There's no audience, but everyone laughed at the third one.
There appeared to be an audience of sorts and when the first of Frankie's jokes was read out it was met with a wall of silence. It was cringeworthy stuff, especially with Adam constantly having to reassure everyone it was 'funny'.
There appeared to be an audience of sorts and when the first of Frankie's jokes was read out it was met with a wall of silence. It was cringeworthy stuff, especially with Adam constantly having to reassure everyone it was 'funny'.
I can feel myself getting dragged into an argument where facts and opinions become interchangeable, so I think, having hopefully made my point, I'll step out.
I can feel myself getting dragged into an argument where facts and opinions become interchangeable, so I think, having hopefully made my point, I'll step out.
Your initial point was that when Adam Hills read out Frankie's jokes he got several laughs.
That certainly wasn't what I witnessed, a comedian reading out a load of unfunny jokes which were met with a lukewarm response was how I interpreted it.
Saudi Arabia have been represented at the Paralympics since 1996.
At the 2008 games in Beijing they took gold in the men's triple jump and silver in the men's long jump.
Not that past results should be a consideration when lampooning a nation's disabled competitors.
Distasteful will never be anything but distasteful.
Sorry, if you don't understand that Boyle was very much having a go at the Saudi justice system rather than lampooning their diasabled competitors then you frankly don't understand what you are talking about
Because you can't understand sharply and clearly ( to most prople ) directed humour, albeit dark humour, does not make it distasteful.
He was lampooning a justice system that cuts off the hands off thieves. Which is a pretty barbaric practice.
It is indeed barbaric - but imo he can hardly be credited with lampooning disabled athletes for the greater good i.e. attempting to draw attention to the inhumanity of the Saudi Arabian justice system. imo his distasteful cracks were solely in pursuit of raising a cheap laugh at the expense of those who battle disability day in - day out.
I'm not a big fan ( more just him rather tha his jokes ), but I'll defend his right to use the Paralympics as comedy material. What I have seen and read about has had thought, humour ( yes, often black humour ), and often been taking the mick about others via the paralympians, and I rather doubt bothers many paralympians at all. It's not some out of control ranting as seems in some quarters to be being suggested.
I suspect the issues are generally with non paralympians who feel the need to speak for or act on behalf of paralympians, or are ridiculously over sensitive in seeming to think that you can't make a joke that includes such as paralympians in any way even as a vehicle for other points.
Some folk who are quick to condemn it appears simply don't get it ! ( my vehicle point ) eg. him having a go at the Saudi justice system, not their paralympians, and unfit Scots, not the paralympians. Both these jokes I thought worked well in hitting their target and being funny. A comedian doing his job !
Pretty ridiculous the outcry, including some names who just see it as a bandwagon to jump on, and that apparently it is being suggested some Channel 4 chiefs want to drop him from appearing again on that channel.
There are many who disagree with my opinion as has been amply illustrated on this thread. I have no problem with that; each to their own - though I am somewhat bewildered by those who, not content with voicing their own views, proceed to make assumptions about the motives of those of a different persuasion.
I do not feel the need to speak for or act on behalf of paralympians - most of those I know can speak eloquently for themselves.
I am not ridiculously oversensitive on their behalf - although I reserve the right to speak out in support of various minority groups if I see fit to do so.
I do not for one moment believe that Boyle was using paralympians as a vehicle to publicise the barbaric Saudi Arabian justice system - nor do I believe that his crack about the GB high jumper was motivated by an altruistic determination to bring to public attention the injuries and loss of limbs suffered by British troops at the hands of the Taliban.
I find his 'humour' tasteless and the man himself repels me - furthermore his cringeworthy attempts to justify hmself made my skin crawl.
I know you'll disagree - you have every right to do so; but please don't make uninformed assumptions about my motives in finding him obnoxious.
btw - I do know many disabled people who agree with me and certainly the mother of Ellie Simmonds found him offensive.
Although I would defend his right to make them, his jokes remind me of Bernard Manning's humour circa the 1970s but with different groups to lampoon, i.e. very dated and not very amusing.
Sorry, if you don't understand that Boyle was very much having a go at the Saudi justice system rather than lampooning their diasabled competitors then you frankly don't understand what you are talking about
Because you can't understand sharply and clearly ( to most prople ) directed humour, albeit dark humour, does not make it distasteful.
So strange that whilst assuming you understand what you are talking about - those disagreeing with have no such appreciation.
It's not rocket science to comprehend his attempted justification of his offensive comments - I'm simply surprised anyone is taken in by his obsequious protestations.
Clearly he's realised that his crude insensitivity is likely to hit him where it hurts most - in the pocket.
btw - I'm sure you're an intelligent person who, whilst disagreeing with me, carefully considers the points you make. I'd like to see you extend a similar courtesy to me - for I too am intelligent and capable of full understanding of my opinions and conclusions.
As always I don't think smileys are necessary to indicate the gist of my post.
So strange that whilst assuming you understand what you are talking about - those disagreeing with have no such appreciation.
It's not rocket science to comprehend his attempted justification of his offensive comments - I'm simply surprised anyone is taken in by his obsequious protestations.
Clearly he's realised that his crude insensitivity is likely to hit him where it hurts most - in the pocket.
btw - I'm sure you're an intelligent person who, whilst disagreeing with me, carefully considers the points you make. I'd like to see you extend a similar courtesy to me - for I too am intelligent and capable of full understanding of my opinions and conclusions.
