A lot of these friends have around about zero interest in gender issues, and even they have picked up on and been disgusted by it, at various stand-up shows, and on various TV broadcasts.

I’m not sure I have anything that’s actually useful to include in this ‘debate’, except joint irritation and oft-disbelief though.. so… GRARGH!

Depending on how it was constructed, a joke about blaming mess in a loo on a disabled person could be deeply self-deprecating- pointing out the flaws of the maker of the mess and their inability to own up to their actions, and their shame at passing the buck. Or it could be a damning indictment of the person who would believe that the mess was made by someone disabled rather than someone able-bodied but drunk/nasty/thoughtless.

Or it could be a cheap shot at people with disabilities. I’ve honestly seen circuit comics do the same joke (not THAT joke, but equivalents) all three ways depending on the audience.

Also I have a deep fear of where the “avoid this subject as it may trigger flashbacks” argument leads.

I love some of the good shock-jokers (Pryor, Bill Hicks) but they’re so full of humanity and *an actual message* that they never grated the way half the examples you give above do.

Aiming the anger ‘up’ or ‘down’ is a brilliant way of putting it. My example would be Tim Minchin. His song “Some people have it worse than I” covers bad things happening to thalidomide children, policemen in Iraq… but it’s done to ridicule people with 1st-world problems. You can include the targets which will make people gasp, but still aim the anger up (in this case at entitled whiners). His comedy has never come across as cheaply using minorities, and you nail why: empathy and warmth. Empathy means putting yourself in the same group, not setting up a wall and laughing at them from the other side. (For contrast, Jim Davidson.)