Ship of Fools: Following St Onan

Thread: Following St Onan Board: The Laugh Judgment / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=61;t=000043

Posted by Simon (# 1) on :

Joke submitted by HAPPY_Squirrel:

Q: How does Jesus masturbate?

A: [Mime: place the palm of your hand over your groin, then move your hand away from and towards yourself, as if you were using the hole through your palm.]

[ 16. July 2005, 18:13: Message edited by: Simon ]

Posted by Simon (# 1) on :

As far as we know, this joke was coined by a Danish comedian, Uffe Holm. Here's a newspaper report about it:

quote:
Here in Denmark, comedian Uffe Holm was reported to the police for blasphemy, after he told a joke about Jesus on the youth programme "Boogie" on DR [Denmark Radio], in connection with the "Humour about Aids" campaign. In the joke, Jesus masturbated through the holes in his hands and offered to do the same to God with his feet.

The joke led to Morten Meisner, the parish priest of Skarrild in mid-Jutland, to collect 15,000 danish kroner in a campaign called "Emergency aid for Uffe", so that the comedian could be taken on an educational tour of Israel.

However, Uffe Holm recently dismissed this (the money will instead go to AIDS victims), but he has taken the joke out of his material. "I trod in the spinach. Jesus hung on the cross for our sake, and it arouses very strong feelings amongst those who are very Christian. But I do think that people overreacted. When you live by telling jokes, it is also important to make people laugh at something that they don't normally laugh about, and you happen to break your neck once in a while. But it does need to be tried," says Uffe Holm.

From the 'Urban' newspaper, Tuesday 12th July 2005

Posted by Simon (# 1) on :

Excuse the triple post...

Just for the record (since I'm down as having posted this): I find the joke gruesome and cruel. In the way it's told here, it's not really a joke at all, more a bizarre and horrible idea. I once interviewed Richard Ingrams of Private Eye and asked him what he thought about the final scene in The Life of Brian, where Brian and others sing, "Always look on the bright side of life" from their crosses. He said: "If you make fun of the crucifixion, you are making fun of someone dying a painful death. Whether he is God or not is immaterial."

I get the same feeling here... I don't think I'd make this sort of remark to a friend who had a gaping wound in their wrist after an accident. And I'd be surprised if anyone found it laugh-out-loud funny (although I'm interested to know if anyone reading this does). For me, this easily crosses the line from humour into offence.

Posted by SteveTom (# 23) on :

This made me physically cringe.

I don't know whether "offended" is the right word, but it makes me feel more uncomfortable than any other religious joke.

It's a powerful combination of several elements:
the suffering of Christ on the cross;
the juxtaposition of that with not just sex, but wanking, which I think brings in an element of shame;
and the graphic physicality of the image, the physical sensations that it brings to mind.

Mix together and you have sacrilegious alchemy.

Posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf (# 2252) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Simon:
"If you make fun of the crucifixion, you are making fun of someone dying a painful death. Whether he is God or not is immaterial."

Oh for goodness sake, that's not what the Pythons were doing. They were making fun of peoples' reactions to suffering - from the cheery typically British 'keep your pecker up' attitude of the song down to the useless resistance organisation who pass a resolution and give Brian a round of applause. And it's bloody hilarious.

Posted by SteveTom (# 23) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Simon:
I once interviewed Richard Ingrams of Private Eye and asked him what he thought about the final scene in The Life of Brian, where Brian and others sing, "Always look on the bright side of life" from their crosses. He said: "If you make fun of the crucifixion, you are making fun of someone dying a painful death. Whether he is God or not is immaterial."

I completely disagree. I don't see why making fun of a form of punishment that hasn't been used (round here) of 1700 years is in bad taste.

The Life of Brian, like several million cartoons, also has jokes about a man hanging in chains from the wall of a dungeon. This is also a horribly barbaric punishment in reality, and I might not tell jokes about it to a hostage who has just been released form a Lebanese jail, but I don't see that that makes the joke itself tasteless.

