Man fired for joke he made 23 years ago - General Discussion Discussion

[–] jriley555 (8117) 3 years ago

what was the joke.

reply

[–] bobbydallas (8511) 3 years ago

i also love that no one would tell you exactly what was said...

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

According to the article, something in his comedy act, including the phrase "Let's play Holocaust." I haven't seen anything more specific than that.

It being part of a comedy act implies he did it in multiple performances, but the article reads, "The Tokyo Olympic organizing committee fired the director of the opening ceremony on Thursday because of a Holocaust joke he made during a comedy show in 1998," meaning it may well have been a one time thing.

reply

[–] huwdj (4566) 3 years ago

Probably not. Comedians seem to have specific sets and perform with and the same jokes used many times. Apparently this one was filmed and is now circulating on social media.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

> Comedians seem to have specific sets and perform with and the same jokes used many times.

Yeah, you're probably right. I'm just noting that we can't be absolutely sure of that, at least based on this single source. I haven't looked at every news article out there but haven't seen any that said it was a regular part of his act.

reply

[–] huwdj (4566) 3 years ago

You could be right as well and I agree we don't know the context.
But at the end of the day the guy has apparently made a joke, in a public performance, about something most people think is unacceptable. There are very few things beyond the pale but this is one of them.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

Even if so, part of what bothers me about things like this is that there's simply no sense of proportionality. Being expected to apologize, OK -- but is this really worth losing ones job? I don't think so.

reply

[–] Stratego (30494) 3 years ago

Apparently it was a parody of children's programs. He suggested playing the Holocaust with paper dolls. A lame joke, but no crime.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

> A lame joke, but no crime.

Sounds like it beats some of SNL's material.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

A joke about the Rape of Nanking would have been much funnier.

reply

[–] jriley555 (8117) 3 years ago

there's a great line of holocaust humor in the film 'the hangover :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XRtmd-7oI0

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

There's even a novel lampooning the modern "Holocaust industry": https://www.amazon.com/My-Holocaust-Novel-Tova-Reich-ebook/dp/B000Q80RYA/

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21452) 3 years ago

Do people not understand that comics say outrageous things all the time? It’s an act. I’d be willing to bet this guy is very sympathetic to the Holocaust as are most.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

> Do people not understand that comics say outrageous things all the time?

And people laugh at those things. I suppose the next level for this sort of thing will be to track down audience members who laughed at it in 1998 and demand they be fired from their jobs too.

reply

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21452) 3 years ago

Exactly! It’s all so silly.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (56640) 3 years ago

Wait, so it was part of a stand-up routine? What's the problem?

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

Our world has become absurd. About a year ago, a local television station here fired a reporter/commentator who had been with them for twenty years over something he said on the air ... a scripted comment which had been written by someone else! All it takes is a few people getting butthurt and businesspeople toss their brains out the window and people lose jobs.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (56640) 3 years ago

We had a reporter here who got fired for using the N-word twice during board meetings which was directly about the news story they were discussing.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

What astounds me about this particular instance is how long in the past the "offense" was. I can still find emails I made to a technical Usenet group in the mid-1990s. Now, I was using my work email account, with my employer's domain name, so I was always professional both in content and in tone; no worries there. But a 13 year old in 1998 would be 36 today, and there were plenty of them on the Internet doing the things 13 year olds do. We're headed toward the point where adults with families to support are going to be fired over stupid things they said when they were kids.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (56640) 3 years ago

I swear this is going to backfire for so many people. When some woke person has a tweet that's out of context from 10 years ago that comes out, they're going to realize how people have to slow down with trying to get everyone fired.

reply

[–] AndyKing1967 (38067) 3 years ago

Well that’s you and me screwed.

reply

[–] jriley555 (8117) 3 years ago

and me. i've said some real stupid shit in the past internet era. actually, my worldview has changed radically in that time. would not want to be held up to ridicule or charges of inconsistency for something i said in 1997.

one example, like many, my view about gay marriage changed drastically in the past 20 years. i'm now against it. j/k.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (56640) 3 years ago

And I can't stand when they try to cancel people who have said something when they were 13.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

> my worldview has changed radically in that time. would not want to be held up to ridicule or charges of inconsistency for something i said in 1997.

Yeah, that flabbergasts me too. People aren't allowed to simply change their minds anymore.

> one example, like many, my view about gay marriage changed drastically in the past 20 years. i'm now against it. j/k.

I started to ask why you're against it, but then saw the "j/k" -- my eyes ain't what they used to me.

I personally don't care one way or the other about the issue on moral grounds. If Jim Bob and Bubba want to shack up, they're going to do it, and if they want to call themselves "married," so what? But I also thought Obergfell v. Hodges, the US Supreme Court decision which legalized gay marriage, was one of the worst decisions in the Court's history. Any legal analytical "method" which could lead from the actual Fourteenth Amendment to that result must necessarily be so open-ended, so unrestrictive, to make any result possible, turning the Fourteenth Amendment into a license for judges to strike down any laws they simply don't like.

Unfortunately, in many places a statement like that immediately gets one branded as a "homophobe," "gay-basher," or worse.

reply

[–] jriley555 (8117) 3 years ago

i haven't even troubled to look at the opinion. my take on it is the fairly manifest social utility of social recognition & approval for unions of individuals pragmatically qualified to make their unions productive. and having known loads of sane, responsible gays in committed relationships, i knew first-hand it was a reality.

there was an earlier time when i had 'opinions' about preventing people from exercising their basic human rights to love & partner with the person they love & are prepared to commit to. that was part of my change.

reply

[–] BullSchmidt (3189) 3 years ago

> When some woke person has a tweet that's out of context from 10 years ago that comes out, they're going to realize how people have to slow down with trying to get everyone fired.

Yeah, it's bad enough when stuff like this is quoted fairly, honestly, in context. But that doesn't always happen. I remember an incident from about ten years ago. A journalist had written a story on race relations, contrasting attitudes between the older and younger generations. It included a photo of an interracial couple at a high school prom -- he was black, she was white. The story was titled something like, "A Parent's Worst Nightmare?" A somewhat provocative title but still a fair question to draw the contrast she was making. Some "activists" circulated the photo on social media and cited the story title as "A Parent's Worst Nightmare" -- no question mark. They managed to get a fair sized mob of people baying for the reporter's blood. As I recall, her employer stood behind her. Would that happen today? If her employers were anything like the would-be men without balls who run my local TV station, likely not.

reply

[–] samoanjoes (56640) 3 years ago

They're going to take all of us down to the point where there's no one left to take down. At least then we'll all be united.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

Holocaust jokes just aren't funny

reply

[–] trevorh321 (5495) 3 years ago

Liberal insanity infecting the world.

reply

[–] Furienna (3342) 3 years ago

Actually, there is nothing "liberal" about this.
If you're a true Liberal, you will not get a man fired for a 23-year-old joke.

reply

[–] BillHicksFan (10559) 3 years ago

The politcally correct joke of today will be illegal in 23 years.

reply

[–] PaladinNJ (21509) 3 years ago

At the rate things are going, in 23 years all jokes will be illegal.

"We have become stupidly politically correct, which is the death of comedy."
-Mel Brooks

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

There is no expiration date on hate!

reply

[–] BillySlater (4241) 3 years ago

How can you know what love or hate is if your idea of love could be hate tomorrow and vice versa depending on what the culture/society/world decides what it is?

reply

[–] BillySlater (4241) 3 years ago

Is there an expiration date on forgiveness?

reply

[–] beancrisp (1623) 3 years ago

FACT: Making jokes about the Holocaust has nothing to do with hate. Prove me wrong.

reply

[–] [deleted] 3 years ago

I wonder if he ever did a joke about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings. I would bet he didn't.

reply

[–] Boromir (10005) 3 years ago

I recommend watching the documentary Can We Take A Joke (2015) about the PC in comedy.

reply