Jump to content
IGNORED

General Current Events/Political Discussion


MrWunderful

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

It was good in the sense that it made for a good character with a funny voice wich is the main objective of a cartoon comedy show. Realism isn't the main objective so like i said it's beside the point how close he was to an "authentic" Indian accent.

Apu is a good character DESPITE the OFFENSIVE voice.

The cartoon is funny but that aspect was short sighted.

Cartoons do not get a pass just because they're "unrealistic." Like I said, you don't see that racist Coal Black or its ilk again.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

They didn't correct the character on that basis they caved in on social pressures. They started segregating racially on who can do what work wich is a pretty big part of a what a racist system is but i guess since they consider themselves to do good it's all fine.

They corrected the character because they knew it was wrong. They aren't "segregating," they're assigning roles by people who are appropriate for those roles.

What's racist is a white person's interpretation on a real culture.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

You can say it's unfunny to you personally but you can't say it's unfunny period and shouldn't have a place in 2020. But that is exactly what you're doing.

I'm saying it's unfunny, the creators came to the conclusion, and society itself is saying it's unfunny. I'm not alone.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

What "little niche" are you talking about? Those are pretty big names in comedy and they feel they're getting stifled. It's not really a fringe thing that there will be moral condemnation of jokes it's a pretty safe bet. But your solution is that they can "find a way" by not telling offensive jokes so basically they could just stifle themselves. It still is funny to many people and yet again you're using your personal definitions and tastes to speak generally and justify others being stifled. 

It's funny to an ever dwindling population.

Times are changing. The world is changing.

What used to be funny isn't.

We don't do minstrel shows, even though people found them funny in the past.

Adapt or die.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

Yes it is making fun of down syndrome people. And of Cartman too. But the way he trains and transforms into a retarded guy by cutting the hair, making goofy facial expressions and talking in a retarded voice is most definitely a gag too.

And the funny is in Cartman's pathetic attempts, not the nature of people with Down's syndrome being different.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

Are you really saying that the absurdity of a wheelchair and cruches guy getting into a fight is NOT supposed to be used for comedic effect but it's merely this deeper social criticism of the crowd watching it?

Yes. Watch it again in context.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

What is fat Abbott if not funny for his ghetto attitude, is that too merely some kind of deeper social criticism in the fact that little kids are watching it?

Again, watch it in context. The "ghetto attitude" isn't the joke.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

I think you're reaching to have it all make sense. I mean you're taking blatant examples of someones race or disability incorporated into comedic situations and they're satire on biggotry but a character like Apu who is a 1000x more beningn stereotype is pushing over the limit just because the actor is white. Is fat Abbott really less offensive than Apu if we determine that the former was voiced by a black guy while the latter isn't (i don't who voices fat Abbott irl)?

Apu's accent isn't supposed to be the joke. He's supposed to be a fleshed out character. Therefore, utilizing a white man to do a bad accent (and it is a bad accent) is a flaw in anotherwise perfectly fine character.

So the show corrected for it.

White dudes doing jive talk for Fat Albert/Abbott/whatever would also be offensive. Unless the joke is that white dudes are doing the voice and the ridicule is on them.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

Like i said the video game companies self-regulated AGAINST Lieberman and moral sensitivities wich is the exact opposite of what the Simpsons have done in regards to Apu.

What are you talking about? The Simpsons creators self regulated. Lieberman never had the majority on his side, which is why his initiative to have the government step in ultimately failed.

The industry itself took up self-regulation as it was the moral thing to do.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

I'm not talking about government regulation specifically (altough it can certainly lead to that) but rather the outcome of different mindsets and the more people that hold your views the bigger risk games would face of not getting to be violent, be it by regulation or otherwise. Hence why i said that your stance enables the undoing of the very people that hold them because their own interests might one day be up for the cancellation.

The majority of society is never up for cancellation. That's why they're the majority.

It's just that the majority is no longer the domain solely of old white dudes. Although there are still plenty of them around. The majority can certainly change, but guess what? They work towards a greater good.

I do not live in fear of this.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

No being against slavery is not something "your side" got rid of.

Sure it is. Slavery was the norm. It was morally wrong but the white dudes in charge kept it. Then a war happened. And people on the right side of history abolished it. I'm on that side.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

The difference between forcing someone to work for you is that it actively takes someone elses rights and forces your will upon them while getting to create something that others find offensive doesn't require anyone who is unwilling to be part of it.  You don't have to be a voice actor and you don't have to watch a show but when your enslaving someone that person HAS to work without pay or risk getting punished

I'm on the side of being morally right. Slavery was wrong. Offensive stereotypes are wrong. They hurt people.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

And you're not in favor of equality either by racialising every issue, that only entrenches inequality and division.

