Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:37 PM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Yes, they really should. It's the 21st fucking century, they should know better.
We should automatically assume that anyone drawing a caricature of an ethnic person is racist?
  #252  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:44 PM
begbert2 begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
We should automatically assume that anyone drawing a caricature of an ethnic person is racist?
Personally I first look at the caricature to determine whether it has attributes I associate with standard racist characterizations, and only after I determine the image is clearly a racist caricature (as the one in the OP is), only then do I cast aspersions upon its creator.
  #253  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:45 PM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
But good intentions aren't adequate here. If the effect of a drawing is racist, then it is a racist drawing.
I disagree. I place intent on a much higher level than you do and that is how I navigate the world.
If you think it is not important then that's a philosophical chasm that I can't get over so I'll leave it there.
  #254  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:48 PM
begbert2 begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
I disagree. I place intent on a much higher level than you do and that is how I navigate the world.
If you think it is not important then that's a philosophical chasm that I can't get over so I'll leave it there.
Out of curiousity, what's your take on 'classic' disney and warner brothers cartoons, which were probably not designed by people chuckling to themselves "I'm gonna offend some people, heh heh heh", but managed to include characterizations that their own owners won't release to the public today because they themselves confess that the art is inherently racist?
  #255  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:53 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 5,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
I disagree. I place intent on a much higher level than you do and that is how I navigate the world.
If you think it is not important then that's a philosophical chasm that I can't get over so I'll leave it there.
I don't think intent is not important. That's how you tell the difference between somebody who made an error of judgment and somebody who's a despicable asshole.

But it's equally wrong to think that intent is all that matters. It's almost certainly true that most racism is unintentional. (Well, maybe that's naive, given who we elected President, I don't know.) It behooves us to consider the effect of what we do, and to learn that the effect of what we do may be quite different from what we intended or expected.

It's hardly a philosophical chasm, unless you believe that being inconsiderate of others is a philosophy. It's simply learning to be a better human being by expanding our capacity for empathy.

Last edited by Riemann; 09-13-2018 at 06:55 PM.
  #256  
Old 09-13-2018, 06:56 PM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Personally I first look at the caricature to determine whether it has attributes I associate with standard racist characterizations, and only after I determine the image is clearly a racist caricature (as the one in the OP is), only then do I cast aspersions upon its creator.
Those racist characterizations were themselves caricatures. Why is it surprising that legitimate caricatures share characteristics? How could it be otherwise?
  #257  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:00 PM
Riemann's Avatar
Riemann Riemann is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Santa Fe, NM, USA
Posts: 5,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Those racist characterizations were themselves caricatures. Why is it surprising that legitimate caricatures share characteristics? How could it be otherwise?
Your second sentence is begs the question. A caricature that shares the characteristics is of historical racist characterizations is not legitimate precisely because it shares those characteristics. If that leaves no non-legitimate caricatures in your repertoire, your options are to learn to be a better caricaturist, to quit using caricatures, or to accept that people calling you a racist are correct.

Last edited by Riemann; 09-13-2018 at 07:02 PM.
  #258  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:01 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
I disagree. I place intent on a much higher level than you do and that is how I navigate the world.
If you think it is not important then that's a philosophical chasm that I can't get over so I'll leave it there.
What has more tangible impact though? Intent or effect? Obviously effect. So much so that intent in many cases is of trivial significance. I can personally relate to this as a disabled man. Just as I'm sure it's relatable to black people and other minorities, women, even those with mental illnesses.
  #259  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:03 PM
begbert2 begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 11,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Those racist characterizations were themselves caricatures. Why is it surprising that legitimate caricatures share characteristics? How could it be otherwise?
"How could it be otherwise"? Well, your cartoonists could have the barest awareness of the history of their own medium, and perhaps exercise the barest modicum of effort to avoid stomping on clearly marked beartraps, for a start.

