Blatant and thoughtless Racism is alive and well

[clanglee]

Holy shit. I mean. . wow.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/18/new-york-post-cartoon-race

[fartpants]

jesus man, thats outrageous...

[bassman]

Wow.....

Could be really racist, or it could be a blind fuck up by the artist. Maybe he meant the people behind the stimulus are apes instead of making a racist comment? I know....it's a stretch, but sometimes people make racist comments without meaning them that way.

[DubiousComforts]

I believe this is simply a very poor choice of combining two unrelated current events to make a point.

They just don't make political satirists like they used to.

[Chic Freak]

T-shirts portraying Obama as the children's book character Curious George, a monkey, made occasional appearances among audience members at Republican rallies during last year's election campaign, and a similar stuffed doll continues to be advertised online.

ew!

Anyway, I was going to suggest that maybe the cartoonist was making a comment about racist law enforcement, until I read this:


The Post's cartoonist Sean Delonas, meanwhile, has frequently been accused of bigotry: the New York gossip blog Gawker once nicknamed him "the Picasso of prejudice".

The criticism has centred on his portrayals of gay characters, which have linked homosexuality to bestiality.

Dear me.

[clanglee]

Yeah, like I said, thoughtless as all hell. I just can't believe this got through the editors!!!

[SRP76]

Another case of making it look like what people want it to look like. Obama didn't write the fucking bill, despite the credit he'll take for it; the chimps in Congress did. And yes, most of the bullshit in there does look like a chimp wrote it. The caption and Obama have nothing to do with one another.

And yes, I called your Representative a chimp. I also called your Senator a chimp. If you think I'm racist for it, just watch next November when I dangle re-election over his or her head; you'll see them dance, dance, dance. Just like a chimp.

[DubiousComforts]

And yes, I called your Representative a chimp.
So then which species of primate are those Senators and Representatives that didn't vote for the stimulus bill?

[LoneCrusader]

LOL


it's actually kinda funny.

[SRP76]

So then which species of primate are those Senators and Representatives that didn't vote for the stimulus bill?

They aren't. They only briefly become chimps when doing something pointless and stupid. At all other times, they're weasels.

[MaximusIncredulous]

It's the NY Post. A Piece Of ShiT rag owned by Mr. Fox News - Rupert Murdoch. Doesn't surprise me to see this crap.

[blind2d]

Ahh... racism or poignant satire? My vote: neither. I stupid cartoon with a poor dead chimp and some dumb police. Not worth my time.

[strayrider]

They aren't. They only briefly become chimps when doing something pointless and stupid. At all other times, they're weasels.

:lol:

-stray-

http://paulfite.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/al-sharpton.jpg
Show me da money!

[EvilNed]

It's not even that funny, so I say the artist doubly fails at his job.

[AcesandEights]

It depends on how one reads the cartoon, I suppose. I think it's a huge over-reaction and the artist was using the time-tested analogy of monkeys to thoughtlessly imbecilic ineptitude and inefficiency, but if the fellow has a history of art that could be construed as homophobic it certainly won't help him.

It's always a hard line to walk in these cases, because you never know when someone is just seeing racism in the image because they're very sensitive about race, or missing it because they are not sensitive enough to the issue.

[Mr.G]

That's a tough one but I'm surprised an editor didn't pause before giving the ok.

[clanglee]

It depends on how one reads the cartoon, I suppose. I think it's a huge over-reaction and the artist was using the time-tested analogy of monkeys to thoughtlessly imbecilic ineptitude and inefficiency, but if the fellow has a history of art that could be construed as homophobic it certainly won't help him.

It's always a hard line to walk in these cases, because you never know when someone is just seeing racism in the image because they're very sensitive about race, or missing it because they are not sensitive enough to the issue.

It's not really that tough tho'. Even if the artist didn't mean it racially (which he probably didn't) Someone on the paper should have known that many people would see it as such. Like I said. .I'm surprised it made it through the editors. I just can't believe that many people just dropped the ball. Someone should have seen it and gone "ummmmm. . no"

[AcesandEights]

Like I said. .I'm surprised it made it through the editors. I just can't believe that many people just dropped the ball.

True. I guess they just can't throw up their hands and be like: "Hey, what do you expect, it's the Post." I think that's what everyone in the city says about the Post a few times a week.

[Mike70]

It's not even that funny, so I say the artist doubly fails at his job.

yep. it's a double fail. it seems to be in poor taste if anything and if this cartoonist didn't have a rather poor track record on these sorts of issues, i'd say just let it go.

SRP's right: most politicians have more in common with weasels than any species of primate. i think that likening them to any sort of primate is giving them far, far too much credit.

[J0hnnyReb]

Funny, how come when millions of editorial cartoons showed Bush as a chimp, they even called him McChimpy it was ok? Whats good for the goose is good for the gander I should suspect. Unless you're all saying Obama's partial blackness deserves special conditions where he is above satire that was used to eviscerate Bushs public appeal.

[Mike70]

Funny, how come when millions of editorial cartoons showed Bush as a chimp, they even called him McChimpy it was ok?

probably because chimps, gorillas and monkeys have been used as racist symbols for black people for a long, long time. things like this strike a chord in a lot of people and remind them of the bad old days.

besides, equating bush to a chimp is giving bush way too much credit. he's more akin to a tapeworm or some other nasty parasite.

[J0hnnyReb]

probably because chimps, gorillas and monkeys have been used as racist symbols for black people for a long, long time. things like this strike a chord in a lot of people and remind them of the bad old days.

besides, equating bush to a chimp is giving bush way too much credit. he's more akin to a tapeworm or some other nasty parasite.

Ahh, so Obamas race makes him immune to satire. I see. I guess some people do have it easier.

[Mike70]

Ahh, so Obamas race makes him immune to satire. I see. I guess some people do have it easier.

uh, no it doesn't make him "immune" to satire. however, using a chimp or any other lower level primate in place of a black person is slippery ground as far as taste goes and probably says more about the artist than the subject of his intended satire.

[MinionZombie]

If Bush had been drawn as a slave-driver whipping black people, for example, that'd be pretty damn racist - the term "cracker" is a racist term against white people, but it's either ignored as such, or somehow accepted ... because racism only goes one way, just like discrimination (shockingly enough). Or if Bush was drawn to be some other kind of white-skin racial stereotype, that'd be pretty darn racist.

What was really done though, is jokes and cartoons relating to his intelligence (or apparent lack thereof - I don't think he's an idiot though) were spewed out into the world of political satire (and any two-bit jokester doing a show even) ... so the use of Bush as a chimp is purely based on people considering chimps to be dim (even though they're relatively quite intelligent, as well as genetically damn close to humans), and also in terms of physical appearance.

I've got no real political view on Bush one way or another...he's not God, and he's not the Devil...and I look forward to seeing an in-depth and properly unbiased biopic of him in a few years ("W." doesn't count, it had a confused stance and message, and was made up of a lot of hearsay and hypothetical dialogue).

Just as an aside, while it's not race, Tony Blair was always shown as having a gigantic smile and big ears, Margaret Thatcher always had a witch-like nose, John Major was embodied by the colour grey, and Gordon Brown is often depicted as a fat, barge-like buffoon.


uh, no it doesn't make him "immune" to satire. however, using a chimp or any other lower level primate in place of a black person is slippery ground as far as taste goes and probably says more about the artist than the subject of his intended satire.
If the cartoon was making some other kind of point, I don't know what it was.

All I know is what I thought of when looking at that cartoon:

1) Black people have often been referred to, in a racist way, as monkies/chimps etc.
2) It's a stereotype (but also based on true past and present events) that (some) cops shoot black people because of their skin colour, or give them a harder time because of their skin.

So when you've got a cartoon involving both, it's hard to tell what the message is supposed to be?

At most it's pretty darn racist, at least it's a horribly and inappropriately delivered piece of political satire.

[Yojimbo]

LOL


it's actually kinda funny.

Perhaps to you, but not to me.


probably because chimps, gorillas and monkeys have been used as racist symbols for black people for a long, long time. things like this strike a chord in a lot of people and remind them of the bad old days.


Damn straight.

At least the cartoonist in this particular instance cannot claim ignorance of the racial implications behind use of a chimpanzee or monkey as a symbol, unlike Cyrus who hides behind the lame excuse of making a goofy face.

[J0hnnyReb]

uh, no it doesn't make him "immune" to satire. however, using a chimp or any other lower level primate in place of a black person is slippery ground as far as taste goes and probably says more about the artist than the subject of his intended satire.

Not sure I agree, I think the slippery slope is when we start setting standards for taste and enforce them. If Bush was a chimp, then Obama is a chimp. No one is seeing the primate thing in comparison to black people except you and a few others, I saw it as well as the Bush Mcchimp thing more as a trained monkey a la the hurdy gurdy or curious george than anything. but I guess you see blacks more like apes or monkeys, I dunno, I don't.


Perhaps to you, but not to me.


Damn straight.

At least the cartoonist in this particular instance cannot claim ignorance of the racial implications behind use of a chimpanzee or monkey as a symbol, unlike Cyrus who hides behind the lame excuse of making a goofy face.

The artist just throws something out there, we all add the paint with our own imaginations, if you see blacks as chimps then see this as racist thats your thing. I saw this more like with bush that Obama like Bush are just trained monkeys performing for their insane bases.

[strayrider]

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/1046805.html

Maybe cartoonists could come up with a more appropriate symbol for Barry Hussein? With those ears and jawline a jackass might work nicely.

:D

-stray-

[clanglee]

No one is seeing the primate thing in comparison to black people except you and a few others,.

What?!?!? Seriously? It's the first thing I thought of when I saw it. It's the first thing that a LOT of people think when they see it. Whether or not it was his intention, it shows a decided lack of awareness or sensitivity on the artist's and the paper's part. A few others. . :lol::rolleyes:

[J0hnnyReb]

What?!?!? Seriously? It's the first thing I thought of when I saw it. It's the first thing that a LOT of people think when they see it. Whether or not it was his intention, it shows a decided lack of awareness or sensitivity on the artist's and the paper's part. A few others. . :lol::rolleyes:

You make my point for me, you and a number of others immediately thought of blacks = chimps.. see what i'm driving at?

[clanglee]

No I don't. That particular racial slur has been around forever. It is obvious, and people should indeed be sensitive to it. Of course I don't see black people as apes. But I am aware that this is a common rascist comparison. Nice try tho.

[SRP76]

Of course, nobody has yet said just why they think the shot chimp is supposed to be any black person, in the first place.

[J0hnnyReb]

No I don't. That particular racial slur has been around forever. It is obvious, and people should indeed be sensitive to it. Of course I don't see black people as apes. But I am aware that this is a common rascist comparison. Nice try tho.

There really is no try, art is just 1 thing that makes other people think of whatever they want to think of. When I see a chimp I see an animal, when I saw Bush labeled a chimp and drawn as one in the news I always figured it had to do with him being like a trained chimp a la Cheneys chimp... Now someone makes the comparison for Obama and its suddenly racist because you think chimps look like African Americans or whatever. Thats what I am driving at.

[clanglee]

There really is no try, art is just 1 thing that makes other people think of whatever they want to think of. When I see a chimp I see an animal, when I saw Bush labeled a chimp and drawn as one in the news I always figured it had to do with him being like a trained chimp a la Cheneys chimp... Now someone makes the comparison for Obama and its suddenly racist because you think chimps look like African Americans or whatever. Thats what I am driving at.

Being aware of a long standing racial slur does not mean that I think there is any validity to the slur. :rolleyes: If you are unaware that black people have been compared unfavorably to simians throughout history, well that just makes you uninformed and innocent. That's great. But if you are aware of that historical rascist comparison, and you choose to ignore it. Then you become an insensitive prick.

[SRP76]

This reminds me of the time that an official was forced to resign because he said "niggardly".

[J0hnnyReb]

Being aware of a long standing racial slur does not mean that I think there is any validity to the slur. :rolleyes: If you are unaware that black people have been compared unfavorably to simians throughout history, well that just makes you uninformed and innocent. That's great. But if you are aware of that historical rascist comparison, and you choose to ignore it. Then you become an insensitive prick.

I have never heard someone call a black person a chimp. I have heard people call the ex president a chimp though. I have heard names for black people that are unflattering, chimp wasn't one. If you insist that it is, then I must rely on your extensive knowledge and experience in the calling black people chimps and concede that it can be an insulting term. Why, I don't really know.. unless you are saying blacks do look like chimps in which case I disagree with you, I think they look like west African humans.

I think the artist of this comic is a lot more clever than most people let on, kind of like Dave Chappelle and Sacha Baron Cohen who will put on a racist spectacle then sit back and watch all the racists and anti Semites laugh their asses off because they "get it". "getting it" seems to be the major problem which sort of pokes a stick at the underlying problem of this situation.