As always I don't think smileys are necessary to indicate the gist of my post.
OK, apologies if you didn't like the tone of my post. I just do honestly find it difficult to understand how some folk have taken the Saudi comments. But I guess we pick up on things differently.
But anyway, please let us not get sidetracked by how posts are expressed and concentrate on Boyle. .
Cutting to the particular Saudi comments, do you really not think that it was an aim at the Saudi justice system ? Maybe how he phrased it, using the Saudi competitors as a vehicle was not to your taste ( he is an edgy comedian ), but he was not targetting them, but the Saudi system, in my view a very legitimate target.
I'd happily reprint them here, because I didn't find them at all offensive, but I do realise that some folk would find them so, in my personal view mistakenly.
Your initial point was that when Adam Hills read out Frankie's jokes he got several laughs.
That certainly wasn't what I witnessed, a comedian reading out a load of unfunny jokes which were met with a lukewarm response was how I interpreted it.
I watched it, I heard laughs, certainly no tumbleweed moments
Frankie does this kind of humour better than a lot of other people. I watched his Boyle Variety Performance, and it was quite noticeable. All the acts were offensive, but the only funny ones were Frankie himself, and Catherine Ryan. The rest had nothing other than shock value. Frankie does have a certain amount of wit and insight.
(Jimmy Carr is another who gets it right, in my view. Can't think of anyone else off-hand.)
Adam Hills stood up for him last night. And reading out his jokes got several laughs.
Actually there was some cringingly awkward moments when he read the jokes out. Most normal intelligent people are refusing to accept this kind of behaviour anymore.
Actually there was some cringingly awkward moments when he read the jokes out. Most normal intelligent people are refusing to accept this kind of behaviour anymore.
Your so called 'normal intelligent people' are actually showing themselves up as stupid here though.
Comments
There appeared to be an audience of sorts and when the first of Frankie's jokes was read out it was met with a wall of silence. It was cringeworthy stuff, especially with Adam constantly having to reassure everyone it was 'funny'.
He's being doing it for years now, if you dont like what he does then just ignore it - it really isnt difficult.
I can feel myself getting dragged into an argument where facts and opinions become interchangeable, so I think, having hopefully made my point, I'll step out.
Your initial point was that when Adam Hills read out Frankie's jokes he got several laughs.
That certainly wasn't what I witnessed, a comedian reading out a load of unfunny jokes which were met with a lukewarm response was how I interpreted it.
Sorry, if you don't understand that Boyle was very much having a go at the Saudi justice system rather than lampooning their diasabled competitors then you frankly don't understand what you are talking about
Because you can't understand sharply and clearly ( to most prople ) directed humour, albeit dark humour, does not make it distasteful.
What a strange conclusion.
There are many who disagree with my opinion as has been amply illustrated on this thread. I have no problem with that; each to their own - though I am somewhat bewildered by those who, not content with voicing their own views, proceed to make assumptions about the motives of those of a different persuasion.
I do not feel the need to speak for or act on behalf of paralympians - most of those I know can speak eloquently for themselves.
I am not ridiculously oversensitive on their behalf - although I reserve the right to speak out in support of various minority groups if I see fit to do so.
I do not for one moment believe that Boyle was using paralympians as a vehicle to publicise the barbaric Saudi Arabian justice system - nor do I believe that his crack about the GB high jumper was motivated by an altruistic determination to bring to public attention the injuries and loss of limbs suffered by British troops at the hands of the Taliban.
I find his 'humour' tasteless and the man himself repels me - furthermore his cringeworthy attempts to justify hmself made my skin crawl.
I know you'll disagree - you have every right to do so; but please don't make uninformed assumptions about my motives in finding him obnoxious.
btw - I do know many disabled people who agree with me and certainly the mother of Ellie Simmonds found him offensive.
It's not rocket science to comprehend his attempted justification of his offensive comments - I'm simply surprised anyone is taken in by his obsequious protestations.
Clearly he's realised that his crude insensitivity is likely to hit him where it hurts most - in the pocket.
btw - I'm sure you're an intelligent person who, whilst disagreeing with me, carefully considers the points you make. I'd like to see you extend a similar courtesy to me - for I too am intelligent and capable of full understanding of my opinions and conclusions.
As always I don't think smileys are necessary to indicate the gist of my post.
OK, apologies if you didn't like the tone of my post. I just do honestly find it difficult to understand how some folk have taken the Saudi comments. But I guess we pick up on things differently.
But anyway, please let us not get sidetracked by how posts are expressed and concentrate on Boyle. .
Cutting to the particular Saudi comments, do you really not think that it was an aim at the Saudi justice system ? Maybe how he phrased it, using the Saudi competitors as a vehicle was not to your taste ( he is an edgy comedian ), but he was not targetting them, but the Saudi system, in my view a very legitimate target.
I'd happily reprint them here, because I didn't find them at all offensive, but I do realise that some folk would find them so, in my personal view mistakenly.
I watched it, I heard laughs, certainly no tumbleweed moments
(Jimmy Carr is another who gets it right, in my view. Can't think of anyone else off-hand.)
Actually there was some cringingly awkward moments when he read the jokes out. Most normal intelligent people are refusing to accept this kind of behaviour anymore.
No one laughed at the first 'joke' unless you are counting the presenter's uncomfortable smile.
There were far more laughs in the penalty shootout thing they did.
Your so called 'normal intelligent people' are actually showing themselves up as stupid here though.
Have to admit I had a bit of a chuckle, bad Muze