Originally Posted by Jack_ (Post 5072906)

Comedy doesn't and should never have any boundaries...because it's simply just that, comedy. There is a discernible between satire and jokes, and remarks made with malicious intent, and I find it odd how some people can so easily confuse the two.

Ricky's shows are about mocking stereotypes, tearing them apart and just being generally satirical. If you don't understand satire, then it's offensive, but if you do, it's not.

And this is coming from someone who is pretty indifferent towards him. I might give this show a chance though.

Originally Posted by Ammi (Post 5073344)

..I don't really find Ricky very funny anymore..I liked 'The Office' and 'Extras'..I don't know if it's me or whether his comedy has changed..
..I saw a trailer for this..and it didn't look anything special..I like Karl Pilkington so I'll give it a try
..I don't see the point in complaining about prejudice..when it hasn't been aired yet..when you think about it..disabilities are raised in lots of ways on TV..dramas..documentaries..etc..and comedy is just a different form..it all brings awareness and that's good..if it's not funny I wont watch..as to whether it offends..well I can't say without watching it
...After actually giving it a few weeks to see what it's like..maybe do a survey of disabled people..and ask them if they are offended..rather than assume things on their behalf

Originally Posted by Ammi (Post 5073351)

..yeah I see that..as you say..first thing to do is watch it..and then isn't it more up to the disabled to decide if they think they are being ridiculed..if a large number of disabled compained..were outraged..that's the time to address it

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073604)

There are a lot of "ifs" in there.

Where are all the people bleating on about free speech? I hate that people think comedy should be censored. This programme hasn't even aired yet and already there are people worrying about it and feeling bad on other people's behalf! Most disabled people don't need someone else to do their thinking and their feeling.

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ (Post 5073638)

What a mongy thread.

Originally Posted by 08marsh (Post 5073668)

I'll use the Frankie Boyle example again. Should he have been allowed to get away with his ridicule of Harvey? Because Harvey himself is most likely unaware of what was said and not really "affected" should Boyle have been allowed to make the "jokes" he did and make that child the centre of attention for being laughed at? I don't think so.

I compare that kind of thing to Jeremy Kyle, he acts high and mighty that he's doing a "service" and helping people through the problems yet all the guests he has on the show are just there to be laughed at, hissed at, screamed at and just treated like crap.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 5073679)

I don't agree with what Frankie Boyle did to Harvey at all, and I don't think he should have gotten away with it. I do think a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Obviously as I haven't actually seen this show yet it's hard to comment on whether or not it crosses that line but by the sounds of it, it is more taking the piss out of people reacting to the main character rather than he himself

Originally Posted by 08marsh (Post 5073685)

Agreed. That was my point, I don't agree with all the people saying comedy shouldn't have boundaries. When, really, everything has a line you shouldn't cross.

I don't know whether to watch the show or not though because Gervais in general doesn't make me laugh.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 5073679)

I don't agree with what Frankie Boyle did to Harvey at all, and I don't think he should have gotten away with it. I do think a line needs to be drawn somewhere.

Obviously as I haven't actually seen this show yet it's hard to comment on whether or not it crosses that line but by the sounds of it, it is more taking the piss out of people reacting to the main character rather than he himself

Originally Posted by kizzy (Post 5073649)

Why?...If It is being used to ridicule a section of our 'civilised' society then it is wrong.
Do you have any evidence to support this? Who are these 'most' disabled people?

Originally Posted by kizzy (Post 5073661)

You know for a clever person you can say some silly things....

Originally Posted by 08marsh (Post 5073357)

I wouldn't think so. If someone is being ridiculed, and if Gervais does that in this show, then I would think it would be blatantly obvious to everyone that it is the case. You don't need someone disabled to say "I categorically deduce he is making fun of me and people like me".

Take Frankie Boyle's comments about Harvey, you don't need to have any of his conditions to know that he used the kid to get a laugh, and to ridicule him.

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 5073720)

Then it's not free speech then isn't it? There's no half and half you either have the freedom of speech or you don't.

I couldn't give a **** about with Frankie Boyle or Ricky Gervais, I just feel that people who kick up such a fuss about such insignificant things are in desperate need of sorting out their priorities.

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 5073720)

Then it's not free speech then isn't it? There's no half and half you either have the freedom of speech or you don't.

I couldn't give a **** about with Frankie Boyle or Ricky Gervais, I just feel that people who kick up such a fuss about such insignificant things are in desperate need of sorting out their priorities.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 5073838)

Well, the example Marsh gave about Harvey I think over steps a mark, it's become personal and taking the piss out of a disabled child personally is wrong and bang out of order imo. If that damages Frankie Boyles right to Free Speech then I couldn't care less to be quite honest, somethings are more important.

Originally Posted by Ammi (Post 5073842)

I didn't actually see the Frankie Boyle thing..or know exactly what was said..but it seems that it was personal..a specific child..and also the fact that it was a child..who is classed as 'vulnerable'..I mean children in general are vulnerable

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 5073850)

I didn't see it either but it was something along the lines of him ****ing his mother

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073907)

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 5073909)

I don't disagree with you, however I still believe him singling out a particular disabled child to mock, is not on.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073917)

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

Originally Posted by 08marsh (Post 5073817)

The line has to be drawn between making a joke that certain people can laugh with together and singling people out to be laughed AT. It's a fine line but very different.
And when it comes to that there most certainly needs to be boundaries.

When a disabled child is laughed at, and people say he "****s his mother" then I say ******* "free" speech.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 5074020)

Its good to laugh at people and if they are in no position to physically injure you then it becomes very funny.

This is why Ricky is not doing a skit on thick black bodybuilders or MMA stars

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ (Post 5074037)

Yeah, no comedian has ever gone after muscle heads or fighters, have they?


What?


Oh.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet (Post 5074045)

If there has been a bodybuilding or MMA sitcom I must have missed it?

maybe they show it in your wing but not on normal tv?

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073907)

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073917)

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

Originally Posted by Niamh. (Post 5073909)

I don't disagree with you, however I still believe him singling out a particular disabled child to mock, is not on.

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 5074006)

You'd willingly give up your rights so that comedians can't make jokes that might offend someone?

Sorry but that's HILARIOUS, foolish but hilarious.

Originally Posted by 08marsh (Post 5074276)

I absolutely detest Katie Price and everything that she stands for but that's no excuse for comments to be made in a public arena claiming her disabled son has sex with her, in order to attract laughter and "favour".

In this case, why should the mother "take some of the responsibility"?
Yes, Katie Price has given her kids a level of fame at a very young age but that's pretty much irrelevant to what Boyle did.
That's like saying, you're a kid in the playground and therefore you must take some of the responsibility for being bullied by an older kid. Illogical.




Agreed.




Did I say that? No.

You were talking about everyone having the right of "free speech" and there being no boundaries to comedy.
I suggested when comedy (ie. Comedians broadcasting to a larger arena, TV, radio and DVDs) crosses the line like the likes of Boyle's comments there is some kind of boundary needed. Which channel 4 thankfully (or was it BBC) understood and reprimanded the spineless twerp.

Yes, hilarious isn't it? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073750)

It's a little rich you asking ME for evidence, when you're basing your whole opinion and your moral outrage on a show that hasn't even been aired yet.

Originally Posted by Jesus.H.Christ (Post 5073763)

Because there is a difference between being clever, and having a stick continually wedged up your arse about every little thing. An ability to poke fun at people and situations, doesn't detract from intelligence.

Originally Posted by Ammi (Post 5073842)

I didn't actually see the Frankie Boyle thing..or know exactly what was said..but it seems that it was personal..a specific child..and also the fact that it was a child..who is classed as 'vulnerable'..I mean children in general are vulnerable

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 5074357)

So you don't want Free Speech then, that is hilarious.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073907)

I didn't get the full story of what Frankie Boyle said either. However, I'm not sure that flaunting her kids around in the public eye like fashion accessories and using them to get maximum publicity for her sorry self didn't help the cause of that "celebrity Mother of the Year". Not saying he was right in what he said... just saying, I didn't hear reports of him singling out any kid who's mother hadn't already thrust them into the public eye. Jordan herself must take a little of the responsibility.

Originally Posted by 08marsh (Post 5074378)

I believe TV and other broadcastable "comedy" akin to Frankie Boyles comment from above needs to be controlled.

But, you just put 2 and 2 together and come up with 5. Whatever.

Originally Posted by Livia (Post 5073917)

I agree, it was a poor show on Frankie Boyle's behalf. But had Jordan not made sure we all know what Harvey looks like and who he is, I guess Frankie Boyle would never have heard of him either. I can picture all of Jordan's kids, but I can't picture many other celebrity kids.

Originally Posted by Dezzy (Post 5074357)

So you don't want Free Speech then, that is hilarious.

Originally Posted by kizzy (Post 5074409)

How about the beckhams...tom cruise... madonnas kids?....
Stop trying to justify it , it's pathetic.