Who else do you think I mean when I say “the devil?”
We have met the monster, and he is us.
11 Likes
Savage. Petty. I love it.
8 Likes
One of my favorite bits of Good Omens is both of the main characters (one a demon and one an angel) got commendations for things they had nothing to with. Sometimes for the same thing.
11 Likes
And yet the number of people willing to take him on pro bono…
Fuck, people. At least the original ones were paid.
10 Likes
The devil doesn’t have advocates but he does have accomplices.
11 Likes
“Advocate of the Devil” or “Devil’s Advocate”).
A popular title given to one of the most important officers of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, established in 1587, by Sixtus V, to deal juridically with processes of beatification and canonization. His official title is Promoter of the Faith (Promotor Fidei) . His duty requires him to prepare in writing all possible arguments, even at times seemingly slight, against the raising of any one to the honours of the altar. The interest and honour of the Church are concerned in preventing any one from receiving those honours whose death is not juridically proved to have been "precious in the sight of God.
John Paul II restricted the role of the Promotor Fidei, which made the canonization of Mother Theresa possible, despite Christopher Hitchens’s best efforts.
A good Devil’s advocate will earnestly point to flaws in ones argument-- but there aren’t many of those sort left these days. Perhaps they’ve reverted to form.
9 Likes
That is such a flimsy straw man that the real Devil would be embarrassed for you advocating for him.
Both of those things would be considered very offensive to a lot of people. And there would be people who either think its funny, or are meaning to cause offense. Just like people who wear blackface. So what is your point? All three are socially taboo in most cases.
7 Likes
I don’t think the Neil Diamond remake is an improvement on the concept.
Laurence Olivier was clearly in it for the check.
1 Like
The devil’s advocate has mixed up “forbidden” with “offensive”.
The first amendment generally protects offensive speech such as this. Although, it does not protect you from being called an asshole.
11 Likes
Obligs:
13 Likes
I don’t work for an imaginary underlord, but seriously advocate everyone forsaking pants/slacks in summer months.
Not that this is on topic in the least…
11 Likes
Grazie.
10 Likes
Megyn Kelly and her view that blackface isn’t particularly offensive.
My point, which was rather flimsy because it is difficult to defend blackface, is that offensive outfits are not forbidden. They are simply frowned upon. They are absolutely acceptable as long as you are willing to offend some people.
However, I would argue that most people who wear blackface are being accidentally offensive. While it may be deeply offensive to many people, I think they could make an honest argument that they didn’t see it as being deeply offensive. Wearing an offensive Jesus costume is a different matter. Anyone who wears an offensive Jesus costume is almost certainly doing it with the INTENT of being an asshole.
I think you could make a pretty good argument that intent matters to some degree in these situations. Intent doesn’t absolve you, but it does ratchet up the degree of your crime.
If you disagree that intent matters, then why do we consider intent for most legal matters? Murder, theft, assault? We even consider intent for sporting penalties. Once again, lack of intent doesn’t absolve you from all responsibility, but in normal circumstances it reduces the penalty significantly. If people weren’t intending to be racist, I think a fair argument could be made that society should demonize them and attack them. Maybe we should just tell Dave that he needs to go change costumes?
8 Likes
Ignorance does not excuse bad behavior. You can argue all you want as to why you think something might not be offensive but that doesn’t change the reality that it is, in fact, still offensive regardless of intent.
Now if someone didn’t know something was offensive the best course of action is NOT TO DEFEND IT, it is to own up to their ignorance and learn.
11 Likes
Megyn Kelly has been dropped by the CAA, and NBC is looking to put her in a less damaging role.
6 Likes
I don’t know if htis was brought up in here already. Megyn apologized for defending blackface and she got a standing ovation from her audience. Seriously.
6 Likes
I find it grimly amusing that Kelly herself has apologised and admitted she was wrong, but that some people are still playing devil’s advocate on her behalf.
I’d suggest making her the Today Show’s new weather idiot, but knowing her she’d find a way to victim-blame those affected by hurricanes and tornados and, of course, to deny anthropogenic global warming.
8 Likes
Just take the bullet and fire her. They can buy out her contract, it’s not like NBC is hurting for money and keeping her on likely reflects worse on the network. Then again i don’t watch TV at all so idgaf i guess
8 Likes
