PDA

View Full Version : Avatars & Racial Sensitivity



Æmeric
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 04:41 PM
I've been requested by staff to change my avatar twice in the last day:


http://savagepolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/bfh_obama_oreo_dunk.gif

Avatar 1

This one was described as "not aesthetically appealing". What is aesthetically appealing can be debateable. This one is apparently not a problem, though it is very similar aesthetically:


http://forums.skadi.net/image.php?u=12873&dateline=1223150817

I guess it's the oreo that makes mine aesthetically unappealing.





http://us.altermedia.info/images/chimp_banana3.jpg
Avatar 2

This one was described as tacky. I've seen plenty of tacky/silly avatars used at this forum. One member in particular is know for his silly avatars - and I wonder if he used a monkey with a banana if it would have received the same reaction. Mine were singled out for making fun of a non-White, and I believe it is because of my political & racial views. I can't believe an Avatar making fun of John McCain (age) or George Bush (intellect) would get the same scrutiny. The same rules that require special racial sensitivity for Negroes in the real world are bring applied here, at least for some people.

Nachtengel
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 04:49 PM
I don't see how the second avatar ("abandon all hope") is more "aesthetically appealing" than the first either, to be honest.

But this begs for a good question: What means "aesthetically appealing" to the staff? Just curious.

arthor
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 04:51 PM
I am not offended by it but I am not sure if it is meant to be amusing or making a statement. I feel that if it is making some sort of statement then what is it?
Another thing that struck was that if people wish to express racist views using a chimp and a banana then doesn't that suggest that the one making the point is devoid of any other way of expressing themselves.
Surely it is less likely that a sensible opinion on racism is unlikely to be forthcoming and adds fuel to the view that racists are of a certain ilk?
Furthermore. I am not sure just how secure any racist comments are, even on here. I would imagine that should a similar picture be put up in a workplace some sort of legal or disciplinary action would ensue.
Are we allowed to say what we want on here or do we assume that it will be monitored by the powers that be?
I therefore feel that while I think it infantile, daft and unnecessary, I am not sure why you were asked to remove it. That said, I am sure there are a number of fora that would actively encourage such an avatar.

wasshael

Bärin
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 04:53 PM
Hey, there's another member who has an avatar of a fat cat saying "I is American cat". That has been left standing for ages, despite not being pretty. Making fun of Americans overall is alright because they aren't a racial minority? Does the sensitivity only apply to foreign races? I don't hang around here so often anymore. It looks like Aeternitas left the forum at the whim of PC moderators. Nice job.

BeornWulfWer
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:01 PM
Hey, there's another member who has an avatar of a fat cat saying "I is American cat". That has been left standing for ages, despite not being pretty. Making fun of Americans overall is alright because they aren't a racial minority? Does the sensitivity only apply to foreign races? I don't hang around here so often anymore. It looks like Aeternitas left the forum at the whim of PC moderators. Nice job.

That avatar with the cat is funny. It personifies the persons humour very correctly. It isn't racist, nor is it offensive.
I wouldn't object to someone putting up a picture of a typical Englishman with bad teeth.

It is only gentle ribbing of national stereotypes.

The monkey avatar is racist according to "what is normal", and is therefore likely to get the site into trouble.

Best keep it down and have this site attract no trouble.

Rose
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:04 PM
I didn't realise that this forum was so "politically correct". what a disappointment.

Nachtengel
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:04 PM
That avatar with the cat is funny. It personifies the persons humour very correctly. It isn't racist, nor is it offensive.
I wouldn't object to someone putting up a picture of a typical Englishman with bad teeth.

It is only gentle ribbing of national stereotypes.

The monkey avatar is racist according to "what is normal", and is therefore likely to get the site into trouble.

Best keep it down and have this site attract no trouble.
In other words, we should be politically correct? Are you aware that expressing opposition to immigration, or to Jihad taking over Europe, etc. is not considered "normal" by the politically correct elites? Should we drop that too?

Hauke Haien
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:06 PM
Self-ironic avatars and names (e.g. Boche) are not exactly the same.

