Dis/Respectful Laughter

A challenging article today on the use of disability in humour, with some interesting comments beneath it.

Humour and society is of course a debate that goes back as far as people have been making jokes – and those who have been the subject or target of comedians have always (I imagine) had something to say about the way they’ve been portrayed or referred to. Recently there have been a swathe of news stories of comedians such as Frankie Boyle, Jimmy Carr (and before then Bernard Manning, Roy Chubby Brown, et al) making jokes about topics that others find offensive.

The writer of this article objected to a comment on Celebrity Big Brother which made reference to ‘retards’. Her complaint has not been upheld so far by either Channel 4 or Ofcom.

The comment posted in response to the article which interested me most was this one:

“I’m not entirely convinced that laughing at someone means you think less of them.”

I think I agree with the sentiment of this statement, whilst of course I recognise that context is all. So where exactly this line where humour because abuse? Isn’t that the debate that comedians who operate at the edge of what is deemed ‘socially acceptable’ in terms of their humour continually negotiate with their audience?

I enjoy ‘dark’ humour. I enjoy hearing (and telling) jokes which some people find offensive. I also recognise that some people DO find those jokes offensive, and I will respect that response, though I am also likely to be curious about why they have that response.

I do not believe that enjoying dark humour is entirely incompatible with my work, in which I seek to hold all of my clients as being OK; I am capable of moderating my self, by behaviour, my thinking, to be appropriate to the environment or context that I am in.

Maintaining this capacity to shift into the most appropriate mode of being is key to sustaining any relationship effectively – and where humour is concerned it is especially important to be able to moderate the tone and content of our engagement.

It is worth acknowledging that what ‘risky’ comedians are manifesting is a public expression of the anti-social component of their personality. We all have this bit of us which resists social conformity or seeks to challenge those around us with our behaviour, and comedians who use it are hooking our own anti-social tendencies with their jokes and humour. Of course it is important to keep it in check, otherwise we become dysfunctional, full-blown anti-social beings with disordered personalities who are a danger to society.

Allowing ourselves to indulge and express this part of us is integral to keeping our characters in balance. And it could be argued that closing down our acknowledgement of this anti-social part of us may be a failure to recognise ourselves as a vast, complex, not-wholly-likeable entirety.

We do all have dark bits of us that we don’t like so much, but closing down on them and shutting off is withholding from ourselves an important part of our capacity to be, and in a professional sense I’m always keen to explore with clients what parts of themselves they’re seeking to avoid, ignore, disown or reject.

Of course people have the right to be offended, and the right to express this sense of offence, but I don’t agree with that the best way to manage this is to impose and enforce ever tighter and more strict limits on the means and ways of personal expression.

www.wayforwardcounselling.co.uk