Ive just seen an anti’s post saying that most people dont “jack off” to violence and gore and murder, and like, how innocent are they? Plenty of people “jack off” to that stuff.
Have they never heard of ero-guro? Thats literally erotic gore for people to “jack off” to.
And REAL serial killers have always had fan girls, which is NOT a good thing and people should NOT romanticise REAL killers but it unfortunately does happen.
And yet people that like fictional violence and gore are no more likely to commit actual murders than anyone else.
I personally love fictional gore and violence and killers, and i have always been fascinated by Jack the Ripper (i dont romanticise him i just like learning about him and theorising who he might have been), yet when i saw a photo of one his victims i quite literally threw up.
Because liking fictional gore and violence and murder is different to liking it in real life. And it is the same with any other kind of “problematic” fiction.
Imagine your monstrous or killer f/o covered with splashes of blood.
It’s dripping off their hands, or claws, off their face, across their chest. It’s fresh, and bright, and the smell of it is almost overpowering as you stand before them.
They grab your wrist and pull you close to them, smearing the blood on your skin and clothes as they do.
They give you a little look, wondering what you think of them, perhaps.
And then they pull you into a kiss that tastes of copper.
I very much understand a person not wanting to support speech that they feel is hate-speech (racist, transphobic, homophobic jokes), and it is true that stand up comedy/telling jokes is a little different than creating fiction.
However, if you believe in free speech, as we do, you can not believe that it’s okay to censor these types of jokes either.
Because then we get into the authoritarian question of “who is doing the censorship?”.
If we censor people from making jokes on the basis that they are “homophobic”, it is entirely likely that these rules will actually be used to stop queer people from telling jokes about themselves, as much or more than it will censor actual homophobia.
I do not trust anyone with the power to enforce censorship with the power of censorship.
That said, like every other form of content, I think that comedy should ideally come with content warnings (or a deliberate lack of content warnings a la AO3’s “chose not to warn”).
If a performer is making homophobic, transphobic or racist jokes, I want a warning so I can make the decision to listen or avoid it as is my personal preference.
I think it should also be obvious that not everyone is considers the same material offensive or ‘ist’. There are plenty of queer comedians who make jokes that some might consider homophobic, but some might see as relatable or funny.
There are also plenty of jokes that simply age out of their original context and seem much more tasteless now than when they were originally created.
There are lots of reasons to laugh at a joke, shock, surprising, relating to it. You don’t know that someone laughing at a tasteless or ‘ist’ joke is laughing because they’re ‘ist’.
However, it’s also important to remember that there are some things people call “censorship” that really aren’t.
A specific person or company refusing to broadcast or promote your content is not censorship
A person being offended by your content or publicly disagreeing with your content is not censorship (it can be harassment, if the person is being uncivil.)
A person choosing to avoid your content is not censorship
A person choosing to avoid people who enjoy your content is not censorship
Telling jokes in bad taste is not, and should not be criminal, and should not be censored. But nobody has to laugh at them either.
I don’t think laughing at tasteless jokes makes you a bad person, but I don’t think wanting to avoid jokes that you find hurtful makes you a bad person either.