I don't believe that there is such a thing as "offensively lazy". The sets "lazy jokes" and "lazy jokes that have the power to cause offense" are not equivalent.
Have you ever seen somebody appear offended by "Why did the chicken cross the road?""So how about that airline food?""'Knock knock.', 'Who's there?', 'Banana.'""Can I has cheeseburger?"
Those are all lazy jokes. As lazy is as is possible. Yet their laziness lacks the power to offend. No sane person is going to become offended by somebody dredging up some lame 10 year old joke about cats that like to eat cheeseburgers. Wherever you find an example of a "joke that is so lazy, it is offensively lazy", there is without fail a more plausible explanation for the offense the joke elicits.
For example, "Australians are upside-down". Lazy, and makes many people upset. Are they upset because it is lazy? No, they are upset because it is picking on other people (themselves or others).
As an Australian, I don't mind it. Reddit bots which make jokes about it on every comment with the word "Australia" in it ... that's annoying (because bots wear out their welcome pretty fast). But most people like to be joked about.
The only lazy jokes which actually hurt are those which are rubbing salt in a wound.
Right, I think that's what I'm getting at. A lazy joke that is nothing but lazy is nothing more than a standard failure to rise above mediocrity. Repetition can push it into "annoying" very quickly.
If there is some element of rubbing salt in the wound, then the joke can cross into the territory of "offensive", but that can happen with novel jokes as well. Repeating an offensive joke can make it more offensive, since it contributes to an overall atmosphere, but the repetition itself is not what is offensive.
Australia being upside-down might not be the best example of a joke that crosses into offensive territory.
>For example, "Australians are upside-down". Lazy, and makes many people upset. Are they upset because it is lazy?
Are you saying there is no joke so bland, overused, and by the books that it would make people groan and say "that joke is so bad I feel offended you would think I would find that funny"
People don't dislike fart jokes because they're offended by farts. They dislike fart jokes because they're usually bad.
> Are you saying there is no joke so bland, overused, and by the books that it would make people groan and say "that joke is so bad I feel offended you would think I would find that funny"
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. A joke cannot become so lazy that it actually offends people with how lazy it is. In the most extreme case realistically imaginable, a series of sufficiently lazy jokes may anger people if they shelled out a lot of money on tickets to hear jokes, but even then they would not be offended unless there is something besides just lazy jokes at play.
Disliking fart jokes and being offended by fart jokes are two different things. If you are actually offended by fart jokes, chances are it has something to do with the scatological nature of fart jokes and your puritanical mentality towards such things. If you merely dislike fart jokes, chances are it is because you are not twelve.
Are you saying there is no joke so bland, overused, and by the books that it would make people groan and say "that joke is so bad I feel offended you would think I would find that funny"
Yes. I would think the joke is dumb. I can't see how you would be offended by it.
People don't dislike fart jokes because they're offended by farts. They dislike fart jokes because they're usually bad.
Interesting, because I would say the exact opposite. I don't like fart jokes because I don't like to think about farts.
The phrase "offensively lazy" is somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Obviously no one is "offended" by lazy humor the way they are by racist humor, etc. It would more accurately be phrased "annoyingly lazy".
And I agree that this Nickelback joke is annoyingly lazy. Not funny enough for the inconvenience it apparently causes some users.
I think "annoyingly lazy" is a very fair description.
"Offensively lazy" annoys me because I don't think it is tongue-and-cheek much of the time. I think it is a phrase that gets brought into the fray when a joke really was offensive to some people. I never hear it in response to "rated PG" jokes; people who say it probably are offended, but it seems they have misidentified the source of their feeling of offense.
Have you ever seen somebody appear offended by "Why did the chicken cross the road?" "So how about that airline food?" "'Knock knock.', 'Who's there?', 'Banana.'" "Can I has cheeseburger?"
Those are all lazy jokes. As lazy is as is possible. Yet their laziness lacks the power to offend. No sane person is going to become offended by somebody dredging up some lame 10 year old joke about cats that like to eat cheeseburgers. Wherever you find an example of a "joke that is so lazy, it is offensively lazy", there is without fail a more plausible explanation for the offense the joke elicits.
For example, "Australians are upside-down". Lazy, and makes many people upset. Are they upset because it is lazy? No, they are upset because it is picking on other people (themselves or others).