Surely who Jesus was is precisely what makes this joke what it is.

Posted by SteveTom (# 23) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
Oh for goodness sake, that's not what the Pythons were doing. They were making fun of peoples' reactions to suffering.

I think that's a bit naive.

Though perhaps this is not a subject for this thread.

Posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf (# 2252) on :

Well, it's the response some of the Pythons themselves gave to accusations of blasphemy. But no, that's not the topic at hand (as it were). The joke is not particularly funny, and not particularly offensive.

(I have a theory that jokes trading on the associating Jesus with sex are found uncomfortable and/ or funny because of a deeply embedded cultural docetism. But hey...)

Posted by SteveTom (# 23) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
I have a theory that jokes trading on the associating Jesus with sex are found uncomfortable and/ or funny because of a deeply embedded cultural docetism. But hey...

Hey indeed. Quite agree. But I think it's more to do with Christianity's long history of erotophobia, which is why jokes about horny nuns etc. have always been so popular.

Posted by GreyFace (# 4682) on :

I was waiting for the punch line, then I realised I'd reached the end of the post, and that was it.

I can't see a joke there at all.

Just to continue the tangent, I always thought the Python song was about resignation and getting on with it being the only possible response to the recognition of the futility of life for those who can't bring themselves to believe in anything more.

But I usually read too much into these things [Razz]

Posted by Ariel (# 58) on :

I think this may be where I drop out. I haven't found many of the jokes on this board funny, but I wouldn't say all were offensive. This one made me feel physically sick. If there are more like this, I'd really rather not know.

People have differing reactions to jokes but I've never found the idea of pain at all funny. This is too much. It's sick.

Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :

Well, I saw it coming, this one... [Big Grin]

There are a number of problems with this joke, and on different levels.

Again, of course, sexuality: The Son of God having a certain 'problem' and acting accordingly, 'as one does'. (After all, he's one of us, eh?)
One of the central mysteries of Christianity, Jesus' death on a cross, as a redemptive deed - and as a horrible sign of his suffering, visible to all, the holes in his hands, feet and his side.
Thirdly, from a linguistic point, the wording of the response seems very unlucky, and doesn't really match with the question.

Now, interestingly, I quite seem to 'like' some of the jokes about above holes. While they will be very offensive often, they do also touch the deepest mystery of what we believe. This part of the joke (or any holey one) I find painful, but in a good way: a reminder of how Jesus was/is unique, and that he dies for our sins.

In other words, and as I learnt early on in my Christian life, it was us, it was indeed myself as well who helped nail him to that cross. In that sense, I feel personally touched by that part of the joke. Yet as I believe I have come to terms with Jesus' offering (if you ever can...), I can only accept it and be eternally grateful for it. Again, it has me cringe, however I feel I need to be reminded of this gruesome truth every now and then.

Secondly, sexuality - a less intense taboo, I find; wouldn't be too horrible, especially in the expression of masturbation - the pedophile priests jokes (please see comments there) are incomparably worse because a) they involve more than one person, and b) may be rather realistic and in that definitely extremely cruel and nasty. The thought of Jesus 'needing to relieve sexual tension' looks a bit absurd to me, although he will have been tempted there as well, as in any other area of human life; this as such is not very offensive to me.

Thirdly and finally, however, the poor quality of the wording more or less ruins the joke: Why jump from the subject 'Jesus' in the question to 'you' in the answer? This turns it into a lenghty joke, and makes it painful to read, not so much due its content than to its form.

Is Jesus using my hand to jack off? But then, it appears to be my groin, and I move towards and away from myself...? Oh, pleeeeze... [Disappointed]

To conclude, this joke deserves to be shot because it is lamely told. Call the RSPCJ, and have it put to sleep. Or try a different wording.

Thumbs down, in that order: i) for poor structure, ii) having the Son of God masturbate, which I don't feel he's in need of really [Roll Eyes]

, iii) for using The Holey Argument - which actually could be justified for poking fun, but needs to be devised a bit more expertly.

Posted by Newman's Own (# 420) on :

I found this joke revolting and not funny in the least. The agony of the crucifixion is far too vivid in my mind to picture Jesus (apparently after the resurrection!) finding the marks of the nails as a substitute vagina in which to masturbate. It made me cringe.

On another note - I rather like Monty Python. In the Life of Brian, the entire crucifixion segment was a total farce. ("One cross each!") The characters on the crosses with "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" presented such total absurdity - and were clearly in no pain whatever - that my sense of the ridiculous could engage with this. Had the Pythons shown anyone in the agony of crucifixion, and those around them singing the same song, it would have been horrifying.

Posted by TrudyTrudy (I say unto you) (# 5647) on :

Having said in the "About the Laugh Judgement" thread that I thought this joke (before it was posted) was the most offensive of the lot, I naturally voted that way. I have to say though that this is a particularly badly-worded execution of the joke; it would probably be even more offensive to me if it were stated more clearly and wittily, because it's more likely that people would laugh, and, as someone else said, this image not only is completely not funny but actually makes me feel ill.

Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :

I think the 'answer' part of the joke is meant to be a direction for the joke-teller to mime - not words for him to speak. If you see it in that way, the effect is a lot clearer.

It's still a lame joke, though. There's no wit. I have a very high tolerance for puerile humour, but this one is all obscenity and no funniness.

[ETA: also, I was disappointed by the thread title. A joke about a St Onan sounded promising]

[ 15. July 2005, 13:54: Message edited by: Eliab ]

Posted by Simon (# 1) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Thirdly and finally, however, the poor quality of the wording more or less ruins the joke: Why jump from the subject 'Jesus' in the question to 'you' in the answer? This turns it into a lenghty joke, and makes it painful to read, not so much due its content than to its form.

I've edited the joke to show that the answer is a physical action, rather than verbal. Hope that makes it clearer.

Sorry about the thread title, Eliab. I think you'll find that St Onan is the patron saint of Kleenex tissues.

[ 15. July 2005, 14:16: Message edited by: Simon ]

Posted by Zeke (# 3271) on :

When I stumbled across this one on another thread, I found myself actually rather shocked. This would seem to be off-limits to anybody. I still find it pretty sick, and extremely offensive, not to mention adolescent-style.

I have to admit that it is funny, though it didn't make me laugh out loud, for the absolutely ludicrous image brought into the mind, and the inevitable idea that it actually could (I imagine) represent a rather efficient method, given the circumstances. Ugh. It's still very, very sick. And it took me a while to get accustomed enough to the Life of Brian scene to see what was funny about it, too, even though I had laughed a lot during the rest of it. The first time I saw that I felt it ruined the end of the film, though I can't honestly think of much else they could have done.

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

An unpleasant joke, and if shown it, rather than reading it, I doubt I would get it very quickly. I have this image of watching someone do the mime and having to to use my imagination to work out what it means, and not really wanting to go there. That's not very well explained, is it! Children will sometimes say things like 'listen to the swishy noise I can make with the jelly in my mouth.' Horrid and yucky. Too intimately physical. So is this joke.

And sort of offensive. I did give it a 2. These jokes are getting 'worse.'

Posted by Suze (# 5639) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
While they will be very offensive often, they do also touch the deepest mystery of what we believe. This part of the joke (or any holey one) I find painful, but in a good way: a reminder of how Jesus was/is unique, and that he dies for our sins.

I think this is the reason I find this joke incredibly offensive, that Christ died such a violent death is the so fundamental to my faith to see both Him and His sacrifice portrayed in this way makes me both sick and quite angry.

I can honestly say this is the first one I have found really offensive.

Posted by themanwiththegingerhair (# 9691) on :

Well I am the only person (so far) to give it a mark above 2 for humour: it made me chortle.

Personally, even though the joke revolves around the hole in his hand I was able to separate that from the suffering of the crucifixion for the purposes of the joke. Probably, in the same way many others were able to see the funny side of The Life of Brian. Brian wasn’t suffering in the film. Jesus is not suffering here (nor was he in the bible after his resurrection).

It also plays on the questions of Jesus’ fullness as a man. He was making sperm, so how did he get rid of it?

Posted by starbelly (# 25) on :

A very similar idea was used on a Channel 4 quiz/humour thing last night. They were talking about who would make a good best mans speech, and Jesus was one of the options. One of the c-list comedians suggested (visually) that he would not be able to hold the rings becuase of the holes in his hands. I laughed, but it was of course without the sexual referance and it works as a visual joke.

Posted by Sarkycow (# 1012) on :

I saw that show! It was very very funny, the way the guy made the joke [Big Grin]

I think, for me, the 'best man' version worked better than the 'masturbating' version. Probably because it is a visual joke, and relies on you seeing and understanding. Reading what was written, then translating it into actions lost the moment for me.

Why is it funny? Good question. I'll think on that.

Why is it not offensive? Because I don't tend to assume the Jesus from JokeLand (JL) is the RL Jesus who suffered so horribly. So JL Jesus has holes in his hands, and this is a characteristic which can be played with, and used in humourous ways.

I'm not sure if I'm explaining very well. I'll think on it more.

Sarkycow

Posted by Midnight Scholar (# 9112) on :

This struck me as another of those primary-school 'dirty' jokes, not offensive at all (too absurd) but then not funny either.

Divine Outlaw Dwarf has a serious point though:

quote:
(I have a theory that jokes trading on the associating Jesus with sex are found uncomfortable and/ or funny because of a deeply embedded cultural docetism. But hey...)

I agree entirely, Divine. IMO crypto-docetism has been the plague of the church since the earliest times, and has led to all kinds of distortions and abuses. But ymmv of course [Smile]

Posted by PerkyEars (# 9577) on :

quote:
(I have a theory that jokes trading on the associating Jesus with sex are found uncomfortable and/ or funny because of a deeply embedded cultural docetism. But hey...)

Definately. I came across a fan fic site the other day that had links to bad Jesus/Judas slash, and worse. There was one story where Jesus meets a WWJD bracelet salesman, and they get stoned and have sex, before Jesus runs of with his wallet. Being unaware that this kind of stuff was out there (naive, I know), I found it shocking, gross, offensive and horribly funny, in an "oh God, I've got to bleach my eyeballs!" kind of way.

It was that kind of naughty laughter I hadn't felt since I was about 10, when anything related to sex was taboo and hysterical, which it itself was a bit disturbing - I didn't know I still had that kind of childish sense of humour in there. I suppose as an adult once you've got your head round a lot of things theres nothing to trigger it off reguarly. Oddly enough I had the same reaction to the idea of pouring communion wine down peoples underpants that appeared in a recent thread. Being made to think or imagine something you deeply feel you shouldn't even be thinking about causes uncontrollable giggles I think.

*shudders* I feel vaguely soiled and guilty even telling folks about that fic, but it was way more offensive and funny than anything thats been on this thread - although this joke comes closest.

I think breaking taboos is funny, and Jesus and sex is taboo. Jokes about, say, child abuse differ because thats not a taboo subject in itself - its finding it funny thats taboo.

Despite all of the above, I didn't find this joke that funny - more gross. I think its the imagined physical sensation of having something pulled through nail holes that made me go [Projectile]

as I'm a bit squeamish - as well as everything thats been said about why a focus on the wounds of the cruxifiction is just not funny.

Posted by themanwiththegingerhair (# 9691) on :

Do you really think that docetism is deeply embedded in our culture? I would find that surprising.

I never found this joke offensive so maybe I am not the best judge, but I would have thought that any offence was due to people not wanting to think about Jesus in a way that is anything other than Divine.

It is sort of taking his name in vain. Whether he was of flesh or not is irrelevant surely?
[Confused]

Posted by m.t_tomb (# 3012) on :

I once 'saw' a similar 'joke'. The person said:

'What's this?' as they mimed a biting motion against each palm of their hands.

'Jesus biting his nails.'

I hated it then and I hate it now. But not as much as the one this thread is about.

[ 19. July 2005, 16:26: Message edited by: m.t_tomb ]

Posted by Pax Romana (# 4653) on :

This one made me cringe. It is offensive, blasphemous, insensitive and everything else.

A joke like this about anybody is insensitive, but when it is the Son of God being insulted in this manner it is just plain indescribably awful.

Pax Romana

Posted by Amos (# 44) on :

I 'm with those who found this one viscerally horrible, and not funny at all. And yet I found the 'Popular Man' joke funny. It must be the grotesque attempt to find humour in mutilation--like the Chapman brothers sticking cartoon animal heads on Goya's mutilated peasants.

Posted by Esmeralda (# 582) on :

I found this utterly revolting, and not at all funny, for all the same reasons people have given above.

On the 'Life of Brian' final scene, I found it the only offensive thing in the whole film, because when the camera panned back and revealed hundreds of crosses ranged in rows, it reminded me of Flanders fields. And I am just old enough to have known someone who fought in the First World War.

Posted by rewboss (# 566) on :

I don't think this joke is blasphemous -- in any case, I think that's a judgement bandied around too much whenever religion is involved, and it's not really for me to say what offends God and what doesn't, just as I don't tell you what you should and should not feel insulted by.

I do, however, think it's in poor taste and not very funny. It "works" because it brings together two taboo elements -- sex (in a form that some people consider deviant) and religion. Its only purpose is to shock, and as such it's a terribly cheap form of joke. If you laugh at the joke, it's either out of acute embarrassment or a form of schadenfreude, depending on whether you're the religious type or not.

Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on :

Apparently the more offensive the better for me. This is one of the few jokes that actually made me laugh out loud. At work.

Posted by The Lady of the Lake (# 4347) on :

You don't need to be a Christian to find this joke stupidly revolting. If it were about a victim of torture in Iraq, for example, it wouldn't be considered funny at all. (And if it were about Muhammed, you'd have to run from a potential fatwa).

Nuff said.

[Roll Eyes]

Posted by OliviaG (# 9881) on :

I'm afraid I laughed uproariously. One of my friends (Catholic) laughed until she cried. On the bus. Pray for us. OliviaG.

Posted by Halo (# 6933) on :

I don't consider myself to be an especially naive person, but I just didn't 'get' this joke untill I had read a few posts on. Perhaps it was the aforementioned poor wording that made it difficult to understand.

When I 'clicked' I experienced a moment of revulsion. [Projectile]

How can anyone find this joke funny? It's maccabre and base.

Yuk.

[ 19. August 2005, 11:55: Message edited by: Halo ]

Posted by wyngdh (# 10143) on :

I found the 'joke' in extremely poor taste. In fact, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a joke.

Posted by mannchildr (# 10458) on :

I absolutely love anything that makes fun of the absurdity of organized religion. It is so funny to read the postings of the Christians and their professed outrage at pain and suffering, in light of the fact that the christians didn't seem too concerned with the inquisitions, witch hunts and persecution of perceived Pagans and Heretics over the past 1700 years.
The ignorance of christians, who are usually on the bottom rung of the intellectual ladder of life, only makes their outrage more laughable. When you are ignorant of history and place all your eggs in the basket of faith you open yourself up to ridicule.
Most intelligent people know that Jesus never existed as a historical person. The Jesus story is allegorical and was created by mere men to give the people of the middle east their own personal counterpart to the pagan gods.
I think that christians must have been responsible for the term POMPOUS ASS. They are so bigoted and intolerant of other religions and so sure that they are right and everone else is wrong. They are the POMPOUS ASSES of the civilized world and deserving of the most irreverant and cutting humor. Can I hear an AMEN!

Posted by Janine (# 3337) on :

I notice some Christians have good taste.

I notice some Christians know how to post so that people can read what they write without a headache.

When the Pagans send me an 18-wheeler trailer full of baby supplies and MREs cleaning supplies and mattresses for my Rita-flooded neighbors downstream, I might entertain something of what you say, Apprentice Mannchildr.

