Support NeoGAF

[JayTapp]

Well, if we're being specific and fair, only a very, very small minority of people following that religion would actually murder someone for a comic.

Sadly, a small minority of 25% of the world is still a fuck ton of people who want to kill others over a cartoon/free speech/gender equality etc.

 

[walking fiend]

Isn't shitposting like what you're doing right now a bannable offense here?
What's the point of this post? What's the link with Charlie Hebdo's cover? What the link

The point is that the issue of racism in France is real, and just because I don't live in France, it doesn't mean I should accept that there is no such an issue. The link to the Charlie Hebdo's cover is that, as I pointed before, it shows they have a lack of political sensibility.

So the correct thing to do is assume your audience are a bunch of braindead idiots and cannot think for themselves?

Just because people do not understand the satire of Charlie Hebdo, or perhaps aren't even aware that Charlie Hebdo is a left magazine [whatever that means], it does not mean that they are braindead. I assume you are not implying that Muslims who make these threats are braindead. That it doesn't make political sense to stir a pot that is already full of tension.

 

[ClosingADoor]

The point is that the issue of racism in France is real, and just because I don't live in France, it doesn't mean I should accept that there is no such an issue. The link to the Charlie Hebdo's cover is that, as I pointed before, it shows they have a lack of political sensibility.


Just because people do not understand the satire of Charlie Hebdo, or perhaps aren't even aware that Charlie Hebdo is a left magazine [whatever that means], it does not mean that they are braindead. I assume you are not implying that Muslims who make these threats are braindead. That it doesn't make political sense to stir a pot that is already full of tension.

When did "political sensibility" - what the fuck does this even mean - became the responsibility of a satirical magazine?

And yes, I'd say people making death threats are not too smart in general.

 

[DiipuSurotu]

Glad to see GAF is defending Charlie now. I seem to remember that when they did a drawing about that drowned Syrian toddler GAF wasn't too hot on defending them.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1112663

 

[BarringGaffner]

How do you explain this?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-against-Muslims-and-Jews-soar-in-France.html

The soar in anti-semitism is due to the increase of people from middle east where that is accepted as part of their culture.

The soar in muslim hate crimes is from the left having no answer to problems with immigration, leaving people to go to far right more now. This is the case in all of Europe. It will only get worse unfortunately.

 

[JayTapp]

Christianity was just as bad at one point (I'd argue that it was worse), but thankfully we're long past that time. Many people fought and died to earn the right to speak their mind and discuss new ideas. If Muslims aren't free to criticise their own religion it's going to take a long time for them to break the restrictive hold it has on them.

The sad thing is islam used to have the greatest minds of the world. Open to all, sharing and spreading knowledge. Many things happened since.

 

[BarringGaffner]

Glad to see GAF is defending Charlie now. I seem to remember that when they did a drawing about that drowned Syrian toddler GAF wasn't too hot on defending them.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1112663

There was plenty of people defending them. That was an even better example of people misunderstanding the comic though... people get offended easily without thinking.

 

[walking fiend]

When did "political sensibility" - what the fuck does this even mean - became the responsibility of a satirical magazine?

Pardon me, a satirical magazine is not supposed to be political? Isn't the purpose of satirical magazine, a left one for that, to be political?

And yes, I'd say people making death threats are not too smart in general.

So you have basically categorized Muslims into two groups: Group A. who laugh at Charlie Hebdo's caricature, group B. who don't find it funny and make death threats?

How convenient for you to forget that there are perhaps many people who find this offensive yet do not make any death threats [or even demand ban of such cartoons].

It is as if whatever cartoon Charlie Hebdo comes up with, just because it is satire, cannot possibly offend someone.

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

Ugh, I love GAF but every time I see a Charlie Hebdo thread I want to slam my head against a wall. Trump comparisons, seriously?

I don't read Charlie anymore as I have disliked their approach to satire for a good decade but there are no racist connotations to their cartoons. Context is key. They are a far left publication and their favorite targets are the ultra-xenophobic european extreme right and religious extremists of all kinds.

This cover is attacking the mayor of Cannes's stupid policies that are probably going to be overturned and no French citizen with half a brain is ever going to interpret it any other way.

 

[Real Hero]

Glad to see GAF is defending Charlie now. I seem to remember that when they did a drawing about that drowned Syrian toddler GAF wasn't too hot on defending them.

I brought that up earlier and I was likely defending them when that was posted

 

[nilbog21]

So funny that it's Americans who are always the first to talk about freedom and free speech, but when it comes to walking the walk, it is the french who are showing us how it's done.

 

[Systolique]

The point is that the issue of racism in France is real, and just because I don't live in France, it doesn't mean I should accept that there is no such an issue. The link to the Charlie Hebdo's cover is that, as I pointed before, it shows they have a lack of political sensibility.

Well I've talked to walls before, but you're one of a kind.

The cover is a response to the """""political sensibilty""""" of the french mayor who issued the ban, asking you to read the previous pages might be too much of an effort to ask you again for you to do so I'll just quote myself again :

The inability to understand something that's been explained numerous times through this thread is fascinating ; the emphasis on "loosen up" is criticizing the idea of the mayor to ban burkinis, which are completely unrelated to terrorism or anything close to it.

It's sarcasm, the thing that internet memers love to misuse 24/7, when it says to muslims to loosen up it's in fact telling idiots like the mayor to chill the fuck down because women wearing burkinis at the beach aren't threatening our country.

You - as in, you gaffers - gotta stop typing nonsense when you have no clue about what you're talking about, just read the thread you want to participate in, there's only 4 pages !

 

[radios shipping overview]

The soar in muslim hate crimes is from the left having no answer to problems with immigration, leaving people to go to far right more now. This is the case in all of Europe. It will only get worse unfortunately.

Hate crimes seem like a reasonable, well-considered response to the challenges presented by immigration. Yes sir.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

How do you explain this?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-against-Muslims-and-Jews-soar-in-France.html

Even though this has nothing to do with the topic at hand I'll humor you and answer.

Those were in reaction of the attacks, I expect the hate crime to slow down when islamist attacks slow down as well because in 2014 the hate crimes targeting muslims were actually decreasing of 41%.

http://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs...anti-musulmans-en-france_4982934_4355770.html

« Alors que l’année 2014 s’était soldée par une baisse importante des actes antimusulmans (− 41,1 % par rapport à 2013), ces derniers ont crû de façon particulièrement inquiétante en début et en fin d’année 2015, en lien avec les deux vagues d’attentats parisiens de janvier et novembre. »

Traduction:

Even though 2014 ended with a sharp decrease of islamophobic acts (-41,1% compared to 2013) those acts saw a important and worrying increase in the beginning and in the end of 2015 linked with the 2 terrorist waves in paris in January and November

 

[Real Hero]

It is as if whatever cartoon Charlie Hebdo comes up with, just because it is satire, cannot possibly offend someone.

'This cover is attacking the mayor of Cannes's stupid policies that are probably going to be overturned and no French citizen with half a brain is ever going to interpret it any other way.' Why does this bother you?

 

[wachie]

Glad to see GAF is defending Charlie now. I seem to remember that when they did a drawing about that drowned Syrian toddler GAF wasn't too hot on defending them.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1112663

So what are you saying? That GAF picks and chooses?

 

[ClosingADoor]

Pardon me, a satirical magazine is not supposed to be political? Isn't the purpose of satirical magazine, a left one for that, to be political?


So you have basically categorized Muslims into two groups: Group A. who laugh at Charlie Hebdo's caricature, group B. who don't find it funny and make death threats?

How convenient for you to forget that there are perhaps many people who find this offensive yet do not make any death threats [or even demand ban of such cartoons].

It is as if whatever cartoon Charlie Hebdo comes up with, just because it is satire, cannot possibly offend someone.

A satirical magazine doesn't have to be "political sensible," which were your words. They should make satire about political issues.

And no, I'm not grouping Muslims into anything. I'm saying people who make death threats are crazy to me, because you know, they make death threats.

People who find it offensive and are not making death threats are not a problem. They are free to find it offensive. They are free to state why. They are free to even protest about it. Guess what, they are also free to not buy the damn magazine.

 

[Kelthink]

When did "political sensibility" - what the fuck does this even mean - became the responsibility of a satirical magazine?

We're all responsible. Some more than others, but nobody is absolved, especially how easy it is to spread a message using social media these days.

 

[radios shipping overview]

So what are you saying? That GAF picks and chooses?

It's almost as if GAF contains a multitude of opinions and viewpoints.

 

[BarringGaffner]

Pardon me, a satirical magazine is not supposed to be political? Isn't the purpose of satirical magazine, a left one for that, to be political?


So you have basically categorized Muslims into two groups: Group A. who laugh at Charlie Hebdo's caricature, group B. who don't find it funny and make death threats?

How convenient for you to forget that there are perhaps many people who find this offensive yet do not make any death threats [or even demand ban of such cartoons].

It is as if whatever cartoon Charlie Hebdo comes up with, just because it is satire, cannot possibly offend someone.

It's ok to offend someone.

That's the problem with Charlie Hebdo- they were established in France prior to Islamists and Jihadists and prior to the left making Islam a sacred cow. The rest of the world has changed to avoid offending where as they have stayed the same and treat far right religious people just as they do any other far right people.

 

[Tiberius]

A satirical magazine doesn't have to be "political sensible," which were your words. They should make satire about political issues.

And no, I'm not grouping Muslims into anything. I'm saying people who make death threats are crazy to me, because you know, they make death threats.

People who find it offensive and are not making death threats are not a problem. They are free to find it offensive. They are free to state why. They are free to even protest about it. Guess what, they are also free to not buy the damn magazine.

They are even free to sue it

And with time they will don't care about it like the catholics now

 

[Kinyou]

The France is already painted with unfounded fear and hatred of every kind of Muslim; stupid caricatures will only fuel that hatred.

It is the same as defending all the bullshit that Trump spews out.

Freedom of speech that just adds to racism and hatred should be condemned, even if allowed; just like how Trump should be allowed to run for presidency, but should not be voted in [unless you are okay with racism and sexism]

No it is not, because the messages are inherently different, but lets just ignore that.

 

[walking fiend]

'This cover is attacking the mayor of Cannes's stupid policies that are probably going to be overturned and no French citizen with half a brain is ever going to interpret it any other way.' Why does this bother you?

Because that is not clear unless someone already knows that Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing magazine and is at least somewhat familiar with their approach to satire.

My issue is that when they draw something, they should also consider the fact that their caricature will be uploaded to internet, where people will just see it without having the slightest clue what has been the context of it [published by a left-wing magazine to mock the racist decision of a mayor]; then they already form some opinion about it, and then see the name of Charlie Hebdo is the source. We do not live in 1980's where a cartoon circulate only among the Charlie Hebdo's subscribers.

I posted something before

Let me show you another image; do you think this is racist or not?
http://i.imgur.com/g2ARrZB.jpg

And asked what people really think about this. No one has answered yet.

 

[freethoughtbubble]

Because that is not clear unless someone already knows that Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing magazine and is at least somewhat familiar with their approach to satire.

Like French people?

 

[ClosingADoor]

Because that is not clear unless someone already knows that Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing magazine and is at least somewhat familiar with their approach to satire.

My issue is that when they draw something, they should also consider the fact that their caricature will be uploaded to internet, where people will just see it without having the slightest clue what has been the context of it; then they already form some opinion about it, and then see the name of Charlie Hebdo is the source. We do not live in 1980's where a cartoon circulate only among the Charlie Hebdo's subscribers.

I posted something before

And asked what people really think about this. No one has answered yet.

So maybe they should look up the context instead of drawing conclusions? You can take pretty much everything out of context. That is not on the creator of the cartoon.

And what does that picture have to do with anything? Give some more details, maybe then I can make an opinion from it.

Edit: Looked it up.

Linde's art became internationally known through an event at the Moderna Museet in Stockolm in April 2012.[5] At the 75th anniversary celebration of the Konstnärernas riksorganisation (KRO) he had been invited to make the cake which he called Painful Cake. He decorated and made the cake in the shape of a black Venus of Willendorf, but with his own head in full black make-up looking like a stereotypical black person,[6] a so-called "Golliwog".[7] When the first piece of the cake was cut, a resemblance of female genitals were revealed with Linde screaming to give the effect of an actual black woman being cut.[8][9] The scene was filmed with a video camera and the effect was increased by the fact that the person slicing the first piece of cake was the Swedish Minister of Culture Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth.[10][11]

Some claimed racism in the depiction of the cake as an art piece and the event was reported to the Parliamentary Ombudsman.[12] The Afro-Swedish society demanded that the Minister of Culture should resign.[13] Linde claimed to have been misunderstood and explained that the cake symbolized how white people consumed black people, with the act of cutting off the cake's body parts and eating it.[14][15]

Still don't get your point.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

I posted something before

And asked what people really think about this. No one has answered yet.

No one answered because it's irrelevant to the topic at hand. Is she working in Charlie Hebdo? Is she even french for that matter?

 

[Real Hero]

Because that is not clear unless someone already knows that Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing magazine and is at least somewhat familiar with their approach to satire.

My issue is that when they draw something, they should also consider the fact that their caricature will be uploaded to internet, where people will just see it without having the slightest clue what has been the context of it [published by a left-wing magazine to mock the racist decision of a mayor]; then they already form some opinion about it, and then see the name of Charlie Hebdo is the source. We do not live in 1980's where a cartoon circulate only among the Charlie Hebdo's subscribers.

So everything should be made for everyone especially ignorant people? Readers have a duty to be informed and consider the context if they can't then read a dumber a magazine

 

[BarringGaffner]

.
I posted something before

And asked what people really think about this. No one has answered yet.

No I don't think it's racist, as it's clearly some sort of art. Who is the artist and what was their point?

 

[MUnited83]

Glad to see GAF is defending Charlie now. I seem to remember that when they did a drawing about that drowned Syrian toddler GAF wasn't too hot on defending them.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1112663

You have terrible memory then.

 

[dream]

My issue is that when they draw something, they should also consider the fact that their caricature will be uploaded to internet, where people will just see it without having the slightest clue what has been the context of it [published by a left-wing magazine to mock the racist decision of a mayor]; then they already form some opinion about it, and then see the name of Charlie Hebdo is the source. We do not live in 1980's where a cartoon circulate only among the Charlie Hebdo's subscribers.

When people deploy the term PC, this is what I think they're referring to. I don't think anyone has a moral obligation to avoid offending those who are unwilling to consider context, especially at a time when Charlie Hebdo has such a high profile.

 

[BarringGaffner]

So everything should be made for everyone especially ignorant people?

This. It's a stupid point. We don't accept ignorance as an excuse in society. You can't commit a crime and get off because you didn't realize it was illegal.

Either inform yourself and join the conversation, argue and make a fool of yourself, or walk away.

 

[Acerac]

I know this is probably being paranoid but you might just want to link to that image instead of embedding it.

These guys are basically suicidal at this point

The terrorists have won. -_-

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

Because that is not clear unless someone already knows that Charlie Hebdo is a left-wing magazine and is at least somewhat familiar with their approach to satire.

My issue is that when they draw something, they should also consider the fact that their caricature will be uploaded to internet, where people will just see it without having the slightest clue what has been the context of it [published by a left-wing magazine to mock the racist decision of a mayor]; then they already form some opinion about it, and then see the name of Charlie Hebdo is the source. We do not live in 1980's where a cartoon circulate only among the Charlie Hebdo's subscribers.

I posted something before

And asked what people really think about this. No one has answered yet.

So, no cartoonist should ever draw anything that could be misinterpreted in a foreign country? To be on the safe side, nobody should ever make a joke ever again. That's an easier solution.

 

[walking fiend]

So maybe they should look up the context instead of drawing conclusions? You can take pretty much everything out of context. That is not on the creator of the cartoon.

Well, we get back exactly to my first point. The message that Charlie Hebdo wanted to get across, is not what will be perceived by Muslims. They know that will happen [do they really think Muslims find their cartoons funny?], and since they know it, they are responsible for it.

Sure, they should be allowed to do it, and they should be protected from any kind of physical threat, however, that doesn't abdicate them from responsibility and it doesn't mean I shouldn't find what they do stupid.

That is how people started to pile up on me; when I said defending their Cartoons is the same as defending what Trump says [which they translated the same as saying Trump = Charlie Hebdo, which I didn't said so].

 

[Ghostandgoblin]

My issue is that when they draw something, they should also consider the fact that their caricature will be uploaded to internet, where people will just see it without having the slightest clue what has been the context of it [published by a left-wing magazine to mock the racist decision of a mayor]; then they already form some opinion about it, and then see the name of Charlie Hebdo is the source. We do not live in 1980's where a cartoon circulate only among the Charlie Hebdo's subscribers.

Here you go, your special edition just for you. Great for a satirical journal hey ?

 

[MUnited83]

Pardon me, a satirical magazine is not supposed to be political? Isn't the purpose of satirical magazine, a left one for that, to be political?


So you have basically categorized Muslims into two groups: Group A. who laugh at Charlie Hebdo's caricature, group B. who don't find it funny and make death threats?

How convenient for you to forget that there are perhaps many people who find this offensive yet do not make any death threats [or even demand ban of such cartoons].

It is as if whatever cartoon Charlie Hebdo comes up with, just because it is satire, cannot possibly offend someone.

Holy shit, it's like you can't read, not even your own posts. It's amazing.

 

[Ghostandgoblin]

[do they really think Muslims find their cartoons funny?]

What the hell man ? Just read what you are writing.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Well, we get back exactly to my first point. The message that Charlie Hebdo wanted to get across, is not what will be perceived by Muslims. They know that will happen [do they really think Muslims find their cartoons funny?], and since they know it, they are responsible for it.

Sure, they should be allowed to do it, and they should be protected from any kind of physical threat, however, that doesn't abdicate them from responsibility and it doesn't mean I shouldn't find what they do stupid.

That is how people started to pile up on me; when I said defending their Cartoons is the same as defending what Trump says [which they translated the same as saying Trump = Charlie Hebdo, which I didn't said so].

So the magazine is now responsible because some people don't understand their work? And that makes it somehow OK for those people to make death threats? What exactly are you trying to say here...

And yes, you compared the two. Because if you say defending the cartoon is the same as defending Trump, then you think the two have the same message. Which they don't.

Find it stupid all you want. But don't say they somehow are responsible for the death threats and should be more "political sensible", since that isn't their job.

 

[atr0cious]

Here you go, your special edition just for you. Great for a satirical journal hey ?

Wow, this is a really great edit, and shows the real effect of what the ban does.

 

[Real Hero]

Well, we get back exactly to my first point. The message that Charlie Hebdo wanted to get across, is not what will be perceived by Muslims. They know that will happen [do they really think Muslims find their cartoons funny?]

Not all Muslims are mindless killers you know, I'm 100% sure there are some french muslims who will find it funny

 

[walking fiend]

No I don't think it's racist, as it's clearly some sort of art. Who is the artist and what was their point?

Their point was to "highlight the issue of female genital mutilation"

Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth was [Sweden's minister of culture] taking part in an event at the Moderna Museet in Stockholm, the capital's museum of modern art and home to works by Picasso and Dalí. She was invited to cut the cake, an art installation meant to highlight the issue of female genital mutilation. She began, as instructed, by taking a chunk from the cake's "clitoris".

My point is that art can be very controversial in the age of internet and mass media. Just because the creator wants to promote harmony or a more moderate understanding, it doesn't mean it will do so.

So, no cartoonist should ever draw anything that could be misinterpreted in a foreign country? To be on the safe side, nobody should ever make a joke ever again. That's an easier solution.

That's not my point. My point is that, if you are a left magazine and if you claim that your cartoons cause X, while in fact your cartoons cause exactly the opposite of X in reality, and you know that, at least you are being irresponsible. It is similar to making a joke to make someone happy, while you know it will hurt them. How is that a joke anymore?

Not all Muslims are mindless killers you know, I'm 100% sure there are some french muslims who will find it funny

Yes yes. Please read my post above. I am sorry that I used the general word 'Muslims' before the sentence 'don't find it funny'.

[Why do I have to point out my points all the time; please try to figure them out]

 

[Systolique]

This poster successfully hijacked this thread and is now using it to spread his "I have no idea what I'm saying" ideology

Edit : You're comparing conceptual art to satire on completely different matters, I just can't even anymore, I'm getting off this conversation, I hope life goes easy on you buddy

 

[Riposte]

Charlie Hebdo threads need a explanation of the joke/context or GAF's humor-challenged members will end up derailing the thread for understanding the comic as saying the exact opposite of what it's saying. This thread is more about death threats than the comic and yet here we are.

 

[Kurtofan]

Glad to see GAF is defending Charlie now. I seem to remember that when they did a drawing about that drowned Syrian toddler GAF wasn't too hot on defending them.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1112663

Lol how are people so dense

is gallows humor not a thing in your culture

 

[ClosingADoor]

Their point was to "highlight the issue of female genital mutilation"



My point is that art can be very controversial in the age of internet and mass media. Just because the creator wants to promote harmony or a more moderate understanding, it doesn't mean it will do so.

Did you notice something? Everybody here didn't comment on the out of context picture, because they needed more information to make an opinion. Maybe you should try that with cartoons also.

 

[Sami+]

Just wanted to say that I admit my reaction was premature and I didn't know the context of the comic. I'm formerly Muslim and Islamophobia is a touchy subject.

I stand by saying its crass, low-brow, and not funny, and still regard Charlie Hebdo as a rag magazine that I don't want to salute or respect, but I was wrong in calling it racist and hateful. I should have looked further into the context before commenting.

Spoiler

I also don't appreciate the guy who personally insulted me on Twitter about this thread but some people are assholes so it is what it is.

 

[Spaced Harrier]

Satire threads are always the best.

 

[Real Hero]

Just wanted to say that I admit my reaction was premature and I didn't know the context of the comic. I'm formerly Muslim and Islamophobia is a touchy subject.

I stand by saying its crass, low-brow, and not funny, and still regard Charlie Hebdo as a rag magazine that I don't want to salute or respect, but I was wrong in calling it racist and hateful. I should have looked further into the context before commenting.

Spoiler

I also don't appreciate the guy who personally insulted me on Twitter about this thread but some people are assholes so it is what it is.

I didn't know this kind of post was possible on the internet!

 

[shandy706]

I want a Duck Commander version of the guy with his cock and balls sticking through his beard. Outside of any meaning of the comic, I died at the genitals through the beard.

I have a friend with a huge beard I could pick at with that.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

Just wanted to say that I admit my reaction was premature and I didn't know the context of the comic. I'm formerly Muslim and Islamophobia is a touchy subject.

I stand by saying its crass, low-brow, and not funny, and still regard Charlie Hebdo as a rag magazine that I don't want to salute or respect, but I was wrong in calling it racist and hateful. I should have looked further into the context before commenting.

Spoiler

I also don't appreciate the guy who personally insulted me on Twitter about this thread but some people are assholes so it is what it is.

Good on you to admit that. It's a rare sighting in internet.