Its a cartoon buddy. And a paper is allowed to publish whatever they want, if you don't agree, don't ****ing read it, simple as that. I still do not see how the monkey automatically indicates that he is black while numerous Bush cartoons depicting similar things indicate a totally different thing. Its a joke. This country is getting too damn sensitive to the most trivial and meaningless things.
I'm choosing to stick to the topic at hand. I don't see how discussing every potential historical/current situation involving racial tension is relevant here. The guy could have meant monkey in a derogatory racial sense in that example, but it has nothing to do with this cartoon so I'm not sure I follow you? Shall we now open this discussion to include all instances of racial tension? Is that what you'd like to do? I barely have enough energy or concern to continue dumbing down my position so it's understood on this one let alone 100's or 1000's of others. Leave me out of those discussions I'll agree now to disagree with everything posted accept for the agreeable stuff I agree with. I'll further agree to allow you or anyone else to disagree with everything said in order to maintain disagreement for disagreement's sake. In the end, we'll have wasted time, energy, and keystrokes while coming to the conclusion "those people" just don't think the way "we do". We will decide for ourselves that it's okay for people not to have the same opinions we do, for we know people come to things carrying their own experiences, education, and wisdom from their own unique section of the planet. We'll like some, dislike others, wonder about people's intentions, and probably spin gears working to get people to see things "just like we do". Let's save time and put this topic to bed. I'm kind of tired about writing about a cartoon.
...and you don't get the FACT that your OPINION of the irrelevancy is itself irrelevant. Since you are not black (I'm taking your silence on the topic as validation although I didn't need it), the derogatory aspect of the cartoon is not impactful for you. So if you want to know if something is hurtful ...the ONLY test is to ask the group of people that feel targeted. There simply is no other way to approach it. If you want to know if something is offensive, just ask. You have NO MORAL POSITION]/b] to tell other people how they should react. This is the key part ...so please let this sink in. It serves you no benefit to tell other people how they should feel. All it does is make you appear like a jerk. On the same line, if you have a girlfriend/wife and they get really upset about something you feel is dumb. Do you: A.) Try to convince her it's dumb and show her the error of her ways. B.) Give her a hug and sit there and listen to it. If you regularly chose A, your relationship won't last long. Ah, I see another one of your problems. That isn't my position. My position is that people find it offensive. You don't need to concern yourself why because you aren't the morality police. The FACT is that people are offended. ...and that is an irrefutable FACT. ...and the paper was either out-of-touch or being racist by printing the cartoon because it doesn't 't take a genius to know that people would "take it the wrong way". So your position is that the paper was out-of-touch for printing it. I can accept that. It's a bad thing when a newspaper, of all things, are out of touch with reality. Just for clarity, not saying it was racist. I'm saying it was offensive to a group of people and the paper was stupid for not realizing it ahead of time. Just once, I'd like to hear you acknowledge that I'm not the only person in the whole "coloring this my own way." If you could just acknowledge that, it might go a long way for you to understand the larger issue here. Perception is King. Ever heard that before? If people think it's true, then for all intensive purposes it IS true. ...and if you think about it, that's how the whole principle of democracy was built. That's worked out pretty well, huh?
If you want someone like me to maintain any degree of respect for your position, you should be aware that the correct phrase is "all intents and purposes". I have no idea why people sometimes elect to make this statement as "intensive purposes". All I can say is in this type of medium, you really learn a lot about people's ability to communicate. That's the nicest way I can put it. When I run across people using words of phrases they don't really understand, my mind hits a speedbump and I don't really "hear" anything else they say. If I may sum up your babble in here, you're trying to enlighten us by stating the picture might offend some people and that it might not offend others? Wow, that's a news flash. That's headline material you have there. /shrug In any event, you've made more assumptions about me in your previous post and I was going to explain how you're a little off but quite frankly, upon stumbling across the misused phrase above, I lost my concentration so maybe I'll come back to it later
If you want anyone here to take you seriously, please don't act like a dick. I'm not saying you are a dick. In the above post, however, you are acting like a dick. You also forgot to end your last sentence with a period, so perhaps you should not be playing English professor on a message board.
Yep, I ended with a smiley rather than a period. I'm sorry. That's nowhere close to choosing words or phrases I'm clueless about. I don't care so much about punctuation and all as I tend to type posts as I would speak, not as I would write. I think most people do. However, it's not often you see someone using words they aren't sure of while trying to hold side in a quasi-serious debate. Is it? Sorry if that threw a wrench into my gears. I still haven't recovered from it! (kidding)
By the way, you're pretty easy to lead around, aren't you? Imitation is the sincerest form of not having a clue.
I'm pretty sure I've exhausted my points about this cartoon. I'll bow out of the discussion and leave it to the smart folk. You either know what I'm saying by now or have no clue. I give this topic my blessing. I have no more energy left for a point I didn't care much about to begin with. Toons are toons. Free speech is a curse sometimes, but should be protected at all costs. Feel free to continue putting words into my mouth and making assumptions about my person. I'm not upset, angry, and despite what a couple have ASSUMED, I'm not even condescending. I'm merely trying to make my points. I'm a sarcastic person at times and it gets me into trouble, but I honestly don't have malicious intent. If we were all sitting around a dinner table or something, having this conversation, I'll assure you that not one of you would be offended at these things I've been saying. It's too hard to communicate tone or something, I don't know. Anyway, have fun with the monkey discussion. I'm out of this one!
I'm mobile right now so I will make it short. It's not OK for me to articulate my point of view on this subject, but it's Ok for YOU to dictate what I should think or do huh (lol)?Take your own advice... How about if don't like what YOU read, YOU don't respond to MY POST! Is that a Deal? Moving on My advice for you is stop thinking like a rino for a little while and actually start using your brain.You have to realize what doesn't offend you just might offend someone else and vice versa..I think you suffer from George bush syndrome and if you don't get it (which I don't think you will) then oh well. who the hell are you to tell someone what to think or what should or shouldn't offend them? who gave you that moral authority? some jokes are meant to be provocative so just because a few people laugh doesn't make it tastefull.
I will responded to your prior post when I get to a computer later, but I feel like you were pretty much owned... that's just my own personal opinion.
Old moral one, I didn't know you had a patton on that phrase...I guess every elected offical in this country and others on this same forum owe you money then right?
Old moral one, I didn't know you had a patton on that phrase...I guess every elected offical in this country and others on this same forum owe you money then right? Why haven't anyone paid you this again?
A what? A "patton"? Guy? Not for nothing, but that isn't even a word. Patton was a general. I believe this is what you wanted... pat·ent (ptnt) n. 1. a. A grant made by a government that confers upon the creator of an invention the sole right to make, use, and sell that invention for a set period of time. b. Letters patent. c. An invention protected by such a grant. 2. a. A grant made by a government that confers on an individual fee-simple title to public lands. b. The official document of such a grant. c. The land so granted. 3. An exclusive right or title. adj. 1. a. Protected or conferred by a patent or letters patent: a patent right. b. Of, relating to, or dealing in patents: patent law. 2. also (ptnt) Obvious; plain. See Synonyms at apparent. 3. (ptnt) Biology a. Not blocked; open. b. Spreading open; expanded. 4. Of, relating to, or being a nonprescription drug or other medical preparation that is often protected by a trademark. 5. Of high quality. Used of flour. 6. also (ptnt) Archaic Open to general inspection. Used especially of documents. tr.v. pat·ent·ed, pat·ent·ing, pat·ents 1. To obtain a patent on or for (an invention, for example). 2. To invent, originate, or be the proprietor of (an idea, for example). You are welcome. Okay, now I'm out of this discussion. When you guys on "that side" start making up words and phrases, no one logical can argue with you. Good luck! (sorry to post, but this was a major eyesore)
...and that proves my point. Since you don't care, why do you feel you are an authority on the offensive nature of this cartoon? Why don't you rely on the opinions of people that feel targeted? It's a pompous position for you to take to decide the offensiveness of an issue when you have no stake in the matter. I've never said the artist didn't have the right to create the toon. That said, what is "legal" doesn't make it "moral". ...and don't try marginalizing the subject by saying it's just a cartoon. That's a cop-out answer and you know it. The offensive part of your position is your outright dismissal of people's feelings on the matter. Why do you feel you are in position to tell other people how they should react particularly when you aren't the target? What gives you the authority? That in itself, is offensive. Since you are ending this discussion, I'll take that as you have no more legs to stand on and you are stubbornly holding onto your convictions despite the overwhelming arguments undermining your position.
What exactly are 90% of the people in this thread trying to do? It sounds to me like you're trying to tell me it is offensive? Who gives you the authority to judge anyone buddy? You sound like a condescending douche bag. Maybe the world isn't always out to get people like minorities. Maybe it was a simple cartoon that people shouldn't take so damn seriously. But maybe I'm wrong. Maybe every time someone mentions a monkey it is speaking in a derogatory manner against a black person, but we can call white people monkeys, thats just fine.
Exactly. The cartoon wasn't very funny.....but man how people see racism in so many things just amazes me. Weren't there drawings of our last president being depicted as a monkey? This one, imo wasn't even referring to Barrack...more so congress.
With the history of racism in the country the cartoon is insensitive, it doesn't take a genius to determine that others might percieve this cartoon as racist.
