Jerry Sadowitz

JemimaPuddlegoose I'm still intrigued what you think should happen (if not cancellation) to a comedian who (and this time I'll ask using your exact words) racially abuses female audience members and flashes his penis at women without their consent?

Complete nonsense.

I know people who went to see his show who'd never heard of him before. That's the norm at Ed Fringe. He's hardly so famous that everyone knows his name, let alone the content of his act!

I really wonder how many people on this thread have ever done Edinburgh Fringe. I've done shows at Ed Fringe several times and have also attended numerous times as an audience member. I've seen a million shows at Edinburgh.

The culture at Ed Fringe is very much "go and see everything and anything, take a punt on an unknown comedian, see stuff you don't know." It's not like going to see a stand-up show in London where you probably research it ahead of time and only book tickets for acts you know and like. Edinburgh is messy and chaotic, you run around seeing a dozen different acts per day. You read the EdFringe website or app and make choices what to see based on that.

It's very very possible that Ed Fringe goers would end up at his show without having heard of him before, which is why it's crucial that acts submit accurate information to their show listings page.

It's not okay to blame women for going by the information that JS himself decided to submit to edfringe.com, when he could very easily have included "may contain nudity" or been more accurate about the show content.

I'm not putting words into your mouth, I asked you some questions based on your earlier post.

You literally said this...

"I'm honestly astounded that feminists are defended a man who racially abuses female audience members and flashes his penis at women without their consent"

You said that JS had racially abused a female audience member and flashed women without their consent. In my post I used the word "assault" and then immediately corrected it to "harassment" because I realised that was perhaps over interpreting what you had said. But look at what you actually said. How is what I asked putting words into your mouth?

And ‘I, Joan’ is the stupidest, most sexist thing I’ve ever seen. The show notes about Elizabeth the first are written in such a way as to suggest that she is non-binary because she called her self a Prince. Total misunderstanding of Elizabeth language usage and attitudes of the time period.

But the great thing about free speech is they get to have their opinion and I get to have mine. In an ideal world it would open a discussion, rather than creating another round of cancellations and bans.

I wonder if this entire thing would have been avoided if JS had just been upfront in the show description.

Anyone who goes to see Sadowitz knows EXACTLY what they're going to see.

The venue is most certainly to blame here. They can’t have researched much about him.

To be clear- I don’t like him and would never book to see one of his shows (much like I would never book to see Frankie Boyle after having the misfortune to sit through one of his shows before) but the conversation is all relevant to the current discussions on free speech.

How far does free speech go and how and who decides what is acceptable. If you are going to deplatform and ban things then who gets to decide the criteria?

I often think that sunlight is the best disinfectant for distasteful views because it reveals them for what they really are- the ravings of an arsehole.

If The Pleasance had let it run then he would have inevitably gotten some shite reviews and we could have had a conversation about his language and views.

Now it looks like nothing but silencing and tone policing. And it makes it harder to have that reasonable conversation. Banning things never makes them go away. It only makes it more salacious.

There's also a thread here:

Comedians defending Jerry Sadowitz http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/amiibeingunreasonable/4610857-comedians-defending-jerry-sadowitz

Or Sadowitz could have just written "potentially contains nudity and discussion of racial themes some may find offensive" in the show description/content warning.

Please remember, the people who maintain and update the edfringe.com website are not the same people who programme the acts, and they have to upload show content for literally thousands of different shows. All the website content is submitted by the acts themselves (or by someone from their team), the website team literally just copy and paste the show info and content warnings from the submission forms into the website listings page. And they do it hundreds and hundreds of times over.

You cannot expect that some underpaid webdesigner who's copy and pasting thousands of different show descriptions is going to take the time to read each one, notice "hang on I personally know that act, and they've left something out!" and take the time to flag it.

The onus is on the act to ensure they submit accurate information.

I wonder if this entire thing would have been avoided if JS had just been upfront in the show description.