I'm not radicalizing every issue. You certainly are. Everything is the fault of SJWs.

Must be tiring.

I work to help people see reason. Some people are certainly lost causes, though.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

My side is that people should be allowed to and encouraged to create entertainment or have opinions without caving in to others getting offended.

So you feel if someone created a racist cartoon they should be free of criticism?

Not how the world works.

Not how free speech works.

People must be able to criticize.

No one is storming the studio and forcing them to stop voicing Apu. They brought up legit criticism and the studio listened and changed it. The studio could have ignored them.

It wasn't some irresistible pressure by government or a cabal, it was a moral decision.

What you want is for no one to speak up if something offends them, to just sit there and take it, or go away.

Nope, not happening.

The world has many voices. Yours gets to be heard just like everyone else's. You just don't want to hear the other voices so you can watch whatever you want to watch and laugh at whatever you want to laugh at without feeling guilty.

Sorry. World's changed.

44 minutes ago, cartman said:

There are actually black voice actors that do white character voices by the way but that would NEVER be allowed to be problematised. Then the roles would be reversed immediately and the white guy criticising it would be portrayed as biggoted, racist etc.

Black actors tend to voice characters in ways that aren't stereotypes. It's not problemized because it isn't a problem.

 

Edited by Tulpa
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It looks like this virus is going to perform its own version of Darwinism. 
 

im not upset at all!

 

Luckily in the bay area everybody’s on board, you get the one Trumper here or there that wants to yell about God and whatever else, but they are immediately ostracized as they should be and removed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

As Giddy as I am to want to believe that, I wasnt sure about the source, than I realized it was Fox news. I almost never trust anything Fox says, but it makes no sense to make up a negative about the dear leader. 
 

Unless its some of that 3D chess high level stable genius Trump is known for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Apu is a good character DESPITE the OFFENSIVE voice.

The cartoon is funny but that aspect was short sighted.

Cartoons do not get a pass just because they're "unrealistic." Like I said, you don't see that racist Coal Black or its ilk again.

They corrected the character because they knew it was wrong. They aren't "segregating," they're assigning roles by people who are appropriate for those roles.

What's racist is a white person's interpretation on a real culture.

I'm saying it's unfunny, the creators came to the conclusion, and society itself is saying it's unfunny. I'm not alone.

It's funny to an ever dwindling population.

Times are changing. The world is changing.

What used to be funny isn't.

We don't do minstrel shows, even though people found them funny in the past.

Adapt or die.

And the funny is in Cartman's pathetic attempts, not the nature of people with Down's syndrome being different.

Yes. Watch it again in context.

Again, watch it in context. The "ghetto attitude" isn't the joke.

Apu's accent isn't supposed to be the joke. He's supposed to be a fleshed out character. Therefore, utilizing a white man to do a bad accent (and it is a bad accent) is a flaw in anotherwise perfectly fine character.

So the show corrected for it.

White dudes doing jive talk for Fat Albert/Abbott/whatever would also be offensive. Unless the joke is that white dudes are doing the voice and the ridicule is on them.

What are you talking about? The Simpsons creators self regulated. Lieberman never had the majority on his side, which is why his initiative to have the government step in ultimately failed.

The industry itself took up self-regulation as it was the moral thing to do.

The majority of society is never up for cancellation. That's why they're the majority.

It's just that the majority is no longer the domain solely of old white dudes. Although there are still plenty of them around. The majority can certainly change, but guess what? They work towards a greater good.

I do not live in fear of this.

Sure it is. Slavery was the norm. It was morally wrong but the white dudes in charge kept it. Then a war happened. And people on the right side of history abolished it. I'm on that side.

I'm on the side of being morally right. Slavery was wrong. Offensive stereotypes are wrong. They hurt people.

I'm not radicalizing every issue. You certainly are. Everything is the fault of SJWs.

Must be tiring.

I work to help people see reason. Some people are certainly lost causes, though.

So you feel if someone created a racist cartoon they should be free of criticism?

Not how the world works.

Not how free speech works.

People must be able to criticize.

No one is storming the studio and forcing them to stop voicing Apu. They brought up legit criticism and the studio listened and changed it. The studio could have ignored them.

It wasn't some irresistible pressure by government or a cabal, it was a moral decision.

What you want is for no one to speak up if something offends them, to just sit there and take it, or go away.

Nope, not happening.

The world has many voices. Yours gets to be heard just like everyone else's. You just don't want to hear the other voices so you can watch whatever you want to watch and laugh at whatever you want to laugh at without feeling guilty.

Sorry. World's changed.

Black actors tend to voice characters in ways that aren't stereotypes. I've never seen a black actor do the equivalent of an Apu.

When has that ever happened?

No there is no despite. They wanted an immigrant type of storeowner or however you wanna call it and the voice being funny served a purpose. He is a good character for other reasons too it's not either-or but that was one of his assets. No cartoons don't get a pass because people feel the need to enforce themselves upon others. And chances are you wouldn't have seen Simpsons get made at all because like i said, it was the counterculture at a point. Like i said you're undoing yourself by using your subjective morals as an authority because if other people got to before you there would be no Simpsons there'd be another Diff'rent Strokes.

They didn't know it was wrong they hired talented and dedicated people to try making a serious attempt in creating a good show wich is what they did. They focused on what mattered instead of bullshit and pandering to the cozy show formula that came before and they succeeded. They aren't segregating they're merely telling people "you should be doing this rather than that because of your race". Yeah ok.😒

It's funny to a large section of people. The shows are popular but they get backlash from people who think their political and ideological stance should reign supreme. Social mobs and journalists on a mission to get offended and bend culture to their will. Comedy has always pushed the envelope it has always been one of it's main attributes so this is regression taking place.

It's not people with down syndrome just being "different" it kinda stands out in the facial expressions, speaking patterns, clothing and that he actively TRAINED towards making himself look retarded. It kinda stands out when handicapped people fight wich it probably wouldn't if they were just regular guys - but let's pretend that none of it looks or sounds funny and that those offensive plot devices are merely there to send a socially aware message or however you wanna frame it. Even if the show has been infamously controversial and called out for years, let's pretend that it's offensive parts are not made to be funny. Trey and Matt would probably disagree as would most of the people who find it funny.

The Simpson creators caved in, the video game creators didn't. Had the video game creators caved in the games wouldn't get to be as violent as they are and especially if the majority wanted them not to be. Is that what you want? The majority opinion being swayed against violent games. Or anything else that you like. But you're fine with the sways when they're happening to others.

No anti-slavery comes with most ideologies and stances. That was a legitimate progressive cause where peoples freedoms where infringed upon while the so-called progressivism today revolves around enforcing morals on others, silencing open debate and witchhunting people. A libertarian for example is profoundly politically different than the regressive left and yet his ideology does not vibe well with slavery at all. Just because you're against slavery doesn't automatically make you morally right lol it only does on that particular point.

You're racializing the issue while i'm the reactive response. You're saying what white voice actors should do and what Indian should do while i'm saying let anyone who can get the job done do it. Yes people should get to criticize but their criticism can also get counter-criticism. If you're criticising people transcending racial roles in a job where they very well can be talented enough to do that is regression and anti-productive to me more than anythig else but apparently it's supposed to count as progressive to segregate races through vocal cords.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CodysGameRoom said:

I've never seen someone try so hard to rationalize something so much that almost no one else is bothered by. 

@Tulpa literally perfectly countered every weak point you tried to make. Pwned. Move on to the next topic.

I'm not the one creating these issues so there's obviously others much more bothered by them than i am. I wouldn't even know who most voice actors are while a bunch of other people have already researched it and made it their activist cause to be offended.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, cartman said:

I'm not the one creating these issues so there's obviously others much more bothered by them than i am. I wouldn't even know who most voice actors are while a bunch of other people have already researched it and made it their activist cause to be offended.

You're the one writing paragraph after paragraph about how angry you are that Hank isn't voicing Apu anymore. I've never seen anyone online more outraged about it and more willing to debate it over and over and over than you. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CodysGameRoom said:

You're the one writing paragraph after paragraph about how angry you are that Hank isn't voicing Apu anymore. I've never seen anyone online more outraged about it and more willing to debate it over and over and over than you. 

It's not only that but rather a regression in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, cartman said:

No there is no despite. They wanted an immigrant type of storeowner or however you wanna call it and the voice being funny served a purpose.

 

Yeah, to be an offensive stereotype. That comedy may have slid by in 1990, but not in 2020.

33 minutes ago, cartman said:

He is a good character for other reasons too it's not either-or but that was one of his assets.

Being an offensive accent against Indian people is a piss-poor asset. I'm glad we're doing away with those.

33 minutes ago, cartman said:

No cartoons don't get a pass because people feel the need to enforce themselves upon others. And chances are you wouldn't have seen Simpsons get made at all because like i said, it was the counterculture at a point. Like i said you're undoing yourself by using your subjective morals as an authority because if other people got to before you there would be no Simpsons there'd be another Diff'rent Strokes.

That's bullshit. Total bullshit.