I think it is a sensible measure to avoid alienating those who are still caught up in getting offended by such puerile jokes. I also think that members should make an effort to use more topical avatars and I don't see the relevance of Negroes and apes, unless they are Germanic apes, of course.

Bärin
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:08 PM
That avatar with the cat is funny. It personifies the persons humour very correctly. It isn't racist, nor is it offensive.
I wouldn't object to someone putting up a picture of a typical Englishman with bad teeth.

It is only gentle ribbing of national stereotypes.
I see, so when it concerns white ethnicities, it's not racist or offensive, it only is racist and offensive if it concerns coloreds. Maybe it doesn't offend you if someone uses an Englishman with bad teeth, but can you speak for all other English people on site?


The monkey avatar is racist according to "what is normal", and is therefore likely to get the site into trouble.

Best keep it down and have this site attract no trouble.
What this site stands for, Germanic ethnic/cultural/spiritual preservation is not considered "normal" by todays PC standards.

BeornWulfWer
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:20 PM
In other words, we should be politically correct? Are you aware that expressing opposition to immigration, or to Jihad taking over Europe, etc. is not considered "normal" by the politically correct elites? Should we drop that too?

Are Negroes monkeys? Indeed, is a half-caste like Obama, a monkey?

Are Americans the worlds leader in having an obese people population?


I see, so when it concerns white ethnicities, it's not racist or offensive, it only is racist and offensive if it concerns coloreds. Maybe it doesn't offend you if someone uses an Englishman with bad teeth, but can you speak for all other English people on site?

Same questions apply.

Are black people monkeys? Are Americans unfortunately the worlds leaders of obese people?

Which avatar is pointing out satirically the truth, and which is pointing out a racist thought?


As for the English, I think they would take it like the English always do: With a smile(a few teeth missing, mind) and a laugh.

Nachtengel
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:26 PM
Self-ironic avatars and names (e.g. Boche) are not exactly the same.

I think it is a sensible measure to avoid alienating those who are still caught up in getting offended by such puerile jokes. I also think that members should make an effort to use more topical avatars and I don't see the relevance of Negroes and apes, unless they are Germanic apes, of course.
I don't have a problem with either avatars but if the reasons cited for removing them are "not being aesthetically appealing", then I don't see how an avatar of a fat "American" cat falls into the "aestethically appealing" category either, so I see Bärin's point. Moreover, I'm pretty certain I saw other avatars which aren't that what would generally be thought as "aesthetically appealing". I have reported none, because as I said I am not offended, but if a rule is going to be cited, it shouldn't be done selectively in my opinion.


Are Negroes monkeys?
No, but there is a certain resemblence between them.


Are Americans the worlds leader in having an obese people population?
Not last I checked, it was the Australians who were even fatter than Americans.

BeornWulfWer
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:40 PM
No, but there is a certain resemblence between them.

But are they monkeys?


Not last I checked, it was the Australians who were even fatter than Americans.

Really? That is surprising.

OneEnglishNorman
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:48 PM
Obviously there's a big difference between a large "American cat" and a monkey with a banana in place of a black man. One is explicitly racist in a coarse way. I agree with BeornWulfWer.

Leonhardt
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:52 PM
Are Americans the worlds leader in having an obese people population?
We are the world's leaders in drought resistance. We will survive the bad economy much better than yall skinny peoples.:burger

BeornWulfWer
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 05:54 PM
We are the world's leaders in drought resistance. We will survive the bad economy much better than yall skinny peoples.:burger

Watch what you say. If times are that bad we may come over and eat you fat Americans :D

Sigurd
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 06:00 PM
Hey, there's another member who has an avatar of a fat cat saying "I is American cat". That has been left standing for ages, despite not being pretty. Making fun of Americans overall is alright because they aren't a racial minority?

In fact, we have discussed this avatar in length on Staff if I recall correctly. We felt that despite not finding it particularly aesthetically pleasing, that it was a sort of borderline case.

