Dapper laughs - Sexist/Misogynistic?

2»

Comments

  • Nah. I reckon Baron Cohen gets away with it because he's not doing the same thing. He's not really the star of those films, any more than Jeremy Beadle was the star of "Beadle's About". It''s about the reaction and interaction with the ordinary bods, the ultimate straight men. Borat and Bruno aren't set up as figures to emulate or admire. They're comic grotesques that are only made funny by their context. Like the mentions above of Jay from Inbetweeners. He says things that are objectively, stripped of context, pretty horrific (Not as bad as the bould Dapper), but from the mouth of a sweaty desperate teenager trying to lie his way into peoples affections, to build himself up as a "man", they come across as funny. The humour is derived from him being a complete fake, and continually being exposed as such.

    Dapper Laughs appeared to elevate this vile creation and almost make him aspirational: You can certainly trace that in the reaction from some of his fans across social media. His interview on Newsnight wasn't exactly triumphant, he came across as a sulky get, with neither contrition or reasonable explanation. If you're at a point when you have to openly state that you think rape is wrong, though, you're not in a good place.
  • finchy
    finchy Posts: 6,686
    And yet if I were one of the people who came across Baron Cohen during filming, all I'd see is a man w*nking in the street in broad daylight. Or getting into a crowded lift, completely naked, with another naked man, carrying a gay sex toy. Those two actions could easily be labelled as sexual harassment, but he'll get away with it because the type of people who kick up social media storms like him and agree with his politics. So when Bruno makes unwanted sexual advances on John Bolton (a man that I loathe), then that's OK because, hey, Bolton's a gobshite and he deserves it, yeah? That priest is a homophobic bigot, so it's OK to ask a load of lewd and offensive questions...

    As I have already said, I'm not a fan of this man's work at all, and I think that some of his fans are complete and utter morons, which is probably where the problem lies. If they are threatening people over social media, then the comedian should have taken a step back, said "this has gone way too far" and reminded his fans that Dapper Laughs is an act who is not set up as an example. He didn't, that was a massive mistake and now he's paid for it, but his many detractors in the media have partially quoted him to misrepresent his words. For example, I was watching Newsnight the other day and some Guardian journo said that he had encouraged his Twitter followers to tell some critical bloggers to "f off" (which prompted his fans abusing said bloggers). AFAIK, this is a complete misrepresentation because the full sentence was "tell them to f off by buying my album". That's completely different to encouraging his fans. The fact that he didn't stand up to them is bad enough, but why are journalists going on TV and twisting the truth to fit their agendas?

    It just seems that at the moment, anyone who falls foul of a well-organised campaign will be silenced, while others are arbitrarily let off the hook. If we are to object to a national broadcaster showing this TV series, why do we not also object to some of the James Bond films? There is a character who is often held up to be the epitome of masculinity, so why not stop ITV putting out Goldfinger and From Russia With Love in the future? And why not campaign against publicly-funded libraries stocking the films and books (which are both genuinely racist and sexist)? Why did Robin Thicke cop a load of flak for his song Blurred Lines, but not the other two performers who co-wrote and sang on it? Why have I just watched a series of Dr Who which was shown as family viewing in which his female companion threatens to hit him on at least three different occasions?

    As a lefty PC Guardianista type I'm getting very sick of the way that certain people on the left are setting themselves up as judge, jury and executioner and shouting down anyone whose politics they don't agree with. It isn't debate, it's a digital lynch mob.
  • pesky_jones
    pesky_jones Posts: 2,890
    Well said! I know I didnt articulate myself as well as John but +1
  • pdstsp
    pdstsp Posts: 1,264
    ^^ Well reasoned in my opinion

    On a lighter note http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/soci ... 4111392712
  • Personally I'm not down with James Bond films, but as they're very much artifacts of their time, they probably get a bye-ball on that basis. I think that's something reasonable people recognise, and it's also reasonable to expect a new act establishing itself with these attitudes would get monstered for it.

    As far as agreeing with Baron Cohen etc. surely it's long established as an axiom that punching up is funny and punching down isn't?

    I dislike the idea of the twitter mob shutting people down, but it's not exactly a new thing. If anything it's merely a balance to the Mary Whitehouse/Daily Mail tendency that's been doing the same thing for years. It's a price of democratic speech, really.
  • airbag
    airbag Posts: 201
    How the hell does anyone know if a comedian is misogynistic?

    Their job is to say what they think their audience will find funny - a critical part of which is being a caricature of (usually) the audience themselves. We're relieved to find out everyone else is as petty and idiotic as we are.

    Concluding from a misogynist act that the actor is mysogynist may not be complete BS, but it's waaaaay too presumptuous. Thinking a cyclist "wanted to start a fight" by not riding on the kerb levels of presumptuous. If that's how he acts outside of his job, or if he's not funny, those are grounds for complaint. Otherwise, you're shooting the messenger at best, seeing enemys where none exist at worst.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,871
    airbag wrote:
    How the hell does anyone know if a comedian is misogynistic?

    .

    Through listening to what they say or write and making a judgement?
  • Personally, I find a lot of humour that will offend my exact beliefs and lifestyle, but would never kick up a fuss. Too many people are too eager to be pissed off at someone, to create a scapegoat, and be abusive to others.

    People, in my opinion, should just live their life and if they don't like something, ignore it. This man is a comedian, and you may not like him, but plenty of people do. Just let the ones who enjoy his humour enjoy it, and you enjoy the humour you like.