Celebs getting attacked!

[Tholl]

Pretty simple really. Post your favorite videos of a celeb getting attacked or injured by someone.

First up. Danzig getting knocked out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfD7agP1yxw

[Soisoisoi]

Somehow I don't see how a thread of people(yes, celebs are people) getting attacked is allowed...

(Not that I don't enjoy Bieber being hit in the face with a bottle, I just doubt it would be appropriate here.)

[whyusocrazy]

Somehow I don't see how a thread of people(yes, celebs are people) getting attacked is allowed...

zzz... yeah lets talk about politics or your religious views all day long. why censor in the off topic forums?

[Darkdruidelf]

Berlesconi (or however you spell his name) getting hit in the face with a statue.

[reverendball]

as much as i love watching Bush dodging shoes

this threads not gonna last very long

[Relentless]

zzz... yeah lets talk about politics or your religious views all day long. why censor in the off topic forums?

Because a discussion or debate is different than asking to show people getting injured for your entertainment. Do people even think before attempting to make a point or compare things these days? Seriously.

[Ferrair]

Should have started the topic with this.

[Deleted]

This. This times infinity.

[Willelm]

Because a discussion or debate is different than asking to show people getting injured for your entertainment. Do people even think before attempting to make a point or compare things these days? Seriously.

Have you ever watched Oops TV or American's funniest videos? 9/10 of that is people getting injured somehow.

You ever laughed at a movie where a guy gets kicked/punched/mauled in the balls? Sure you have, 'cause everyone has.

Jackass the Movie.

So. Yeah. It is entertainment. Want to debate further?

Don't like it then avoid the thread.

And ON TOPIC of this thread, probably Ashlee Simpson practically falling off the Mickey-D's counter while drunk. We all know the injury she sustained pulling that stunt wasn't purely physical, though.

[Yavannie]

I would post a video of the Swedish king getting pied (someone throwing a pie or cake in someone's face) because it was a fairly harmless prank (even though it cost the kid dearly), but I think the court has purged the web of videos and pics of that :/

[Howard Moon]

Whoa, Glen Danzig got owned.

[Deleted]

Justin Bieber water bottle incident was lololol².

W. dodging shoes was epic.

Can't really remember anything else that was harmless but hilarious.

Edit : the prescott egg incident where he just blew his top on the egg thrower. Remember him saying he thought it was more than an egg lol, so "self defence" ...

[Xenryusho]

Because a discussion or debate is different than asking to show people getting injured for your entertainment. Do people even think before attempting to make a point or compare things these days? Seriously.

Do you think? Typically religion and politics cause a great deal of distress and maliciousness. Given that a thread of lighthearted humor (of course allow me to define lighthearted as LH1: Without distress or graveness that would in turn cause intrinsic pain) like this avoids personal opinion, personal attacks to members (assuming no celebrity misinterpretations a video of them being posted being a "personal attack"), or dark and depressing overtone I can't see why you object to this. If the thread stays on topic to videos such as that being posted the creation of this thread would more then presumably be a good thing. Considering with a Justicism approach these celebrities need the negative utils of humiliation to balance out the universal justice level.

Furthermore you make the point "injured for your entertainment". Have you never been entertained by a novel in which a person (this would be easier if you specified in what sense you meant person) had gotten injured or died? Perhaps not by that part of the novel but one in which it appeared. Religious doctrine, movies, televison, radio, certain work situations. The sense that injury or pain for another is in something that entertains you or I is normal when concerned with the global acceptance. In addition as with my earlier argument the moral implications with many utilitarian points of view (Hedonistic, Hedonovitalistic, Vitalistic, Justice Act to name just a few) all support the moral acceptance to this. And if not from a Utilitarian point of view what rational sense do you view this as a lower form of entertainment then a discussion that may very well bring a lower amount of good then the alternative (IE this thread).

[whyusocrazy]

Because a discussion or debate is different than asking to show people getting injured for your entertainment. Do people even think before attempting to make a point or compare things these days? Seriously.

its already happened.. consider it journalism like julian assange. you really going to hide the truth cause you dont like it? we deserve to know what goes on everywhere at all times right?

[Kawlisse]

I just love this one, not because he was attacked, but just by how well he handled it ! gotta give props to the governator on this !




wheres my bacon now ! I want my Bacon

[Relentless]

People are awfully quick to jump to defend what amounts to taking enjoyment from someone else's injury. Dress it up as applied ethical theory, journalism, or whatever other excuse works for you in your mind, but it's still taking satisfaction or enjoyment from someone else getting hurt.

My post answered a question. You can attempt to compare a discussion of politics or religion to laughing at people getting hurt, but attempting to frame it as lighthearted and inside some contrived set of definitions is simply an attempt at justification for taking enjoyment from someone else's misfortune. You can have a political or religious discussion without someone getting hurt. You can't have a thread like this without it, so your comparison is flawed at best.

No, I don't laugh at or enjoy situations where real people are hurt. Fiction, where the situation is manufactured to further a story and no "real people" are harmed in the process, is fine.

That said, I do at least appreciate the attempt at actual debate and discussion. This thread is now not completely without merit, so kudos for that...lol

[Bitlovin]

show people getting injured for your entertainment.

Pretty sure that watching strangers get injured is why the internet was invented. Well, that and porn.

---------- Post added 2011-04-14 at 01:27 PM ----------

some contrived set of definitions is simply an attempt at justification for taking enjoyment from someone else's misfortune.

I don't need justification to enjoy schadenfreude. I enjoy it because it's funny.

[Relentless]

Pretty sure that watching strangers get injured is why the internet was invented. Well, that and porn.

---------- Post added 2011-04-14 at 01:27 PM ----------



I don't need justification to enjoy schadenfreude. I enjoy it because it's funny.

Enjoyment of schadenfreude is also frequently attributed primarily to males with low self-esteem. It also is typically correlated with envy, which explains why people especially like to watch celebrities suffer.

Not that I'm implying that you're some emo guy who secretly wants to be Bieber, but I thought it was relevant given the audience of the forums.

[Deleted]

Needs more Bieber.

[whyusocrazy]

Enjoyment of schadenfreude is also frequently attributed primarily to males with low self-esteem. It also is typically correlated with envy, which explains why people especially like to watch celebrities suffer.

Not that I'm implying that you're some emo guy who secretly wants to be Bieber, but I thought it was relevant given the audience of the forums.

cite your reference for your enlightened opinion. i think you are the one with low self-esteem. probably always picked on in life and this bring back bad memories you thought you suppressed. now just let us have our fun and take your crap political/moral views elsewhere.