You can be transgressive, edgy, and funny without the truly offensive stuff. Simpsons has done it plenty of times. They just dropped the ball on this. It's okay. THE SHOW IS STILL ON THE FUCKING AIR!

And I'm not undoing myself. Plenty agree with me. We're the ones winning, almost every single time.

Because there is a moral right.

And it's not the side that creates a fake, offensive Indian accent.

35 minutes ago, cartman said:

They didn't know it was wrong they hired talented and dedicated people to try making a serious attempt in creating a good show wich is what they did. They focused on what mattered instead of bullshit and pandering to the cozy show formula that came before and they succeeded. They aren't segregating they're merely telling people "you should be doing this rather than that because of your race". Yeah ok.

Sorry, but they fucked up on that part. Azaria is a funny guy, but even he admitted they did wrong.

AGAIN, HE ADMITTED THEY DID WRONG.

And they corrected it. He still has his job.

There's no long term damage.

What you call bullshit and pandering is actually treating people with respect.

Is it that you want offensive humor? Is that the only humor you laugh at? If so, you really need to look at your sense of humor.

If not, then don't worry about it. There are plenty of things to laugh at.

Like the Simpsons.

The show that is still on the air.

37 minutes ago, cartman said:

It's funny to a large section of people.

The majority of the Simpsons is. The Apu accent by a white guy is not.

That's why they dropped it.
 

39 minutes ago, cartman said:

The shows are popular but they get backlash from people who think their political and ideological stance should reign supreme. Social mobs and journalists on a mission to get offended and bend culture to their will.

And how do they bend culture? To use your words.

Ask yourself this.

If the SJW is a small movement, why is it sooooo powerful?

It's because the majority backs them.

They don't have mystical powers. They don't scream racism and the majority shits their pants and does what they want.

If the majority disagreed with them, then they wouldn't have power.

Guess what, when the majority of society agrees with something, it becomes the norm. Now we're seeing the offensive stuff getting shoved into the trashbin where it belongs.

 

The majority agrees with them. That's why they have power.

You just might be in the minority. I know, it sucks.

 

41 minutes ago, cartman said:

Comedy has always pushed the envelope it has always been one of it's main attributes so this is regression taking place.

So what changed?

Nothing. Not a goddamn thing changed. Except people who didn't have a voice getting a voice.

And the people who had the sole voice have to share now.

Well, that means all those racist stereotypes aren't funny anymore.

New funny stuff will take its place. Or stuff that was funny but not demeaning to another human just for who they are will take forefront.

43 minutes ago, cartman said:

It's not people with down syndrome just being "different" it kinda stands out in the facial expressions, speaking patterns, clothing and that he actively TRAINED towards making himself look retarded.

And that's funny because it's Cartman doing it in a funny way. We actually agree there.

It's not the Down's Syndrome. Cartman could have done any other thing, like pretend to be black (which maybe he did, I can't remember), and it's not the stereotypes themselves that are funny, it's Cartman being morally bankrupt and getting punished later that is funny. It's hilarious.

Cartman doing a Down's Syndrome impression with no context would not be funny. At least not to those with morals.

45 minutes ago, cartman said:

It kinda stands out when handicapped people fight wich it probably wouldn't if they were just regular guys - but let's pretend that none of it looks or sounds funny and that those offensive plot devices are merely there to send a socially aware message or however you wanna frame it. Even if the show has been infamously controversial and called out for years, let's pretend that it's offensive parts are not made to be funny. Trey and Matt would probably disagree as would most of the people who find it funny.

You have to look at the context. Matt and Trey are MASTER satirists. It's all they really do. They would never have a handicap fight that didn't have some context. Watch it again, and pay attention to what it's actually doing.

Everything they do, from South Park, to The Book of Mormon, to Team America, all sends up something in a satirical way. And it's funny. Because it has that edge, not because it's offensive. They don't do offensive just to be offensive. And if that's all you watch South Park for, that's on you.

BTW, if you haven't seen the Book of Mormon, it is awesome.

 

48 minutes ago, cartman said:

The Simpson creators caved in, the video game creators didn't.

You call it caved. That's not how it went down.

It went down like this:

Indian people make statements that Apu's accent by a white dude is offensive.

The creators and Azaria apologize  and drop that aspect.

There was no huge protests. There was no general boycott.

The creators did one thing.

Be fucking human beings.

50 minutes ago, cartman said:

Had the video game creators caved in the games wouldn't get to be as violent as they are and especially if the majority wanted them not to be. Is that what you want? The majority opinion being swayed against violent games. Or anything else that you like. But you're fine with the sways when they're happening to others.

The majority didn't see an issue if the industry self-regulated. And that's exactly what happened. They put on ratings, parents could make their own decisions.

But I don't see how The Simpsons just dropping one aspect of Apu (that he's voiced by a white guy) and yet KEEPING THE CHARACTER equates to an entire industry saying, "Hey, maybe we should just give the customers a head's up on how violent our games are."

Both are pretty smart decisions.

52 minutes ago, cartman said:

No anti-slavery comes with most ideologies and stances.

It didn't before the 1800s. And it didn't happen at the same time.

Slavery was the NORM through most of human history. We finally "woke up." Way too late, but we did. Oh, there's that "woke" word.

53 minutes ago, cartman said:

That was a legitimate progressive cause where peoples freedoms where infringed upon while the so-called progressivism today revolves around enforcing morals on others, silencing open debate and witchhunting people.

The abolition of slavery WAS forcing morals on others.

Morals that said human beings should be treated like human beings.

That's still the progressive stance today.

You may not like it because, I dunno, you dig offensive stereotypical humor, but it's still about treating humans as humans.

55 minutes ago, cartman said:

A libertarian for example is profoundly politically different than the regressive left and yet his ideology does not vibe well with slavery at all. Just because you're against slavery doesn't automatically make you morally right lol it only does on that particular point.

So you're against slavery, but people can do whatever the hell else they want, including doing racist stereotypes in cartoons. Is that truly your position?

It all ties into the same thing, treating humans with respect. Getting the white guy to do voices other than a bad Indian accent, while not as profound as ending slavery, is still in that wheelhouse.

You just don't like it.

57 minutes ago, cartman said:

You're racializing the issue while i'm the reactive response. You're saying what white voice actors should do and what Indian should do while i'm saying let anyone who can get the job done do it.

The Indians can certainly play Apu as good as any white dude, so why not? And you don't have white dudes doing awful stereotypical accents. Azaria wasn't "getting the job done" in a good way. His Apu was awful. And he knew it. He admitted it.

He does a killer Moe, though.

58 minutes ago, cartman said:

Yes people should get to criticize but their criticism can also get counter-criticism.

Sure. And the majority will decide.

The majority decided on this one. They didn't twiddle their thumbs while those who spoke up got their way. They agreed with those who spoke up. So did the Simpsons creators.

59 minutes ago, cartman said:

If you're criticising people transcending racial roles in a job where they very well can be talented enough to do that is regression and anti-productive to me more than anythig else but apparently it's supposed to count as progressive to segregate races through vocal cords.

The people "transcending racial roles" weren't doing the job. Time after time they make it offensive and stereotypical. And people who are those racial roles feel offended, because it is saying, "You Indians/Blacks/name your race are stupid/sound funny just for being who you are." And it makes them feel like shit.

So why not let them do the voice when they're actually, you know, the person being portrayed.

If they screw it up, that's on them. And then another one of that same race can do it.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrWunderful said:

As Giddy as I am to want to believe that, I wasnt sure about the source, than I realized it was Fox news. I almost never trust anything Fox says, but it makes no sense to make up a negative about the dear leader. 
 

Unless its some of that 3D chess high level stable genius Trump is known for. 

I'm kind of the opinion I've always had, that Trump never wanted to be president.

He wanted to lose to Hilary, then squawk for four to eight years on his new Trump TV channel about how she cheated him on the election and how he could do things better.

He won, and he had to step up, but he's doing such a piss-poor job that he's miserable every day. People demand things from him that he has no clue on how to handle. He wants to run the country the way he ran Trump Inc and he's told he can't do it that way. He even got impeached for pulling the same Trump Inc bullshit on Ukraine, and the Senate had to bail him out. And it has to be killing him physically and mentally.

If he resigned early on, he'd be seen as weak and his base would crucify him. But now things are so out of control that his polls are in the toilet, and he might be able to cite some health issue and just fucking bail.

Edited by Tulpa
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Administrator · Posted
1 hour ago, MrWunderful said:

It looks like this virus is going to perform its own version of Darwinism. 
 

im not upset at all!

 

Luckily in the bay area everybody’s on board, you get the one Trumper here or there that wants to yell about God and whatever else, but they are immediately ostracized as they should be and removed. 

I know you don't mean it of course, but the sad part, the unfortunate part, about this, is that it isn't just Darwinism for those who choose to ignore science and get sick.  Everyone has the potential to spread it to others who are trying really hard to be safe.  And that's the scary part - that my grandma who is in a nursing home right now, could potentially get sick and die because despite almost everyone around her being careful, maybe an employee of the facility gets sick, maybe catches it from the doctor or grocery store, from someone being very unsafe.

That's not to say we should all live in fear or walk around in bubbles --- obviously there is balance to life, and some sort of balance to how we should be handling it.  

I went to drop off a package the other day to be shipped, and the place had a sign on the door that said something like "We are choosing to wear masks to try and keep all of our customers safe.  We kindly ask that you do the same for us."

It wasn't a "you have to wear a mask to be in here."  It was a "hey, can you please wear one for us?"   And people still weren't.  Maybe time will teach us that we all blew things a bit out of proportion - I don't know - but I'll at least take a few measures - just in case - to try and prevent what I can.  I wish more would do the same, but some people are intentionally not.  It's unfortunate.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, spacepup said:

I know you don't mean it of course, but the sad part, the unfortunate part, about this, is that it isn't just Darwinism for those who choose to ignore science and get sick.  Everyone has the potential to spread it to others who are trying really hard to be safe.  And that's the scary part - that my grandma who is in a nursing home right now, could potentially get sick and die because despite almost everyone around her being careful, maybe an employee of the facility gets sick, maybe catches it from the doctor or grocery store, from someone being very unsafe.

That's not to say we should all live in fear or walk around in bubbles --- obviously there is balance to life, and some sort of balance to how we should be handling it.  

I went to drop off a package the other day to be shipped, and the place had a sign on the door that said something like "We are choosing to wear masks to try and keep all of our customers safe.  We kindly ask that you do the same for us."

It wasn't a "you have to wear a mask to be in here."  It was a "hey, can you please wear one for us?"   And people still weren't.  Maybe time will teach us that we all blew things a bit out of proportion - I don't know - but I'll at least take a few measures - just in case - to try and prevent what I can.  I wish more would do the same, but some people are intentionally not.  It's unfortunate.

I know dude its terrible. I am SOOOOO glad I dont live in the south right now. 

Around here, Its way more rare to see someone without a mask unless they are exercising, out on a walk/biking etc. 

 

My Wife and I walk every night, and even the people that arent actually wearing masks will generally have one available and put it on momentarily as we walk by  each other (We do the same thing). I prefer a bandana, and keep it around my neck and only put it on when im within 10 feet of people or in buildings. 
 

Masks save peoples lives, and slow the spread. There are tons of examples about it, scientific proof, videos etc but what do you tell the people that all just say its fake news?

 

There’s always going to be a population that thinks the government is overreaching, or look at it as an excuse to get pissed off at Democrats.Any of those people ranting about God and masks or whatever nonsense can get Covid as far as im concerned. I hope anyone who isnt a fucking idiot doesnt get it, but not much I can do. 
 

There are county health directors getting death threats and stepping down for Fucks sakes

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrWunderful said:

My Wife and I walk every night, and even the people that arent actually wearing masks will generally have one available and put it on momentarily as we walk by  each other (We do the same thing). I prefer a bandana, and keep it around my neck and only put it on when im within 10 feet of people or in buildings. 

Yeah, that happens here, too, in LA.

But we're still getting a few people raising hell over it.

https://abc7.com/trader-joes-north-hollywood-face-mask-outburst/6279359/

 

And then there was the lady that didn't want to wear a mask (for "health reasons") but didn't want a personal shopper ("I don't want them knowing what I buy", even though they don't give two shits, and the store is going to know anyway) or get it delivered.

She clearly wanted to get her way and not wear a mask, and/or pick a fight.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Yeah, to be an offensive stereotype. That comedy may have slid by in 1990, but not in 2020.

Being an offensive accent against Indian people is a piss-poor asset. I'm glad we're doing away with those.

That's bullshit. Total bullshit.

You can be transgressive, edgy, and funny without the truly offensive stuff. Simpsons has done it plenty of times. They just dropped the ball on this. It's okay. THE SHOW IS STILL ON THE FUCKING AIR!

And I'm not undoing myself. Plenty agree with me. We're the ones winning, almost every single time.

Because there is a moral right.

And it's not the side that creates a fake, offensive Indian accent.

Sorry, but they fucked up on that part. Azaria is a funny guy, but even he admitted they did wrong.

AGAIN, HE ADMITTED THEY DID WRONG.

And they corrected it. He still has his job.

There's no long term damage.

What you call bullshit and pandering is actually treating people with respect.

Is it that you want offensive humor? Is that the only humor you laugh at? If so, you really need to look at your sense of humor.

If not, then don't worry about it. There are plenty of things to laugh at.

Like the Simpsons.

The show that is still on the air.

The majority of the Simpsons is. The Apu accent by a white guy is not.

That's why they dropped it.
 

And how do they bend culture? To use your words.

Ask yourself this.

If the SJW is a small movement, why is it sooooo powerful?