This is sort of like saying "how can a reasonable person avoid being accused of impersonating a police officer? If I happen to be wearing a blue uniform, a badge, and a gunbelt, it could just be coincidence!"
  #260  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:15 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 23,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
no, you haven't. You've asserted it several times like you just did then
Of course I asserted it. It's what I think, wasn't that the question?
Quote:
Context would be an understanding of why it was being spoken or shouted in either case.
No. The volume itself is context.
Quote:
You haven't given any context in either scenario.
Yes, I have. Volume, and size of audience, and location. All of these are context.

Is it possible you don't know what context actually means?
Quote:
The volume may or may not be relevant. I have absolutely no way of knowing and you haven't elaborated.
Like I said right at the start - equivocation. I specified 3 things about each example. A sincere debater would assume I did so intentionally. An intentional equivocator would look for the loopholes that let him out of acknowledging the obvious differences.
Quote:
That is a very low debating tactic.
That's rich. I was asking a question for clarification.
Quote:
Your comment about artists lying was made for the first time just now.
Did you assume all this time I thought the artist was honest when he said he had no racist intent in the OP's linked article? All my posts saying I think this cartoon is racist are clearly also me calling the artist a liar. I didn't think it needed spelling out.

Obviously, I was mistaken. I apologize for thinking you'd see the obvious.
Quote:
You can't retroactively take a comment of mine and say it doesn't agree with something you've just said in clarification.
I would think the "Ha Ha Ha. No" was already an obvious statement. I wasn't clarifying, I was asking for clarification, as I don't understand what you reference by "your previous comments"

Last edited by MrDibble; 09-13-2018 at 07:17 PM.
  #261  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:23 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 23,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
We should automatically assume that anyone drawing a caricature of an ethnic person is racist?
Was that what I said? No, I believe, if you follow the chain, you'll see that I'm saying it's specifically using exaggerated ethnic features in your caricature that would automatically lead to the assumption one is racist. So no, not any caricaturist. Just the shitty racist ones.
  #262  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:44 PM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
"How could it be otherwise"? Well, your cartoonists could have the barest awareness of the history of their own medium, and perhaps exercise the barest modicum of effort to avoid stomping on clearly marked beartraps, for a start.

This is sort of like saying "how can a reasonable person avoid being accused of impersonating a police officer? If I happen to be wearing a blue uniform, a badge, and a gunbelt, it could just be coincidence!"
Again, caricatures rely on exaggerated physical characteristics. By definition of the word "caricature". That the art form was used for absolutely racist purposes in the past does not mean that all exaggerated physical characteristics moving forward have racist purposes. So, it's not sort of like saying that at all.

Any of the cited examples of "non-racist" caricatures of Serena Williams if put into a negative context would all of a sudden become racist by these definitions, thus making her uncaricaturable. That's probably not a word though.

Last edited by Fiveyearlurker; 09-13-2018 at 07:46 PM.
  #263  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:53 PM
octopus's Avatar
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 7,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
Your second sentence is begs the question. A caricature that shares the characteristics is of historical racist characterizations is not legitimate precisely because it shares those characteristics. If that leaves no non-legitimate caricatures in your repertoire, your options are to learn to be a better caricaturist, to quit using caricatures, or to accept that people calling you a racist are correct.
Actually, your conclusion is nothing but an opinion. The reason the ridiculous caricatures of the past and some of the present were or are racist is because the person responsible for the drawing is intending the art to be racist. Just like using language can be racist depending upon intent, some aspects of the same racist language can be used completely non racistly.

If you were to do a caricature of someone who happened to be black and had large lips, like Biggie, youd be doing a disservice to the form to draw tiny little lips so as to not offend. https://www.tomrichmond.com/2016/10/...and-ethnicity/

The above is a link to a caricature of Biggie and a brief essay. It would help many to read it. Of course, those who think all negative or satirical treatment of the perpetually oppressed is off limits may disagree.
  #264  
Old 09-13-2018, 07:57 PM
pool pool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 4,060
I think the answer is by necessity a subjective answer. Think about it for a minute, can a series of lines, dots, slashes, shadings, etc. be racist? Eventually we begin to get into some really abstract territory and also how the human brain functions and mirror neurons and all kinds of shit. You'd also have to see into the mind of the cartoonist both consciously and subconsciously, which is pretty much impossible. In my opinion it isn't racist but it's impossible to prove either positively or negatively unless we have an honest dialogue with the illustrator and maybe not even then.
__________________
"You can do anything you set your mind to...But money helps"
  #265  
Old 09-13-2018, 08:10 PM
Chisquirrel Chisquirrel is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarvinKitFox View Post
Yes, it is racist.
Unfortunately, Serena *was* fat, big-lipped, huge-mouthed,irrational and screaming like a baby.
I disagree about the frazzle-haired though.
Actually, I disagree about the screaming like a baby. She was screaming like a drunk dockworker.

Did she deserve the penalties she got? Hell yes.
Did she receive biased treatment from the umpire? Not compared to that same umpire's last couple of years on the job.
Comparing the umpire's actions to those of the McEnroe era is ludicrous, that is from two generations ago!!
Compare it to recent standards, and you will see that every tennis player that acted like a spoilt brat, high on his/her entitlement, has been treated the exact same way.
Of course, at this time, the *only* international tennis player that acts like that is Serena.
You must have missed the multiple tweets by current male tennis stars like Djokovic that say they've said worse things to Ramos and not gotten a warning or penalty (including Ramos going so far as to say "stop, or I'll have to give you a penalty").

The bright red lips are what sealed the caricature as racist. That's Aunt Jemima-level bullshit right there.
  #266  
Old 09-13-2018, 08:47 PM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
If John McEnroe went into politics (christ! we shouldn't even joke about these things in the current climate) the caricaturists would draw him in tight shorts and sweat band and a wooden wilson racquet would be shoehorned in there somewhere.

Putting big earrings on a Serena Williams caricature is perfectly valid.
But this illustrates precisely why caricature is inherently problematic and should be avoided.
  #267  
Old 09-13-2018, 08:57 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
I have often heard variations of the phrase "Just because you experience racism all the time doesn't mean everything is racism". My interpretation of this is that it takes two components for racism, or any -ism for that matter, to exist in a society. Namely a belief held, subconscious or otherwise, by members of a society's dominant race, in the inferiority of a group of people based on the color of their skin and member(s) of that targeted race experiencing a combination of unique and unreasonable hurdles as a result of those beliefs of the dominant race.

What it also means is that the individual perception of racism, on it's own, is not always sufficient for a charge of racism to be genuine and true. As well as just because the person(s) being accused of racism believes, honestly, that they are not being or perpetuating racism does not in any way mean they are correct. I think it's a stumbling block, on both sides, in the war on racism.
  #268  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:18 PM
Isamu Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 5,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I have often heard variations of the phrase "Just because you experience racism all the time doesn't mean everything is racism". My interpretation of this is that it takes two components for racism, or any -ism for that matter, to exist in a society. Namely a belief held, subconscious or otherwise, by members of a society's dominant race, in the inferiority of a group of people based on the color of their skin and member(s) of that targeted race experiencing a combination of unique and unreasonable hurdles as a result of those beliefs of the dominant race.

What it also means is that the individual perception of racism, on it's own, is not always sufficient for a charge of racism to be genuine and true. As well as just because the person(s) being accused of racism believes, honestly, that they are not being or perpetuating racism does not in any way mean they are correct. I think it's a stumbling block, on both sides, in the war on racism.
Yes.
  #269  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:27 PM
etasyde etasyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
Namely a belief held, subconscious or otherwise, by members of a society's dominant race, in the inferiority of a group of people based on the color of their skin and member(s) of that targeted race experiencing a combination of unique and unreasonable hurdles as a result of those beliefs of the dominant race.
You cite dominant race twice here... as if minorities can't be racist. That's repugnant. This is a woefully ineffective definition of racism, and I reject it handily.

