(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

[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

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Thanks for posting. I really do appreciate it.

I take your point about needing to make sure everyone knows the kind of show you do. But from our perspective, the last few days has been as if we were forced to sit through a show, so something went wrong there.

When my wife posted, angry and upset, to her facebook page, a lot of people who have no clue what Vil is got wind of it, hence the posts. I actually have no clue who that guy or his organization is. We - my wife and I - know what your shows are about and I absolutely respect your collective comedic gifts.

From other cast members, friends/family of cast members, and just folks who like to play devil's advocate, I have been getting a number of different kinds of defensive responses, which basically argued that I should not be offended for varying reasons.

1 - no one meant to hurt us (we know. We were hurt anyway. Intentions count but the lack of bad intentions doesn't fix anything).

2 - you didn't complain when the show was insulting blacks and gay people (it's true. I'm not sure it's relevant. I can't say for sure I would have complained were I to see such a thing, as the personal emotional response would not have been as sharp).

3 - It's just words.

4 - We (whoever) don't find the word retard offensive, so you (me and my wife) shouldn't either.

5 - the show is actually satirical (or raises awareness) to combat hate and stereotypes. That's the one I wrote this post about to see if I could get examples.

Jen's comment about it raising her personal awareness (somewhere in this thread) is quite telling and undeniable. I've been thinking about that since I read it, and like to think that everyone connected to this mess has had to stop and think a little, regardless of what conclusions they've reached or what they'll do in the future. In a locked post a few days ago I wrote about every time I've encountered this kind of language and when I've handled it well and when poorly. I handled it poorly, presumably because my wife was so angry, presumably because the attack came from inside the community.

I am working extremely hard to develop language to explain why this language is both so painful and wrong. I maintain that the title of this show perpetuates the idea that calling people retards, as an insult, is funny. Maybe it is, but it's funny because of the images of retarded people that conjures up, which in turn perpetuates the stereotypes, etc.

That's actually why I keep writing, not because I expect to convince anyone of anything or right any wrongs, but because this is going to happen to us again, and again, and again. And it's going to hurt every time. And people are going to be offended that we're offended. So I have to get better at this.

[mamajenzie.livejournal.com]

Jen's comment about it raising her personal awareness (somewhere in this thread) is quite telling and undeniable. I've been thinking about that since I read it, and like to think that everyone connected to this mess has had to stop and think a little, regardless of what conclusions they've reached or what they'll do in the future.

Still not done with my design work. I'm going to blame you for it. :P

I had to come by and take a look, see what else had been posted. I want to make just this one point clear... My personal awareness was raised because the show and ideas surrounding it made me slightly uncomfortable, and even though I'm not a part of the show, I still have to decide for myself if something is too far. Since it wasn't something we talked about and kept rather hush hush in my family, I had to research this myself. The show being what it was made me look into which parts made me uncomfortable, and thus increased my awareness.

I share a hope that people involved in discussion have stopped to look at their actions and why, and what words mean to them, "this mess" isn't what spurred my further reflections on the issues. The show doing what it does and "pushing the envelope" is what made me reflect. The show pushing my boundaries made me look at what they were and why.

I just don't want people to think that a riot has to break out from these shows to make someone (esp me) look at what makes something wrong or right. Simply bringing up the subject can sometimes be enough.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

Thanks for taking time away from your work to offer your thoughts. I absolutely mis-read your original post and am so glad to have been corrected. Your thoughtful reaction, wherever you end up, is the best thing I can hope for. If we all paused to consider things more often, even if we end up disagreeing, we can only be the better for it.

[petsnakereggie.livejournal.com]

I just read this and I have to take my kids to school, work, etc. I plan on responding so please don't feel that I'm blowing you off.

However, let me say one thing - I was never offended because you were offended. I know what kind of show I'm in charge of. I can explain why I chose the approach that I did and what my comic philosophy is, but I'm never going to suggest you have no right to be offended by my approach and my philosophy.

I'll write more later.

[petsnakereggie.livejournal.com]

OK, I have time to do a more in depth response. I've read through every post in this thread and while I could try to respond to many very good points, I think I'll stick to this one. No offense meant to anyone else (I mean aside from the offense already taken).

I'm really just going to expand on what I wrote very quickly this morning.

I don't blame you for being offended. I'm not upset that you are. As I said, the intent was not to cause pain but it did and for that I'm truly sorry.

What individual cast members say is their own choice. I do understand the level of defensiveness because people (not you) have been pretty harsh about us. There is even someone on our event page who went so far as to suggest that our parents are horrible people because of this show. I don't think they were doing that to somehow satirize our show. I think they were doing that because they actually feel that my mother is a bad person because she raised a son who is a part of this show. When someone in our show makes fun of someone else's parents, they don't mean it. How is it useful when someone upset by our show insults our parents and means it?

That wasn't you. It wasn't Shannon. I'm just saying that I get the defensiveness.

I'm not trying to be defensive. I'm telling you why I made the choices I made and that is it.

So, to the individual points:

1) Your response is, as I said, completely fair.

2) I think this point is somewhat relevant but the argument is not productive.

3) I do agree with this argument to some degree. Words are damaging insofar as we allow ourselves to be damaged by them. The title was making fun of the people who objected to the scene in "Tropic Thunder" because they didn't understand the context. To me, the use of the word in the film was making fun of the people who were using the word - not the stereotype that word evoked. So to me that was an example where the word itself was being viewed as offensive simply because the word was being used. I don't subscribe to that philosophy. A similar argument has been as to why people shouldn't read Mark Twain. Yes, Twain uses the word "Nigger" and that word has extremely negative connotations. It is how he uses the word, however, that is relevant.

As a personal example, I've been a "nerd/geek" all my life. People made fun of me for that and so long as I viewed that word as derogatory, it hurt. When I found a bunch of like minded people, I could embrace the term "geek" as who I was and the jokes about being a geek didn't hurt because the word no longer had a negative connotation.

Now please understand that I'm not trying to draw a direct parallel here. I'm just using my experience to demonstrate my personal philosophy on this particular matter.

This is not to discount your response to the word or how I chose to use it. My intent in coming up with the title obviously did not register with you (and several others) which was a risk I took.

4) I can't agree with that argument and I would certainly never put it forth. What you find offensive is what you find offensive. What I think is offensive is irrelevant to your response.

5) I think I covered that one. I think we do that at times. I don't think we do it all the time.

I've known you and Shannon for a long time. We aren't exactly close friends or anything but I want to say again that I sincerely regret the pain that I caused you. It wasn't my goal and I'm sorry. I have no less respect for you than I did before this whole thing started.

Now, if you would like to savor some sweet irony for a moment - think about this.

The whole reason I did a handicapped theme was because we were going to have sign language interpreters at the show (which makes our show funnier for some reason). Due to a conflict, one of our interpreters had to bow out and the other one can't do the show alone. So far, we haven't been able to find a replacement.

So this whole thing is going on because of something that is most likely no longer going to take place.

I hope you can find that ironic twist to this story at least a little amusing.

Tim

[mamajenzie.livejournal.com]

Please note- my parents ARE horrible people. I didn't find that offensive in the least. Just, well, TRUE.

[lollardfish.livejournal.com]

The title was making fun of the people who objected to the scene in "Tropic Thunder" ...

That -really- didn't register, as you say, obviously. To our ears/eyes, it was embracing the language, not making a commentary on the controversy, and I could already hear the retard jokes ringing in my ears (in this case, knowledge of V-Tennis did not help mitigate the reaction, because VT enjoys provoking outrage and offense in the context of the shows, so it did feel that provoking offense was an intended consequence). FWIW, I think your take on the controversy is spot on, and even shared by Michael Berube, a liberal blogger, great English professor, and father of a boy with Down syndrome here (http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/special_special_edition/), somewhere in the middle.

Berube also has this lovely piece (http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/a_stupid_proposal/) on insults and grammar. You'll like it, I think.

With the exception of the wedge driven between my family and the Brusts, I'm feeling pretty good about where things stand. Understanding and awareness, on all sides, has improved. That can only be a good thing.

I really wish I had been rational enough to just write you an email asking you about your thoughts on the title. You would have explained it. I would have said it was really painful and didn't read that way to people like me. We would have gone from there. But this isn't really an area in which I can guarantee full, calm, rationality. Thanks for your time talking about this.

[petsnakereggie.livejournal.com]

I don't act particularly rationally when I'm angry so I would be quite the hypocrite if I expected others to do so. You have every right to be protective of your son.

Thanks for the links and for listening to what I had to say.

If I offend you this way again (not likely since we only re-use a few themes and I never intended this to be one of them - I will probably offend you in a completely different way), please know you can talk to me about it. Hopefully, I won't be a complete douchebag ;-)

[buttonlass.livejournal.com]

Also people should lay off your parents. I know your mom and think she's fantastic.:)

[buttonlass.livejournal.com]

Thank you Tim. Your responses have been well put and not dismissive nor judgmental.

For my part, I apologize for swearing at you indirectly through my mad rantings you may have heard of. I was mad and hurt. I have been trying to be more productive and less crass with my anger since then.

As he has said before, David and I have a lifetime of dealing with stereotypes of our son in front of us and we have to learn the best way of dealing with it. We haven't had much practice and lack a certain grace.

[petsnakereggie.livejournal.com]

I appreciate the apology but I'm the one who made you mad and hurt so I accept the things you said, directly or not. I took a risk and got burned for it. That is fair.

I like you guys and I'm glad we could talk about this.

Like I said to David, I don't blame you guys for being protective of your son. Thanks for saying nice stuff about my mom. She really is pretty awesome :-)