it’s an election with no Democrats, in one of the whitest states in the union, where rich candidates pay $35 for your votes. Or, as Republicans call it, their vision for the future.
What I want to know is; would the outrage be as loud if Richards (Kramer) lost his temper on a couple of fat dudes. Would there be all this controversy if he had a go at someone because of his age? Or sexuality?
I don't think so. There's a phrase that describes this: "positive discrimination".
Lets assume that Richards was heckled twice during his routine, once by a fat man, and once by a black man. Now assuming he lost his temper with both parties' and called the fat man "lard arse" and the black man "nigger". Which one of the insults causes the most damage?
One is racism and the other isn't. I imagine they could cause the same amount of damage. A self-conscious fat person could be offended just the same.
However, people laugh at themselves. Lard arse can be funny. Nigger? Hardly.
I'd like to know if the fellas' (hecklers) story is true. It changes things a bit.
Would you like to explain to me why the insult of "lard arse" is funnier than the insult of "nigger"?
The same reason why fat jokes can be funny while racism isn't.
The same reason someone can call somone else on here a lard arse and it's no big deal but calling someone a nigger would be.
I mean really if you wanna open up the sensitivity bridges we couldn't have name calling at all.
For instance, I've been called a fat ass on here but I didn't go into an uproar over it.
People are just jealous of my luxurious body and resort to name-calling.
There's is a fella at work that tried to put it in perspective by saying that if you are black and call your friends "niggas" that you are a hypocrite for getting mad at Cosmo.
I wouldn't really call him an idiot but just a little clueless.
Whoever doesn't realize that offense can change depending on who is saying the words then they need to get off their soapbox and delve into their own noggin a bit.
It's quite easy.
Bookmarks