(no subject)

[lollardfish]

Can anyone more knowledgeable than I point out any examples of the Vilification Tennis show doing productive social satire - that is, making fun of something in order to demonstrate its impropriety or nonsensical nature?

I'm seeing excuses that I shouldn't be offended at their upcoming show because it's productive social satire.

I think it's just an excuse and the show isn't about satire, it's about getting laughs by being as mean as possible. They are really good at it. They get a lot of laughs. I think they're kidding themselves about the satire, but I'm not that familiar with their shows.

Comments

[techdragon.livejournal.com]

I can get you in contact with some of their members who I am friends with... I have not actually seen a show though.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Thanks. This is not a friends-locked post, so they are free to chime in. I am genuinely looking for examples.

[groomporter.livejournal.com]

I as I think I said on Facebook I have only seen the show at festival, which is just insult tennis, I haven't seen the off-site "themed" shows, but
their are excerpts of some of them on Youtube that you can check out.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

I'd like to hear what their advocates say.

[groomporter.livejournal.com]

Yeah, just figured the Youtube bits might provide some unfiltered direct samples of the shows even if they are just excerpts,

[(Anonymous)]

I am on the cast of Vil Tennis and the following is my opinion and does not reflect or represent the other jerks in Vil Tennis.
I personally do not care about providing "productive social satire". I am not even sure I understand what that is suppose to mean.
My job is to make people laugh. I do my job and I do it well. I'm not doing shows to make statements.

Mark L

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

I didn't think so, Mark. But the claim has been made (see below), and I wanted to hear examples as I couldn't think of any.

I think it's a superb example of cruelty humor.

[mamajenzie.livejournal.com]

I just made a post a few hours ago on my perspective of all of this on my lj. It's a locked down blog, and for many reasons, but buttonlass has access to it, and I give permission for her to share it with you.

I seriously thought about preventing comments, but I feel everyone should get to say their piece. Just know that the post is not about you, us, them, sides, or whatever else. It is about me and my experience, about how I view vilification and what means I use it for. It has nothing to do with anyone except me.

And yes, I certainly do use the r-word. I have sometimes been called a "tame" vilifier, but that doesn't make me any less of a vilifier. :)

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

I read it and couldn't come up with any examples. I'd love to hear some. Right now, it looks to me like you are just making excuses for causing pain to people like me and my wife and for perpetuating the belief that it is appropriate and comical to make fun of people who, by definition, cannot defend themselves and are frequently seen as lesser humans on account of their disabilities. That's what I see.

But I believe satire can be extremely effective at undermining social ills, and I'd like to hear how Vill does that.

[mamajenzie.livejournal.com]

I never promised examples. I stated that the post was made for me and my thoughts. It wasn't actually made for you, sweetie.

That being said, I would love to hear exactly how we are picking on and making fun of the handicapped. The only thing you have to base your entire argument off of is the title "Going Full R____", which is a very obvious play off of Tropic Thunder. So very obvious that even I, the pop culture inept, got it. The use of that reference was in performers being hindered at being able to fully represent one with special needs. It's social commentary that I believe is rather accurate, and sadly shows a misrepresentation in Hollywood. Unless you feel Forrest Gump is representational.

All that being said, the show itself can often be satirical. It can also be ironical and sarcastic. For my part, I work best at word play. Were I in the show, I could tell you three insults I would definitely use in the show.

-You're so stupid, you thought a paraplegic was a step below lawyer.
-You're so stupid, you thought Downs was the opposite of Ups.
-You're so stupid, you thought retard was a noun.

If you are looking to me for a very specific example of what the show is going to be, I honestly can't help you. I'm not in this show- I was not a part of the planning, I did not help with any of it.

In fact, a part of me is having difficulty with the thought that you might know what's going to happen in the show better than I do. I mean, you already know it's going to hurt children. I had no idea.

[akitrom.livejournal.com]

I am reminded of Don Imus and the Rutgers' Women's Basketball controversy. At the time, the aspect of it that landed Imus in such hot water was the perception that he was being nasty to people who were not celebrities, not behaving badly, and who were innocent of any cause of his malice.

Unlike, oh, Mel Brooks and Hitler.

Vilification Tennis and the art of offensive comedy

[zarathud23.livejournal.com]

I have been a member of the Vilification Tennis cast for 13 years.

To quote our official website: "We feel that there is humor inherent even in the most taboo subjects and we are, therefore, willing to make fun of things that most people would think aren’t the least bit funny."

Our show is about being funny. It is also about pushing the envelope into non-politically correct humor, because (I feel that) "Political Correctness" has gone way too far. You can't hardly sneeze without offending someone these days!

I have ADHD and have always been wild. When I was a kid the other children called me all sorts of names such as "Spaz" "Mental" "Retard" (That's right! I said it!)and "Loser." I turned out just fine (ok, some might argue that last point).

We are not trying to piss you off. We are utilizing a format that no one else dares to touch. Why? Because somebody should.

As far as examples go, I suggest you come to the show. You may be surprised.

