this post was submitted on 12 Apr 2024
305 points (97.2% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35735 readers
920 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 179 points 7 months ago (3 children)

In the United States, parody is protected by the First Amendment as a form of expression.

[–] [email protected] 110 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

Yuuuup, and a lot of times the people that get parodied love it. It’s like fuck me! We made it to the point where South Park makes fun of us. Only person I know of that got pissed was Kanye but fuck that guy anyways

[–] [email protected] 86 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The best thing is he apparently actually didn't get the fish sticks joke which, if true, makes Parker and Stone the best satirists of all time on merits.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

what was the joke meaning, i don't watch south park

[–] [email protected] 35 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Say it out loud.

"Do you like fish sticks?"

'Yeah

"Then you're a gay fish."

Kanye in the show didn't get it and thought people were calling him a gay fish. So if real Kanye didn't get the joke, and got mad because he thought South Park was calling him a gay fish... that's just incredible.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Are you by chance kanye west? In all seriousness it's because fish sticks sounds like fish dicks

[–] [email protected] 17 points 7 months ago (4 children)

Oooooooooooh... I might not be Kanye, but it seems I am of similar intelligence.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

Nah I think it's overthinking the thing while it's a juvenile joke. I got it after I thought about it a lot

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

Sounds like someone likes putting fish sticks in their mouth...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

You would probably get a kick out of the episode after this.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Isn't that still a roundabout way of calling him a gay fish?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

If you're 8 years old then sure.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Why else would "fish dicks" be funny?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The recipents reaction is a jab at their lack of self awareness

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

I don't see how self awareness has to do with anything here

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

Fish sticks... Fish's dicks...

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The kids came up with the joke:

“Do you like fish sticks?” (Pronounced like “fish dicks”)

Then, when the person said yes, they’d call them a gay fish.

The joke becomes a meme, but Kanye West doesn’t get it, despite having it explained to him. He thinks the joke is directed at him personally, and does actual scientific research to find out why people think he is a gay fish. At the end of the episode, he accepts his fate, and decides to live as a gay fish (complete with a catchy autotuned song.)

[–] [email protected] 45 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Nirvana famously said they knew they had made it when Weird Al did a parody of Smells Like Teen Spirit.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months ago (2 children)

If I recall, Weird Al tries to get permission for all his parodies too, just further adding to the point that people mostly are good with that kind of attention.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago (2 children)

That he does. The only snafu he had was with Coolio for Gangster’s Paradise. Apparently the label said yes but didn’t actually check with Coolio and he wasn’t happy about it. Weird Al apologized for the mixup and they made peace with it later. Weird Al said the only star that has consistently turned him down was Prince, who didn’t find the whole parody thing funny.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Many years later, Coolio said that he regrets his reaction and that he realizes it's an honor to get a Weird Al parody.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

That warms my old cynical heart just a little

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

~~Didn't Paul McCartney refuse as well with the live and let die cover: "chicken pot pie".~~

~~Or is that just a joke I took too serious?~~

Edit 2: ~~Never mind. The cover exists. Maybe he just didn't appreciate it~~

Edit 3: it's just not officially released according to wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_Pot_Pie

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Yep that one is true as well. Paul is a vegetarian and didn’t want a song about non vegetarian food. He didn’t have a problem with parody in general, just that specific instance. Geez, I know way too much trivia about Weird Al :)

Edit: the song was created just never released.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_Pot_Pie

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I'm pretty sure Prince wouldn't give him permission.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

George Clooney liked the show so much he wanted to be on the show but they rejected his request initially since they don't let famous people play themselves. They in turn offered him the non-speaking role of Stan's gay dog. Clooney showed up and gave a full performance of barks.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago

George Clooney was instrumental in getting the show made in the first place. He liked their second Christmas short so much that he made hundreds of copies and gave them to all his friends, which helped them pitch the show.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

He also got a speaking role later as the doctor in the movie.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And most of the ones who arent ok with it are aware of the "Streisand effect" and know that their best course of action is to either ignore it or pretend they are ok with it and wait for everyone to move on.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

The Mormon church did this when the play Book of Mormon came out! Also amazing play if you have not seen it please do!!!! There is a reason it won a Tony!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And Kathleen "The Force Is Female" Kennedy.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

And Prince Harry & Meghan

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I have to doubt a lot of people love being parodied on that show. They are pretty harsh.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That's a very limited scope ruling.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago

In terms of parody as a whole, sure, but in cases that involve trademarks it's huge. They completely killed the test that was set by the prior precedent case.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

It should be noted that that really only applies to citizens being protected from the government (and primarily was created to protect the printing presses and media from the government). There is no legal precedent to indicate that it would apply between citizens.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago

There comes an issue when a private citizen seeks to use the engines of state to punish those whose speech offends them.

It's one thing to withdraw society and business from someone who offends you, quite another to demand that the state crush them for you. Of course, most states will do that to a greater or lesser degree. No state extends an absolute freedom of speech.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

But all kinds of other laws protect citizens from other citizens. You can't hurt them, can't slander them, etcetc so there's really not much most people can do. The most of it is saying "they did a terrible parody of me" and not deal with them anymore.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

That concept doesn't really apply very well here.

The government can't make laws restricting speech(with very limited exceptions) therefore other citizens can't legally go after you for protected speech. They're allowed to tell you you're an asshole, they're allowed to ignore you, but they don't have a court case.