Prejudicial or preferential treatment in contexts where it is inappropriate (there's a long list for what constitutes "inappropriate", but it excludes sexual preference and includes business, for instance), based upon race. It doesn't matter which race is dominant, and to argue otherwise is giving inappropriately prejudicial or preferential treatment based on race.
  #270  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:31 PM
Isamu Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 5,745
He didn't say minorities couldn't be racist. They can be. Is it as systemic, horrible and life debilitating? Maybe not.
  #271  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:35 PM
etasyde etasyde is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
He didn't say minorities couldn't be racist. They can be. Is it as systemic, horrible and life debilitating? Maybe not.
His definition specifically excludes minorities from being racist. They are not the "dominant race" and therefore, under that definition, cannot be racist.

It's a sentiment I hear a lot, and it's aggravating because it's both wrong and extremely hypocritical.
  #272  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:48 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by etasyde View Post
You cite dominant race twice here... as if minorities can't be racist. That's repugnant. This is a woefully ineffective definition of racism, and I reject it handily.

Prejudicial or preferential treatment in contexts where it is inappropriate (there's a long list for what constitutes "inappropriate", but it excludes sexual preference and includes business, for instance), based upon race. It doesn't matter which race is dominant, and to argue otherwise is giving inappropriately prejudicial or preferential treatment based on race.
Let me use my disability as an analogy as an attempt to explain. I belong to a minority group that is disabled people, specifically wheelchair users. Marginalization is something that I am familiar with and can recognize in other minority groups as well. It is this marginalization that affects the second component of what constitutes racism. And that is it's unique and unreasonable hurdles experienced by members of the race on the receiving end of these beliefs of inferiority held by members of the dominant race. While anyone and everyone can believe other people or races are inferior based on skin color, only the dominant group/race actually wields significant power to negatively impact the lives of those they believe to be inferior.

Last edited by Ambivalid; 09-13-2018 at 09:50 PM.
  #273  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:49 PM
Isamu Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 5,745
If the minorities are in a position (in any place and time) to negatively affect you due to your race, then they are in a dominant position (for that time and place).
  #274  
Old 09-13-2018, 09:59 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
If the minorities are in a position (in any place and time) to negatively affect you due to your race, then they are in a dominant position (for that time and place).
Perfect. Very succint.
  #275  
Old 09-13-2018, 10:09 PM
Sunny Daze's Avatar
Sunny Daze Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Bay Area Urban Sprawl
Posts: 11,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
Let me use my disability as an analogy as an attempt to explain. I belong to a minority group that is disabled people, specifically wheelchair users. Marginalization is something that I am familiar with and can recognize in other minority groups as well. It is this marginalization that affects the second component of what constitutes racism. And that is it's unique and unreasonable hurdles experienced by members of the race on the receiving end of these beliefs of inferiority held by members of the dominant race. While anyone and everyone can believe other people or races are inferior based on skin color, only the dominant group/race actually wields significant power to negatively impact the lives of those they believe to be inferior.
{side bar}
Taking notes (re: the other thread)
{/side bar}
  #276  
Old 09-13-2018, 10:17 PM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunny Daze View Post
{side bar}
Taking notes (re: the other thread)
{/side bar}
??

ETA: the thread talking about autism?

Last edited by Ambivalid; 09-13-2018 at 10:19 PM.
  #277  
Old 09-14-2018, 12:02 AM
DragonAsh DragonAsh is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,413
That anyone could defend the OP 'cartoon' as 'not racist' is baffling.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you think hiring a pro to do the job is expensive, wait until you hire an amateur...
  #278  
Old 09-14-2018, 12:05 AM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
That anyone could defend the OP 'cartoon' as 'not racist' is baffling.
Maybe. But not surprising.
  #279  
Old 09-14-2018, 02:04 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 23,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
That anyone could defend the OP 'cartoon' as 'not racist' is baffling.
Some people just love to argue. Some people are themselves racist (although it's of note that even one self-admitted racist has agreed it is racist). And some people, while not racist, are very defensive of their White privilege.

Last edited by MrDibble; 09-14-2018 at 02:06 AM.
  #280  
Old 09-14-2018, 02:08 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
Out of curiousity, what's your take on 'classic' disney and warner brothers cartoons, which were probably not designed by people chuckling to themselves "I'm gonna offend some people, heh heh heh", but managed to include characterizations that their own owners won't release to the public today because they themselves confess that the art is inherently racist?
I don't have a take on them as I'm not familiar with them. The creators seemed to have self-censored as they themselves think it is racist. It is not my claim that there are no racist works out there.
  #281  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:00 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riemann View Post
I don't think intent is not important. That's how you tell the difference between somebody who made an error of judgment and somebody who's a despicable asshole.
I agree but I think that in the current climate intent is given little to no consideration at all.

Quote:
But it's equally wrong to think that intent is all that matters. It's almost certainly true that most racism is unintentional.
and it is also true that people will see racism where none is intended and where it does not exist. Not every accusation of discrimination is valid and I don't think the default position should be that it is. I think a cure of that nature is worse than the disease.

Quote:
It behooves us to consider the effect of what we do, and to learn that the effect of what we do may be quite different from what we intended or expected.
Correct, but as we all do that we have to balance it with an equivalent responsibility to assess of the motives of others in their interactions with us and modify our response accordingly.

Quote:
It's hardly a philosophical chasm, unless you believe that being inconsiderate of others is a philosophy. It's simply learning to be a better human being by expanding our capacity for empathy.
Empathy is a wonderful thing, being able to see things from the other side is a wonderful thing and I wholly support that approach. Part of that is accepting that people are sometimes going to do something that rubs you up the wrong way and absent of any malicious intent we should be broadly tolerant. It isn't a zero sum game where the offense taken on one side equates to an equivalent guilt and responsibility on the other.

Free expression is massively important, as it stands at the moment the back and forth of this discussion is exactly the right thing to do. A verbal difference of opinion that both sides may learn from.

What bothers me is any suggestion of a curb on free expression based purely on subjective offence and a discussion shorne of any nuance. I think that is a massively dangerous path to take and this goes well beyond racism.
  #282  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:05 AM
kambuckta kambuckta is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vic, Australia.
Posts: 9,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Some people just love to argue. Some people are themselves racist (although it's of note that even one self-admitted racist has agreed it is racist). And some people, while not racist, are very defensive of their White privilege.
And maybe it's possible to debate whether the cartoon was racist without being labelled a racist for engaging in the debate.
  #283  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:10 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
What has more tangible impact though? Intent or effect? Obviously effect. So much so that intent in many cases is of trivial significance. I can personally relate to this as a disabled man. Just as I'm sure it's relatable to black people and other minorities, women, even those with mental illnesses.
Clearly only an effect can have an effect in the world as we experience it, that's pretty much the definition of "effect". However to treat intent as "trivial" is unhelpful in the extreme. How do you react to, understand, change or discuss peoples behaviours without an appreciation of why they are doing what they do?
  #284  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:15 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
the individual perception of racism, on it's own, is not always sufficient for a charge of racism to be genuine and true. As well as just because the person(s) being accused of racism believes, honestly, that they are not being or perpetuating racism does not in any way mean they are correct. I think it's a stumbling block, on both sides, in the war on racism.
I agree completely with this, I think that is exactly the nuanced view that is so often missing with the offerenderati on both sides perfectly willing and able to knee-jerk their way to idiotic conclusions.
  #285  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:23 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Of course I asserted it. It's what I think, wasn't that the question?
No, my question (asked multiple times now) was "why" not "what" but to be honest it's going nowhere is it?

There are others in this thread that are happy to have a productive back and forth. I'm not having any problem understanding the points their making and ours is rather heavy weather and extremely unproductive so I'll politely bow out of this line of argument with you.
  #286  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:44 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 23,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by kambuckta View Post
And maybe it's possible to debate whether the cartoon was racist without being labelled a racist for engaging in the debate.
There are 2 other options in there. Nobody's been labelled as a racist, feel free to pick whichever fits, or give another category if you don't like mine.
  #287  
Old 09-14-2018, 03:54 AM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 23,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
No, my question (asked multiple times now) was "why" not "what"
Distinction without a difference. The what of how they're different is the why - as I've said before : because the press is not the private sphere. Again, asking "But why" to that reply makes you come across a little bit otariid.
Quote:
but to be honest it's going nowhere is it?
Takes two to tango. Like what I said above about sincere debate vs obvious equivocation.
Quote:
There are others in this thread that are happy to have a productive back and forth. I'm not having any problem understanding the points their making and ours is rather heavy weather and extremely unproductive so I'll politely bow out of this line of argument with you.
Cheers.

Last edited by MrDibble; 09-14-2018 at 03:55 AM.
  #288  
Old 09-14-2018, 04:25 AM
Ambivalid's Avatar
Ambivalid Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: In my head
Posts: 13,170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Clearly only an effect can have an effect in the world as we experience it, that's pretty much the definition of "effect". However to treat intent as "trivial" is unhelpful in the extreme. How do you react to, understand, change or discuss peoples behaviours without an appreciation of why they are doing what they do?
I said "in many cases" intent can be of trivial significance. Don't mischaracterize my words, I didn't describe intent as inherently trivial or meaningless. I agree with you, understanding and appreciating one's intent is important when wishing to influence the impact of the behavior that is shaped by that intent. My only point was that the damage or benefit of the two concepts, intent and effect of behavior shaped by that intent are apples and oranges, not comparable.

So I think I need to acknowledge a misstatement on my part and correct myself. Originally I took issue with the notion that intent is of primary or even sole importance. In my effort to challenge this position I went too far in characterizing intent as potentially trivial. It's not, it is of equal import. In the sense that discerning it is fundamental to the task of changing or influencing the behavior it produces. And I realize that I'm arguing against a point that you didn't actually make. I read it as being implied in your post. I see that I could be wrong though. However, it's still a valid point in general to make re the subject.
  #289  
Old 09-14-2018, 04:38 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
I said "in many cases" intent can be of trivial significance. Don't mischaracterize my words, I didn't describe intent as inherently trivial or meaningless. I agree with you, understanding and appreciating one's intent is important when wishing to influence the impact of the behavior that is shaped by that intent. My only point was that the damage or benefit of the two concepts, intent and effect of behavior shaped by that intent are apples and oranges, not comparable.
No mis-characterisation intended. I was talking in the abstract regarding the lengths to which that line of thinking can be taken. Not that you do. I think were are in general agreement on the points you made.

Quote:
So I think I need to acknowledge a misstatement on my part and correct myself. Originally I took issue with the notion that intent is of primary or even sole importance. In my effort to challenge this position I went too far in characterizing intent as potentially trivial. It's not, it is of equal import. In the sense that discerning it is fundamental to the task of changing or influencing the behavior it produces. And I realize that I'm arguing against a point that you didn't actually make. I read it as being implied in your post. I see that I could be wrong though. However, it's still a valid point in general to make re the subject.
Clarification gladly understood and though we are not perfectly aligned on this I think we agree on those points in general.

Last edited by Novelty Bobble; 09-14-2018 at 04:38 AM.
  #290  
Old 09-14-2018, 09:07 AM
SlackerInc SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 9,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
That anyone could defend the OP 'cartoon' as 'not racist' is baffling.
I agree.
  #291  
Old 09-14-2018, 10:35 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 34,876
I've finally found an image that illustrates a lot of what we're talking about:

https://i.imgur.com/SUWL8Ls.png

You can see that the drawing of Serena has the same ears, mouth, and hair style (except longer) of the old racist cartoon. Only the skin color and lack of bangles are there.

What you can't see is that this character (named Angelfood McSpade) also has the weird fat muscular thing going on. So here is the same character. She's actually less big than the cartoon Serena.

I don't really understand how anyone can't see the similarities. And, if you do see them, then you know why the comic is said to be racist.

Last edited by BigT; 09-14-2018 at 10:36 AM.
  #292  
Old 09-14-2018, 10:35 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambivalid View Post
As far as whether Osaka is/isnt portrayed as a white woman or as a minority, i find it completely disingenuous for those who say she is being portrayed accurately because of a similarity in skin tone to Serena. You have to look extremely closely and critically to notice a difference in her skin tone and that of the ref's. His does have a slightly more pinkish hue but that slight difference is more that overshadowed by all the other much less nuanced and less slight differences between Serena and Osaka. Dollars to donuts, if you ask 100 random people unfamiliar with the story what race the girl who reprezents Osaka in the cartoon is, 100/100 people are going to say "white". In my opinion, the cartoonist only used the fact that Osaka had a blondish pony tail to go "all out white" so that he could fall back on it when (rightly) criticized for "whitewashing".
For the record, I personally never claimed she was being portrayed accurately, but I did make the claim that she has the same skin tone as Serena, and in another thread mentioned the pink cheeks of the judge. Isn't it only fair to the artist though, that if you are going to claim that Osaka was portrayed as white, that you make sure of this, by, yes, examining closely? For all I know, others did examine it closely. But if so, how they couldn't see the white highlighting of Osaka's nose and chin and by comparison note her brown skin tone is beyond me. And your 100 random people theory? Quite frankly, it's ridiculous. I could just as easily say the opposite, and neither one of us could prove the other wrong.

Last edited by Fiddle Peghead; 09-14-2018 at 10:37 AM. Reason: clarification that the white highlighing was on Osaka
  #293  
Old 09-14-2018, 10:38 AM
BigT's Avatar
BigT BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 34,876
Also, the people throwing a temper tantrum at their comic being described as racist and getting all defiant and putting in on the front page while yelling about PC only make me more sure of the artist's intent.

That's not how non-racist people react to being told that what they made might be offensive. They would just say something like "I wasn't trying to be racist, but I can see the similarities and I apologize for those who I may have offended."

Easy peasey. But they'd rather milk this for popularity and outrage.
  #294  
Old 09-14-2018, 10:40 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonAsh View Post
That anyone could defend the OP 'cartoon' as 'not racist' is baffling.

Oh, yeah? Well, that anyone can attack the cartoon as racist is baffling. Hey, that was easy!
  #295  
Old 09-14-2018, 11:23 AM
Fiveyearlurker Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 5,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Also, the people throwing a temper tantrum at their comic being described as racist and getting all defiant and putting in on the front page while yelling about PC only make me more sure of the artist's intent.

That's not how non-racist people react to being told that what they made might be offensive. They would just say something like "I wasn't trying to be racist, but I can see the similarities and I apologize for those who I may have offended."

Easy peasey. But they'd rather milk this for popularity and outrage.
That's a convenient way to have a discussion. Anyone disagreeing with you is proof that you are correct.`
  #296  
Old 09-14-2018, 11:37 AM
octopus's Avatar
octopus octopus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 7,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
Also, the people throwing a temper tantrum at their comic being described as racist and getting all defiant and putting in on the front page while yelling about PC only make me more sure of the artist's intent.

That's not how non-racist people react to being told that what they made might be offensive. They would just say something like "I wasn't trying to be racist, but I can see the similarities and I apologize for those who I may have offended."

Easy peasey. But they'd rather milk this for popularity and outrage.
Or the cartoonist and others may actually be sick of the concept of PCness being used as a bludgeon to silence and control. Its sad that illiberalism is so acceptable.
  #297  
Old 09-14-2018, 11:51 AM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,439
Racist?
  #298  
Old 09-14-2018, 11:56 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
That's not how non-racist people react to being told that what they made might be offensive. They would just say something like "I wasn't trying to be racist, but I can see the similarities and I apologize for those who I may have offended."
ah yes, of course.

Monty Python got there before you.
  #299  
Old 09-14-2018, 12:17 PM
MrDibble's Avatar
MrDibble MrDibble is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 23,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead View Post
Let me see...
Caricature involving exaggeration of Serena's personal distinguishing features like cheekbones over generic racial stereotype traits like lips and nose? Check.

I'm going to go with "No"
  #300  
Old 09-14-2018, 12:38 PM
Fiddle Peghead's Avatar
Fiddle Peghead Fiddle Peghead is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Harlem, New York, NY
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Let me see...
Caricature involving exaggeration of Serena's personal distinguishing features like cheekbones over generic racial stereotype traits like lips and nose? Check.

I'm going to go with "No"
How would you say the lips in this image compare to Serena's actual lips?
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017