Jo Brand and battery acid comment

[decisionsindecisions]

I love Jo Brand. I love her stand up comedy and I think she's great when she presents HIGNFY.

I don't know what to make of this comment that she has apparently made regarding throwing battery acid instead of milkshake. Some people are saying this is comedy. Some people are disgusted by the comment. I sit somewhere in the middle of this. I think it's in poor taste and to be honest I am surprised that someone of her obvious intelligence would say something like this. But at the same time we live in a free society.

I just wondered what people on here think about it?

www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jo-brand-sparks-fury-by-saying-politicians-should-have-battery-acid-thrown-at-them-instead-of-a4165941.html

I wonder how many people would have still found it funny or would still defend it if it had been Frankie Boyle saying this about May? (or even thatcher)

Whilst I do agree that Jo Brand shouldn't have said what she said. Haven't we all at some point? She has been in the public eye for such a long time and hasn't put a foot wrong. She obviously didn't intend to encourage anyone to actually carry out acid attacks and it was said in the context of a comedy show. She shouldn't have said it, granted. She had misjudged this one. But I find it quite scary in this world, that you can be a good person, never put a foot wrong, make a mistake and then have people signing petitions to have you sacked and your career that you have worked your whole life for to just be over in an instant. Can we allow others some room for error? Or is the rule that once you're in the public eye, you can't make a single mistake (or, you know, be human)?

I wonder how many people would have still found it funny or would still defend it if it had been Frankie Boyle saying this about May? (or even thatcher)

I think more would have found it funny, if it where directed at a left leaning MP then it would be different again.

As I said upthread, it was a terrible joke, but this weaponisation of crappy laws for political millage is as damaging as was predicted.

But I find it quite scary in this world, that you can be a good person, never put a foot wrong, make a mistake and then have people signing petitions to have you sacked and your career that you have worked your whole life for to just be over in an instant.

I don't agree with all the twitter mobs rallying for outrage, but this has been happening for some time now. The pendulum may swing back to people having a bit more common sense instead of trying to rally the troops (you see threads posted on her for example) but it will take some time yet.

Justanotherlurker

I agree that somebody would find it funny no matter the comedian or the focus of the joke.

But threads on here have already proved that violence against certain people is lauded by some, yet those same people would be horribly offended if it were focused on something/one that they support.

The only truth to come out of this is that humans are hypocrites.

I didn’t think Farage was being literal when he said he would ‘pick up a rifle’.
I thought it was like ‘rally the troops’ or ‘I will die on this hill’ type thing.
I don’t think Jo brand was being literal either.
But reporting people to their employers has long been a weapon of the left, and I find it ironic that they’re frothing now the tables have been turned.

But threads on here have already proved that violence against certain people is lauded by some, yet those same people would be horribly offended if it were focused on something/one that they support.

Oh I agree, and you can see why this has been reported as a hate crime, it is playing by the rules that have been set for the past few years.

I don't think she should be investigated for a hate crime, but the thin end of the wedge has already been used for political mileage and wanting to drag people through the courts for edgy facebook comments, so this is just a natural progression IMO

What @PFB2 said.

This is a case of be careful what you wish for. The left have, for a long time now, behaved badly, in order to punish those with opinions they don't like. It's very hard not to feels some satisfaction that a situation resulting from their own behaviour is now starting to bite them in the arse.
But laws regarding incitement were not meant to be used to stop people from saying stupid shit. No one has a right to go through life never being offended or disagreed with and only hearing about unicorns and glitter. I'm uncomfortable too with the weaponisation of laws meant to protect people from physical harm.

But threads on here have already proved that violence against certain people is lauded by some, yet those same people would be horribly offended if it were focused on something/one that they support.
Very true. I’ve seen a few times on threads about the royal family posts saying that ‘they should lined up against a wall and shot’. Now, the posters may or may not mean it literally, but it’s a pretty unpleasant violent image and no one commented on it.
Had anyone written the same about say Diane Abbot or Caroline Lucas I’m sure there would have been plenty of objections.

This isn't going to go down very well with the GBBO Extra Slice crowd.
She's lost that audience a bit. Whenever I watch JB now I will remember the acid attack joke just as I always think of Danny Baker's attack on M and H's baby or Frankie Boyle's joke about Harvey Price.

This is a case of be careful what you wish for.

