Disgusting! I can't believe people actually defended this magazine. All they publish is hateful messages and yet they have a right to freedom of speech?
This doesn't make sense on a number of layers. The not making sense density is high.
Disgusting! I can't believe people actually defended this magazine. All they publish is hateful messages and yet they have a right to freedom of speech?
Most french people with the habit of that humor + the context will get it.
Everyone is forgetting a little something there with Charlie's shaming. Those drawings are not meant to be seen by an international crowd, they are local, and even more than that, they are really niche. That's not mainstream humor. Yet with internet it spreads in an unhealthy way everywhere around the globe where people have no clue what it is...
To be honest, OP thread title is trash. Completely literal just to shock people, without even a hint of the message behind the cartoon.
-snip-
In the heat of the moments or events , satire can especially offend
Some countries have themselves sued over sensitive matters like South Africa
Sometimes it's just used by the other side to make fun of another
And sometimes satire really crosses the line
So you come to the realization that the freedom of speech doesn't equate that you should offend sensibilities, it means you have the responsibility to use it maturely, you certainly have the right to offend on sensitive matters but that makes you an idiot nothing more nothing less and does not move the conversation forward. Positive satire like Colbert moved ideas forward because he took the responsibility to use freedom of speech where he healed wounds with humor not take a pencil and jab it in the wound and laugh while saying that's just satire because you are not tending to that wound , that is what Charlie hedbo does
Holy shit at all the people that missed the whole point.
This.No, that's why it's satire. It's mocking how Europe is OK with Christian migrants, but hesitant about Muslim ones.
Isn't the cartoon trying to bring home the point that Europe should be more accepting of migrants ? i.e., "You're dead because you're not white and christian like us", it's sarcastic.
Anyways, that's what I understood.
I don't think you understand the points the Hebdo cartoons are making. Certainly if you equate them to any of the points made in the cartoons you cited here you don't.
Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire
No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire
What's satirical here?
They're making fun of the callousness of European culture towards the Muslims....by being callous. The French are weird.
Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire
No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire
Not sure if things have changed recently, but I always saw the French as being the most callous and intolerable of muslims out of the European nations.
Charlie Hebdo is on those parent's side. They're arguing for them. The image being used isn't a "ploy," it's the whole damn point.
Let's ask the parents of other refugees who drowned or were killed if they agree with Charlie hedbos point of using the death of the toddler as a ploy for the satire
No one is calling it not satire, a lot of people are calling it insensitive and offensive Satire
most good satire is insensitive and offensive.
You're absolutely right, but I'm sure the parents don't give a shit about that.
Personally, I think it's brilliant!
They probably wouldn't like it, but there's this wonderful little thing called free speech, which is not beholden to the acknowledgment or respect of other people's misfortunes.
As most satire is.
Disgusting! I can't believe people actually defended this magazine. All they publish is hateful messages and yet they have a right to freedom of speech?
So you would ok for a publication of a falling victim on 9/11 to be used as satire near 2001?
most good satire is insensitive and offensive.
The purpose of free speech and satire is to bring to light underlying issues, not poke at the pain of individual loss of individuals offending sensibilities.
Would you be ok with ch satirizing a falling man from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The sensitivy among people regarding that image of the toddler is high and yet they made fun of it
eeehhhh
So you would ok for a publication of a falling victim on 9/11 to be used as satire near 2001?
Has a parent or parents given any kind of reaction to the cartoons?
It depends!So you would ok for a publication of a falling victim on 9/11 to be used as satire near 2001?
They aren't poking at anyone's pain or making fun of it. You aren't understanding the point being made by the cartoons at all.
So you would ok for a publication of a falling victim on 9/11 to be used as satire near 2001?
Where's the satire in that though? If there is a valid message being made I could digest it regardless of it being in bad taste.
Would you be ok with a publication satirizing TSA security with a cartoon of a falling victim from the world trade centers ?
I can't even build a coherent connection between that image and the TSA. What point is it making?
Would you be ok with a publication satirizing TSA security with a cartoon of a falling victim from the world trade centers ?
See above your post
I can't even build a coherent connection between that image and the TSA. What point is it making?
Would you be ok with a publication satirizing TSA security with a cartoon of a falling victim from the world trade centers ?
There's no satire there, no message, no point. it wouldn't be satire.That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
The purpose of free speech and satire is to bring to light underlying issues, not poke at the pain of individual loss of individuals offending sensibilities.
Would you be ok with ch satirizing a falling man from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The sensitivy among people regarding that image of the toddler is high and yet they made fun of it
Where's the satire in that though? If there is a valid message being made I could digest it regardless of it being in bad taste.
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
And yes people who are fine with this will sweep this question under the rug and say they can't see it or can't imagine it. Typical ignoring the question
It's not satire, I understand you're trying to draw an example, but you're going to have to do better. For the sake of this line of argument.
Maybe the US gov't/military grabbing their file on Iraq Invasion before the person falling hits the pavement?You're maybe forgetting to make the point that satire would be making. It's kinda required to be satire.
No because the point being made is stupid and the connection between the two events are nothing.
If you wanted to compare a dude jumping off the twin towers to the thousands of innocent deaths in Iraq, you would have a point. Would people in America be pissed? Yea, but that's what satire does and it's showing a harsh but valid parallel.
There, I just made your argument for you.
I love how you think people are just sweeping the question under the rug because you made a bad analogy and don't realize that there isn't a logical connection between the TSA and 9/11 like there is in the situation in this cartoon.That's not what I asked. If a publication made a satire of TSA using a falling victim from the World Trade Center would you be ok with that satire ?
And yes people who are fine with this will sweep this question under the rug and say they can't see it or can't imagine it. Typical ignoring the question
I think good satire comes from actually caring and being sensitive to people's pain. Colbert was pretty good about it.I can't think of any really good satire that takes into considering the feelings of others when making a point or pointing something out. Can you?
I love how you think people are just sweeping the question under the rug because you made a bad analogy and don't realize that there isn't a logical connection between the TSA and 9/11 like there is between the situation in this cartoon.
I love how you think people are just sweeping the question under the rug because you made a bad analogy and don't realize that there isn't a logical connection between the TSA and 9/11 like there is between the situation in this cartoon.
Maybe the US gov't/military grabbing their file on Iraq Invasion before the person falling hits the pavement?
.
..
Comics are hard.
I'm pretty sure that the problem is he doesn't understand the point being made in the Hebdo cartoons.