Conference turris::womannotes-v3

    Of issue to me were-

    1- You can joke about anything, including rape, as long as there
    was enough exaggeration in the joke.
    2- Feminist are right- men are vain, inconsiderate, children who
    have messed up the world beyond any recognition.
    3- The control of words is an attempt to control thought.
    But there is a point where feminists and minorities must
    stop attempting that control.
    4- The feminist movement is correct in that there should be more
    to life than "just pumping out units every 9 months", but 
    pointless careerism is no replacement.  Putting on a man
    tailored suit with shoulder pads, to work in a plant where
    men are already destroying the earth, and emulate some
    of the worst aspects of men's behavior is not really a
    reasonable option.
    5- The majority of feminists are white, middle class, women
    who only care about their productive freedom, and their
    right to earn money... They do not really care about black
    women's problems, latino women's problems, poor women's problems....
    6- If Richard Pryor and Eddie Murphy can say N*gger in their
    act, so can he.  The only reason we do not mind when they do
    it is because they are n*ggers.  There should be no double
    standard.


    I'm not sure which, if any of these, were backhanded slaps.

    Any opinions?

    Cindi
    

    RE: .1 by the numbers... ;^)
    
    
    1.  I agree.  But, then again, I've been nailed before for this
    attitude.
    
    2.  I think this goes back to one...he was joking.
    
    3.  I agree.  I don't like certain words, but it's not my place to
    say you can't use them...just to tell you that *I* don't like them.
    
    4.  I think he might be saying that men fall into the "pointless
    careerism" syndrome too much and that women shouldn't follow blindly.
    
    5.  I (meaning MHO) agree with what he has said.
    
    6.  Again, I agree with what he says.
    
    
    And I think a lot of them were back handed slaps...and I think the rest
    were straight forward slaps!  ;^)
    
    
    
                                  L.J.

so what parts of Carlin's work do you have a problem with?  (wry grin)

in the 60s, his humor pointed out some of the inconsistencies and hypocrosies
in our society.  Sounds like he's still doing it.  His stuff is pretty tame, 
compared with Lenny Bruce or Richard Pryor.  (or adc)

I think he may be an Equalist.  (another wry grin)

    That is what is wrong.  The way he phrased them... I found myself
    half and half on all of them.
    
    1- Rape, to me, is no joking matter.  It is a somber subject of cruelty
    and pain that should be taken seriously by all.
    And yet... during his jokes about it... the pain of it showed how
    ridiculous "She was asking for it" is as an excuse.  I am stuck
    debating if his expose on the men's excuses was enough to merit the 
    insensitivity of his choice of topic.
    
    2- He depicted men stereotypically.  The more men I deal with, the
    more trouble I have refuting the stereotype.  However, his saying
    it was too canned, and to easy to accept as the real deal.
    
    3- I agree that controlling words is a form of mind control.
    However, I did not think that there was a time when we should
    stop applying the issues.  Manhole should be Person hole.
    But he was right  a Ladies' Man is clearer than a Person's Person, and
    in some things, the dimensions are lost without the gender attachments.
    
    4- The two main extreemes described for women were very clearly
    outlined.  However, it seemed to me more like he bashed both sets
    without offering a good intermediate.  He also did not do the same
    for men.  Maybe that is another skit.
    
    5- I have heard of and met several feminists that were tunnel visioned
    regarding "women's issues".  A lot of the time, they did not consider
    how some of them related to "racial issues".  As I have said before,
    in school, Black women were mostly called on when a show of strength
    was needed, but they were seldom invited to the leadership meetings.
    But- on the other hand, I am loath to accept that such manipulation
    and disregard still exists within the movement.
    
    6- I recognized the double standard about use of racial descriptors
    when he was talking about it.  But it hurt when he called the other
    entertainers n*ggers.
    
    
    So-- I was split...
    Did it have the same affect on anyone else?
    
    Cindi
    
    3-
    

    Carlin always struck me as a philosopher more than as a comedian.
    I think his main purpose in his routines is not to get people to
    laugh, but to get them to *think*, and the ostensible comedy is
    just a means to getting them to listen.
    
    If his routines have caused you to think about the issues involved,
    then he's done his work. It doesn't really matter whether you agree
    with his opinions or not (and it's also not clear if the ideas he
    puts forth actually reflect what he himself believes). What matters
    is that you think through the issues and come to your own conclusions.
    
    --- jerry

    re.4 on your point #1
    
    I cannot comment upon Carlin's treatment; however, I can say that
    without humour I would not have survived the aftermath of being raped.
    The pain and the horror were epic, yes.  It's a serious subject, yes. 
    But the excuses _are_ ludicrous and laughable -- even while being
    deadly serious in their impact.
    
    Recently, I was in a position to speak about my experience.  There were
    points at which people laughed -- and I meant them to laugh -- but I
    was _not_ telling a joke.  And then I helped them to explore the
    "whys?" behind their laughter.
    
    Sometimes our laughter can open our eyes.
    
      Annie

    It is hard.
    Laughing throug the tears.
    
    Cindi

    laughing through tears isn't one I've mastered.
    
    however, laughing through anger, or more specifically Rage, is more
    natural to me than breathing ...

    re.6 Would it be fair to say that a victim needs to find their
    own way to that laughter, that it can not be imposed from wihout?
    Which would make Mr. Carlin's routine unwelcome to persons who
    have not yet reached that point.
    
    re.7 Every time the topic turns to humor and laughter I'm reminded
    yet again of Heinlein's observation that "We laugh because it
    hurts so much."

    re: -1    Or....We laugh because otherwise we'd cry.
    
    	-HA

    re.9
    
    I do not understand what you are asking me.  Could you please elucidate?
    Perhaps I was unclear in my wording.  My comment was to more to say
    'don't deny humour [or anything] as a route to healing or venting.' It
    was not to even say that all will, or should, find laughter.