Blatant and thoughtless Racism is alive and well

[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. 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:

[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

[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 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. -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. 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?