- cross-posted to:
- usnews@lemy.lol
- cross-posted to:
- usnews@lemy.lol
You must log in or register to comment.
why was he even invited?
He was receiving an honorary degree from Duke and spoke at the commencement.
Why? Was it for his work in underage dating?
He Mastered in it.
And here I thought it was a minor
he never actually dated anyone under 18. but I’m sure someone will chime in with a slightly different strawman to try to rage at someone else because they hate their own life
Her name is Shoshanna Lonstein Gruss. They started dating when she was 17 and he was 38. No strawman.
Is it really hard to believe that a celebrity was dating someone way too young? It should be illegal to have schools in LA.
They did not start actually dating until she was 18 according to many things I read but people will still die on this hill no matter what I say and no matter what they read.
This was the same era when Bill Clinton claimed he did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky because it was only a blow job.
“Dating” just means they claimed not to have had sex until she was 18. He still met her by herself in a park and had private time with her when she was underaged. We call that today Grooming. Jerry Seinfeld is a groomer.
Check out that moving goalpost!
In 2010 or so I went to Cornell for the graduation ceremony of a family member of mine from their business school. The keynote speaker was Rudy Giuliani. His speech about living life with integrity really aged well lol.
Alum, maybe?
Tomorrow he’s going to complain about being “cancelled” and how he “can’t say things anymore” while talking about the event where he was invited to speak in front of a college full of students.
You can say whatever you want, people don’t have to listen.
Exactly. Plus the right to free speech doesn’t equate to being free from criticism, or as you said, general disinterest.
The supreme Court has described it as freedom of speech not being freedom from speech.
tomorrow he
no he’s not, this is a nothing burger that has nothing at all to do with his comedy
invited
be mad at the people who invited him if you’re going to be outraged at something.
Confusiong riches and fame for brains. Classic mistake
The guy who said woke (aka not self centered sociopaths) have ruined comedy even though his partner on Seinfeld has had a wildly successful hit comedy series burning everyone for like eight years?
does anyone under 40 watch Curb?
I’m sure you can look up the demographics but I’m not sure how it would change the point
Me. I watch curb and I’m in my 20s
I started watching at like age 20. This is a bad take.
8 years? Try 24 yeas of Curb your Enthusiasm and it was glorious.
Also Always Sunny in Philadelphia exists and proves Seinfeld wrong as well.
Try 24 years of Curb your Enthusiasm and it
wasis glorious.The newest season just ended.
Last season :’(
Last season :’(
He’s been saying that since season 5.
🤞
- Jfc
- Absolutely
I forget where I heard it but I’ve never forgotten it: Comedy punches up, bullying punches down. The only people who are afraid of getting canceled are the ones who do the latter.
What’s the deal with college kids these days?
Took me a second
Title of your sex tape.
Not even worth the film.
Their sex tape was shot with a Polaroid.
Wow. Those protestors are so violent. Call the riot squad!
Anti-semites!¡
I find it funny that everyone assumed they walked out over Gaza, while I assumed it was because Jerry Seinfeld isn’t funny.
What, and miss the opportunity to throw things at him?
Or organize the crowd to laugh whenever he says something serious but never at anything intended to be funny
He would 100% take that as a win
I just figured it was cause he’s an egotistical asshole.
well i mean, its duke
Which coincidentally is the primary reason I’ve never found him funny. All egotistical assholes I’ve ever met thought they are hilarious. They are mostly just incredibly cruel and bigoted.
I thought he was funny playing a petty, egotistical asshole as a character. It became a lot less funny after realizing he’s just like that.
Same goes for Ricky Gervais IMO…shout out to Karl Pilkington who genuinely was the funniest part of Derek before he became fatigued with Ricky’s bullshit.
I kind of liked Gervais at one point, but I realized he was still one of those types, just one I agree with occasionally. So I don’t follow him anymore.
Watching Seinfeld is like watching people endlessly criticize other because they are given license to since they themselves are jokes. Never will you find a heartfelt moment. Never will you see someone reflect on how awful they’ve been to other people.
George trys to but is instantly ridiculed.
“No hugging, no learning” was a writing rule for the Seinfeld show. The lack of reflection and heartfelt moments is an intentional response to other sitcoms of the era.
Well looking at it in retrospect it’s a monument to assholes.
He just followed Cleese in doing that.
Cleese wears the lampshare well though.
Seinfeld thinks he has important things to say. The show’s Hot Coffee arc and the jabs at the “A dingo ate my baby!” woman didn’t age well.
I can’t help but notice all the comedians who complain about society being took woke for comedy are has-beens. John Stewart’s back to crushing it at the Daily Show, is he complaining? No, it’s only the guys who’ve run out of material and have nothing left to do but shake their canes at gen Z kids.
I challenge anyone to go to the “good old days” and find me a comedian who was actually funny and not just being an edgelord. You know who the most popular comedian was in the 80s? Andrew Dice Clay. That’s right. That’s was peak comedy, dirty nursery rhymes. Sure, I get that some people are nostalgic. But let’s be serious for a minute - do we really wanna go back to that kind of comedic void?
Society hasn’t gotten too woke, rather comedic standards have evolved to the point where merely being offensive in itself no longer counts as comedy.
Emo Philips
This shit couldn’t be more off base lmao.
Not only have many greats been listed in response to you, you also have relevant comedians today bitching about “woke” as you call it.
Is Bill Burr an edge lord has-been? Chapelle? Jon Stewart has mentioned this as well. Honestly, I think the meme of “YoU cAnT sAy tHiNgS aNyMoRe” is in over half of standups I watch.
A huge portion of comedians mention this at some point.
Chappelle I’ll grant you, but I’d put Chappelle in the category with Seinfeld of a once super-popular comedian who has passed his prime, and now just shakes his cane at Gen Z in frustration instead of creating new material.
As for Bill Burr and John Stewart:
Bill Burr Stuns Bill Maher by Declaring Cancel Culture ‘Over’
Jon Stewart Is “So Fucking Sick” of “Anti-Woke” Culture: “I’ve Lost Two Words in 35 Years”There’s a difference between thinking cancel culture has gone too far and complaining endlessly that it has “ruined comedy”. One is an opinion, the other is an excuse.
I challenge anyone to go to the “good old days” and find me a comedian who was actually funny and not just being an edgelord.
The master himself. George Carlin. We could debate whether he was an edge lord or not. But his comedy was timeless and remains hysterical to this day. And his funniest bits were based on observation of the human condition.
Carlin also re-invented himself with the times. The comedy he did in the 60s was entirely different from the comedy he did in the 90s.
Jerry Seinfeld is still doing the same comedy he did in the 80s.
Carlin was vulgar, but he never punched down. I firmly believe his comedy would be as accepted today as it was when he made it.
I can confirm. No matter how many times I listen to Mr Conductor talk about Poo Bear, I can’t help but laugh. Specially when he saws Roo into his own pouch!
Carlin was good at what he did but he absolutely did punch down, just not at a specific person. The overarching message for a lot of his comedy was “You know you’re all being screwed over and maybe you have a hard time doing anything about it, but you deserve it because you’re stupid.” It’s just such a popular sentiment to call everyone else in society stupid, while excluding oneself, that I guess few people notice those undertones and their implications.
It IS as accepted today. His material is still very relevant.
He could plainly see what was coming. Tore it down. People laughed and let it happen anyway.
Robin Williams, Eddie Murphy, and Jim Carrey all seemed like they had really good specials. I haven’t watched them in a long time, but I don’t recall them being edge lords. I’m sure there have to be others.
Eddie Murphy can be funny, but there’s a ton of homophobic and other problematic content in Raw and Delirious.
=(
(I’m unhappy because that’s bad, not because I disagree with the statement.)
problematic
mfs can’t take a joke in a thread about not being able to take a joke
/s
The first 10 mins of Delirious are difficult watching, but worth getting through for the timeless gold in the rest of it.
If you want to keep happy memories, never rewatch a comedy special older than 10 years. It’s incredible how fast most jokes age.
I think there are some big exceptions. For example- Robin Williams at the Met was an amazing show and is still extremely funny.
Is George Carlin considered an edgelord?
He was, back in the day, his anti-authoritarian bent was pretty edgy then
Tangentially: I tried getting into him a few years ago and it seemed tame and nothing I hadn’t heard before from so many other comedians. Then I realized that he was the vanguard of that style of comedy and of course it’s going to sound like retrodden ground if I’d heard all the people he’d influenced before I listened to him.
CoMeDy Is DeAd.
No. We’re just through with your bigotry disguised as humor.
That wasn’t it at all.
The only people who left were pro-palestine nutjobs and there weren’t even that many of them
“The people doing this boycott are just anti-Rhodesia nutjobs and there aren’t even that many.” -some jackass in 1975
I read that one of the Charities he donates to is actively engaging in the suffering of the Palestenians.
The suffering? That puts it lightly. He has aided in killing the mothers and children of Gaza.
I honestly never understood the attraction to Seinfeld.
There were a few good jokes in there but the whole show was about them being assholes and proud of it.
They’re selfish, judgemental and entitled. They’re constantly mocking and bullying other people and each other. The final episode even lays it out explicitly.
Shows like “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia”, “Married… With Children” or “Breaking Bad” have various unsavory characters but we’re invited to reject these flaws or at least identify with them as flaws.
Seinfeld is shameless about being an asshole and pretends the rest of us are just too dumb to understand his genius.
I found that the clowning/assholery in Seinfeld was just too close to plausible to clock as humor most of the time, while picking on small and petty things; it’s a little too real. I don’t think that comes from conceit, but rather, a generation gap and all the insensitivity that comes with it. Just add a little casual violence and it’s peak boomer-era humor. That said, Seinfield was its best when the stories were less believable and cruel.
The other shows you cite put these humor beats way over the top which is far more paletteable, IMO.
I think you’re missing the point of these shows and that’s okay.
The characters aren’t role models, they are your intrusive thoughts manifest. If you didn’t hear someone’s name when they told you, any rational person would just say it was loud and they didn’t hear you. They wouldnt go through lengths of introducing friends, finding out childhood taunts and rifling through your belongings in an attempt to save face.
The joke is in the breaking of social norms. A show about people being polite to each other doesn’t make for very good comedy.
That’s exactly my point. None of the characters in these shows are role models. We can sympathize with the Bundy’s or their neighbors but the show makes it obvious that nobody wants to emulate them. We can understand why Walther White did the things he does even if it’s clear that he shouldn’t have. The gang in Philly is all about showing us the worst possible decision in any given situation.
Seinfeld, on the other hand, celebrates their behavior. It canonizes our intrusive thoughts as though they were a more authentic form of expression.
you must be fun at parties
I think you have a fundamentally different view than I do on the characters. They are all fundamentally nice people. The difference is, they get fixated on small issues, and let it control their actions. Jerry dates a woman that only looks good in bright light? Only go on dates that have good lighting. It is something you would want to do too, but you would have the control to not let it run the relationship. Jerry doesn’t have that control, and focuses on the good lighting at the expense of everything else.
The characters aren’t mean. They didn’t wish I’ll on anyone. Many of the episodes are them trying to find a way to get out of a situation without being honest because they think the truth would hurt too. Idiots, yes, not not jerks.
For another example. There is an episode where a waiter accidentally puts a menu on a candle and it lights on fire. George points it out, puts the fire out, and casually mentions “I think the busboy put the menu too close to the candle.” The manager overhears this, and fires the busboy. George then finds the busboy to try and help him get another job, but leaves the front door open, and the busboy’s cat escapes. It is the perfect example of what the characters are. They don’t want to hurt people, and go to extreme lengths to do it, even though it always backfires.
I think you have a fundamentally different view than I do on the characters. That’s clearly true :)
Even when the characters behave reasonably I always felt that they were motivated more by the potential for public embarrassment than by moral concern.
It’s hard for me to think of George as a fundamentally nice. This is the guy who shoved children and elderly out of the way when he saw smoke, goaded an alcoholic into relapsing because he felt left out, constantly lied to get advantage in situations and even tried to kill a guy out of jealousy.
The characters in Seinfeld are shameless, but like with IASIP, they usually get burned at the end of the episode. And that continued over Curb Your Enthusiasm. Larry is petty and self-centered, he never learns, karma gets him in the last 30 seconds and then the Tuba drops - BUM BUM BUM.
The bass theme is a banger than that’s about it
It was always played with a keyboard. No one is ever slaping a bass
And they’re different lengths to make up the small differences in episode length.
Archer. Archer is the perfect genius asshole protagonist.
You have to have grown up with it and gained an unconditional love of the characters. You don’t care that they are an asshole to a character you don’t like.
Look at Kramer he is so stupid he can’t figure out a washing machine! Lol he’s going to try to pour a bunch of deterrent in next and act like he’s drunk because he’s that stupid! He’s so funny!
I grew up with it and still hated it. I know I’m in the minority but I agree with the comment OP, I hate asshole like this.
Not as many as Harvard, but it’s something.
Weird choice of quotes and headlines:
From the OP article:
“He has been “uncharacteristically vocal” about his support during press calls for his new film, Unfrosted, The New York Times reported.”
From the NYT link in the quote:
“As Mr. Seinfeld, who has recently been vocal about his support for Israel, received an honorary degree, dozens of students walked out and chanted, “Free, free Palestine,” while the comedian looked on and smiled tensely”
But when you go to the link to the NY Times article that references Mr. Seinfeld as being recently vocal about his support of Israel, one of the concluding comments in the article is:
Surely, Mr. Seinfeld sees it differently. His public comments have largely avoided geopolitical specifics, dwelling little on the choices of the Netanyahu government or prospective conditions for a cease-fire.
And he can still sound hesitant even in recent discussions about the Jewishness of “Seinfeld” — which an NBC executive once described as “too New York, too Jewish.”
Nothing about this makes me think Seinfield is a a strong supported of the war. Support for Israel after the attack can be a lot of things and does not mean pro Netanyahu war machine.
I’m confused. By all accounts Jerry and the entire cast came together to point out their hate for Trump and Republicans. But because he doesn’t agree with one issue he’s been labeled as a right winger? I’m so far left that young leftists think I’m too extreme, to the point where they call be right wing for disagreeing with every tiny thing they say. The young left have become the keepers of “right/wrong think”
“”“One issue”“”
Which is supporting a genocide.
Also he’s recently joined the whole “woke has ruined comedy” bit. Which is very much right wing.
Oh and he’s also a predator that dated a teenager when he was in his 30s.
It’s just the rise of loud, groupthink edgelords, refusing to think past a hyper-emotional brainwash.
Opposing a genocide and those who support it makes you a hyper-emotional edgelord? That’s quite the edgelord take on the subject.
Can you point out where anyone labeled him as a “right winger?”
Your comment is a complete false dichotomy based solely off a strawman argument.
You’re not paying attention. I’ve seen him called right wing quite a few times outside of Lemmy, different forums etc. Also lots of articles out there essentially calling him the new right wing mouthpiece.
All you gotta do is Google
I’m so sorry to inform you of this, but in the year of our Zord 2024, we are no longer accepting “one of the ten billion apes, bots, advertising agencies, liars, and trolls who are screaming into the Internet at all times said something I disagree with” as a valid source of outrage, controversy, or secondhand conversation.
Please understand that this is not personal, nor is it a judgement on your specific opinion. We would recommend addressing the comment you disagree with directly at its source, if you feel you must address it at all.
Damn. This is a great response!
The “one issue” happens to be supporting a genocide, so it’s kind of a big one? I haven’t seen anyone calling him right-wing, but you can bet if cops were firing rubber bullets at peaceful student protesters under a republican administration, every lefty from NY to LA would be wringing their hands and crying “fascism”. The times they are a-changing my friend. It’s not just about left or right, and I’m glad these kids understand that.
