Uploaded by Background Pony #1918
2209x1080 PNG 1.61 MB
Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
Tags
+-SH safe2268134 +-SH artist:anontheanon347 +-SH edit180740 +-SH applejack208059 +-SH earth pony546072 +-SH pony1700743 +-SH g42127149 +-SH applejack's plantation37 +-SH monitor1219 +-SH neo22 +-SH the architect6 +-SH the matrix243 +-SH the matrix reloaded6
Source
not provided yet
Loading...
Loading...
Frustration would be the natural response, one’d presume. <w<
A lot of the comments, quite a few from me, were civil in nature and devolved over time out of frustration
Hm… Eh… X3
Usually it’s wiser to let people tire themselves out. If you start pruning content it turns people into martyrs and increases the fervor of arguments coming in.
Nuke that whole thread from orbit, honestly, I don’t give a shit anymore.
Edited
This guy right here is using the suit “only slavery-era Kentucky Colonels and plantation owners wore”. Ergo, from your viewpoint, he’s portraying a plantation owner in this particular scene of this particular movie. Great! Thanks for teaching me about symbolic oppression in movie costumes; now I know the Wachowski sisters were racist bigots all this time!
your current filter.@15InchBic
Citation needed.
@TheDrizzle404
Are you talking about my favorite comedian, Dick Cheney?
That was my closing statement regardless, I appreciate you ending this conversation
That’s enough - if seeing a cartoon makes you so upset you have to start calling each other names like this please log off, go outside for awhile, and find a hobby or something.
That joke was shit and I’ve never heard of any of those “comedians.” You want comedy you look at people like Bill Burr. you wouldn’t know dark comedy if it flew into an office building you were working in.
Pretty sure no one likes C.K. anymore cause he’s a sex offender, but really I’m gonna ignore any film or comedy recommendations from someone whose a Last Jedi and Rise of Starwalker Fan, lol.
Ever wonder why people like George Carlin, Richard Pryor, and Dennis Leary are still held in high regard while nobody cares about Louis C.K. anymore?
Because they understood what makes dark humor work. The darkness in a dark joke, be it something like murder, rape, racism, or even genocide, is always, always, always the setup, never the punchline. “Hey, slavery existed!” isn’t a joke; it’s a sad, terrible truth of history, American history in particular. This is a joke.
“How come the Confederates never had an Olympic team? Because everyone they had who could run, jump, and swim joined the Union.”
But hey, don’t take my word for it. Go watch Blazing Saddles, Ladykillers, or Jojo Rabbit and see for yourself.
Edited
And yet here you are dictating to others what is or is not funny, as if there were a Legal Code to Humor.
Don’t be an idiot. “Fun police” is right up there with “epic” and “SJW” in the club for words and terms that have been used so much they no longer have any meaning. And no, I don’t think “fun” is in and of itself a buzzword. That’s just stupid, and I’d appreciate it if you wouldn’t put words in my mouth.
@Background Pony #4AEF
I’m not “making a big deal” out of her clothes, that outfit being worn by racists and slave owners is nothing but a neutral statement of fact regardless of how much you say otherwise.
“derivative of a racist image without any further subversion or tweaks beyond ‘change the background.’”
the only context is the clothes and expression, thats all thats left of the original picture, you said
“No, I’m stating a fact of history. That style of suit was worn by wealthy Southern American slave owners, Col. Sanders, and nobody else.”
you’re the one making a big deal out of the clothes, it was the core of your argument!
“It’s racist because of the context, that context being that this picture is derivative of a racist image”
to say it for like the 5th time now, the context comes from the image, this image doesn’t have that context like you claim. its as simple as that
You’re seriously angry about the word ‘Fun Police’ now? Are you one of those who think Fun itself is a buzzword?
2009 called, they want their buzzword for a nebulous PC boogieman back.
So the end gist is that since it doesn’t fit your arbitrary definition of “punching up”, that makes it racism. Thank you great Arbitrator of All Universal Rules of What Is Humor, the proud forces of the Fun Police Applaud You.
I spelled it out for you clear as day and you keep coming back to “You’re talking about her clothes!”
It’s racist because of the context, that context being that this picture is derivative of a racist image without any further subversion or tweaks beyond “change the background.”
You invalidated nothing. You repeated yourself again and again in the hopes that I’d concede. Which ain’t happening.
Her clothes are racist because it was and still is favored by racist people.
Look dude, if this is the hill you want to die on then whatever, you do you. Just don’t act surprised when some of your black friends (of whom I’m sure you have so many ) give you the sideways eye over stuff like this, and let me remind you that this whole thing only started because some people got butthurt over me joking about racists eating each other.
Take care.
Fine, let’s try that again.
So far, so good (although your definition of the exceptions to racism seem a tad reductive to me, but whatevs).
And here’s where your argument breaks down, because, stripped of its original context (which attached the “slave-owner” label to it), the leftover image of “smug AJ in a white costume” works when transposed into the context of the movie, and thus constitutes a valid example of the aforementioned case A.
And now you resort to false equivalences and hyperboles, thus finalizing the self-destruction of your own argument.
Sorry, you fail again (at least it was useful to pinpoint how said failure occurs).
Edited
“to deny it is to deny the tide”
did you forget or just ignore the whole conversation we had about context and how this image has none?
I think you just ignored it, all that extra shit you tacked onto that last comment means nothing since this image is not that image, this image has no context, and the clothes thing was wrong as we’ve discussed
You are ignoring everything I am saying in favor of calling me stupid while not actually making any valid points of your own other than the same 3 points of
“its racist because of the context” of which there is none
“you’re ignoring my points!” I invalidated them, several times
“her clothes are racist, even without the context” which they are not