Thanks for that link to the DFW article; if I weren't trying to make up for lost time towards a deadline (from writing stuff like this post) I'd read it right now. For a long time I've been trying to wrap my head around the whole idea of how you voice an objection to political correctness, without turning into one of the assholes who's always complaining about political correctness. I'd bet that Wallace explains perfectly and insightfully what I've spent months and thousands of words trying to figure out.

I don't want to get into the "mind" of Daniel Tosh, but I'm skeptical that it was even that sophisticated. From what I've read, he was spontaneously responding to a heckler while on stage, so I doubt he had "wouldn't it be funny if she got raped by a bunch of guys" prepared in advance. (Unlike the radio pundits, who carefully craft just the right offensive phrase that'll Stick It To The Lib'rals). I'd bet that Tosh's lizard brain thought process was nothing more than "INSULT HECKLER. JOKES WORK ON IRONY. SPEAK NOW."

Obviously your brain has to be wired a certain way if the first thing you think of to belittle a female audience member is "gang rape." But trying to put it into some larger cultural context seems as pointless to me as putting thought into 8-year-olds' playground taunts. It's not like, say, Andrew Dice Clay or other shock comics who were every bit as stupid, but who crafted their stuff deliberately to provoke some shallow anti-PC reaction. They were playing to the crowd of dumb people who say stuff like "How come there isn't a White History Month?" Tosh is playing to the crowd of dumb people whose understanding of comedy began and ended with the Truly Tasteless Jokes books we got in elementary school along with our Weekly Readers.

I'm still not sure I agree with DFW's quote entirely, though. I started to try to explain exactly why, but I think it'd be better served by a separate blog post. (Although I don't have a life, I do have a job right now). Basically, though: does someone's right to be offended take precedence over whether or not I intended to offend? If someone says, "That offended me," is it insensitive to respond with anything other than silence or a full apology? Blowhards complain about "PC Thought Police" and the like, but then you see a shitstorm like the Penny Arcade "dickwolves" debacle play out, and all of a sudden smart people who should know better are acting like characters in The World According To Garp.

Which is the other reason this topic drifted into a Jezebel article and other semi-feminist topics: the geek & nerd crowd generally has a lot of problems treating women with respect. So I can see why some women in particular would feel like there's some bizarre pressure on them to establish "geek credibility," when of course, they shouldn't feel any need at all to defend themselves. And then of course that adds a little layer of complexity to everything — if you complain about nerds being mocked, I'm going to say, "Get over it. We're supposed to be able to make fun of ourselves." If you complain about the representation of women (or like in the blog post, gay people), it's not as clear cut.