Did you get the joke? It sucked, but I got it...
...Which joke? Well the Little Jeremy joke by Mike Ward of course. I heard of this controversy and always thought that something felt wrong: no one could quote all the joke and no one knew the whole context of the said joke. But today, after hearing that Ward lost the case and went the ''I'm rich and greedy and like to pretend I'm not on Kickstarter to get your pity money'' route, I went on Youtube to listen to the original show by myself. Good job Ward, your joke was about how people are hypocritical when it comes to critisizing handicapped people and pretend they are perfect to not hurt their feelings and victimize them as soon as someone do critisize them and you victimize yourself.
You fucking twat.
Ahem, so yes that whole ''Ableist'' hate speech joke everyone thought was so bad ( a 2 minute joke by the way)? It was bad. As a joke. Nothing else really. A bit mean? Yes. Incitment to hatred and violence? Hum where the fuck did you get that? ''he said that the little guy is not dead yet and that he would drown him''. Wow! That sound bad, except that if you listened to the whole joke in french, like I did, you would find out that the context actually meant: ''isn't it funny how everyone pretend he is not ugly and a terrible singer just because he is handicapped? Let's be honest: he's ugly as fuck. '' What about the ''I wished he was dead part'' and the ''I would drown him myself part'' you ask? Well, for starters, he never said the first one, that's just either bad reporting or bad translating ( or both) because as a perfectly fluent native french speaker quebecer I can assure you that the meaning of all he was saying was more ''he is dead ugly and still a crappy singer, so why is he still in the spotlight being praised and lied to?''. Do people forget there is always context to jokes? At the start of the joke he is DEFENDING Jeremy, and praising him jokingly ( or sarcasticly, that's debatable)! He also thought that Jeremy was dying and in context made part of his joke about death made sense. It wasn't very funny, but still not serious. The drowning part? ''I tried to drown him in the water slides and it didn't work [quebecer obscenity], he's unkillable!'' But that part was followed by ''I looked his illness online, and he's ugly [quebecer obscenity]''. Really that was pretty much it. In context it was a bad, poorly written, joke, but clearly he wasn't inciting anyone to violence or discrimination. He was defending him. In the joke. The joke was more ''It's funny how people treat the crippled as precious little flowers'' than ''LOL CRIPPLED FAG''. Can't believe he lost his case with the joke being what it is, really. But let's ramble a little. Nothing would have happened if no one felt offended.
That's the sad part about hate speech laws: it's the offendee that decide what is the crime.
Don't believe me? Think about that: if Ward made his joke about someone else and that someone else and his parents said they were fine with the joke, would it be a crime? No, of course, and that is a legal nightmare. A crime should be objectively a crime, not subjectively. And that's the thing with hate speech, it's about being offended. BUT ANYONE CAN BE OFFENDED BY ANYTHING TO VARYING DEGREES IN VARYING CONTEXTS! Take the word ''nigger'' that many people consider offensive... Except when black people use it between themselves. Then it's fine. Because offense is subjective. Same thing with ''faggot'': bad when straight people use it, fine when gay people do it amongst themselves. ''But there is history of oppression and [lecture about how society was evil and how it is supposedly still hyper racist and bigoted despite being in a society that take the side of those who point out the racists bigoted morons, even when it's false alarm]'' Ok then, let's me get you a less historically charged example, my mom. And no that's not a joke. One time when I was a teenager and angry at her, I called her a ''chienne'' which in english litterally translate to the female of dog, but as a slur, his equivalent is ''bitch''. Bitch is not a very insulting word for most people, but my mother had a personal history with that word being used by someone which who she had a very bad history with ( no, it wasn't me, oh and since she only speak french she is actually ok with the english word bitch, just not the french one...). So when I used it, she felt EXTREMELY offended and hurt. She told me that this word was especially offensive to her, despite being used casually by a lot of people. Later on I would guess by myself why, knowing my mother's life story. But of course, I couldn't have known that the word was especially offensive to her before saying it ( I could have guessed but I was young and stupid) and to most people the word isn't very insulting, but to her it was. This little story helps to remind me that offense is subjective, that there is nothing universally offensive to everyone. Everyone is or isn't offended, in varying degrees, from barely noticing it, to extremely butthurt about it, to differents things, and , often, in different contexts. Today for example, I worked (I know, what a surprise) and one of the customer was drunk and said pretty racist stuff to a middle-eastern customer. Out of context what he said wasn't racist in itself. Asking a total stranger that look like he could be from Syria if he is from Syria or the middle east can be a bit dense, but not necessarily racist. But asking this question, caricaturing the arabic accent and pretending to speak arab like a moron, definitely sounds racist. The man was obviously annoyed, but answered that he was Iraqi (from Irak), and specified that he was working in town. Probably to clear out the implied assumption from the drunken idiot that he was a syrian refugee ( that idiot even asked if Iraq was in the middle east just ot be sure, what a dumbass, he also used a racial slur to describe my chinesse boss). See, context matters. I'm not an SJW that believe that any use of the question ''where are you from?'' directed to non-white people is a racist ''microaggression'' , because I understand that context, and intent, matters. And about Mike Ward intent, even though I say all the time that judging people intentions to defend or critisize an argument is sophistry and should be avoided, I feel that I should tell you what his intentions seemed to be for me since he was judged, by a court, for his intentions and how butthurt Jeremy's parents were instead of any objective standards: Mike Ward was well-intended, he wanted us to question the fact that people lie to those with handicaps to not incommodate them, but at some point they inevitadly learn that they are not perfect, and in fact, are terrible at many things because of their handicap. If you cuddle a child and make him believe he is flawless, the day someone do point out his flaws, he is going to throw a tantrum. Isn't it evidence that Mike Ward view Jeremy as a human being equal to himself that he wouldn't give him special treatment? If we are willing to say that our fellow humans beings, despite all their imperfections or differences are our equals, we must treat them as such, not just in law, but between ourselves. And yes I know this is a SJW talking point but I didn't used it to defend their shitty arguments, and it makes more sense when I say it than when they use it to tell us the opposite message, that the handicapped, women , or ethnic minorities deserve special treatment, when I say they don't. I want to treat people fairly and equally. That's why I'm for facillitating access to buildings for the disabled, but not to lie to them to not hurt their feelings: because it's not fair, and hypocritical. How many of you, dear readers, mock Trump, Hillary Clinton, Kim Kardashian, Justin Bieber or any other public figure without shame? They are people too, with feelings. Yet, no one cares when it's them. And, no , the lesson here is not, ''you should care about these famous people feelings'' the lesson should be '' They should not care about what people say, and choose sparingly what to be offended at, it's not that you can't be offended, but that it shouldn't matter to the entire world if you are''. Jeremy was, that he liked it or not, a public figure the second he started singing in front of the pope. And public figure or not, he was free to be mocked at, as any other public figure ( or anyone really) should be. This whole thing blew out of proportions. Just like Milo Yiannopoulos permaban on twitter ( he might be a dense asshole, but he didn't encourage the racist tweets directed at Leslie Jones), Mike Ward is not responsible for the actions of others that were ill-inspired by his joke to harass and bully Jeremy. Hate speech laws, micro-aggressions, trigger warnings... all used to police language, and since language is used to reflect our thoughts, people's thoughts. I really hope people will realize that being an asshole is part of freedom of speech and that if people get hurt in their feelings and want everyone else to care, then they are the one making a fuss about it unnecessarily. Now let me preemptively defend myself from the angry twats that will come at me saying stuff like: '' so when someone is raped and hurt in their feelings you want us to ignore them!? You monster!'' Apples and oranges , really. I was speaking about how your feelings toward being outraged or hurt about things that happens to you or someone else, not your depression from a traumatic event. ''But what if someone is outraged because of their traumatic past?'' Then think of my mom. Hum, just not litterally please. My mom was offended by that word, but she will have to learn to not be triggered by any random twat saying it. Plus, no one can read her mind to preemptively know this. So even if I know that saying some stuff might offend people who have been raped, I will say them anyway, because it's up to them to not feel offended. I don't have to cater to everyone feelings, and neither do you. Evidence? How many of you will shout insults at me while not caring the slighttest about my feelings? Good, because you shouldn't. As I shouldn't try to be offended. I might be, of course, but then it's up to me to make peace with myself and accept that outrage. Not go around expecting everyone to be outraged with me and pity me. There is nothing more self-loathing than someone self-pitying themselves. That's why I can't be a feminist or for Black Lives Matter: they victimize themselves all the time. You don't become a victim just because you got stabbed in the streets by a thug, you become a victim if you don't move forward and lingers in self-pity begging for victim points everywhere arounds you. If you don't want to move forward by yourselves then don't expect me to hold your hand, sit on the ground with your lazy ass, and tell you how much I pity you, because I won't. To the risk of offending the nannies and some feminists: man up and grow up. -KeLvin P.S: the real article to follow my last article is coming soon, this was really just a rant. A smart rant, but still a rant.