posted on May 18, 2001 01:09:16 PM new
Plus, these people on the stage invite ridicule, as well. Like a freak show. That also takes away some of the onus of laughing.
posted on May 18, 2001 01:16:07 PM new
Well I guess part of my point is, regardless of whether or not a person is disabled, and regardless of whether or not he's made some sort of conscious "decision" to allow himself to presented as a freak for other people to mock, ridicule, and abuse, a nice person doesn't take advantage of the fact and go for it. And a person with a decent sense of self-esteem and self-respect doesn't even feel the desire to go for it.
spazmodeus -- I see what you're saying, but it seems to me a person of character wouldn't be shouting "Whore! Whore! Whore!" even if "everyone else was doing it" and it was "safe." My friends don't have to be perfect, but I do have higher expectations of them than that.
[ edited by triplesnack on May 18, 2001 01:19 PM ]
posted on May 18, 2001 01:28:57 PM new
The people that put themselves up there and let their "oddities" be made fun of are a disgrace to all people fighting the label and discrimination they experience in day to day life. The whole show is disgusting, audience, crew, guests, host. They all deserve each other and what they get from going there.
posted on May 18, 2001 01:49:35 PM newHepburn, I must also agree.
I hope my posts didn't come across as sounding like I was saying, "Oh, that mean audience, and those poor, poor guests!" Yes, the guests clearly know what they're signing on for before they even appear on the show. I would say people who are so quick to sell out their own self-respect and/or the respect of whatever "group" they might represent are a "disgrace." Your statement, "The whole show is disgusting, audience, crew, guests, host" pretty much sums it up.
Yep, mob mentality does do strange things to people. Still doesn't validate, legitimatize, or excuse it, in my opinion.
[ edited by triplesnack on May 18, 2001 01:52 PM ]
posted on May 18, 2001 01:54:43 PM new
Springer-type shows are designed to capture that segment of the viewing public which finds soap operas too intellectually challenging.
Interesting discussion.
Like triplesnack, it is incomprehensible to me how and why people see humor in these displays. And I mean that very literally; I don't comprehend the humor. It's not so much about whether or not the humor is nice, it's the presence that mystifies me. I can understand usually why I may have missed humor that's gone over my head, too subtle, etc. I can sometimes see in other instances why some people may see humor in certain types of jokes or situations that don't amuse me. This type of humor however really baffles me.
posted on May 18, 2001 01:56:23 PM new
No triplesnack, I wasnt thinking you were saying that. I think what gets me most of all is the Final Thoughts of Jerry when its all over. He eggs all that on and then has the balls to do that final "lecture". Gross.
posted on May 18, 2001 02:16:45 PM new
It worries me that children are watching the crap on Springer. Here in the New York area, Channel 11 has Springer on a 9 am and 11 am -- a time when pre-school age kids ought to be watching Sesame Street or something. Yet I know even without a shred of proof that out there somewhere, there are no-account mothers and fathers sitting there watching Springer regardless that their children are watching right along with them, the kids learning to laugh at this crap, learning to mistreat people, learning to react violently to people you disagree with. And worse, the older grade school kids are going to be out for the summer in just a few weeks. And they sure as heck aren't going to be watching Sesame Street in the morning. They'll be tuning in to the freak show, sitting there getting programmed for their futures as intolerant, stupid a-holes.
posted on May 18, 2001 03:41:35 PM new
There's certainly enough commentary on Springer to go around. Excluding 8-year olds, I don't think anyone takes the show seriously; that's not the point of it at all.
Regarding my initial post, I believe only KRS and Spaz picked up on my issue, which is that the appeal to home viewers is that the show speaks to basic meanness in people. The whole point of the show is to jeer at freaks. Of course it's base and disgusting trash.
When I was growing up, my favorite TV shows were Star Trek, Batman and Superman. Oh yeah, it was campy, but at least heroes were heroes, not freaks on display. It's interesting that Jerry Springer, which titillates the dark side of human nature, enjoys such popularity.
posted on May 18, 2001 03:54:32 PM newI don't think anyone takes the show seriously; that's not the point of it at all.
Wishful thinking. There are unknown numbers of people out there who watch Springer and come away believing that all homosexuals are mincing, lisping sexual pigs, that transgendered people are scheming, conniving whores out to seduce straight men away from their girlfriends, that obese people are disgusting gluttons who should be spit upon, and that everybody from the South is trailer trash.
posted on May 18, 2001 05:32:39 PM new
The Bickersons was before my time. I believe it was a sitcom about this couple who routinely bicker back and forth -- sort of Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolff Lite.
The only reason I know is because a former boss of mine used to refer to me and my partner, a female art director, as "the Bickersons" because we frequently didn't see eye to eye and often carried our back-and-forth repartee into presentation meetings.
posted on May 18, 2001 06:38:31 PM newme is the object of a preposition which calls for the objective case in customary English usage, not the nominative case I. People frequently misuse the nominative case in such instances because they think that it sounds more educated but is only pretentious.
Therefore, Spaz is correct. Missed the point, again, twinsoft.
posted on May 18, 2001 08:08:39 PM new
Quite right. The boss would not refer to "I" in the usage. "mine used to refer to I as the Bickersons" is incorrect.
posted on May 18, 2001 10:18:08 PM new
Umm, okay. So technically the usage may be legal. If you prefer the "customary" usage. I prefer a more formal style in writing. Call it pretentious if you'd like.
Antiquary, I guess I did miss the point because I have no idea what you are talking about.
"My partner and I" is better style than "my partner and me" (and certainly "me and my partner" ) no matter where it occurs in the sentence.
posted on May 19, 2001 01:23:55 AM new
When did "formal style" become a euphemism for just plain wrong? Calling it "formal" is b.s., Steve. Your "formal style" is not only pretentious, it's ignorant of the basic rules of grammar. Try to dress it up any way you please -- you still sound like a pedantic know-nothing.
posted on May 19, 2001 08:38:32 AM new
Sorry to have confused you with a reference to the rules which actually govern the use of pronoun case, twinsoft. I generously assumed some rudimentary knowledge on the part of a poster who would be so presumptuous as to try to correct another, however erroneously. After all, if I hadn't made that assumption, of some degree of knowledge on your part, I would have been left with the impression that you were engaging in some low-level, inept trolling.
I might have attempted a crash course in some basic grammatical usage here, but you don't seem to have much of a grasp of style either so I would recommend a basic English course, perhaps at a community college nearby. Should that prove successful, a course in basic logic and thinking skills would be advantageous to one such as yourself who has shown all the characteristics of one who would like to be successful in OAI leadership. I believe it possible that you could have a bright future ahead and I wish you the best of luck. Let us know from time to time how you are progressing.
posted on May 19, 2001 09:24:07 AM new
Whoa upscale Jerry Springer,taking the high road on a low road topic...interesting and informative to Me, ( myself and I are waiting in the getaway car)tippy toe out the back door:::::
posted on May 19, 2001 03:20:15 PM new
I was just reading Martin Luther King's Letter From A Birmingham Jail and in the letter he
referred to a quote by Reinhold Niebuhr... that "groups are more immoral than individuals."
It seems to apply to this topic. What do you think?
