Very disturbing thing I saw

[Urgluf]

I found this somewhere

someone was using it as a signature.. how fkn wrong is that

 

[old.Tohtori]

If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.

 

[Dudley52]

Thats so sad, makes me want to cry.

 

[Dudley52]

If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.

err, what?

So your saying we only care for black people?

 

[Congax]

If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.

Honestly, Tohtori, have you been taking dope the last few days? (grumpy old man and all that)

 

[Glacier]

If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.

Finally, someone who agrees.

Yes I laughed at the picture, I also laughed at the picture with the overly-obese woman with the added "I beat anorexia" whilst being fat myself, oh the horror.

 

[old.Tohtori]

No i'm not actually saying anything about race or related to that, i'm saying that it's only "sad" and pathetic because it's a starving kid.

I used the white comment to make my point more, opposite of the picture.

Honestly, Tohtori, have you been taking dope the last few days? (grumpy old man and all that)

No, i'm just not trying to be fluffy haha funny. I'm quite normal and i haven't found anything "grumpy" about my posts. I think i've made quite a lot of sense these past few days.

 

[noblok]

If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.

True. I don't think it's because of the skin colour though, but rather because:
a) There are actually plenty of African children dying from starvation. This isn't the case with cowboys.
b) It's a kid.

edit: Damn you being faster!

 

[Congax]

Yes I laughed at the picture, I also laughed at the picture with the overly-obese woman with the added "I beat anorexia" whilst being fat myself, oh the horror.

I wouldn't call that the same thing anyway but ok sure

 

[Glacier]

Why not? both pictures are of things about to die, with humorous comments added.

 

[leviathane]

pic doesnt wanna load for me :/

 

[Bugz]

If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.

If it as a white skinny boy we probably would.

And besides - its nothing to do with race. It's just the charity adverts & so on use black people in their adverts. That coupled with the fact alot of Africa contains black people.

 

[old.Tohtori]

True. I don't think it's because of the skin colour though, but rather because:
a) There are actually plenty of African children dying from starvation. This isn't the case with cowboys.
b) It's a kid.

edit: Damn you being faster!

Fastest poster in the west

What i meant by the whole thing is that once again, a starving kid is more valuable a life then a starving/dying cowboy. I find it more disturbing that people can so easily differentiate the value of life, based on "aww" factors.

 

[Dukat]

Honestly, Tohtori, have you been taking dope the last few days? (grumpy old man and all that)

Ah, so its not just me who'se noticed?

 

[Huntingtons]

Fastest poster in the west

What i meant by the whole thing is that once again, a starving kid is more valuable a life then a starving/dying cowboy. I find it more disturbing that people can so easily differentiate the value of life, based on "aww" factors.

still, its not about the value of life, dont even know where it came in - its not like people are saying they would sacrifice a white cowboy to let that kid live. its the fact that its a very up to date or how you'd express it (can't find the right word so bear with me - that there's alot more reality in a starving african child than a starving white cowboy). would have been equally entertaining if it was a white man in a cowboy suit who clearly was starving (which would be impossible to see since he would be wearing cool clothes ) its exactly the same when people make "funny" pictures with homeless people having it just as tough
. there's politically correctness and then there's the complete opposite (having the opposite opinions because they want to be "different" or "cool") both are equally as retarded. you're in the latter catagory toh...

Ah, so its not just me who'se noticed?

yeah somebody didnt get a job *wink wink*

 

[Congax]

What i meant by the whole thing is that once again, a starving kid is more valuable a life then a starving/dying cowboy. I find it more disturbing that people can so easily differentiate the value of life, based on "aww" factors.

That's just logical innit? I mean, a starving kid is far far worse then a starving cowboy.

The kid doesn't have gay boots.

:|

 

[noblok]

What i meant by the whole thing is that once again, a starving kid is more valuable a life then a starving/dying cowboy. I find it more disturbing that people can so easily differentiate the value of life, based on "aww" factors.

I think the first factor I mentioned is much more important than the second one in this particular case. I won't deny that children have a special moral status for which there are no (sufficient) rational reasons, but what irked me about this particular picture is that it's making fun of a real situation. Had it been a cowboy lying there, this wouldn't have been the case as there aren't any cowboys dying from starvation and thus it would've been all about the humour. Now it has a slichtly perverse component attached in that you're laughing with actual misery.

It's a bit like making jokes about 9/11. These things need to cool down a bit, before it's perfectly acceptable to make jokes about them. As the hunger problem isn't going to be solved in the forseeable future, it's a bit twisted to make jokes about it. It's not wrong to make jokes about starvation (paedophilia, terrorism, etc) as such, but it is a bit twisted if the subject of the joke is actually starving (a paedophile, [recent] terrorist attack, etc.). I hope this makes my point more clear.

That being said, I often find jokes which are a bit twisted humourous. I'm just looking for an explanation as to why this is considered bad taste, but a picture with a cowboy in it isn't.

Gah, I shouldn't post in popular threads. Once again beaten to the post. Damn you Huntingtons!

 

[old.Tohtori]

(having the opposite opinions because they want to be "different" or "cool") both are equally as retarded. you're in the latter catagory toh...

yeah somebody didnt get a job *wink wink*

First off, bringing in things from other threads(job), a low blow, not even remotely necessary and untrue at that(by the way). Yes yes, haha, it was a joke, but at the moment it's a bit touchy subject.

Second, could you people PLEASE drop the whole "you're opposing everything because you want to be cool" thing?

I think it was tris- who way back when said something about me bringing up why i say things, i noticed he was partly right and dropped it. Have the courtesy of doing the same, especially since "cool" or being "different" has nothing to do with it.

About the issue at hand, i meant that i don't really get why people have this tendency to value something more. As in, say "oh that's horrific" and then laugh at another issue with only the object of focus being different.

EDIT: From nobloks answer, i guess the issue is that different things effect people in different ways. If you don't worry about the 9/11, you will find the jokes funny. If you don't stress about hunger, it's not an issue of making fun about it.

 

[Succi]

dont see anything

 

[Huntingtons]

agree with noblok more or less.

@ toh
its bullshit to say its a low blow to bring things from other threads into another, wether a joke or in spite - you do it yourself (cba to dig up evidence as im gonna drop this subject now, keep going if you feel like toh, but it will be without me)
secondly i i dont understand your 2nd and 3rd paragraph.
fourth paragrah is just falsely using your own statement about cowboys (which you brought up, not as a question or an argument, but as another persons statement without any justifiable evidence of that being the truth - and if you want to back it up you have to use something from another thread and therefore becomming double standarded) to claim that anybody ever said that it was fun if a cowboy lay there

 

[old.Tohtori]

agree wit*snip*owboy lay there

I never use other people's information they give about their life in spite. There's a difference. And also there's a coc segment on it. Also stating "i could find evidence of you doing this but won't bother" is just another way of saying "well i'm quite sure you do it". Prove it or don't bring it up.

Second and third paragraph was simply a "drop the -you just want to be cool- thing as i did.

Last part was not meant towards any member of this thread, but at humanity in itself. It may be absurd to think that someone might discuss things without actually targetting a spesific person on the forums, but it does happen.

 

[Huntingtons]

(neither have i brought any personal information up in spite, hence the *wink wink* and the smiley - /edit damn i said i would drop it, I will now, i swear on my mothers grave!)
you're stating that: If it was a white guy in cowboy outfit laying on a desert, you wouldn't mind.
since you and OP were the only one commenting on it at that point its hard not to believe you addressed it specifially. nobody in this thread said they would find it funny if a white cowboy laid in the same posture obviously starving. you claim that humanity thinks that way (but do not support it with evidence and so far by the opinions expressed in this thread, i can hardly see where you're getting it from)

 

[old.Tohtori]

(neither have*snip*om)

I can still say if i don't find it funny, or that it felt harmful, even with the winkwinksmileys, and that it's a touchy subject. That's the reason i didn't report it, but actually told you so you know better next time.

On the issue:
If you're saying that a starving kid doesn't get more sympathy from people then a dying cowboy, then i think you might want to recheck that.

*puts on a hawai-i shirt and ace ventura wig*

That's the issue i'm making, that's the thing i don't understand and THAT'S the issue i'm looking to get some constructive input on.

"Let's see that on instant replay...."

*rewind*
.no tupni evitcurtsnoc emos teg ot gnikool m'i eussi eht S'TAHT dna dnatsrednu t'nod i gniht eht s'taht ,gnikam m'i eussi eht s'tahT

*play*

That's the issue i'm making, that's the thing i don't understand and THAT'S the issue i'm looking to get some constructive input on.

 

[Thadius]

I cant see anything :/

 

[Huntingtons]

im not saying that a dying cowboy would get less sympathy. but a obviously starving cowboy wouldnt get less sympathy than a obviously starving african child. (you have to set more or less equal grounds). there's also the background information to take into consideration. we know for a fact that african people are starving in very high rates. we know that the africian children are born into starvation and we know that a white cowboy usually isnt. its from our background knowledge we built our assumptions and our empathy

 

[Keitan]

Spoiler

WARNING THIS PIC IS MASSIVE !

 

[old.Tohtori]

Finally we're on the subject i was trying to get some feedback on. Heh, took a while...

Well that's actually debatable, the starving child vs cowboy. Most the time i believe people would give the kid food. If forced to choose that is.

About the rest of your reply, i did say "From nobloks answer, i guess the issue is that different things effect people in different ways. If you don't worry about the 9/11, you will find the jokes funny. If you don't stress about hunger, it's not an issue of making fun about it."

So basicly it's about how sensitive you are towards the issue that might be associated with the picture. The guy who made that, might have not thought about shock value, but just use the kid as he would any other subject. Like you said, they would be on equal grounds. Which again, isn't right since they are not by default.

EDIT: Honestly Keitan, that should get a bit of a spanking for you.

 

[Huntingtons]

its not even a happy smile its evil with devious plans im scared

 

[Keitan]

Finally we're on the subject i was trying to get some feedback on. Heh, took a while...

Well that's actually debatable, the starving child vs cowboy. Most the time i believe people would give the kid food. If forced to choose that is.

About the rest of your reply, i did say "From nobloks answer, i guess the issue is that different things effect people in different ways. If you don't worry about the 9/11, you will find the jokes funny. If you don't stress about hunger, it's not an issue of making fun about it."

So basicly it's about how sensitive you are towards the issue that might be associated with the picture. The guy who made that, might have not thought about shock value, but just use the kid as he would any other subject. Like you said, they would be on equal grounds. Which again, isn't right since they are not by default.

EDIT: Honestly Keitan, that should get a bit of a spanking for you.

i wouldnt get on the wrong side of him if i was you tho !!!

or this dude

Spoiler

 

[DrunkSkunk]

Spoiler

WARNING THIS PIC IS MASSIVE !

goddamnit.. put the warning before the spoiler tags! It took 5min to scroll down