It's because the majority backs them.

They don't have mystical powers. They don't scream racism and the majority shits their pants and does what they want.

If the majority disagreed with them, then they wouldn't have power.

Guess what, when the majority of society agrees with something, it becomes the norm. Now we're seeing the offensive stuff getting shoved into the trashbin where it belongs.

 

The majority agrees with them. That's why they have power.

You just might be in the minority. I know, it sucks.

 

So what changed?

Nothing. Not a goddamn thing changed. Except people who didn't have a voice getting a voice.

And the people who had the sole voice have to share now.

Well, that means all those racist stereotypes aren't funny anymore.

New funny stuff will take its place. Or stuff that was funny but not demeaning to another human just for who they are will take forefront.

And that's funny because it's Cartman doing it in a funny way. We actually agree there.

It's not the Down's Syndrome. Cartman could have done any other thing, like pretend to be black (which maybe he did, I can't remember), and it's not the stereotypes themselves that are funny, it's Cartman being morally bankrupt and getting punished later that is funny. It's hilarious.

Cartman doing a Down's Syndrome impression with no context would not be funny. At least not to those with morals.

You have to look at the context. Matt and Trey are MASTER satirists. It's all they really do. They would never have a handicap fight that didn't have some context. Watch it again, and pay attention to what it's actually doing.

Everything they do, from South Park, to The Book of Mormon, to Team America, all sends up something in a satirical way. And it's funny. Because it has that edge, not because it's offensive. They don't do offensive just to be offensive. And if that's all you watch South Park for, that's on you.

BTW, if you haven't seen the Book of Mormon, it is awesome.

 

You call it caved. That's not how it went down.

It went down like this:

Indian people make statements that Apu's accent by a white dude is offensive.

The creators and Azaria apologize  and drop that aspect.

There was no huge protests. There was no general boycott.

The creators did one thing.

Be fucking human beings.

The majority didn't see an issue if the industry self-regulated. And that's exactly what happened. They put on ratings, parents could make their own decisions.

But I don't see how The Simpsons just dropping one aspect of Apu (that he's voiced by a white guy) and yet KEEPING THE CHARACTER equates to an entire industry saying, "Hey, maybe we should just give the customers a head's up on how violent our games are."

Both are pretty smart decisions.

It didn't before the 1800s. And it didn't happen at the same time.

Slavery was the NORM through most of human history. We finally "woke up." Way too late, but we did. Oh, there's that "woke" word.

The abolition of slavery WAS forcing morals on others.

Morals that said human beings should be treated like human beings.

That's still the progressive stance today.

You may not like it because, I dunno, you dig offensive stereotypical humor, but it's still about treating humans as humans.

So you're against slavery, but people can do whatever the hell else they want, including doing racist stereotypes in cartoons. Is that truly your position?

It all ties into the same thing, treating humans with respect. Getting the white guy to do voices other than a bad Indian accent, while not as profound as ending slavery, is still in that wheelhouse.

You just don't like it.

The Indians can certainly play Apu as good as any white dude, so why not? And you don't have white dudes doing awful stereotypical accents. Azaria wasn't "getting the job done" in a good way. His Apu was awful. And he knew it. He admitted it.

He does a killer Moe, though.

Sure. And the majority will decide.

The majority decided on this one. They didn't twiddle their thumbs while those who spoke up got their way. They agreed with those who spoke up. So did the Simpsons creators.

The people "transcending racial roles" weren't doing the job. Time after time they make it offensive and stereotypical. And people who are those racial roles feel offended, because it is saying, "You Indians/Blacks/name your race are stupid/sound funny just for being who you are." And it makes them feel like shit.

So why not let them do the voice when they're actually, you know, the person being portrayed.

If they screw it up, that's on them. And then another one of that same race can do it.

No it probably wasn't made with the intention of being offensive but it became that as some people started developing the need to get offended by everything. What a shitty state comedy is in when you can't even have something benign as a dialect anymore but you can still be edgy and transgressive? Lol ok. I mean the show has a fat bald dude regularly strangling his son as it's schtick and it was a challenge to established TV norms when it broke through - now it's problematising itself over a minority voice gag and bending backwards to appease the PC culture.

Yes you are undoing yourself. Simpsons was the antithesis to what you stand for and that's what contributed to it's popularity. You're taking something that wouldn't even have existed as we know it if people with your viewpoints were influencing it's direction and then cheering on how you're "winning" by getting to milk it down. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cartman said:

No it probably wasn't made with the intention of being offensive but it became that as some people started developing the need to get offended by everything. What a shitty state comedy is in when you can't even have something benign as a dialect anymore but you can still be edgy and transgressive? Lol ok. I mean the show has a fat bald dude regularly strangling his son as it's schtick and it was a challenge to established TV norms when it broke through - now it's problematising itself over a minority voice gag and bending backwards to appease the PC culture.