It is, this is nothing more than the 'right' wanting the police to adhere to the same standards wrt to jokes as they have done previously.

It is stupid that the police are involved, and many of the so called 'right wing' advocates are defending Brand, this along with the backlash against IDPOL is the pendulum swinging back.

There is still a lot of people who think they have nothing to hide so nothing to fear, ignoring the whole trans issue and on a smaller scale Brands joke.

An absolutely appalling comment and cannot believe that there are posters who are defending it as a joke..

Very very dangerous...

FWIW, I think the same issue would have occurred had the joke been related to Corbyn just after he had been "egged" (or any other easily recognised political throwing incident) though it largely would have been different people claiming outrage. It would objectively have been equally funny/cleverly crafted/ totally unfunny according to your perspective, though I agree perspectives change depending on the perceived "butt" of the joke and the nature of the teller.

Though the key argument remains, imo, not if it is funny/well advised or whatever, but whether JB should be allowed to say it without being pilloried, called to be sacked, apology demanded or whatever. Assuming it is agreed she wasn't inciting anyone to violence, so it was not illegal, I think the move to hinder free speech of comedians for fear of troops (of whatever persuasion) being rallied is a bit sinister. She was totally within her rights to put forward the joke for public hearing, and be judged as a comedian on it. We may decide she fell on the wrong side of the taste line for it to be funny, but these lines change all the time (benny hill or mother in law jokes no longer generally being considered funny, for example). Personally I don't think there is any topic that should be considered off limit for a comedian if they can handle it appropriately. Their job is to make people laugh, and often that is done by challenging authority, being risqué or whatever. If their intended audience laugh, they are winning. She shouldn't need to apologise if a joke falls flat...though maybe should if she caused unexpected offence to someone outside the scope of the joke.

As it went out on the BBC they had some responsibility to ensure that it wouldn't be too outrageous for all but a niche "intended audience" and wouldn't get them in legal trouble, but I think they were safe on both those points. Though maybe they misjudged it slightly given the current political tensions, which is ironic given the nature of the programme!

It is obviously different to politicians, or even a "man down the pub" saying the same thing in a different context - and then claiming "it was only a joke, innit, I didn't actually mean it" when pulled up. In this case, it was quite evidently "only a joke".

"She was totally within her rights to put forward the joke for public hearing, and be judged as a comedian on it."

yes. But some of us judge that she should lose her job. So if the BBC judge accordingly, they can't be blamed.

I think a police investigation is probably a waste of time, but should someone lose their job for that? Yes. Her and the editor.

btw I have now listened to the whole show prior to the comment. Far from making it better, it makes it worse and I didn't think it could get worse!

@NotAnActualSheep

I agree with your overall point, but this highlights the state of politics and culture war. It is highlighting the mess when you get people retweeting comedians who back Brands right to tell a joke and yet pillored for doing the same with the likes of the Nazi Pug guy.

The so called freeze peach crowd have come out in support of Brand's right to make a joke but want her held to the same standards at which the left have deemed appropriate.

I hope the vocal left take sum semblance from this and we get back to a common sense situation but I think its going to carry on for some time yet.

In this case, it was quite evidently "only a joke".

It's this statement is why it's kicked off. It's slowly inserting the rod into the lefts back that they cannot see coming.

Brand shouldn't be investigated, same as some of the edgy facebook comments or the Nazi pug guy (especially ironic considering he was an out and out socialist anti tory ramblings and with an hammer and sickle tattoo) this is a reap what you sow scenario that should come to nothing. But should be a warning as the other side being prepared to use the legislation and procedures that the left have used for the past few years. Just the same as IDPOL has come back to bite the most advocate adherents in the backside recently.

CONTEXT. It’s a comedic show called Heresy. Therefore comments aren’t meant to be taken as gospel.
If she had said it on Breakfast TV it would be inappropriate. If she’d said it on CBBies she would never work again.

Danny Baker put his picture on social media meaning you could take it anyway you wanted.

Yes lots of sick blokes out there. To be honest Jo Brand as an unattractive, overweight female is likely to have experienced some sort of abuse most weeks I’d imagine. Hardly likely to be a “hater”.

Allhailthesun
CONTEXT.

Right wing politicians are having milkshake thrown at them.
It has been repeatedly said in the media that there is no way of knowing if the contents could contain acid, bleach or any other harmful substance.

Many people have had acid or bleach thrown over them and the scars have been seen.