I’m so far left that young leftists think I’m too extreme
Sure you are, champ.
they call be right wing for disagreeing with every tiny thing they say
You’re so close to a moment of self-awareness, and yet so far.
Kid I’ve been left since before you were nothing but ball juice
You’re 40, you’re a child in both in age and mentality.
Must be true Insaan said it. If you only knew. I didn’t grow up in Western comfort like you, I’ve washed brains off my sidewalk after guerrilla offensives into my town. I’m a native of this continent, not some colonizer remnant. I’ve seen your western brutality and the hypocrisy and patriarchal bullshit that comes with it. All you do is talk on the internet but you don’t actually do Jack shit about anything. Grab your guns and travel to Gaza, that would be a start
I’ve always found the left more annoying than the right. The right are wrong, but the left are self-righteous smug dickheads. Liberals are like a chimera of both and I think that’s why I hate them more than the right even though they’re objectively less bad. That’s my shitty analysis anyway.
That’s how it works these days.
I’m pro-trans, but I’m not pro-trans people in women’s sports. This makes me a anti-trans nazi in the vast majority of leftie/progressivist people’s eyes, who clearly is a closeted Trump supporter. It’s the whole ‘we must be intolerant of intertolerance’ type fo thing… but they’ve twist it to ‘we must be intolerant of any disagreement whatsoever with our unrealistic ideological agenda that has no basis in a factual reality’.
There is no allowance for variance of reasonable opinion or an objective reality. You are with us, or against us, and therefore the enemy.
Lefties and young folks who are left leaning tend to be as braindead and lockstep as the Trumpers they claim to hate.
How often did you watch women’s sports before you became aware of the controversial issue of trans women competing in them?
“Have you heard of these men pretending to be women to win in female sports? I weep for society etc etc”
The notion that people transition to gain social benefits, real or perceived, is absurd.
In fact people who transition are aware that transitioning will bring them to a lesser social status and overall heightened risk.
Unemployment, homelessness, subpar health services, and violence.
There is a driving force greater than these social losses that makes them transition anyway.
Bigots and ignorants might as well stop the hatred-mongering for a second and think, what the fuck that force could be.
The response: Increased mental health benefits from transitioning to live life in way true to their self.
Many homophobe clergymen might think that this equals publicly announcing you take it up the butt, but in fact
it is an expression of identity that cisgender people enjoy without question.
When put this way, without all the TERF/nazi dogwhistling (“groomers”, “trans-identified males”, “biological males”, “degenerates”, etc),
it gets harder and harder to keep pretending that the driving force behind the anti-gender movement is not hatred.
How can you possibly say “I want mental health outcomes only for cisgender people” without being exposed as a total hatemonger and bigot?
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sa-visual/visualizing-sex-as-a-spectrum/
https://genderanalysis.net/2015/09/paul-mchugh-is-wrong-transitioning-is-effective-gender-analysis-10/
https://iv.datura.network/watch?v=NPmjNYt71fk
https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/07/advocating-transgender-nonbinary-youths
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/2600-leaked-anti-trans-lobbyist-emails
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trans-girls-belong-on-girls-sports-teams/
https://www.wpath.org/publications/socAnnoying aren’t they.
“I’m pro-trans, but I’m not pro-trans people in women’s sports.”
If you’re “pro-trans” then that means you believe that, for example, a trans woman is a woman, because she says she is.
So then you don’t believe women should compete in women’s sports?
…
Showing your ass there, huh?
TubularTittyFrog seems like as good as any to block.
with our unrealistic ideological agenda that has no basis in a factual reality
I think I’ve spotted their issue with you.
My opinion on trans athletes is that I lack the qualifications to have an opinion. What happens to the human body during transition should be pretty well-documented by now, though. I’m sure if there’s any real problem, the doctors who work in gender-affirming care would be pretty vocal about it.
They’re biased, though. I don’t assign a moral value to that, I mean sociologically.
Fucking lol
The doctors who research this stuff for a living are biased
Science is biased
Reality is biased
You’re a regressive who hates that reality disagrees with you and would prefer to live in a fantasy world of your own making
Uh, calm down mate. Maybe you think you’re replying to somebody else? A doctor making their living from providing transgender healthcare is absolutely a biased party, as is any researcher choosing to focus on this topic. That’s reflexivity, it’s quite important to acknowledge.
Buddy that’s like saying you won’t listen to physicists about gravity because they’re biased
Researching and reporting on scientific realities isn’t bias
It’s stating the truth
You would definitely need to acknowledge a physicist’s bias towards the theory they have chosen to research. That’s absolutely a thing! I’m not saying anything controversial here. I don’t even like sociology very much, reflexivity is boring and over-emphasised but it’s a legitimate issue, and it’s a big issue in transgender medicine. Which people are very keen to point out when the research doesn’t agree with their own position.
This is some top notch conspiracy theory you got there. A sanity check, religious foundations are funding most TERFy propaganda and “free-speech” absolute-bullshit-ism. https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/2600-leaked-anti-trans-lobbyist-emails Are they more biased than international medical bodies? (American Psychological Organization advocates for trans youth https://www.apa.org/monitor/2022/07/advocating-transgender-nonbinary-youths World Health professional Association advocates for transgender adults and youth https://www.wpath.org/publications/soc) Are you condemning their consensus just because they are interested in the topic? That is moronic. What about the nazis? Are they less biased because they are less invested in transmisogyny? ( https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/news/4188-the-eradication-of-talmudic-abstractions-anti-semitism-transmisogyny-and-the-national-socialist-project ) What about litigation that has come from independent judges, like Forstater’s TERFism was bashed by the first judge as “unworthy of respect in a democratic society”? What about the appeal court that deliberated that she can believe whatever she wants but still can’t misgender trans and non-binary people? (https://criticallegalthinking.com/2021/06/29/not-a-nazi-but-forstater-v-cgd-europe/ ) What about the biologists that independently conclude that biological sex is a spectrum? ( Scientific American visualizing sex as a spectrum https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sa-visual/visualizing-sex-as-a-spectrum/ 1600 biologists condemns Trump anti-transgender proposal https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46067559 Super low rates of regrets or detransition in trans youth https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/landmark-systematic-review-of-trans Transphobe christian psychiatrist McHugh is wrong, transition mental health outcomes https://genderanalysis.net/2015/09/paul-mchugh-is-wrong-transitioning-is-effective-gender-analysis-10/
Jon Stewart destroys ignorant GOP lawmaker for criminalizing youth transition https://iv.datura.network/watch?v=NPmjNYt71fk Scientific American Trans girls belong to female Sports https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trans-girls-belong-on-girls-sports-teams/) You are not talking about individual researchers pal, you are talking about the mainstream medical establishment and legal institutions. So crawl back to your cave or wherever you came from and socialize animals that have no gender identity, as it is apparently the only way to preserve your fragile heteronormativity, lmao.
And the dude openly dated a minor when he was nearly 40, "Shoshanna is a person, not an age. She is extremely bright. She’s funny, sharp, very alert. We just get along. You can hear the click.”
Chappelle has said far worse things about every other race than Richards did about black people that night, but as we know that somehow doesn’t count
Sure this applies only if you also think that Chappelle should also be tarred and feathered. But you’re here wanting to forgive both of them.
But what about another situation no-one is talking about!
You might not have noticed, but young adults aren’t big Chapelle fans these days either. The whole transphobia thing doesn’t play so well with the under-40s.
And Chapelle’s comedy is cringe and awful, and completely unrelated to the topic at-hand. Nice strawman.
I’m sure you love strawmen, you get to burn down someone whose opinion deviates from yours even a little. We used to call it “wrong think” when we were actually fighting for people’s rights and not just being arrogant assholes, pushing everyone away from the left.
“Even a little”. You fall off a cliff if you move slightly in the wrong direction, “Even a little”.
So you admit that budging is wrong think.
Only if it’s about issues like genocide. “A sprinkle of genocide is fine” is what psychos think like.
What did he say?
It wasn’t about the commencement speech
literally nothing. the only people who walked out were pro palestine
