View Poll Results: Is this cartoon racist?

Voters
1080. You may not vote on this poll
Page 15 of 27 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 266

Thread: Is this cartoon racist?

  1. #141
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain America View Post
    I think the cartoon can be considered tacky, distasteful and rude. But racist? Not in the least.

    I am blown away that 97+% of you people think it's racist.
    42 members voted on the poll, 3 yes and 39 no.

    The rest of the yes option is guests...and I suspect someone is stuffing the yes box.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  2. #142
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Oh.

    And I don't think this cartoon is racist at all.

    It's a joke about something that appears fine actually being ****, and **** is the same color as chocolate, so...here we are.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  3. #143
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:22 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,783

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    I sense some veiled racism there... who ever heard of a person with a chocolate touch? The golden touch? Yes. The Chocolate touch? No, and then to have it be from a black man?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  4. #144
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:22 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,783

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Oh.

    And I don't think this cartoon is racist at all.

    It's a joke about something that appears fine actually being ****, and **** is the same color as chocolate, so...here we are.
    I guess I can see that too...
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  5. #145
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    I sense some veiled racism there... who ever heard of a person with a chocolate touch? The golden touch? Yes. The Chocolate touch? No, and then to have it be from a black man?
    It is somewhat uncomfortably concidential that chocolate and **** are the same color as Obama's skin...

    But what other analogy for "this is a piece of ****, but we're calling it something that is the same color, only nice" are you going to use?

    You could go with urine, and something about lemonade, I suppose. But you can't form lemonade or urine into shapes without freezing it...or adding jello?

    No, feces and chocolate work best, I think.

    Holy **** I just killed the joke entirely by analyzing it too much.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  6. #146
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:22 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    63,783

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    It is somewhat uncomfortably concidential that chocolate and **** are the same color as Obama's skin...

    But what other analogy for "this is a piece of ****, but we're calling it something that is the same color, only nice" are you going to use?

    You could go with urine, and something about lemonade, I suppose. But you can't form lemonade or urine into shapes without freezing it...or adding jello?

    No, feces and chocolate work best, I think.

    Holy **** I just killed the joke entirely by analyzing it too much.
    uh, what?

    ...and you sent me on a dreamy moment of unfocused blankness.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have pooped in public, even in public neighborhoods.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  7. #147
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    If one is shown the word "nigger", without any other context, it's absolutely reasonable to suggest it's racist. The word's meaning is one that's inherently racist.
    The flaw here is that you want to put forward the notion that words have inherent meaning. Words are just sound, physical and mental, that humans associate with concepts. When the usage of words become common, those who have been exposed to the environment in which they are used experience conditioning associated with such usage and as a result comprehension takes place. That is to say, worlds have no inherent meaning. Rather words are given meaning through usage and conditioning. To see this, only need consider that no one understands any words until they are taught them in some fashion. As a result, for example, I don't understand Spanish at all, and when people speak it it sounds like gibberish to me. If the words had inherent meaning, I would be able to comprehend what they are saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    The word's creation was one of pure racism. It's primary usage in this country's history has been racist in nature. Its only non-racist typical usage, in anything other than using it to simply reference the word, is as a slang term used primarily by a subset of black people.
    That the word can be used another way demonstrates my point that words have no inherent meaning. Rather, meaning is assigned through usage and conditioning. Furthermore the word has also been used historically to refer to persons outside of a racial context.

    From wiki
    During the fur trade of the early 1800s to the late 1840s in the Western United States, the word was spelled "niggur", and is often recorded in literature of the time. George Fredrick Ruxton often included the word as part of the "mountain man" lexicon, and did not indicate that the word was pejorative at the time. "Niggur" was evidently similar to the modern use of dude, or guy. This passage from Ruxton's Life in the Far West illustrates a common use of the word in spoken form—the speaker here referring to himself: "Travler, marm, this niggur's no travler; I ar' a trapper, marm, a mountain-man, wagh!" It was not used as a term exclusively for blacks among mountain men during this period, as Indians, Mexicans, and Frenchmen and Anglos alike could be a "niggur"
    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Sans any other context, looking at the word and asking "is it racist", it's reasonable to say "yes".
    Not necessarily. For example if the sentence "The nigger scored a touchdown" is presented with no other context, one cannot tell if it was uttered by a black guy referring to his friend, or a racist white guy who is mad at a black player from the opposing team.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Does that mean it can't be used in a non-racist manner? No. It has the potential to be used in a non-racial fashion, just as that cartoon could potentially be feasibly used in a racist fashion, but in both cases it would need additional context to make it so.
    Context comes from the perception of an observer whose conditioning associates symbols such as words with concepts. For example one person here has said he has never heard the "black is beautiful feces" racist joke that I referred to earlier. However for me being black and coming up in the South, I have heard that many times. So of course, because of such conditioning, I am more likely to make the association than he would, assuming of course that he is telling the truth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    A cartoon indicating that Obama is said word, save for probably a few specific exceptions, would be reasonable to call racist as there would be few clear ways of taking the cartoon...sans any additional context...that wasn't racist in nature.
    Although that is true, you have also admitted that it is possible to use the word in a non racist context. As such, technically, one could say that we should not preclude such non racist usage either without any additional context if we were to apply your logic consistently.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    There is also FAR more examples of contextual usage of feces to refer to BAD THINGS. From "that's ****ty", to "it's gone to ****", to "they **** on" something, and more...it's routinely and FAR more regularly used as a reference to something bad.
    That may be true, however I have demonstrated that it is indeed used as a derogatory term with reference to the skin color of blacks. Therefore in a cartoon where Obama and his polices are painted brown, along with a reference to feces, one could reasonably conclude that an intentional association was made by the cartoon creator between feces and Obama personally. As such, a racist intent can be reasonably inferred.

  8. #148
    Heavy Hitter


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    63,459

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    I sense some veiled racism there... who ever heard of a person with a chocolate touch? The golden touch? Yes. The Chocolate touch? No, and then to have it be from a black man?
    On that level it does indeed leave the door open for a racist interpretation. So, it's either a coincidence or intentional. If intentional, then it is definitely a veiled attempt at subtle racism. If not, then it sure is a strange coincidence.

  9. #149
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    And considering in this cartoon, with the little bit of context we were given (it was put on a conservatives site), is referring to policies that conservatives generally find "bad" there's contextual reasoning in the cartoon to suggest that the reference to "****" is to refer to those things as bad. There is no contextual basis within the article to suggest that those things are being called "black", or that Barack Obama is being referenced as "****", or that they're bad and thus **** because he's black.
    Wrong. There is a clear reference to feces and an implied association is made between feces and chocolate which is brown. The policy is colored brown which is associated with feces. Obama is also colored brown, which because of the policy association with the feces, one could reasonably assume that the cartoon creator intentionally means to associate Obama with feces, and thus the racist meaning can be inferred.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    To use your faulty logic...that making giant assumptive leaps sans any significant contextual evidence supporting them, despite a far more compelling and simple explanation clearly there, to declare something is racist is okay as long as you can pull things from the situation/item that have been tied in some way shape or form to racism in the past....then it must also be clear to you that this is racist:

    No that is incorrect because in your picture there is only candy, there is no reference to feces by which one can infer an association to the chocolate, or no black person to make the association as well. Now if there was a statement saying that does not smell like chocolate along with Obama eating it AND it appeared on one of Obama''s political opponents website, then we could indeed infer a racist intent. But since there is no such statement or Obama, none can be reasonably inferred so your claim is bogus.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    This is a Hersey's Chocolate Bar.

    As you've stated, at times "Chocolate" is used to refer to black people.

    As you'll also likely know, racists have long used statistics regarding the amount of blacks in prison as a means of attacking black people.

    People in prisons are kept behind what? Bars. And what's the layout of the Hershey Bars resemble? Prison bars.

    Using the logic you put forward in order to declare that this comic IS (not may) be racist, it is clear then that Hershey's Chocolate Bars are racist as it's association black people with prison.
    No, the flaw here is that there is no reference to prisons and reference to black prisoners. In the cartoon there are clear, direct references to chocolate, Obama, and feces whereby one can make the association. In your image there is merely candy, no prisons bars, no black prisoners, no feces, no nothing except candy. Therefore again, you have made a bogus claim.

  10. #150
    Question authority
    Grand Mal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    on an island off the left coast of Canada
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    16,440
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Is this cartoon racist?

    No, it's not.
    "I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid people. I meant that stupid people are generally Conservatives."
    -John Stuart Mill-

Page 15 of 27 FirstFirst ... 5131415161725 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •