popwatch.ew.com/2012/01/20/hitle ... y-gervais/

popwatch.ew.com/2012/01/20/hitle ... y-gervais/

Some people will find mong funny. Some won't.



One thing you can be sure of is that the "thought nazis" of the world will be trying to prove how offensive things are, to tell us what's right and what's wrong so that if we dare laugh, we can be riddled with shame and guilt.



You can laugh at it.

You can be offended by it.

I don't think any word should be off limits, or that anything should be considered "too offensive" for a comedian to say. If we are going to have free speech, we can't be selective about when that applies. The only possible exception to this should be where there is clear evidence of a person inciting violence. "Mong" isn't a word I'd use myself, or one I find particularly funny, but if Gervais wants to use it in his act, it's up to his audience to decide whether they continue watching his show or not.

I must be one of those "thought nazis" then.

It's a free country of sorts and people have the freedom to laugh at the word if they like but anyone who finds that word funny should grow up and think a bit.

I fully agree with the last part of your post, but that's not a reason for censorship, is it?

The freedom of speech doesn't necessary mean the freedom to abuse. However I do think that Ricky has gone about this in the right way at the right place.

Out of Interest. What puts you in such a position that you feel the need to tell people to "grow up and think a bit" about a word.

My position is the same as yours, i.e. I am expressing my opinion on a message board.



The reason I hold that opinion is because offence is often avoidable and unnecessary, usually unfunny and, in this case, deeply distasteful ... as a moment's thought would tell anyone.

As a disabled person I don't find this offensive, and although I think anybody should be able to say whatever they like to who ever they like I do wonder why anyone would want to call anyone a mong, or a spaz, or spacca or any other similar put down. Surely a comedian can come up with something a bit more clever about Susan Boyle than simply saying she looks like a "mong".

That's one of the most annoying thing about it. It's so f'n lazy. Surely a comedian who thinks as much of himself as Gervais does can do better than this?



Sadly he seems to content to pander to those who think he is being daring, and somehow 're-claiming' a word.

Hang on, Gervais has both apologised, and admitted that his use of the word was both naïve, and never intended to refer to people with disabilities.



He was speaking to the mother of children with disabilities who had rightly taken him to task, a Mrs. Clark;



"Do you understand why people got upset by it?’, to which Gervais replied: ‘I do now. Never dreamed that idiots still use that word aimed at people with Down’s Syndrome. Still find it hard to believe.’

Asked how the anger towards his use of the word had made him feel, Gervais continued: ‘A mixture of confusion, anger, terror and disappointment. But mostly naïve. Never meant the word like that and never word. (sic)’ (meaning would)"

[urlhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2051938/Ricky-Gervais-admits-naive-offensive-remarks-Twitter.html#ixzz1kUfibvnr[/url



Of course he could have sorted the situation rather than putting his foot in it on Twitter and making it worse, and the situation did reflect badly on him, but now he's explained and apologised I fail to see why folk ignore that and pretend he hasn't.

Although I struggle to accept that one as supposedly witty and urbane as Jervais could be as naive as he claims. I am reminded of someone on here who often used the term "window licker", until the popular meaning of the word was pointed out to him. As to Jervais's apology I wouldn't have known about the original incident unless someone thought it necessary to post on here, so I'm hardly likely to look anywhere else for any subsequent action.