Tbh I think that banning jokes based on personal taste is a step too far. We are all going to have our own tolerance levels in terms of what we think is and isn’t acceptable, however it’s not for us to say what others are and aren’t allowed to find acceptable.
I don’t particularly like Franky Boyle anyway, however that doesn’t mean that I think that no-one is allowed to like him or his humour.
I went to see that comedian once whose name I have been trying to remember for the past half hour, jimmy someone, eXH liked him, I thought he was crass, vile, offensive, and never,ever again. But someone obviously likes him.
Even with regard to people with disabilities, (and I do have one fwiw) I do feel that the line should be drawn at disabilities which mean people lack the capacity to know or understand that they or their disability is the butt of someone’s joke, iyswim.
And with regards to victims of crimes, I find all the documentaries which have sprung up recently just as much in bad taste. So we’ve had the madeleine McCann documentary which told us absolutely nothing. The ripper files, which I didn’t watch so can’t comment, and tonight we have the James bulger, previously unrevealed evidence one. All of which are designed to pick over the cases of murdered, tortured, missing individuals for the purposes of entertainment. Is that not just as crass as making any of that kind of thing into humour? At least a joke is probably only a matter of minutes at most, whereas some of these documentaries go on for weeks and weeks.