Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site rochester.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!rochester!ciaraldi
From: ciaraldi@rochester.UUCP (Mike Ciaraldi)
Newsgroups: net.jokes.d
Subject: Offensive jokes
Message-ID: <3704@rochester.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 4-Nov-83 18:08:17 EST
Article-I.D.: rocheste.3704
Posted: Fri Nov  4 18:08:17 1983
Date-Received: Mon, 7-Nov-83 03:58:27 EST
Sender: ciaraldi@rocheste.UUCP
Organization: U. of Rochester, CS Dept.
Lines: 36

From: Mike Ciaraldi  <ciaraldi>
One criterion I use for considering the offensiveness of
a joke is whether it serves to reinforce a stereotype
(presumably derogatory) or ridicule the stereotype itself.

Usually, it has to do with the plausibility of the situation
and actions in the joke.

As an example, there is an old joke about 2 soccer teams
(usually told as Italian and Polish)
In essence, the Italian team leaves the field early for
some reason (factory whistle blows, or whatever, and they
mistake it for the referee signalling the end of the game).
It then takes 5 more minutes for the Polish team to score.
This is also told about football, other nationalities,
schools, etc.

I consider this not very offensive because it is too absurd.
A soccer team of any nationality would have to
be extremely incompetent to be unable to score when there
are no defenders. This is SO unlikely as to never happen,
not even when the players are from a particular ethnic group.
Thus, this joke tends to poke fun at the idea of
ethnic mental inferiority by deliberately taking it to
absurd lengths.

This seems long-winded and overly-analytical, I know,
especially considering that this analysis takes a
fraction of a second.

Incidentally, when jokes are told in person, the
expression and inflection can make all the difference,
the previous analysis notwithstanding.

Mike Ciaraldi
ciaraldi@rochester