I’m not seeing the problem with the clip. It’s not the funniest Simpsons scene, but “the dark side”? Seriously? And how is making fun of rich, entitled Yale legacy students “punching down”?
I wonder if your opinion would change if you saw the whole episode that that clip was taken from. Here and here are a couple of descriptions. The main target of the episode was for-profit colleges (like Trump University"), and the Yale scenes were used as plot points and foils for “Burns University.”
So, basically, you “need” safe spaces, inclusive language, and multiculturalism so somebody (SJW?), doesn’t go into an “obnoxious” place (Fox recording studio?), and go all Charlie Hebdo on their asses? Because they made fun of SJW ideology? Like Charlie Hebdo making cartoons making fun Mohammed? You’re saying SJWs should be kowtowed to in all things, lest they become violent?
NOBODY needs, or wants protection from whoever you think is gonna snap because somebody is an unthinking loud obnoxious jerk. Somebody is JUST as likely to snap because of SJW activity (by running over people with Dodge Challengers, for example). Occasional violence is the price to pay for our freedoms, and will be dealt with accordingly, if and when it happens. Freedom isn’t free.
Let’s grant that people do need these things. (We can argue about the dammit.) That doesn’t mean they have to be off-limits as a source of humor.
As ZipperJJ said, on The Simpsons, everything gets portrayed in a cartoony and exaggerated way. Not because they’re “punching” in any particular direction, but because they’re trying to be funny (sometimes more successfully than others).
I’m not willing to grant that.
Saying you can go off to college and be exposed to new ideas, but those new ideas have to be on the Approved List, kind of misses the point.
Regards,
Shodan
huh? I’d associate atheism mostly with a left-leaning or liberal position and the religious with being more conservative.
That’s not what safe spaces, inclusive language, or multiculturalism is, IIUC.
But I don’t think it’s directly relevant to the point of this thread.
There are certain people who thing “anything I don’t like” = “Republicans” or “alt-Right” or “conservative”. (or “Democrats” or “lefties” or “Liberals”)
Thus “I don’t like blueberry jam” would, to them be synonymous with “Only Republicans eat blueberry jam”.
I don’t know if that applies here, but there are people who act/react that way.
Jesus Effing Christ on a pogo stick, talk about much ado about nothing.
Oh wait, Shakespeare is murder. I forgot, my bad.
Some atheists are “left-leaning”, some are conservative, some are full-blown Randian libertarians, some are feminists, some are MRAs and incels. Some of the jerkwad ones have popular YouTube channels. The only thing atheists need have in common is a lack of belief in a god. But this all ties back to a branch of atheists who wanted atheism to be recognized not as a simple lack of belief but as a movement with a credo based on activism for third-wave intersectional gender feminist causes with a central Atheist Priesthood setting the adgenda. But they soon discovered that cats don’t like being herded, and are angry and bitter about it. Google for “positive atheism” or atheism plus" for history.
Really? Why haven’t we needed them at any time before the last couple of years? There were no safe spaces when I went to college, nor have I ever seen on made available at any job I’ve ever held.
ETA: I watched the clip. ROTFLMAO!
I believe the episode set at Yale aired months before Hari Kondabolu’s program on Apu, so I don’t think this episode of The Simpsons had anything to do with it. If anything, they were parodying the controversy over an (The Halloween Costume Controversy at Yale's Silliman College - The Atlantic) sent by a faculty member about Halloween costumes. And the writing staff of The Simpsons is or was mostly populated by Harvard graduates so I’m sure they had fun making fun of their rival school.
(FYI, I didn’t go to Yale but grew up nearby and was amused by some of the inside jokes about the school and New Haven in general.)
Weird stuff. Of course atheists can have pretty much any worldview but to associate the term itself instinctively with a right-leaning worldview seems very alien to me and very much counter to my experiences. As you explain though, in this situation it seems to be a very specific group involved so I live and learn.
So your proof that these things aren’t necessary is the way you turned out?
I’m a conservative atheist. We exist. I will say my social views are all over the map though.
I’d be a conservative theist, but too much cognitive dissonance.
Someone who claims to believe in Young Earth Creationism is a liar or mentally incompetent. Such a person should not be admitted to a university as a student, let alone as a teacher. Hell, I’m not sure about their admissibility to third grade.
Someone who believes that women should stay home more than men should stay home, while there are children under the age of two in that family, probably have a point worth discussing. Beyond that? I doubt it. They’d have a lot of proving to do. There’s nothing a mother can do for a four-year-old that a father isn’t equally able to do. Someone has to be home, of course. After the age of 2, is there a necessary reason for it to be the mother?
Someone who believes that race should not be considered has a lot of explaining to do - race has always been considered. To simply stop considering it is to decide in favour of the status quo, and the status quo is white men. I’m an older white guy and I don’t find it difficult to wrap my brain around this.
Yeah, and look how you turned out!
(That was not a compliment.)
Let’s not forget that Mr. Burns is seldom presented as a sympathetic character on the show. His usual function is to represent the very worst aspects of the over-privileged in our society, if not outright pure evil. So when he becomes upset over political correctness run amuck, why are we to assume that he is acting as the writers’ proxy, or that the viewer is meant to agree with him?
Political correctness is indeed ripe for mockery, but that’s nothing new. It seems that Burns’s over-reaction to the situation is being mocked at least equally. Most of us exist somewhere in between the two absurd extremes shown in the clip; we can turn our heads in either direction and see a target.
In other words: Jeez, lighten up.
Yeah. I would have thought so too, seeing as the prominent voices–Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher–are clearly left-wing. The only exception was Christopher Hitchens, who was proud Trotskyite for most of his life, but in his final years aligned with neoconservatives and supported the war in Iraq. But lately the left seems to have decided otherwise and to be generally in agreement with what BigT said about them. The primary sticking point is that the new atheists criticize Islam, which leftists have decided is not ok.