When I 1st looked at the image I thought, hmm they're shooting a chimp and calling it Obama, must mean that Obama is as stupid as a trained chimp, like Bush was compared to 10000000s of times less than a month ago. ChimpyMcFlightSuit comes to mind.

Ah well don't mind me, I think the people calling racism on this are seeing their own ghosts or skeletons or whatever, I think the article was funny in an politically incorrect way, its never PC to mock a democrat after all.


This reminds me of the time that an official was forced to resign because he said "niggardly".

Or black hole, lol.

[clanglee]

I have never heard someone call a black person a chimp. I have heard people call the ex president a chimp though. I have heard names for black people that are unflattering, chimp wasn't one. If you insist that it is, then I must rely on your extensive knowledge and experience in the calling black people chimps and concede that it can be an insulting term. Why, I don't really know.. unless you are saying blacks do look like chimps in which case I disagree with you, I think they look like west African humans.

I think the artist of this comic is a lot more clever than most people let on, kind of like Dave Chappelle and Sacha Baron Cohen who will put on a racist spectacle then sit back and watch all the racists and anti Semites laugh their asses off because they "get it". "getting it" seems to be the major problem which sort of pokes a stick at the underlying problem of this situation.

When I 1st looked at the image I thought, hmm they're shooting a chimp and calling it Obama, must mean that Obama is as stupid as a trained chimp, like Bush was compared to 10000000s of times less than a month ago. ChimpyMcFlightSuit comes to mind.

Ah well don't mind me, I think the people calling racism on this are seeing their own ghosts or skeletons or whatever, I think the article was funny in an politically incorrect way, its never PC to mock a democrat after all.



Or black hole, lol.

I see your point, but you are coming from the angle of either an innocent or an idiot. I hope it is the former because you don't seem stupid. Do I think black people look like monkeys? No. Have racists and bigots called black people monkeys for years and years? Yes. Never heard the term porchmonkey then I guess? (ahhh the joys of growing up in the south :rolleyes:) Anyone aware of this, and trust me. . most African Americans are, would react negatively toward the comic. (or positively in your aforementioned situation with the bigots "getting it")

[Mike70]

Not sure I agree, I think the slippery slope is when we start setting standards for taste and enforce them. If Bush was a chimp, then Obama is a chimp. No one is seeing the primate thing in comparison to black people except you and a few others, I saw it as well as the Bush Mcchimp thing more as a trained monkey a la the hurdy gurdy or curious george than anything. but I guess you see blacks more like apes or monkeys, I dunno, I don't.


as clang said, you are either an innocent or an idiot. based on the elementary school logic of "if bush was chimp, then obama is a chimp," i think you are narrowing down the choices. if you are unaware of this stereotype then i can't help you. if you are unaware of or blind to the symbolism being used here, then nothing can be done for you.

nice how you try to twist this around on the people who find this racially insensitive as if the folks who have a problem with this cartoon invented the racist symbol of blacks as chimps and monkeys. that is an old, old stereotype and is something that i certainly didn't invent.

[AcesandEights]

This reminds me of the time that an official was forced to resign because he said "niggardly".

Man, I try not to think about that, because it pisses me off so...so, excruciatingly, pissfire much.

[clanglee]

Yeah that is a completely ignorant and silly overreaction of some folk that need to work on their grammar. Very infuriating.

This situation is just. . not quite the same.

The real issue here is not in the actual comic but in the fact that some complete moron or uncaring lout. . indeed, quite a few of them, allowed this to be printed in all seriousness. There was either no filter in place, or it was ignored by those who should filter these things and they just didn't give a shit and just let 'er rip, or they are just plain uninformed and unaware. None of these things are good for a freaking NEWSPAPER!!

I am not saying that these things should be censored, but when a piece could DEFINITELY be perceived a certain way. And there was nothing done about it, the paper becomes completely at fault and completely deserves and backlash against it.

[J0hnnyReb]

Like the muslim riots in Europe over the cartoons of Muhammad?

[clanglee]

Were those in a newspaper?

[Mike70]

Were those in a newspaper?

yes, in denmark.

http://westernfrontamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/mohammed-cartoons-original.jpg

this is an apples and oranges comparison though. the uproar over these was about the muslim prohibition against showing mohammed's face and not about a racial stereotype.

the large type that reads "muhammeds ansigt" means "mohammed's face."

[strayrider]

What the heck are those "Toms" over at the National Black Republicans trying to prove?

http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-Simple%20Sambo%20and%20Ignorant%20Mammy&tp_preview=true

"This reminds me of the time that an official was forced to resign because he said "niggardly"." http://i34.tinypic.com/2u8wksk.jpg

:eek:

-stray-

[SRP76]

Yeah that is a completely ignorant and silly overreaction of some folk that need to work on their grammar. Very infuriating.

This situation is just. . not quite the same.



It's exactly the same. You have dumbass Sharpton claiming "that chimp represents Barack Obama. Are you implying a chimp wrote the stimulus bill? If so, you're saying Obama's a chimp".

Well, including proposed amendments during the process, the stimulus bill was indeed written by some black people - 2 blacks, to be exact. And one Latino woman. And EIGHT WHITE GUYS. None of which are named "Barack Obama".

So, is Sharpton trying to claim that all 11 of those people have changed their names to Barack Obama in the past month or so? Because if they haven't, then this cartoon has fuck-all to do with him. Which means Sharpton is talking out his ass again, and people are just so eager to jump in on a good, juicy racial witch-hunt that they just ride along with him.

[clanglee]

It's exactly the same. You have dumbass Sharpton claiming "that chimp represents Barack Obama. Are you implying a chimp wrote the stimulus bill? If so, you're saying Obama's a chimp".

Well, including proposed amendments during the process, the stimulus bill was indeed written by some black people - 2 blacks, to be exact. And one Latino woman. And EIGHT WHITE GUYS. None of which are named "Barack Obama".

So, is Sharpton trying to claim that all 11 of those people have changed their names to Barack Obama in the past month or so? Because if they haven't, then this cartoon has fuck-all to do with him. Which means Sharpton is talking out his ass again, and people are just so eager to jump in on a good, juicy racial witch-hunt that they just ride along with him.

That would make sense if there were 11 or 12 chimps lying on the ground. The general belief. . whether true or not, is that this bill Is Obama's. Once again I understand what you are saying tho. And perhaps this was not meant racially. BUT, it should have been well obvious to everyone involved that this comic could EASILY be percieved as racist. And Of COURSE people sensitive to such issues would react badly. It's not that hard.

[MaximusIncredulous]

It was a bad joke all around. Even if the meaning were clear, to "parody" the chimp attack incident was still in poor taste considering how savaged that woman was.

[EvilNed]

No one is seeing the primate thing in comparison to black people except you and a few others,

Now that's alot of bull...

[DubiousComforts]

It depends on how one reads the cartoon, I suppose. I think it's a huge over-reaction and the artist was using the time-tested analogy of monkeys to thoughtlessly imbecilic ineptitude and inefficiency, but if the fellow has a history of art that could be construed as homophobic it certainly won't help him.
I thought it was an over-reaction, too, until Rupert Murdoch opened his big mouth (http://www.nypost.com/seven/02242009/news/regionalnews/statement_from_rupert_murdoch_156676.htm). Why did we even allow this guy into the country? He is only "for" the good ol' US of A as long as it's putting money in his pocket.

This asshat is a political cartoon just waiting to happen:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bf/Rupert_Murdoch.jpg

[J0hnnyReb]

Now that's alot of bull...

I was speaking in reference to this website, and its not bull. Sorry. I think people who see the chimp as obama being a racial thing immediately and jump the gun, are saying more about themselves than the author which was probably his point.

[DubiousComforts]

I was speaking in reference to this website, and its not bull. Sorry. I think people who see the chimp as obama being a racial thing immediately and jump the gun, are saying more about themselves than the author which was probably his point.
So you're saying the artist, the Post editors and Rupert Murdoch are intellectual retards completely incapable of conceiving such a shady, thinly-veiled reference that would spark this exact type of "jump the gun" criticism?

Okie dokie.

[clanglee]

So you're saying the artist, the Post editors and Rupert Murdoch are intellectual retards completely incapable of conceiving such a shady, thinly-veiled reference that would spark this exact type of "jump the gun" criticism?

Okie dokie.

exactly what he is saying.

His logic is:

* I have never heard of black people being referred to as monkeys.
* Calling a black person a monkey is racist.
* Therefore, anyone that has ever heard of someone calling a black person a monkey is a racist.

Really sound logic there :rolleyes:

[J0hnnyReb]

So you're saying the artist, the Post editors and Rupert Murdoch are intellectual retards completely incapable of conceiving such a shady, thinly-veiled reference that would spark this exact type of "jump the gun" criticism?

Okie dokie.

Doesn't matter if they did you already think theyre racist the only thing they got left is to expose how all the non racists are actual racists too, in a clever and media slick way.

[Mike70]

exactly what he is saying.

His logic is:

* I have never heard of black people being referred to as monkeys.
* Calling a black person a monkey is racist.
* Therefore, anyone that has ever heard of someone calling a black person a monkey is a racist.

Really sound logic there :rolleyes:

i had to work that out on my little fingers and it still gave me a headache. it's a lot like dog logic, except it makes even less sense.


Doesn't matter if they did you already think theyre racist the only thing they got left is to expose how all the non racists are actual racists too, in a clever and media slick way.

riiiggghhhttt. ok then. anyone who is aware of a relatively common racial stereotype and can recognize it, is a racist? that makes no sense at all.

[clanglee]

It's like arguing with a shrub with a banjo.

[EvilNed]

I was speaking in reference to this website, and its not bull. Sorry. I think people who see the chimp as obama being a racial thing immediately and jump the gun, are saying more about themselves than the author which was probably his point.

What are you kidding? Black people used to be equated to monkeys in dictionaries from back in the days, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. Anyone who claims they didn't pick up on that while reading the cartoon is just a straight out liar.

[clanglee]

Anyone who claims they didn't pick up on that while reading the cartoon is just a straight out liar.

Or an idiot. . .um. .i mean . . innocent.

[DubiousComforts]

Doesn't matter if they did you already think theyre racist
It does matter, I haven't say anything about them being "racist," and since when does what I think count for anything?

[strayrider]

For anyone who first saw this cartoon through this forum (myself, as far as I know) it would be impossible not to relate it as anything but racist. Look at the title: "Blatant and thoughtless racism ...".

A better title might have been: "Tasteless cartoon causes stir", or whatever. This would have allowed us to click the link without someone else's preconceived notions already in mind.

I fully expected to click on the link and see something along the lines of a black person munching on a slice of watermelon, flashing a toothy grin while twirling a drumstick from KFC and chugging a 40-oz bottle of Old E. You know, real racism.

Even so, my first impression for the cartoon in question was of the violent nature -- the blood, etc ... the shock factor, but not "OMG that is so racist!" even though the thought was already placed in my mind beforehand. Reading the text, I thought "the Democrats" are monkeys (per all of the Bush/chimp cartoons) for their penning of the stimulus bill. The impression that this was a slur against Hussein came in dead last, and that was sketchy at best.

Personally, I don't find the cartoon to be all that funny. Then again, political cartoons are not by cup of tea. I can see where it can (not necessarily should) be considered racist, and where the artist and publisher also did see the controversial nature of the content, and decided to publish it anyway.

Perhaps Rupert Murdoch and the artist (and anyone who dared laugh at this cartoon) ought to be prosecuted for a hate crime? At any rate, they now realize that the rules have changed when it comes to political commentary.

Either that, or the next cartoon they publish might include Rahm "Knuckles" Emanual dressed as an organ grinder and ... na, we won't go there.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_L16VMdYVOU8/R8RGLfvQj-I/AAAAAAAAANk/AFzZ09hG8kg/s400/organ+grinder+11_10_04.jpg

:D

-stray-

[clanglee]

A valid point Stray. I can see how my thread title might influence one's opinion on the cartoon. But as I am no journalist. . I make no appologies.

Wether or not you or I see it personnally as racist however matters not one whit. The likelyhood of anyone making the connection with the monkey as a symbolicly racist icon and the ethnicity of our current president, in the confines of this cartoon, is very high. Very very high. And obvious to many many people. Add in the history of violence experienced by blacks from the police force and it gets worse. It was an easily avoidable snaffu. . but it was not avoided. .for whatever reason.

[SRP76]

Wether or not you or I see it personnally as racist however matters not one whit. The likelyhood of anyone making the connection with the monkey as a symbolicly racist icon and the ethnicity of our current president, in the confines of this cartoon, is very high. Very very high.

That just means that most people are likely to judge the cartoon without having a clue what it's actually pointing at. In other words, it means most people are stupid.

Now, why is it up to the author to cater to the idiots? Why shouldn't it be the responsibility of the reader to have a brain, and know what he's reading?

When people no longer have to actually take responsibility for their own knowledge (or lack of it), that's just giving the green light to rampant stupidity. The "I don't need to actually know shit, someone else should know it for me" attitude.


I thought it was an over-reaction, too, until Rupert Murdoch opened his big mouth (http://www.nypost.com/seven/02242009/news/regionalnews/statement_from_rupert_murdoch_156676.htm). Why did we even allow this guy into the country? He is only "for" the good ol' US of A as long as it's putting money in his pocket.



How is that different from every other person?

[triste realtà]

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=post+racist+cartoon+shakespeare&btnG=Search

Did anyone mention the intended Shakespeare angle yet?

[clanglee]

That just means that most people are likely to judge the cartoon without having a clue what it's actually pointing at. In other words, it means most people are stupid.

Now, why is it up to the author to cater to the idiots? Why shouldn't it be the responsibility of the reader to have a brain, and know what he's reading?

When people no longer have to actually take responsibility for their own knowledge (or lack of it), that's just giving the green light to rampant stupidity. The "I don't need to actually know shit, someone else should know it for me" attitude.

?

Nope, it really has no relation to the viewers intelligence. It has to do with perceptions, which all art is subjected to.

[SRP76]

Nope, it really has no relation to the viewers intelligence. It has to do with perceptions, which all art is subjected to.

Yes, it does.

"It's making fun of President Obama".

That's a fucking WRONG STATEMENT. That's not the cartoonist's fault; that's the fault of know-nothings that have no clue what they're bitching about, but love to run with any racism angle.

Every single person that thinks this cartoon has anything at all to do with "a racist portrayal of Obama as a chimp" should be forced - forced - to get "Barack Obama didn't write the fucking stimulus bill" tattooed across their foreheads, for all to see.

This is what I mean. People want to make the author responsible for THEM not knowing what they just read. And that's simply wrong; it should be their own responsibility to know what the cartoon says, before they go on their crusade against it.

[strayrider]

Wether or not you or I see it personnally as racist however matters not one whit.

I respectfully disagree. What you and I think about any issue does matter and our opinions are valid regardless of whether or not someone might be offended. Divergent opinions must never be silenced.

:D

-stray-

[clanglee]

I respectfully disagree. What you and I think about any issue does matter and our opinions are valid regardless of whether or not someone might be offended. Divergent opinions must never be silenced.

:D

-stray-

True true. And I am not a proponent for silencing the opposition. This is not a situation of censorship, but of self censorship. Courtesy and sensitivity if you will.


Yes, it does.

"It's making fun of President Obama".

That's a fucking WRONG STATEMENT. That's not the cartoonist's fault; that's the fault of know-nothings that have no clue what they're bitching about, but love to run with any racism angle.

Every single person that thinks this cartoon has anything at all to do with "a racist portrayal of Obama as a chimp" should be forced - forced - to get "Barack Obama didn't write the fucking stimulus bill" tattooed across their foreheads, for all to see.

This is what I mean. People want to make the author responsible for THEM not knowing what they just read. And that's simply wrong; it should be their own responsibility to know what the cartoon says, before they go on their crusade against it.

The bill is refered to as "Obama's Stimulus Bill" The man is taking credit for it, so most people would assume he had a part in writing it as well.

[strayrider]

True true. And I am not a proponent for silencing the opposition. This is not a situation of censorship, but of self censorship. Courtesy and sensitivity if you will.

I'll agree up to the point of the "self-censorship" being completely voluntary and not based on fear of someone else's reaction. However, this issue could also be used to stifle free speech and, therein, lies the true danger.


The bill is refered to as "Obama's Stimulus Bill" The man is taking credit for it, so most people would assume he had a part in writing it as well.

Isn't that the point SRP is making? Stupid people?

:D

-stray-

[DubiousComforts]

Did anyone mention the intended Shakespeare angle yet?
No, is that what was intended?

The Post should hire the guy that improved their cartoon:
http://michellemalkinisanidiot.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/monkey_cartoon-malkin-sm.jpg

BE MORE FUNNY!