Australia paper defends Serena Williams cartoon despite outrage

[Nyezhov]

Just now, bristolboy said:

Mostly reporting on reports created elsewhere. Another cheap and know nothing shot from you. To be expected.

Res ipsa loquitur.

ah yes. when in doubt, proceed to ad hominems. Its the tactic of the left. to be expected. Res ipsa loquitur right back at ya.

 

Here, lets try: Black Americans commit crimes all out of proportion to their population in the US. Is that fact racist? 

 

Next thing you know we will be confronted with my personal fav...unconsious bias!

[KMartinHandyman]

He’s spot on as caricatures go.
Now if he put a bone in her nose it would be racist.
car·i·ca·ture
ˈkerikəCHər,ˈkerikəˌCHo͝or/Submit
noun
1.
a picture, description, or imitation of a person or thing in which certain striking characteristics are exaggerated in order to create a comic or grotesque effect.
"a caricature of Jimmy Durante"
synonyms: cartoon, parody, satire, lampoon, burlesque; More
verb
1.
make or give a comically or grotesquely exaggerated representation of (someone or something).
"he was caricatured on the cover of TV Guide"
synonyms: parody, satirize, lampoon, make fun of, burlesque, mimic; More

[bristolboy]

18 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

ah yes. when in doubt, proceed to ad hominems. Its the tactic of the left. to be expected. Res ipsa loquitur right back at ya.

 

Here, lets try: Black Americans commit crimes all out of proportion to their population in the US. Is that fact racist? 

 

Next thing you know we will be confronted with my personal fav...unconsious bias!

How could res ipsa loquitur possibly be ad hominem?

That fact about black americans has what exactly to do with discrimination against black people while driving cars, applying for mortgages or trying to get a job?

[giddyup]

1 hour ago, marcusarelus said:

Americans know Billy the kid and Jesse James were murdering outlaws.  

 

What I find odd about this thread is the lack of understanding that the rest of the world including America knows that cartoon is racist.  Australians/(Brits?) almost universally in this thread have not grasped the simple fact that that cartoon is racist.

 

   I think Australians have a perception that as a country they are not racist compared to other countries like America.  Which is obviously false.  One only has to read this thread with an objective mind to confirm that.  

 

 

 

Of course they know they were outlaws, doesn't stop them being iconic folk heroes, as is Ned Kelly to Australians. Americans would be the last nation on earth to be pointing fingers at anybody re racism, if you need facts to back that up, happy to provide them. Funny they can have their noses put out of joint over a cartoon yet turn a blind eye to police shooting innocent blacks without recourse. Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

[Nyezhov]

41 minutes ago, giddyup said:

. Funny they can have their noses put out of joint over a cartoon yet turn a blind eye to police shooting innocent blacks without recourse. Hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Whoa there Cowboy, there is a whole bunch of Americans like me:

 

Who think that cartoon is great.

Who think that criticism of the cartoon as rascist is just stupid pc whining leftist tripe

Who KNOW that innocent black folks arent being gun downed by the cops.

 

Some folks take the opposite view. Thats fine. The glory of America, from my view, is that all speech is OK. All speech. Not just what the PC crowd thinks is nice.

 

Please dont tar all Americans with the whinging brush. Some of us are ok. 

[giddyup]

1 minute ago, Nyezhov said:

Whoa there Cowboy, there is a whole bunch of Americans like me:

 

Who think that cartoon is great.

Who think that criticism of the cartoon as rascist is just stupid pc whining leftist tripe

Who KNOW that innocent black folks arent being gun downed by the cops.

 

Some folks take the opposite view. Thats fine. The glory of America, from my view, is that all speech is OK. All speech. Not just what the PC crowd thinks is nice.

 

Please dont tar all Americans with the whinging brush. Some of us are ok. 

My apologies. I was responding to marcusarelis' comments where he was insinuating that the US found the cartoon racist, and I was just pointing out that the US was in no position to be pointing fingers at anyone re racism. The US is supposed to be a bastion of free speech, they were up in arms over the shooting of the French journos re the cartoon of mohammed, I'm just surprised that they have reacted so strongly to what is nothing more than a cartoon of Selena throwing a tantrum..

[Quidio]

I found it to be mildly racist and probably a little sexist, but that goes with cartoon caricatures.    It also goes with being a public figure.

 

 

[manarak]

9 minutes ago, Quidio said:

I found it to be mildly racist and probably a little sexist, but that goes with cartoon caricatures.    It also goes with being a public figure.

I would like to ask you - without any malice - if you could elaborate on why you think the cartoon is racist and sexist?

[Nyezhov]

14 minutes ago, giddyup said:

My apologies. I was responding to marcusarelis' comments where he was insinuating that the US found the cartoon racist, and I was just pointing out that the US was in no position to be pointing fingers at anyone re racism. The US is supposed to be a bastion of free speech, they were up in arms over the shooting of the French journos re the cartoon of mohammed, I'm just surprised that they have reacted so strongly to what is nothing more than a cartoon of Selena throwing a tantrum..

No need to apologize mate, its the Internet! Have a beer!

[Quidio]

6 minutes ago, manarak said:

I would like to ask you - without any malice - if you could elaborate on why you think the cartoon is racist and sexist?

As I said, I considered it to be mildly racist and sexist.   It portrays her in a very unflattering manner and for women, body image is more important than for males.   I think when making caricatures of minority groups, it's best to be a little more careful to not be offensive.

 

It was meant to be humorous, but I cringed when I saw it without reading any commentary.   

 

I am not going to try to get into a fray over the situation.   It's a little like a judge once said about pornography  "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it."

 

[manarak]

6 minutes ago, Quidio said:

As I said, I considered it to be mildly racist and sexist.   It portrays her in a very unflattering manner and for women, body image is more important than for males.   I think when making caricatures of minority groups, it's best to be a little more careful to not be offensive.

 

It was meant to be humorous, but I cringed when I saw it without reading any commentary.   

 

I am not going to try to get into a fray over the situation.   It's a little like a judge once said about pornography  "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it."

 

 

So it's more a feeling that something you can rationally explain.

 

But I think what you say about minorities is important:

Quote

I think when making caricatures of minority groups, it's best to be a little more careful to not be offensive.

but I think that's not possible?

how would you have drawn that cartoon?

such a cartoon would be automatically racist and sexist because it would show a black woman?

 

 

 

[giddyup]

38 minutes ago, Quidio said:

    I think when making caricatures of minority groups, it's best to be a little more careful to not be offensive.

 

So you would have found the Charlie Hebdo cartoon of mohammed offensive as well? I guess every cartoon or satire needs to be vetted before publication just in case someone is offended. Not sure who would be right for the job though.

[sanemax]

44 minutes ago, Quidio said:

As I said, I considered it to be mildly racist and sexist.   It portrays her in a very unflattering manner and for women, body image is more important than for males.   I think when making caricatures of minority groups, it's best to be a little more careful to not be offensive.

Why would a minority person get more offended by a caricature than a non minority person ?

Caricatures do tend to exaggerate peoples appearance .

Maybe we could forbid caricatures of minorities ?

[blazes]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Mostly reporting on reports created elsewhere. Another cheap and know nothing shot from you. To be expected.

Res ipsa loquitur.

 

"Res ipsa loquitur"....the thing speaks for itself?  ( = "To be expected"?)  (Surely this is an ad hominem attack on Nyezhov?)

To see racism under every stone is close to "hatred" in my view.

 

Or, at the risk of being rebuked by the moderator for using a language not English, maybe this phrase will clarify matters:

cum odio sui coepit veritas   = the first reaction to truth is hatred.

 

[Spidey]

5 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Osaka is actually a lot more American than she is Japanese.

She's half Japanese, half Samoan.

[Nyezhov]

5 minutes ago, Spidey said:

She's half Japanese, half Samoan.

Haitian

[Spidey]

5 hours ago, marcusarelus said:

What I find odd about this thread is the lack of understanding that the rest of the world including America knows that cartoon is racist.  Australians/(Brits?) almost universally in this thread have not grasped the simple fact that that cartoon is racist. 

Which part of the rest of the world thinks this cartoon is racist? You've discounted Brits and Australians and admitted Americans do find it racist, so who are we actually talking about? Russians? Chinese? Indians? No, only in America is there a groundswell of opinion that it's racist.

 

If they had depicted her as white, I could see that it could be regarded as racist, but for a caricature, it was entirely accurate. Americans, and particularly black Americans, get over yourselves.

[Scott]

Troll posts and replies removed.  

[Quidio]

3 hours ago, giddyup said:

So you would have found the Charlie Hebdo cartoon of mohammed offensive as well? I guess every cartoon or satire needs to be vetted before publication just in case someone is offended. Not sure who would be right for the job though.

Nope, I didn't find it offensive, but a whole entire group of people did.   

[Thechook]

[Thechook]

8 minutes ago, Thechook said:

Same cartoonist, same tournament no outcry from Americans about racism and sexism.  Absolutely no difference in the humour or context the only difference is the players country of origin.  One is an Aussie the other an American.

[giddyup]

1 hour ago, Quidio said:

Nope, I didn't find it offensive, but a whole entire group of people did.   

So you don't publish because someone finds it offensive? Where do you draw the line, a group or an individual? Perhaps have a poll first.

[manarak]

3 hours ago, Quidio said:

Nope, I didn't find it offensive, but a whole entire group of people did.   

according to your earlier post, you feel the cartoon is racist and sexist... now you say it's not offensive... ummmmmmmm...

 

[marcusarelus]

5 hours ago, Spidey said:

Which part of the rest of the world thinks this cartoon is racist? You've discounted Brits and Australians and admitted Americans do find it racist, so who are we actually talking about? Russians? Chinese? Indians? No, only in America is there a groundswell of opinion that it's racist.

 

If they had depicted her as white, I could see that it could be regarded as racist, but for a caricature, it was entirely accurate. Americans, and particularly black Americans, get over yourselves.

I think there a lot of American racists who found the cartoon amusing and accurate.  If one looks to social media in Europe, India, Africa, and JK Rowling the American liberal press you will see the outing of Australian racism.  From what I'm reading here the emphasis is to shift the discussion away from Australian racism to anti American discussion about Billy the Kid vs Ned Kelly - hardly the discussion topic or convict transportation - hardly the topic or American sports pride - not the topic. 

 

I called up my relatives from Alabama who voted for Trump and have Confederate flags on the porch and they found the cartoon funny. 

 

However reading JK Rowling I find she was not impressed.  So I won't be baited anymore about off topic discussions of American reaction to Serena Williams and I'll try to stay on topic about the cartoon not being funny and only not offensive to Australian good old boys as the rest of the world is reacting in a negative way to the obvious racist caricature. 

[Daffy D]

How come we never hear from black people complaining about racism against whites.

 

If this cartoon in anything to go by seems there is more white material for the blacks to get racist about.

 

Does it only work one way?     (The question is rhetorical)   

[Nyezhov]

49 minutes ago, marcusarelus said:

I think there a lot of American racists who found the cartoon amusing and accurate.  If one looks to social media in Europe, India, Africa, and JK Rowling the American liberal press you will see the outing of Australian racism.  From what I'm reading here the emphasis is to shift the discussion away from Australian racism to anti American discussion about Billy the Kid vs Ned Kelly - hardly the discussion topic or convict transportation - hardly the topic or American sports pride - not the topic. 

 

I called up my relatives from Alabama who voted for Trump and have Confederate flags on the porch and they found the cartoon funny. 

 

However reading JK Rowling I find she was not impressed.  So I won't be baited anymore about off topic discussions of American reaction to Serena Williams and I'll try to stay on topic about the cartoon not being funny and only not offensive to Australian good old boys as the rest of the world is reacting in a negative way to the obvious racist caricature. 

My gf back in the States is black.  She voted for Trump. I have a black kid. We all thought the cartoon was funny. I think there are a lot of Americans that play the race card when it's a duece and not an ace.

 

It's a cartoon. 

[RickBradford]

44 minutes ago, Daffy D said:

How come we never hear from black people complaining about racism against whites.

 

If this cartoon in anything to go by seems there is more white material for the blacks to get racist about.

 

Does it only work one way?     (The question is rhetorical)   

You know the basic answer, but you may be interested in the new academic reasoning behind it (courtesy of the Black Studies programs at some US universities).

 

Racism is no longer about denigrating someone of another color. No. Racism is now redefined as being about power and privilege used to denigrate someone because of their skin color. Thus if you have no power and privilege, by definition you cannot be racist.

 

It's just more convenient reasoning from the halls of self-loathing Western "academia" which has produced such gems as "Science has proved that there is no such thing as biological gender", a discovery which surprised billions of people round the world.

[car720]

13 hours ago, KKr said:

Many years ago, I went on a one week training in Singapore. 
I was called Caucasian, the lady sitting next to me Malay and so on ....
by race and Nationality, no offense taken nor intended.
Those were the days when one could call a 2 a 2 and a 1 a 1.

 

and a shovel a shovel and a spade a spade.  

[BobBKK]

1 hour ago, Daffy D said:

How come we never hear from black people complaining about racism against whites.

 

If this cartoon in anything to go by seems there is more white material for the blacks to get racist about.

 

Does it only work one way?     (The question is rhetorical)   

One way street indeed. I love the cartoon and Kudos to the paper for having some Balls and not capitulating like most do.

 

[marcusarelus]

8 minutes ago, car720 said:

and a shovel a shovel and a spade a spade.  

A typical example of Australian casual racism.  That is what I found interesting that Australians don't have a clue how the rest of the world feels about their racists attitude.  Chink restaurants is the same.