Jo Brand states that she would use acid not milkshake (paraphrased) then insta backtrack its just a joke.

So lets have all the CONTEXT and not just a part of it.

rosa As far as I know she isn't a BBC employee. I assume she is self employed. They may not want to contract her for anything else if they agree with you, but not sure that would have the same effect, as she won't be contractually tied to the BBC.

I'm a bit disturbed by the general feeling that "some of us think she should lose her job" is a justification, to be honest. I don't think she has performed badly at her job. I don't think she has bought the BBC into disrepute or any other classic reasons why a contractor would be let go. I'm quite glad that mob outrage isn't generally used as a reason to sack people (unless for general PR reasons). If it were, a lot of politicians would be out on their ear. You may judge she isn't a good comedian and not listen/ watch her, which is your right, but it seems a bit harsh to demand that no one else is allowed to either. Ditto the editor. I don't think he/she grossly misjudged the joke in the context of the programme, skirting the line of what is or isn't OK to say. I wasn't too keen on the presenter's initial quip that women and the mentally ill are basically indistinguishable... but I don't consider it inappropriate in the context of the show and wouldn't demand her (or the writer's) resignation on that basis.

lurker yy, the nazi pug thing is an interesting comparison. But that wasn't a BBC comedy show, "riffing" on the topic of political division, but something much less "controlled", and circulating by social media. I think it is fair that nazi pug guy was honestly having a laugh, but it is not so clear that all his audience/retweets etc had the same interpretation. Right or wrong, I think JB has the benefit in that she is much more widely recognised as a comedian, and no one could honestly take her contribution as an incitement to do anything...especially as she actually said it wasn't something she was planning!

I agree it's complicated though if the same people are blatantly supporting one and not the other. I suppose it is a bit different, as they are not supporting the joke itself (as retweeting the pug was) but supporting her right to tell it. There possibly is a bit of left/right ideology going on (I'm no fan of either extreme honestly), but I don't think that is the main issue. I think a right wing comedian making a similar joke on Corbyn or Sturgeon or whoever would be similarly supported for their right to say something a bit dodgy to a mainstream audience, even if people didn't like the joke.

I don't know what freeze peach or idpol is I'm afraid.

NotAnActualSheep

I'm quite glad that mob outrage isn't generally used as a reason to sack people (unless for general PR reasons)

I find it interesting that "mob" is always pointed at those that disagree with someone's PoV. Yet it is a concerned group or some such BS when agreeing.

I also find your proviso of "general PR reasons" a somewhat disturbing coin of phrase, in 'we will get rid if it makes us look bad' and 'keep them if enough people agree'.

But then we are back to the definition of "mob".

People unironically falling into the context and nuance trap that they themselves have set previously.

There was 4 milkshake incidents that have happened.

Farage
Robinson (sorry, Yaxley Lennon lel)
Some random
And an old guy with the wrong coloured rosette on voting day (which is being played as a false flag, along lines of flat earth conspiracy)

Forgetting all of those was met with much joy, throwing acid is to be considered with context...

A out and out socialist showing in his video how he trained his pug to react to nazi salutes is just out and out hate speech and deserves to be dragged through the courts.

Brand is being investigated because of people like you.

I know where she was coming from, but she actually cocked it up completely.

I thought she was playing on the 'fat-lass' trope she often uses, as in 'I'd actually quite like milkshake thrown at me, because I quite like drinking milkshakes' whereas drinking battery acid would be vile.

I genuinely don't think she intended to create the image of somebody being disfigured or burnt like in an acid attack.

Personally, I think it would have been much funnier if she'd used 'cat-piss' or 'dishwater' rather than battery acid.

Fixthebone was she advocating acid being thrown at her? I thought she felt like throwing it politicians she didn’t like.

"Imagine if Tommy Robinson had said it as joke."
^^^
This 1000%.

I like a good belly laugh as much as the next person. However there are some things that you just do not joke about. Acid attacks being one of them.
What about that poor little baby who was attacked in Home and Bargain not even 12 months ago.
I hardly think his mum will be seeing the non existent "funny side".

I genuinely don't think she intended to create the image of somebody being disfigured or burnt like in an acid attack.

Did you think that the guy with a hammer and sickle tattoo really wanted to gas the jews with is pug.

Did you look for context then, or do default and think it should be dealt with by the courts?