No, actually, you can't make a joke about anything.
There are certain patterns I've seen while arguing people over the Daniel Tosh thing, and I'd like to make one last note before the whole thing completely fades from people's memories. Mainly, all of the people defending Tosh have arguments that essentially boil down to "You can make a joke about anything." This premise is given as if it were an empirical, divine, infallible, god-given and scientifically-proven fact. This is ridiculous of course, since no statement meets that criteria, and certainly not that specific sentiment, for which the opposite has been more readily proven. That is, "It's just a joke" has been given as a backpedaling excuse for some truly horrible shit.
But suppose one were to take it as true--after all it, by itself, is mechanically true. You can in fact put together a string of words and ideas that form together into a sentiment which you do not sincerely espouse for purposes of nonsense, irony, and/or satire, about any subject. Or maybe you do truly espouse those words and ideas, and mean to express this comedically. Either way, it's something that can be done. The problem develops in the fact that invariably, when someone says "You can make a joke about anything", they are trying to excuse a certain joke, which adds the implication that they are saying "You can make a joke about anything, absent of cleverness or tact, without consequence." The multiple problems with that statement have been addressed in my previous post. The further one treads from cleverness and tact, the closer one encroaches to having to face the consequence of one's words.
As such, there's a necessary contradiction involved in defending a joke by saying "You can joke about anything". And this is no surprise; as the people claiming that Tosh should not be called out for his statements, simultaneously defend those statements by claiming that the woman should be called out for hers. Well, more than called out, really, which is the other problem: equating a few seconds of unwanted commentary, with rape threats.
To close, I'll give a bit of further insight as to my own ideals of off-color humor. My main source for an inappropriate laugh is The Nerdfit Network, who have a website I once regularly wrote articles for, and still occasionally do so. They also run a podcast and go around to comic/anime/gaming conventions around the US doing panels, which are essentially stand-up bits(One among them recently suggested going into stand-up, to which I and several others mentioned that is basically what he already does). The difference being, people are encouraged to chime in when relevant. This doesn't diminish some sort of sanctity or pristine holiness of the performance, as some Tosh defenders would suggest. Far to the contrary, the feedback often leads to a better time had for all.
It's kind of like a Cracked.com article I read about why celebrities are so insane--nobody dares tell them what they're doing wrong. So why feed into a system that makes the people we love to watch, terrible?
But suppose one were to take it as true--after all it, by itself, is mechanically true. You can in fact put together a string of words and ideas that form together into a sentiment which you do not sincerely espouse for purposes of nonsense, irony, and/or satire, about any subject. Or maybe you do truly espouse those words and ideas, and mean to express this comedically. Either way, it's something that can be done. The problem develops in the fact that invariably, when someone says "You can make a joke about anything", they are trying to excuse a certain joke, which adds the implication that they are saying "You can make a joke about anything, absent of cleverness or tact, without consequence." The multiple problems with that statement have been addressed in my previous post. The further one treads from cleverness and tact, the closer one encroaches to having to face the consequence of one's words.
As such, there's a necessary contradiction involved in defending a joke by saying "You can joke about anything". And this is no surprise; as the people claiming that Tosh should not be called out for his statements, simultaneously defend those statements by claiming that the woman should be called out for hers. Well, more than called out, really, which is the other problem: equating a few seconds of unwanted commentary, with rape threats.
To close, I'll give a bit of further insight as to my own ideals of off-color humor. My main source for an inappropriate laugh is The Nerdfit Network, who have a website I once regularly wrote articles for, and still occasionally do so. They also run a podcast and go around to comic/anime/gaming conventions around the US doing panels, which are essentially stand-up bits(One among them recently suggested going into stand-up, to which I and several others mentioned that is basically what he already does). The difference being, people are encouraged to chime in when relevant. This doesn't diminish some sort of sanctity or pristine holiness of the performance, as some Tosh defenders would suggest. Far to the contrary, the feedback often leads to a better time had for all.
It's kind of like a Cracked.com article I read about why celebrities are so insane--nobody dares tell them what they're doing wrong. So why feed into a system that makes the people we love to watch, terrible?