Re: Vilification Tennis and the art of offensive comedy

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

I agree with you about the essence of Vilification Tennis.

However:

"I have ADHD and have always been wild. When I was a kid the other children called me all sorts of names such as "Spaz" "Mental" "Retard" (That's right! I said it!)and "Loser." I turned out just fine (ok, some might argue that last point)."

That you withstood this kind of thing is not, I think, justification to inflict it on others.

Actually, insult comedy is pretty common. Plenty of people do this type of humor, just not this format. And it's a really good format executed by tremendously skilled people (at least the last time I saw it, and since it's Tim's show, and Tim's sense of comedy is pretty finely honed, I'm sure it's still great). I have at no time questioned the show's ability to produce laughter.

Re: Vilification Tennis and the art of offensive comedy

[buttonlass.livejournal.com]

Three points:

I know no one is trying to piss us off. I'm not that vain. Not every single song is about me. It was an unintended result however.

I would be thrilled to find out the show is going to be uplifting to people with disabilities, I would also be delusional if I thought that was a representative statement of previous work by vilifiers.

Do you know what the difference is between insulting people with developmental disabilities and insulting let's say someone who has ADD-ADHD as an example? Other groups can stand up for themselves. I also had ADD as a child and I can apparently complain quite a lot. People with developmental disabilities are the least likely group to be able to respond.

[petsnakereggie.livejournal.com]

I do not feel that what we do is social satire. I don't know where this has come from but I've never said it. I don't believe I am fooling myself about our show.

What we do is comedy. We do a specific kind of comedy that is not for everyone and that is why we are popular.

However, I feel that the moment we say "no, we can't go there" we have a problem. When we are willing to make fun of any topic, we are making it really clear that we don't mean anything we say. The minute we say "oh, we can't try a joke on that topic," we imply that we mean the jokes we are making on the other topics.

We don't. We don't mean any of it. We simply use offensive material to entertain our audience.

Our audience has a social contract with us that says "we know you are going to go places that make us uncomfortable. We know you are going to make jokes about things society says are not supposed to be funny." I point that out at the beginning of every show. Within the context of our show, we take chances that are going to offend some people and they need to be OK with that or they shouldn't come.

We also pay attention to our audience and if they respond negatively to a type of joke, we stop doing it. There is a feedback loop at our shows that involve us trying stuff out and our audience responding positively or negatively so we know which jokes are going to fly and which ones aren't.

If you want me to defend the show as "productive social satire," I won't do that. I believe there is some of that. I think that there was a lot of that in our political shows last year. I don't believe that social satire is the primary thrust of what we do.

Hate us or not - we are what we are. I can't change that or our show wouldn't work. Our goal is to make people laugh. That's it.

I'm sure I'm going to get raked over the coals for saying what I'm saying. I accept that or I wouldn't have chosen to post. I'm in charge of the show - I accept responsibility for what we do.

As a caveat - if I don't respond to someone who responds to me, I apologize. I certainly hope to respond as much as possible. However, I only have so many hours in the day to engage in online conversation. If you just want to tell me what a horrible person I am, that is groovy. I can take it but I probably won't respond.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting. I basically agree with what you are saying.

Here's the thing - I'm not in the audience. Neither is my wife.

If I can accept that in the context of your show you are going to say cruel and hateful things in pursuit of humor, can you accept that as a non-audience member and non-participant, I have the right to be hurt when the most personally painful hateful language fills my (wife's) facebook?

I have more thoughts, but let's see if we can come to some agreement there.

I'm not interested in insulting anyone and deeply regret any hurt I've done in responding to this. I am interested in working through the issue as productively as possible, for all the difficulties that presents.

[petsnakereggie.livejournal.com]

If I can accept that in the context of your show you are going to say cruel and hateful things in pursuit of humor, can you accept that as a non-audience member and non-participant, I have the right to be hurt when the most personally painful hateful language fills my (wife's) facebook?

I would never suggest you don't. I completely understand your response and have never stated publicly anything to the contrary. The one post I made on the topic to the Vil Facebook page was specifically in response to someone (not you) who said they "hoped our show would not be disrespectful." I felt it was important to point out that is the kind of show we do.

Here is the thing - the whole reason I selected the title I did is because of the "Tropic Thunder" uproar from last year. I wanted to play off of that. I also wanted to make it really clear what kind of show this was. The concept of someone walking into our show unaware of what they are going to get horrifies me. I want to do everything I can to ensure that won't happen.

I hope you understand that I didn't make the decision with the intent to hurt anyone. I am extremely sorry for causing pain. For all I say the show is not about satire, the title was intended to make a satirical (and literal) point, not to cause pain.

And I say again - it was my decision to go this way. My fault. The buck stops here. I own it.

Tim

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

*Two* separate invocations of Godwin to one post. Two.

K.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

I don't understand.

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

Because you think I was mistaken in pointing it out in this context? Or because you haven't googled "godwin" and found the Wikipedia article on Godwin's Law? Jews can make "Mel Brooks makes Hitler jokes" comparisons to what is being done here. Gentiles? Not so much. If you're on the outside making jokes, it's ridicule, not humor.