It was just one aspect of an otherwise funny character. If Azaria didn't do a shitty accent, or they hired an Indian guy, hardly anything would change. Some Indians had an issue with it. So they changed it. Apu is still there, the show is still there, Azaria is still working.

You can complain that the show went downhill, but that happened years ago, and was because the writing got lamer, not because of PC culture.

4 minutes ago, cartman said:

Yes you are undoing yourself. Simpsons was the antithesis to what you stand for and that's what contributed to it's popularity. You're taking something that wouldn't even have existed as we know it if people with your viewpoints were influencing it's direction and then cheering on how you're "winning" by getting to milk it down. 

I'm cheering and winning because an offensive aspect of an otherwise okay show was changed for the better.

Again, the show's transgressive quality does not hinge on Apu's accent.

They changed one thing. For the better.

And the show keeps going.

Everyone's happy. Why aren't you?

Is it because that accent was the funniest thing about Apu? If so, again, that's on you.

Or is it just another thing that pisses you off about SJWs getting their way?

Well, as I said before, the majority backs them. Or they wouldn't have a voice.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tulpa said:

It was just one aspect of an otherwise funny character. If Azaria didn't do a shitty accent, or they hired an Indian guy, hardly anything would change. Some Indians had an issue with it. So they changed it. Apu is still there, the show is still there, Azaria is still working.

You can complain that the show went downhill, but that happened years ago, and was because the writing got lamer, not because of PC culture.

I'm cheering and winning because an offensive aspect of an otherwise okay show was changed for the better.

Again, the show's transgressive quality does not hinge on Apu's accent.

They changed one thing. For the better.

And the show keeps going.

Everyone's happy. Why aren't you?

Is it because that accent was the funniest thing about Apu? If so, again, that's on you.

Or is it just another thing that pisses you off about SJWs getting their way?

Well, as I said before, the majority backs them. Or they wouldn't have a voice.

 

The character and his voice is just a symptom of the overall problem. I'm saying that without the general counterculture position that it stood for it wouldn't have been the same Simpsons as we know it. And now it took a stand for the opposite: placating sensibilities and being agreeable. 

It's a microissue but it highlights the core of the show and that is that moralizers didn't get to have it their way or they would've been no fucking Simpsons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, cartman said:

The character and his voice is just a symptom of the overall problem.

The problem was that the voice was offensive to a culture of human beings. You expect them to just sit there and take it. Not watch the show? Indians find the Simpsons funny, but that one part made them uncomfortable. They spoke up.

The show responded. They kept the character, and Azaria is still working. It's just that the accent was a misstep, and they owned up to it.

And you equate that as some big regressive thing?

That's fucked up.

No one is going to miss Azaria's voice of Apu, I guarantee it. We'll all move on, and he'll still do characters on the show.

17 minutes ago, cartman said:

I'm saying that without the general counterculture position that it stood for it wouldn't have been the same Simpsons as we know it.

And there's more ways of being counterculture without resorting to cheap gags like offensive accents.

The humor of the Simpsons doesn't hinge on it. The show is still going. Other funny shows are still on the air.

If you're putting all the chips on Apu's accent is what made the Simpsons successful, you're really cutting off your nose to spite your face.

17 minutes ago, cartman said:

And now it took a stand for the opposite: placating sensibilities and being agreeable. 

Yeah, they took one stand, to treat human beings as human beings, and suddenly that's the collapse of western civilization?

No. They corrected an offensive aspect, that wasn't even the core of their humor, and moved on.

17 minutes ago, cartman said:

It's a microissue but it highlights the core of the show and that is that moralizers didn't get to have it their way or they would've been no fucking Simpsons.

No, it doesn't highlight the core of the show. The show has morals. It often hits the same satirical spots that South Park does. In a different way, but they are kissing cousins.

They changed one thing. Apu's accent. And you think that changes the core of the show?

Then it wasn't much of a show.

 

And yet it's still on the air, with most of the gags still going.

I think comedy will do just fine.

Edited by Tulpa
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

It was just one aspect of an otherwise funny character. If Azaria didn't do a shitty accent, or they hired an Indian guy, hardly anything would change. Some Indians had an issue with it. So they changed it. Apu is still there, the show is still there, Azaria is still working.

I haven't watched, "The Problem with Apu,, but the comedian who made the doc. is Indian. I heard there is a scene were he introduced his parents to the character to get their reaction and they think the character is voiced by an Indian person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...