In what world would a country in a similar situation not support groups that try to counter an invading force? What about the assassinations inside Iran? The terrorist attacks orchestrated by the west? The sabotage of their nuclear facilities? How is it that those things can go on for decades, and then when Iran finally reacts, people go “oh look what these maniacs did, how dare they!”

Do you not care that Iran was on the receiving end of these things, or were you simply not aware?

Iran has been notoriously docile because it knows the US had been looking for an excuse to attack it. Just like Wesley Clarke stated.

You’re missing the point. The issue with Fahrenheit is not about the conversion from Celsius, most Europeans don’t need to do that anyway. The problem is Fahrenheit in itself, it’s just not elegant or scientific and therefore comes off as arbitrary and only makes sense when you grow up with it.

Haha, I get it, it’s totally fine!

I don’t think it’s funny, because the joke is illogical. If he is a teacher in a University, and it looks like it, that it is his job to mansplain.

So close. You seem to have Sheldon levels of understanding sarcasm.

It’s just a simple joke about the term being misapplied to an everyday setting.

Life is so simple when all that fits in your head is left versus right.

If you can’t even admit that woke culture tries to clean everything up and has exacerbated the issues then you’re simply in denial. It’s all around you, it’s on TV, it’s in comedy clubs, it’s in movies, it’s in universities. If you can’t even acknowledge that, it suggests to me that you can’t really argue with it, but rather need to act that it doesn’t exist.

You’ve gone from name just one to it’s happening all the time pretty quick. Of course it’s something that’s always been around, but we tend to have the ability to gauge the gravity of a situation and react accordingly to address them. Of course that assumes you’re able to admit there’s an issue in the first place.

That wasn’t my comment, and it obviously was just an arbitrary example.

but that doesn’t mean an old comedy show couldn’t be made today because of some sort of political correctness directive, it means modern audiences find new things funny because the comedy landscape changes.

If the issue were simply a different taste in comedy, people wouldn’t be up in arms about it, it would just be ignored, like many things that aren’t popular. If you want to deny that there is a tendency to comb through everything just to find something offensive to rage against, then the discussion is pointless.

We haven’t just gone through a deadly pandemic because many people got ill and survived. It seems that you don’t know what a logical fallacy is.

Correct me if I’m wrong but you are the only one mentioning the year 2005. You agree things have changed, but in each of your comments you are suggesting that nothing is going on. Which is it?

because otherwise they wouldn’t need to complain about struggling with the expectations and culture of today

You only make this ridiculous notion because you happen to agree with the side being argued against. “Don’t complain, everything changes” is something you utter until it is something that *you *disagree with, unless you’re suggesting that you’d be making the same statements about rampant racism and bigotry. It’s OK Russia, go ahead and ban homosexuality, it’s just the expectations and culture of our times!

Comedy has always been about issues in society, and it has long been a platform for free speech with very little boundaries, and it is exactly for that reason that many comedians and people in the media in general highlight the fact that the attempt to make their profession offence-free is problematic.

Comedians have the same situation, if the minority aren’t their customers, they have no reason to care, but they do because it is their customers.

You’re contradicting yourself. On one hand you’re arguing that it’s the current expectations and culture, but at the same time you’re saying it is the minority. The problem is that this vocal minority has such an effect because everyone with an internet connection these days has the ability to ruin someone’s career because they feel offended over a joke, so rather than take a stance for free speech (and comedy) they appease those who make a lot of noise, just to avoid a negative backlash. I think it is a bit easy to dismiss everyone who calls this into question as merely thinking about their own bread and butter. This guy in particular is almost a billionaire, perhaps there’s more to it, but that of course would make it harder to argue against.

I am saying through the fact that they complain about culture, shows that they don’t understand their job

No it shows that you don’t understand comedy, which has always complained about culture. And if there is one thing that woke idealism can’t stand is criticism about itself. Which is exceptionally ironic, because it complains about everything in the name of progress, and in turn is the biggest promotor of cultural regression.

Why does that matter? Is he wrong? Maybe your insinuation that this is about him is incorrect and he just sees it as a blemish on comedy as a whole? Could it be that he just cares about the profession?

It’s so peculiar that people would rather argue something irrelevant rather than admit that they agree with someone they don’t like.

That’s always the last bastion of people arguing against it happening. Throwing up their hands and saying “things change”.

Wow, what an insightful addition to the discussion you absolute dingus. Nobody is denying that things change, what is argued is that the overly woke mindset has a negative effect on said evolution. Maybe next year when your favourite orange man gets back in the office, we’ll just throw up our hands and say that things change without asking the question why we got there, sound like a plan to you? Or do you think that sometimes it might be a good idea to reflect on why we end up where we do?

A dislike for conservatism does not mean that every change is progress, you know.

That’s quite the hollow argument. To first deny that comedy changed and then state that it’s just moved on to something they don’t like and then insult them for it. I think you’re really undermining your own argument by conflating the evolution of comedy with the tendency to clean it up because we are no longer supposed to offend anyone while handing out participation trophies.

You’re free to deny this is happening, but maybe you’re just too young to notice it, kiddo.

You really think the average Barbie-watching lefty can be equated to the communism bordering Lemmy dweller? Please, just because they’re not on the right doesn’t make them the same.

The irony here is that your comment seems to suggest that you don’t understand comedy. Comedy is not about “saying funny stuff”, it’s the ability to say anything and make it funny, it takes skill, and above all, it especially requires them to “understand expectations and culture”.

Why do people always find it necessary to undermine the success of someone just because you don’t like something they did? It’s perfectly possible, even likely, that these people who are good at something also have flaws. Are you so surprised by that that you suddenly feel the need to question everything they’ve ever done?

Seinfeld became successful because he was good at comedy, Seinfeld is right that a small vocal woke minority has a negative impact on the profession, and yes a 40 year old dating a 17 year old is questionable. These things can all coexist without coming up with some outlandish theory just to convince yourself that the world is not a complex environment that you can’t wrap your head around.

I mean that you’re probably confusing Delta 8 and 9. Delta 9 is the main cannabinoid in regular cannabis, it’s just regular THC.

Just to be clear “Delta 9 THC” is the “real thing”.

Delta 8 is also real but a minor cannabinoid with a milder effect.

This.