FCC To Investigate Colbert

Ziggurat said:
No, because ultimately it's off topic. Darat made a claim related to this thread, he has no evidence for this claim, and all that other stuff is a derail, which I'm not going to follow any more.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that you'll initiate and/or follow a derail just as far as it will go before someone calls you on it or asks you for substance. Then suddenly you're concerned about it being a derail.
 
phiwum said:
There seem to be three broad positions in this thread.

(1) The homosexuality is utterly incidental and plays no role in the burn.
Click to expand...

FTFY. The imagery invokes a kind of crass humor automatically, certainly, so saying that it plays no role in the humor is something that I don't think anyone in this thread was actually doing. Thus, there are a couple aspects to the humor being invoked. There's the homosexuality part and there's the more political Trump/Russia part. The latter is clearly being used to be insulting and, by specifically choosing Putin, is being stressed. The former, on the other hand, is not clearly being used to be insulting, but is quite reasonable to treat as an incidental humor enhancement in a couple ways.

phiwum said:
(2) The homosexuality is used to annoy the butts (no pun intended) of the joke because they are homophobes or overly sensitive about manliness or whatever. As such, the teller expresses nothing negative about homosexuality, but uses the bigotry of Trump and Putin against them.
Click to expand...

This shouldn't actually conflict with (1), regardless, though. What you describe is another aspect to the potential humor that's more about the reactions to the expected reactions to the joke than it is about the actual joke itself.

phiwum said:
(3) The homosexuality is essential to the demeaning nature of this kind of joke. This joke does not work in the same way if you change one or both genders, and hence negative sentiments about homosexuality are essential to the joke.

The difference between (2) and (3) depends on whether it is sufficient that the butts of the joke find giving fellatio demeaning or whether this view is at least familiar to the audience as a whole.

I've argued for (3), not that I think that entails that the teller is a homophobe, but (2) seems reasonable as well. I just don't think that (1) is plausible. Had Hillary won and ended up fawning over Putin, her detractors wouldn't have made this sort of joke.
Click to expand...

I would be utterly and entirely unsurprised if at least one of them had ended up making very similar "jokes" about her in a similar situation, though? Remember the numerous and various insults and fake scandals pointed at Obama, for example, based on the slightest indication in the general direction?

phiwum said:
Now, that's enough analysis for me over a very minor issue. Let me close with a quote due to E.B. White.

Humor can be dissected, as a frog can, but the thing dies in the process and the innards are discouraging to any but the pure scientific mind.​
Click to expand...

On the other hand, I don't really care if it dies. It's not like it got more than an eye-roll from me in the first place, though.
 
Last edited:
Argumemnon said:
It's interesting that you'll initiate and/or follow a derail just as far as it will go before someone calls you on it or asks you for substance. Then suddenly you're concerned about it being a derail.
Click to expand...

I'm just following the standard you and the mods established. And I'm not whining about it either.
 
The "standard" term to use would have been "butt boy". I wonder if that would have caused as much of a stir. It's a much more common expression, and people use it without thinking about the literal meaning.
 
Cain said:
I used to like Colbert, but it turns out he's a flaming liberal socialist cuck.
Click to expand...
He's always been a flaming liberal, but I still enjoy him. That diatribe that everyone is so worked up about would have been more fun on HBO, like Jon Oliver, where you can say anything and they won't bleep it.
 
Darat said:
Still not explaining myself well, what I was meaning is that it is only homosexual because the two of them are male, the homosexuality of the joke is incidental to the joke.
Click to expand...

Let's see if it is still a burn when we change one of the people to female...

"The only thing Angela Merkel's mouth is is good for is being Vladimir Putin's ****-holster"

Well, look at that. It still brings forth imagery of being the submissive in a D/S relationship being 'forced' to do something they don't like, but secretly liking the fact that they are being forced to do it for the pleasure of their lord and master.
 
Last edited:
There's absolutely nothing wrong with being a "flaming liberal socialist". Calling someone a "Cuck" is just another way of saying "decent person who's not a ridge-headed Neanderthal".
 
Cain said:
Who does that? What a fag.
Click to expand...

rite?

