Should This Sick Filth Be Banned?

[angrysoba]

There is a comedian in the UK called Daniel O’Reilly who has a character called Dapper Laughs. As I’m in Japan, I had not heard of him or the apparent outrage he has been causing in the UK where his TV show has been slammed for being misogynistic and emblematic of “lad culture”. When I looked at some of his You Tube clips I didn't think they looked that bad.

Some people have been saying that he is the victim of snobbery, and that if he had been an Oxbridge graduate like Sacha Baron Cohen or Al Murray then he would have the support of the established Comedy Aristocracy, but because he's obviously not posh it's assumed that his act can't possibly be ironic, and/or what's much worse is the plebs and the proles will start acting like him because they are so stupid.

A group of comedians wrote a patronizing letter about how what he does cannot be considered "boundary pushing" and how the comedian behind it is obviously some mixed up and confused bloke who should be battling against gender inequality instead of "reinforcing" it.

http://www.chortle.co.uk/correspondents/2014/11/10/21279/you_are_not_pushing_at_boundaries

I think that it looks surprisingly puritanical and the idea that their target and his followers are too thick to know any better.

Anyway, Danny O'Reilly had his TV show axed after pressure from various groups including from fellow comedians. He appeared on Newsnight to confess his behaviour to the inquisitor and said that he had "killed off the character".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBt3fr5viAE

All seemed well, and that perhaps he had atoned for his sins after all and could now go forth with a pure soul.

Until… he brought back the character with a NSFW video on You Tube in which Dapper Laughs returns from the dead and mocks the comedian for having “no balls” and for groveling in a black polo neck jumper.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2C0_okmrVW4
So what does everyone here think?

 

[ehcks]

Watching some of his videos. Seems like wildly over-the-top satire. No sense of taking himself seriously. Why does anyone else?

 

[fuelair]

Pretty pathetic to me - his "fellow" comics that is...

 

[anglolawyer]

The politically correct, trendy leftie strand of comedy is dominant here, maybe Ben Elton started it. I'm thinking of the likes of Marcus Brigstock (can't stand him) the main guy on The News Quiz (pretty funny) and Mark Steel (brilliant). This guy sounds like an antidote. I have never heard of him. If he's as unfunny as Bernard Manning (just a repulsive person telling crap jokes) then he would not appeal to me but if there is parody both of the PC crowd and our laddish culture (as appears from the you tube clip above) then great.

 

[marplots]

Watching some of his videos. Seems like wildly over-the-top satire. No sense of taking himself seriously. Why does anyone else?

Agreed. The problem with this comedian for me isn't the "lad culture," it's that he's not funny.

 

[angrysoba]

The politically correct, trendy leftie strand of comedy is dominant here, maybe Ben Elton started it. I'm thinking of the likes of Marcus Brigstock (can't stand him) the main guy on The News Quiz (pretty funny) and Mark Steel (brilliant). This guy sounds like an antidote. I have never heard of him. If he's as unfunny as Bernard Manning (just a repulsive person telling crap jokes) then he would not appeal to me but if there is parody both of the PC crowd and our laddish culture (as appears from the you tube clip above) then great.

I didn't see Ben Elton or Marcus Bridgestock's name on the letter to "Chortle" magazine. In fact, I didn't recognize many of the names, but Googling them it seems there are a lot of Edinburgh Fringe, university-educated, members of various judging panels and the Association For Acceptable Alternative Comedy, BBC-connected friends of the big names represented here. They may not be household names but they seem to be establishment names nevertheless.

As for Dapper Laughs himself, I think a lot of his humour is pretty crappy obvious jokes and most of them are laddish and puerile though he has made some genuinely funny gags as well.

The show that was objected to and has had him referred to as a "pick-up artist" uses some generic transform-a-member-of-the-public formula in which he teaches some loser how to "pull" women. His critics seem to hate his use of terms like "moist" and "gash".

I've only seen one episode, just now, and that is here:



But it's also beside the point that Dapper Laughs is not that funny. The point is rather that people in his industry would lobby to have him taken off the air and for him to be banned from universities. I hope they don't congratulate themselves on going to watch the Interview in defiance of Kim Jong-un.

 

[marplots]

(much snipped)
But it's also beside the point that Dapper Laughs is not that funny. The point is rather that people in his industry would lobby to have him taken off the air and for him to be banned from universities. I hope they don't congratulate themselves on going to watch the Interview in defiance of Kim Jong-un.

I think the two are related. A comedian who is shocking and funny should get a pass - the shocking serves the craft well. One who is merely shocking has moved away from being a comedian and into the objectionable territory.

I can envision a KKK-themed jokester who, if funny enough would get away with it. Not so much without the laughs.

 

[angrysoba]

I think the two are related. A comedian who is shocking and funny should get a pass - the shocking serves the craft well. One who is merely shocking has moved away from being a comedian and into the objectionable territory.

I can envision a KKK-themed jokester who, if funny enough would get away with it. Not so much without the laughs.

Do you mean that if someone is merely objectionable then banning them is okay?

 

[marplots]

Do you mean that if someone is merely objectionable then banning them is okay?

Yes. That almost defines what "objectionable" means, doesn't it?

"So what's the act?"
"I twist kitten's necks until they shriek and their spine snaps."
"Oh. That sounds pretty vile."
"Well, it's art, so I think you should let me perform it."
"Um, probably not."

 

[Shiner]

So what does everyone here think?

I don't think he's very funny, but I fail to see how it could be seen as offensive.
If he has an audience, and he obviously does, they should leave him be.

 

[Shiner]

Yes. That almost defines what "objectionable" means, doesn't it?

"So what's the act?"
"I twist kitten's necks until they shriek and their spine snaps."
"Oh. That sounds pretty vile."
"Well, it's art, so I think you should let me perform it."
"Um, probably not."

I've only seen a couple of his vids. Could you link me to vile and disgusting ones please?

 

[angrysoba]

Yes. That almost defines what "objectionable" means, doesn't it?

No. There's plenty of objectionable art and speech around from Meine Kampf to Miley Cyrus, but only in countries which enshrine Freedom From Speech are they banned.

"So what's the act?"
"I twist kitten's necks until they shriek and their spine snaps."
"Oh. That sounds pretty vile."
"Well, it's art, so I think you should let me perform it."
"Um, probably not."

But this is not merely objectionable. It's not a sufficient condition that I don't like it that it is banned; it is banned because of the actual harm that is inflicted on the stupid kitten.

 

[marplots]

I've only seen a couple of his vids. Could you link me to vile and disgusting ones please?

I didn't ban him, his peers did: http://www.chortle.co.uk/correspondents/2014/11/10/21279/you_are_not_pushing_at_boundaries

The videos I've seen didn't reach "vile and disgusting" - the problem for me is they don't reach "entertaining" either.

 

[marplots]

No. There's plenty of objectionable art and speech around from Meine Kampf to Miley Cyrus, but only in countries which enshrine Freedom From Speech are they banned.

I think we are using "banned" in different ways. If I don't want you to read Mein Kampf for a TV show, is that banned or just my preference as the show producer? Is there some kind of duty to give air time to anyone who wants it?

Same goes for hiring someone at a comedy gig. I'm in no position to ban anyone, but I expect club owners who don't like the material might not want him performing it. Is that a ban?

Maybe we should call this a boycott to avoid the negative free speech implications.

 

[Sideroxylon]

Delete

 

[Sideroxylon]

Agreed. The problem with this comedian for me isn't the "lad culture," it's that he's not funny.

Comedy wise it's on par with on night out with some of your mates who see themselves as the funny bloke.

 

[marplots]

Comedy wise it's on par with on night out with some of your funnier mates.

This is probably true. And I have to admit I wasn't drunk while watching. My sobriety bias was in full effect.

 

[Dissolution]

I'm not massively familiar with him or the character, but he appears to be receiving criticism for being the thing that he's actually parodying, which is a bit odd.

 

[Shiner]

I didn't ban him, his peers did: http://www.chortle.co.uk/correspondents/2014/11/10/21279/you_are_not_pushing_at_boundaries

The videos I've seen didn't reach "vile and disgusting" - the problem for me is they don't reach "entertaining" either.

I agree. I was having a joke. I was putting words in your mouth. Seems I got the humour standard about right for the thread. I even put a tongue pokey thing there. *sigh*

Back to the day job.

 

[Shiner]

I'm not massively familiar with him or the character, but he appears to be receiving criticism for being the thing that he's actually parodying, which is a bit odd.

I don't see the parody. I think he's just being himself. IMHO.

A bit like this guy who popped up in Australia last year; Kinne, sometimes funny, but mostly not.