Posted by mannchildr (# 10458) on :

In response to Janine and her 18 wheeler bringing supplies and MRE's to the victims of Rita. Are you suggesting that only Christians come to the aid of those in need. First of all I am not a pagan. I'm a proud atheist who contributed to the Red Cross and to the Humane Society to rescue animals and donated our second home to New Orleans victims. Is it safe to say that you made your donation to Pat Robertson who will skim the cream for himself and throw a few crumbs to the less fortunate and then expect them to be so indebted that they will go to church on Sunday and have their few remaining resources sucked from them.

Posted by Janine (# 3337) on :

No, I am sure lots of Wiccans and Pagans and Atheists and even (*shudder*) Lawyers and Democrats contributed diapers and baby food and mops and brooms and bleach and beds to those trucks we'll be helping to unload. Surely it wasn't all Christians.

Re: Pat Robertson, I have no idea how extravagantly he may live. I'm sure all atheists are humble people who don't live extravagantly on questionably-gotten gains.

But it's a never-mind to me, because my contributions to the Katrina/Rita cause are hands-on, not a check to either a TV personality, or to an organization that may or may not do with the money what I would.

And if I were too far away to enjoy the slimy seabottom mud on my own two feet as I try to help these people, I would be responsible and do my research re: where my money went.

And now, back to the St. Onan thread...

I really would like to see some good jokes about onanism.

Posted by mannchildr (# 10458) on :

This is an old one, but the best I can do. This is for you Jasmine. 98% of all people masturbate - the other 2% are liars. (*Groan*)

Posted by Duo Seraphim (# 256) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mannchildr:
I absolutely love anything that makes fun of the absurdity of organized religion. It is so funny to read the postings of the Christians and their professed outrage at pain and suffering, in light of the fact that the christians didn't seem too concerned with the inquisitions, witch hunts and persecution of perceived Pagans and Heretics over the past 1700 years.
The ignorance of christians, who are usually on the bottom rung of the intellectual ladder of life, only makes their outrage more laughable. When you are ignorant of history and place all your eggs in the basket of faith you open yourself up to ridicule.
Most intelligent people know that Jesus never existed as a historical person. The Jesus story is allegorical and was created by mere men to give the people of the middle east their own personal counterpart to the pagan gods.
I think that christians must have been responsible for the term POMPOUS ASS. They are so bigoted and intolerant of other religions and so sure that they are right and everone else is wrong. They are the POMPOUS ASSES of the civilized world and deserving of the most irreverant and cutting humor. Can I hear an AMEN!

Hello mannchildr.

When you signed up here, you also agreed to abide by the 10 Commandments of this site. If you want to rant about Christianity go to the Hell board. If you want to discuss some of the points you've made above, try Purgatory. You may want to try supporting what you say with some evidence if you go there, though

Otherwise I'm not entirely sure what your point is - given that the Laugh Judgment board is about religious jokes and we are Christians capable of laughing at ourselves.

Do have a look about the boards - I think you'll find the term "Pompous Ass" doesn't apply to the general run of posters here. We also have some regular posters here, who happen to be either neo Pagan or Wiccan. We also have a number of atheists or unchurched people too.

It happens that we aren't accepting any more jokes - including on the debate threads. Discussion is fine - you might try it, sometime.

Duo Seraphim, Laugh Judgment Host

[ 27. September 2005, 05:01: Message edited by: Duo Seraphim ]

Posted by starbelly (# 25) on :

quote:
Originally posted by mannchildr:
This is an old one, but the best I can do. This is for you Jasmine. 98% of all people masturbate - the other 2% are liars. (*Groan*)

We already established this on this thread in Hell. Please go there for all your masturbation needs [Big Grin]

Neil

Posted by mannchildr (# 10458) on :

To Duo Seraphim and Janine,
You are correct in repremanding me for my rant. My apologies. I will do the most severe of penance which is live with my embarassment for being out of line. Thanks for putting me in line

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0