|
The irony in decrying bigotry while lumping homosexuals with pedophiles matches the irony in decrying racism with racist caricatures of black people pretty well I think...
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 21:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
Disinterested posted:You really are a moron huh Why am I a moron? As for your question, 'no.'
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Because I'm fairly certain Charb did not lump pedophiles and homosexuals together, and that even if he did it would not be ironic. Is there literally no other word or phrase for homosexuals in French? My point was to comment on the parallels between the inherent gratuitous intolerance in the language used in that quote and the inherent intolerance in the imagery used in several cartoons (not Charb's cartoons alone, and not all cartoons by him or anybody else). The most common argument I've seen in this thread for why the usage of that imagery is not racist has been 'that's how things are done in French satire.' That feels like a much harder argument to make when the language uses pederast as the word for homosexual - just because it's 'the way it's done in France' doesn't excuse hatefulness of the expression. I'm not trying to make a tone argument here either, I used gratuitous earlier very specifically. When replacing the hateful words or imagery with something else that isn't as hurtful to the people you're trying to defend does not devalue or change the message, it is the more moral choice.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Someone better equipped than me will have to weigh in, but as I understand it PD or pede is a fairly informal idiomatic way of saying gay in French, and doesn't carry a connotation of meaning pederast now at all, but it is still a bit like 'queer' or another word in English that can be used both aggressively and jokingly and be offensive or not depending on the context of its use. Moreover, as I understand it, that word is drifting towards being more and not less acceptable in colloquial conversation. I believe homosexuel or pederaste is quite an arch and formal way of writing, but French people also say 'gay' and have other softer terms. That doesn't work me, but I can understand that line of thought - thank you for providing another context.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:That sounds like context. And like SedanChair has repeatedly emphasized, context doesn't matter when it comes to using racist imagery. It's a racist image no matter if he bought it, somebody else bought it for him, or somebody gave it to him for free with mod powers. I don't see how that contradicts his position that racist imagery is racist.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 21:00 |
|
|
And just like a zoo, there needs to be a good reason behind the questionable actions. The overwhelming majority of zoos in the world are bad, because the overwhelming majority of zoos in the world are horrible little roadside menageries with little to no oversight or regulation that exist only to exploit exotic animals for profit. The context of the cartoons doesn't change whether or not the imagery itself is racist, but it does help determine if the intent of the artist is racist (I don't think that Charb's intent was racist at all). To go back to your analogy, the happiest lion in a zoo with the best care in the world, a condition of some sort that means certain death in the wild, that has inspired and educated a generation of children to be stewards of the natural world is still a very, very, dangerous animal. I think that we're sort of saying two different things. The position that I'm trying to explain is that some of the imagery used is inherently racist, and I'm saying that because a position that I've seen advocated over and over in this thread is that none of the problematic imagery is in any way racist because it was not intended to be, and that's what I disagree with.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2015 19:21
|
|