One of the problems, I think, with this kind of joke is that slightly older generations - and, i would guess, particularly the more conservative types - don't really understand internet culture or the way that the younger generations often tend to use these expressions as playful terms of endearment, and not at all designed to insult homosexuality.

common... Colbert is on record as not being able to see colour, and that includes rainbow colours. He's also free to make as many gay jokes as he likes, the same way black people call each other Monica all the time.
 
;) I'm a white south african. I think that qualifies me to use it in jokes. :boxedin:
It's not for this thread, but race and racism has been an issue that i've been faced with daily for as long as i've been conscious (so i exclude anything before i was 25). It's helpful and confusing all at once. The more i know, the more i know that i don't.
 
Not quite about the FCC investigation, but a response to the colourful Colbert broadside.

“The guy was dying,” he said. “By the way, they were going to take him off television, then he started attacking me and he started doing better. But his show was dying. I’ve done his show. But when I did his show, which, by the way, was very highly rated. It was high – highest rating. The highest rating he’s ever had.” (Ofc it just wouldn't be classic Trump if it wasn't factually incorrect)
 
TofuFighter said:
Not quite about the FCC investigation, but a response to the colourful Colbert broadside.

“The guy was dying,” he said. “By the way, they were going to take him off television, then he started attacking me and he started doing better. But his show was dying. I’ve done his show. But when I did his show, which, by the way, was very highly rated. It was high – highest rating. The highest rating he’s ever had.” (Ofc it just wouldn't be classic Trump if it wasn't factually incorrect)
Click to expand...

Colbert's response: https://youtu.be/_wMvItIDMPU

And wtf is the president of the United States doing getting drawn into a feud with a comedian? What a moron.
 
TofuFighter said:
Not quite about the FCC investigation, but a response to the colourful Colbert broadside.

“The guy was dying,” he said. “By the way, they were going to take him off television, then he started attacking me and he started doing better. But his show was dying. I’ve done his show. But when I did his show, which, by the way, was very highly rated. It was high – highest rating. The highest rating he’s ever had.” (Ofc it just wouldn't be classic Trump if it wasn't factually incorrect)
Click to expand...

Colbert's response is hilarious:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-president-trump-calling-him-a-no-talent-guy/
 
TragicMonkey said:
Which interpretation Colbert puts on it is unknown to any except Colbert.
Click to expand...

My impression is that Colbert was just looking to get a rise out of President. And he did.

It's not "Happy Birthday Mr. President" but it seems to have done the trick.
 
Mike! said:
Trump did make him look a fool on election night, what with him not even having a back up plan in the event Hillary lost.
Click to expand...

Trump made America look like a fool on election night, and I didn't have a backup plan, either. Yeah, if I had a chance to insult Trump on national TV, I'd jump on it.
 
Modified said:
The "standard" term to use would have been "butt boy". I wonder if that would have caused as much of a stir. It's a much more common expression, and people use it without thinking about the literal meaning.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of an incident some years ago when a young, female, very Christian acquaintance of mine used the term "sucks" in a sentence. I was a bit surprised by this, considering her strongly-voiced beliefs and behavior.

I asked her: "By any chance, do you know where the negative meaning of that word came from?" In the span of only several seconds her expression changed from quizzical to dawning realization to horrification.
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
Trump made America look like a fool on election night, and I didn't have a backup plan, either. Yeah, if I had a chance to insult Trump on national TV, I'd jump on it.
Click to expand...

Trump is still making America look foolish, but only because Republicans are letting him do so.
 
Modified said:
The "standard" term to use would have been "butt boy". I wonder if that would have caused as much of a stir. It's a much more common expression, and people use it without thinking about the literal meaning.
Click to expand...

Well unless it's the more archaic version of the term where a "butt boy" is a junior member of the afterguard on a Royal Navy ship who is responsible for manning the water butt.

Sailors would go to the butt in the scuttle during their watch for a drink (and presumably a gossip - hence the term scuttlebutt for gossip) and the butt boy would pass them their water.

Hence the term "butt boy" for junior, servile person which eventually became a derogatory term.


Then again that could all be "alternative facts"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom