Custody Hearing (Humour, off topic)
#1
Posted 2005-December-16, 17:26
The boy has a history of being beaten by his parents and the judge initially awarded custody to his aunt, in keeping with child custody law and regulations requiring that family unity be maintained to the degree possible.
The boy surprised the court when he proclaimed that his aunt beat him more than his parents and he adamantly refused to live with her. When the judge suggested that he live with his grandparents, the boy cried out that they also beat him.
After considering the remainder of the immediate family and learning that domestic violence was apparently a way of life among them, the judge took the unprecedented step of allowing the boy to propose who should have custody of him.
After two recesses to check legal references and confer with child welfare officials, the judge granted temporary custody to Lanzarotti and Buratti whom the boy firmly believes are not capable of beating anyone.
#2
Posted 2005-December-16, 17:56
#3
Posted 2005-December-16, 23:59
b. making light of domestic violence is pretty uncool.
nickf
sydney
#4
Posted 2005-December-17, 06:08
If it´s not important to win, tell me, why do they keep records?
(Barcht, Captain of Nir`ch Tyse´th, Klingon Warship)
www.bridgeball.de
#5
Posted 2005-December-17, 08:35
i'd like to know what comedian, if any, you find funny
#6
Posted 2005-December-17, 08:43
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
"Mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself, but talent instantly recognizes genius".
#7
Posted 2005-December-17, 10:13
"i'd like to know what comedian, if any, you find funny"
I didn't find the joke funny (Lanzarotti and Buratti are great players - a good joke with them would be about cheating), though I wasn't particularly offended.
Robin Williams, Dana Carvey, and Billy Crystal, to name a few. In the late
70's and early 80's I saw a LOT of standup live (I lived in SF, which at that time was the standup Mecca), including Williams and Carvey. In my grumpy middle age, few standups seem more than occasionally funny - I haven't been able to watch a full SNL show for years, and have pretty much stopped trying. I do want to see Sarah Silverman's movie, which is supposed to be quite funny, and offensive to everyone. I don't know how a whole movie of shock comedy will wear, though. I found Eddie Murphy and Andrew Dice Clay to be too much after about half an hour.
Peter
#8
Posted 2005-December-17, 14:47
luke warm, on Dec 17 2005, 02:35 PM, said:
Of course it was intended as just a joke.
And what about those jokes about Muslims, Jews, Blacks, Indians, Poles, Protestants, Belgians, Aborigines, women, fat people, the handicapped, Blondes, Asians, Catholics, Iraqis, the French etc etc?
Do you think they are just jokes or really really offensive?
nickf
sydney
#9
Posted 2005-December-17, 15:56
my wife is blond and she loves blond jokes.. my niece is a lawyer and some of the most offensive, and funny, jokes around are about lawyers.. hell, they even pass lawyer jokes around about one another
ever laugh at a joke that could *possibly* offend anyone? me too...
#10
Posted 2005-December-18, 03:38
nickf, on Dec 17 2005, 08:47 PM, said:
luke warm, on Dec 17 2005, 02:35 PM, said:
Of course it was intended as just a joke.
And what about those jokes about Muslims, Jews, Blacks, Indians, Poles, Protestants, Belgians, Aborigines, women, fat people, the handicapped, Blondes, Asians, Catholics, Iraqis, the French etc etc?
Do you think they are just jokes or really really offensive?
nickf
sydney
The original joke wasn't making fun of the child abuse victim. It was making fun of B & L. Whereas, the offensive jokes about Arabs, lawyers or fat people, for instance, are intended to mock some perceived aspect about these groups.
So while child abuse is no laughing matter, that doesn't mean that a joke can't mention child abuse without being offensive.
Eric
#11
Posted 2005-December-20, 04:24
Point well made I think
#12
Posted 2005-December-20, 06:26
E.g. if you joke about the wars in the middleage, it's fine, but if you make a joke about, say, the war in Vietnam or in the middle east conflicts or the 11 september, that's worse: many people are still suffering about its consequences.
Similarly, the Buratti Lanzarotti case - as all the cheating cases - is still a defeat for the bridge world, whether they are guilty or not, and is still a fresh and open wound for the bridge community and for them (especially if they were innocent)
I'd say it's a painful case, in the limited context of bridge competition and the prestige of the game.
Secondarily, even if they are cheaters, I think that the statement that they can't beat anyone is way out of place, so this does not make the joke funny, or at least well-directed.
Finally, if the joke had to be realistic, it should take into account that in Italy every court appeal takes about 10-20 years to complete
#13
Posted 2005-December-20, 08:40
#14
Posted 2005-December-20, 08:52
#15
Posted 2005-December-20, 19:19
The internet is great for many things but I have seen a danger in humor there. I think it's the time and distance. Face to face, you tell a joke and notice you have stepped on someone's toes, you can smooth things over quickly. On the internet, it festers. In the early days of email I was on the campus senate when they were considering extending health benefits to domestic partners. We adjourned for the week-end, to resume on Monday, and the emails were flying. One very insistent voice was heard from someone who was identifed only by his machine name of penguin. He went on and on about the campus code, only he kept calling it the campus cod. So I made some remarks about penguins and cod, and closed by quoting Jimmy Durante "Everybody wants ta get inta da act". I received a furious response from the penguin telling me I was being "exclusionary" etc etc. We finally smoothed it over after I agreed that in the fuuture I would attach smiley faces to messages that were not intended to be taken seriously. Apparently mentioning Jimmy Durante did not count as a clue. He was young, probably.
#16
Posted 2005-December-20, 20:31
kenberg, on Dec 20 2005, 08:19 PM, said:
The internet is great for many things but I have seen a danger in humor there. I think it's the time and distance. Face to face, you tell a joke and notice you have stepped on someone's toes, you can smooth things over quickly. On the internet, it festers. In the early days of email I was on the campus senate when they were considering extending health benefits to domestic partners. We adjourned for the week-end, to resume on Monday, and the emails were flying. One very insistent voice was heard from someone who was identifed only by his machine name of penguin. He went on and on about the campus code, only he kept calling it the campus cod. So I made some remarks about penguins and cod, and closed by quoting Jimmy Durante "Everybody wants ta get inta da act". I received a furious response from the penguin telling me I was being "exclusionary" etc etc. We finally smoothed it over after I agreed that in the fuuture I would attach smiley faces to messages that were not intended to be taken seriously. Apparently mentioning Jimmy Durante did not count as a clue. He was young, probably.
I am not sure who is Jimmy Durante, a math prof or stat prof? hachaa chaaa chaaaaa
Rim shot smitty please
Is he talking about campus cod pieces? Are they shared and passed around?
Do only international partners get health benefits?
I agree with the student this does not seem to be very inclusive.
Are you talking about Uncle Fester or someone else?
How do emails fly?
This is very confusing.
#17
Posted 2005-December-20, 21:32
#18
Posted 2005-December-20, 22:08
kenberg, on Dec 20 2005, 10:32 PM, said:
Since when did you get the same benefits as the phys profs?
I was under the impression that they were the only ones under an obligation to maximise confusion (it's written in the laws of thermodynamics, you know)

Help