It's Free Speech .. I suspect I'd hate his show, too extreme for me. He's been doing his show for 30 years, no-one goes who doesn't know what to expect. It shouldn't be banned, no more than the Joan of Arc play, no more than Frankie Boyle. That's the thing with free speech - it's for everyone not just those you like and agree with.

I think anyone confused between criticising a work and wanting it banned is inadvertently letting their own fascist flag fly.

Most people are very cognisant of the difference between disagreement and attempts at censorship.

Gosh, I would love to see his impression of Frankie Boyle!

Oh me too. That was the first thing I thought.

I'd be sympathetic to the staff too. I think the venue did have a duty to make sure that they - like the audience - knew what the show was about beforehand. But, if that's what happened then the venue should have sorted it out with the staff, e.g. given them the option to work another shift, not cancelled the show.

The venue just come across as inept. They didn't know sadowitz act or they didn't employ staff who could work alongside him.

As of last night, I'd read all that thread.

I don't recall anyone wanting to ban it. One person thought it should be staged at another theatre, and that was it.

I can mock theatre productions without wanting to ban them.

Especially when it's Puppetry of the Penis, which has visited my local provincial theatre. Cue much gushing from the local paper's journalist who does the arts section.

I don't think anyone on the thread called for 'I, Joan' to be banned. If they did, they were very much a minority voice.

I think previous posters are right. Whatever happened, it's the staff who complained about the working environment it created for them.

I'm actually quite sympathetic to that point of view. I don't think I'd go to see Jerry Sadowitz in a million years, and I don't think however much theatre staff are paid per hour would sweeten the deal. I'd want to swap my shift with someone else, if permitted. And if it wasn't permitted, I'd be miffed.

Did that thread call for 'I Joan' to be banned?

Today they are banning things you don't like so you're happy. Tomorrow it might be something that affects you instead.

That's why everyone was so quick to defend the I, Joan production at The Globe in this thread right?

😒

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4609542-globe-theatre-makes-joan-of-arc-non-binary-in-new-play

Please don't put words into my mouth.

Multiple audience members have confirmed that he exposed his penis to a woman in the audience, and Jerry himself admits he did. His own website even contains a video where he mentions exposing his penis on stage so it clearly happened, no one is denying it happened.

Exposing a penis during a stage show is not "sexual assault" since it's normal for fringe shows to have nudity. BUT this has to be mentioned in the show description so that audiences can consent or not consent to attend a show with nudity.

The issue is that the show description and content warnings that JS/his team gave to the Edfringe.com didn't include any mention of nudity or potential nudity, meaning people were not given the information necessary to consent to attend a show featuring nudity. Not everyone will take the time to google an act's own website and watch videos - that information should be on the event listing page, and it wasn't.

Nobody with a passing knowledge of sadowitz thinks he did anything in the vien of chappelle or Gervais.

*sorry I didn’t mean to say assault in my post I meant to say harassment.

Gosh, I would love to see his impression of Frankie Boyle!

I'm actually not calling for his work to be banned or censored, just explaining why women genuinely felt scared being in the audience, and why non-white women had a problem with being called racial slurs,. And that it was wrong that the show summary didn't mention nudity or give any real indication of the content of the show.

I’m intrigued how you know all this? Is there a report with people interviewed? Can you link to anything? And if you are not calling for JS to be banned what is it that you think should happen? From your post it seems that you think there was a serious racial assault and possibly also sexual assault that took place. What should happen?

They accepted the booking, put a warning on it, and now act surprised.

Except they didn't. I copy and pasted the full show description and content warning from the original show event listing page on page 2 of this thread, and it doesn't say one word about nudity or potential nudity, or anything about racial content.

I've worked the Edinburgh Fringe several times, show descriptions and warnings are provided by the act themselves (or their team/management).

They accepted the booking based on the information Jerry gave them, and they posted the show description and content warning they were given. If nothing else Jerry was in the wrong not to put "potential nudity" in the show description page.