These in fact add up to the third reference to Nazis in these conversations. There was one in Josh's LJ as well.

K.

[jmanna.livejournal.com]

If you spend your entirely life battling a word you're going to waste your life fighting. And not the good kind of fighting that brings awareness, the kind of chewing on the bars of the cage fighting that just bring constant turmoil to your life. Bring awareness is one thing. Brow beating your friends and implying malice because they don't agree with you.

To me, you've passed beyond bring awareness into a battle to be right. No matter what words are typed here, your wife was very upset and hurt. I hate to say this but life being what it is, she will be again. And people will be mean to your son. Because people suck.

You seem to want to win. What I've seen is a pick and chose of various explanations presented to you in a method of trying to disprove them all. Nobody said these were excuses or reasons for your permission. They simply said they were their reasons. You added the concept of 'defensive'. Many of those involved have said they are regretful that your family is hurting but they are not seeking your permission. Because that seems to be what this is all about. Permission.

You have stated you find other instances of derogatory speech (not necessarily about those will mental disabilities) satirical. I'm sure there's someone personally effected by those instances that finds such satire offensive. I will bring up South Park again. You said you don't find it always funny but you find it permissible satire. Is it satirical because it's so ridiculous? Or is it permissible because it's a cartoon? I find what is done in the few Vilification shows I've seen at the BLB to be complete ridiculous. If anyone watches that show thinking anyone on that stage is serious they are easily fooled.

You seem to imply malice in people's use of the word. People have repeatedly said their intent is humor and nothing is said with malice.

Think about this way. I am overweight. I have had people hang out of cars and call me Fat Ass. I have been told by people that I'm 'too fat to be wearing that'. And this is recently, not in school. I have watched friends make jokes like 'I went to the (S&M) floor and all I saw was naked fatties'. I have watched piles of vilification jokes about fat mothers and fat people. Some of them do hurt. Some of the flippant comments made by people I know about my weight have made me cry. Is it okay to make fat jokes because I'm fat and could just lose the weight and therefor it's my fault?

Yes, I do want people around me to think before they default to fat jokes. I want everyone around me to think before they go for any cheap laugh that just pokes fun at a physical aspect of someone. But humor is humor. Do I think no one should make fat jokes? Hell no. The rest of the world doesn't need my permission.

"You're mama's so fat she bends light." That right there is funny. Come on, it's a thinker even.

We laugh at the different. We laugh out of discomfort. We laugh at the ridiculous. We laugh because we are presented a twist of thought on something we recognize. Sometimes we don't laugh because we don't think it's funny.

I just don't find Stephen Colbert funny. I think he's this over-the-top clown and his jokes are obvious and tedious. I have friends that love his humor. I do not expect them to dislike his humor because I do. Even if he makes fat jokes. Which he does.

Humor is so very subjective. You have to just trust people's intent (which numerous people have stated regarding Vilification is not malice) and move on. If you want them to change their sense of humor you're going to fight a losing battle.

[zarathud23.livejournal.com]

Well said, jmanna!

--Eric M. Clark

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

About this time of year, every year, my mother would bring home bags of mixed nuts from the grocery store. You could buy them today, and the mix is the same now as it was when I was a girl: Hazel nuts. almonds, pecans, English walnuts and Brazil nuts.

And my father would complain about the the Brazil nuts. "These damned nigger toes are hard to open." Or, "Why are there always so many nigger toes in the mixed nuts?"

Deconstructing his joke is simple. It's easy to see that it has an element of surprise, a little twist that draws the laugh. It's ridiculous. Using the word nigger simply out of the blue like that gets a laugh from the shock because it is not a word that polite company uses.

For some, I suppose, it's easy to say that the joke isn't about people, it's just funny. For others, the word nigger is a connection to slavery and the not-fully-human status given to slaves is inescapably lucid, and cannot be set aside for the laugh.

On a more personal level, jmanna, you and I don't really know each other. Nevertheless, I am sorry as can be that friends and strangers have hurt you and made you cry by making fat jokes. But I am much, much sadder that on some level you find fat jokes acceptable, and think it's fine for people to make them. You deserve to be treated better than that, by the world and by your friends. Honest. You really do.

K.

[ethel.livejournal.com]

I'm totally late to the game on this one.

I stumbled upon this just tonight, and I read the entire thing through. I'm glad to see that you and Tim were able to exchange thoughts and feelings in a productive, respectful way -- that was actually really good to see.

I don't really thing I can add anything useful that others (particulary Tim in his exchange with you) haven't already said, but I did want to seriously and sincerely thank you for sharing what must be an emotionally wearying series of thoughts, feelings, and words for you.

I spent about 30 minutes reading this, and it was 30 minutes well-spent all around, and I feel I have a more well-fleshed appreciation for others' viewpoints, and that is always ALWAYS a good thing. We may have slightly different stances on humor, but I really believe that our fundamental viewpoints on life, humanity, and respect have more similarities than differences.

Laurie Richardson -- VT performer for 5-6 years now.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Thanks Laurie. I appreciate this a lot.