposed to look to them as guidance on right or wrong, but ... meh... there are lots of better words to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rummy Posted October 22, 2011 Author Share Posted October 22, 2011 And surely, lots worse words too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Maybe it wasn't the smartest word for him to use; I'm all for free speech, but I'm also for thinking before speaking. But I just don't understand why people get so up in arms about it; people are reacting as if he actually did express a negative opinion on people with Down's syndrome, and I'm not sure everyone can actually tell the difference. Honestly, there are some people who really should prioritise what to get offended about; getting offended about the use of a particular word instead of its intended meaning is most often just silly, if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coolness Bears Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 People choose to get offended by certain words/things when they should be offended by all offensive words/things. I remember someone complaining about Curb Your Enthusiasm making fun of 9/11 and then laughing at his comparison between survivor (tv show) and the holocaust. Equally as "offensive." material. You can't just chop and choose your morality. Anyway the most offensive thing about Ricky Gervais' Science Tour was that it is painfully unfunny. Just trying to hard. It's a shame as for me he started out funny his first two tours animals/politics were good. The Office and Extras also good. Now he has become predictable. shame. People take twitter too seriously, it's a joke website. People need to remember this. He compare people to a Gaggle of Mongs in his show.There is probably a time and a place etc. but whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I remember someone complaining about Curb Your Enthusiasm making fun of 9/11 and then laughing at his comparison between survivor (tv show) and the holocaust. Equally as "offensive." material. You can't just chop and choose your morality. Why not, though? We all have different opinions on humour and what's offensive or not. No matter what you joke about, there are always someone who might get offended, so by your logic (which I completely agree with, by the way), you can in principle either joke about nothing or everything. But everyone has their tastes, and that's perfectly fine - good comedy is also about choosing the right audience for the material and vice versa. I wouldn't do religion-bashing stand-up for a strict, Christian audience, and I wouldn't go see a comedian whose speciality was dead kitten jokes. But that's not to say I think either kind of humour is wrong. Now, if that comedian was actually advocating killing kittens, then I'd get pissed, just like I'd dislike Gervais if he was actually hating on people with Down's syndrome. But that's the thing: Humour does not equal actual opinion. It amazes me that people still think making fun of something means you can't have a serious and respectful opinion on the matter as well, one that might, gasp, even differ from the one expressed in your joke! But all this is even beside the point if Gervais did indeed only use "mong" in the same way that "lame" is used nowadays, since the word in that sense has absolutely nothing to do with any handicap. Whether the word "mong" can be used in that sense is another debate altogether, one I haven't formed an opinion on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coolness Bears Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 yes. "There is probably a time and a place etc. but whatever." ...you said in full what I couldn't be bothered to type. I agree you should still have the conscientiousness to use the right humour towards the right people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 I did indeed sense we agreed on the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts