I just happen not to be one of them.

I know that some peoples’ pain runs deeper than others, and I think it’s reasonable to say that that means the closer you are to that pain, the more right you have to harness and explore it.

I just don’t agree.

I’ll agree with the first half of that, but not with the second. Anybody can be hurt by the things that happen to other people, but in order to be inside the circle of people hurt by something, someone has to actually be hurt by it. I am not trans, but I am hurt by transphobia. Someone who is not hurt by transphobia is not inside the circle of people hurt by transphobia, despite the fact that they have the potential to be hurt by it.

Did that make any sense?

In my view, this falls under the category of “intentional harm”, rather than “unintentional”.

As a comedienne, you do indeed have a moral right to be deliberately offensive in certain circumstances. (As you say, however, environmental context is very important, here.)

The problem with causing unintentional harm is that since it is not done with specific attention to context, and specifically controlled for effect, it ends up being completely uncontrolled and irresponsible.

If you own a handgun, for example, there may be appropriate times and places to shoot it at people; even though you know you will be causing them harm. It is not appropriate or moral, however, to randomly fire it off in all directions with no regard for who might be affected, and to what degree.

I think the potential problem with that argument is that it ignores the territorial nature of what you are calling tention causing , and the rest of this discussing has been calling hurt causing.

I think the ‘who gets to be hurt by what’ argument is really the heart of the matter, as said by skzb in an earlier comment.
“…what we are discussing here is, as Thom Digby said, “How long a nose do you have the right to grow?’

To me the answer to that question changes depending on the context, not of subject but of environment.

When it comes to an event in a community that is built to be a safe haven from intolerance and fear, that nose get’s to be pretty darn long, I think.

When you are talking about a comedy show with offensive content as a part of it’s mission statement and it’s promotional material, in a community based on interest in that show, or the people involved with it, well… I think that nose might need to temporarily -resind- back into the face.

For me, I think the big arguement that hasn’t been adressed, as far as I’ve noticed, by anyone who isn’t too stupid to convey it is this:

There are a lot of painful things in the world. Really bad shit happens all the time. Most of the big time bad shit doesn’t change my life directly.

I think, however, that I have every right in the world to be hurt by them. That means that I have the the right to deal with that pain.

And as a comedienne, to me, that means that I have the right to express that pain through comedy. Even offensive comedy.

I guess that I’m both saying that (potentially wildly unpopular, if not hugely controversial idea) just because it didn’t happen to me, doesn’t mean it’s not my hurt. So I think every one is “inside” on everything that’s hurting the people in the world.
I live in a world where pain is caused, and therefore it is mine, and I am on the inside of it.

I feel that gives me the right to find comedy anyplace I think to look for it.

Of course, I think everyone else has the right to think that I’m both wrong, and a bad person.

And just in case this wasn’t inflammatory enough, I also believe that being offended by hot-button humor really only makes the button hotter, and who doesn’t love a bright red button.

Andy Kaufman did a bit where he started out crying, and gradually changed his noises and facial cues into a laugh.

And Robin Williams said, “Joke ‘em if they can’t take a fuck.”

Humor is the absence of terror, and terror is the absence of humor. When we laugh at something painful, we take some of that pain away. Robert Heinlein goes on about this at some length in “A Stranger in a Strange Land”, in short saying that we laugh so that we do not cry.

The laugh is the release of a sort of tension. When a joke flops, that tension isn’t released, and there is that awkward silence. The punchline or laugh is like a non-sexual orgasm. When someone is hurt by a joke, its because they have not released that tension.

As in any form of communication, it is sometimes possible for the meaning to become garbled and misunderstood; and there is sometimes blame on either side of this equation. That is to say, in some cases, a speaker may not fully and correctly express his intentions, or likewise, a listener may not correctly or fully understand those intentions.

It is my view, however, that it is incumbent upon anyone wishing to express himself that at least a good faith effort is made to avoid unintentional harm. At least, if he has any sort of conscience or concern for others. (I don’t feel any particular sympathy for those who simply don’t care, don’t have a conscience, or can’t feel empathy for fellow human beings. I try to avoid such people as much as I can.)

A great author once said that the key to appropriate behavior lies in advancing one’s own goals without causing unintentional harm to others. I tend to agree with this philosophy.

Almost the first thing my boss told me about my new (now several years old) job was “if you’re terribly PC and take offense easily, this is probably not the job for you.” And she was right – expect everyone from your colleagues to the owner of the company to throw jokes at you – especially if you give them unintentionally a straight line. Of course, the (rare – he’s Good!) times one of us get the owner is treated exactly the same way.

But I just spent the last week with a different crew. And while the gay jokes were significantly less offensive than the ones thrown at, or by, my gay colleague in the office, the intent was not – and I felt uncomfortable.

But the one time the people at work hit one of my really sore spots, totally unintentionally, I said please don’t do that one again. And they don’t. And when someone new comes close, *other people* point out the cliff they’re approaching. And I didn’t have to explain why to stop it (although I have, to most people, later to much later, because it’s a safe environment to do so).

So, are we offensive? Well, we get warned when clients come around, so we know to shut it off, so I guess so. If one’s problem is “that’s not funny” or “that’s not a suitable topic for jokes *with me*”, then it stops, though – and so, maybe not.

Unintentionally crossing a barrier like that will happen, and I think it more damaging than helpful to avoid it at all costs, or restrict the open discourse to the point that it’s impossible to do so. It can, and will, hurt, but among friends and colleagues, it will only hurt unintentionally, and *once*, because after that, it Won’t Happen Again. Most of the time, the once is survivable, because we know it will be only once.

In the original poster’s case, I am neither sure that the “joke”, should there have been one, was unintentional; nor do I believe that the point was clear that it was over the line and will not happen again, will it? That is the point where I think we have gone too far.

I am a big fan of really dirty humour. Even highly offensive humour. But it has to be funny. The Dowager Duchess of Denver has it when she said (from memory) “It is possible to be funny while being vulgar, and possible to be funny without being vulgar. I suggest you try one of the two.”

And I point out – with great trepidation, for the abuse whose repercussions I live with was not wholly, maybe even majorly, physical – that there is such a thing as needful hurt; many of the “taboo jokes” are, if done right, such. As said above, “look at the wound, look at the damage. You need to see it, you need to remind yourself it exists. Here, I’ll give you a safe, ‘joking’ place to look at it in.”

But back to the original poster, that safe place wasn’t there, and when it turned into a problem, the support wasn’t there either. Wrong.