None of us found it to be racist in any way, shape or form - because if the member in question who has it is American herself. In that way, it is hardly different from the avatar I have sported of recent with the "JO FRLY!", this being a little bit of self-irony on being a member of Bajuvarian background of sorts. Not all of Bajuvarian background of course wear these type of hats ...

As such, mischak's avatar is funny. Just like most Nationalists would find it funny if their Nationalist compatriots called them "Oh, shut up you Nazi", but would feel deeply offended if an Antifa type said that type of thing.

The Obama avatars are meant to be derogatory, whilst the "American Cat" avatar is tongue-in-cheek towards her own ethnicity. A Swede sporting a Viking avatar with horns on his helmet would be viewed in the same light, even though it is long proven that Vikings had no horns on their helmet ... if on the other hand a person not of Scandinavian heritage had a similar avatar, it might be considered as offensive and derogatory towards another culture.

If a German had the "American cat" avatar, it'd probably be understood as trying to inflame drama, but if an American does it, it is self-irony. If avatars are borderline, it will be assessed case to case as to the intention behind it, and decided accordingly.


It looks like Aeternitas left the forum at the whim of PC moderators. Nice job.Since the ruling on mischak's avatar being borderline dates back to her days on Staff, I suppose you include her in that "PC brigade" statement, too? I'd also like to see how Thorburn ... or even several other long-timers would see that insult (for my own part, I've learnt since to be above your constant claims of victimisation and double-standards). Nice job. :|

Nachtengel
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 06:03 PM
But are they monkeys?
No, but should they be? Are all Americans fat? Do all English have bad teeth? Why is it funny when your average American or Englishman is satirized for his appearance, but not your average Negro?
I think George Bush resembles a monkey and Idi Amin resembles a gorilla. Why am I a racist only in the second case?


Really? That is surprising.
Yes, really.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/2157503/Australians-fatter-than-Americans-study.html

Ulf
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 06:14 PM
Honestly, it's just an avatar on a site you don't pay for. Just change the damn thing to something tasteful, rather than piss off the people who actually keep this place running.

We get it, you don't like Obama.

Bärin
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 06:17 PM
In fact, we have discussed this avatar in length on Staff if I recall correctly. We felt that despite not finding it particularly aesthetically pleasing, that it was a sort of borderline case.
So you agree her avatar isn't aesthetically pleasing. But another member was asked to remove his avatar on the basis that it's not aesthetically pleasing. So the rules only apply to some, not to all? Or are ugly/silly avatars allowed as long as they are not "racist"? You should mention it in the rules then, so people know beforehand.


Since the ruling on mischak's avatar being borderline dates back to her days on Staff, I suppose you include her in that "PC brigade" statement, too? I'd also like to see how Thorburn ... or even several other long-timers would see that insult (for my own part, I've learnt since to be above your constant claims of victimisation and double-standards). Nice job. :|
I've never been PC, so I don't suck up to people, no matter how "long-timers" they are. Yes, I would include her then too. But she is also anti-American, so she is biased. Where are my double-standards? You are the only ones with double-standards, because the rules exist in your minds only for some.

Oswiu
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 06:17 PM
I sent Aemeric a polite request (while giving him Rep Points!) asking if he would consider changing. Two fellow Englishmen have echoed my feelings exactly on the crass tasteless image. The image thus qualifies as aesthetically unattractive by the standards of a major Germanic ethnicity.

Idi Amin did look like a gorilla, because he was a big fat aggressive man, just as George W does look like a chimp. Obama doesn't look much like a chimp to me. Therefore the only reasoning behind it is to call black people monkeys, and such attitudes are a godsend to our enemies. Do we have to make it so easy for people to discredit us?

More importantly, Aemeric has chosen not to speak to me about a private request, but to parade it all on the open forum. That could be interpreted as against rule 29, but is either way bad manners at least.

Sigurd
Tuesday, October 7th, 2008, 06:21 PM
Also, thread closed due to Rule #29:


29. If you have been warned, infracted, or your post or threads fell under activity of editorial Staff discretion, and you disagree with the measure, you can address the Member of Staff who has set the disciplinary measure. He shall fairly hear your appeal and all arguments you cited in your favor, and will, having discussed the issue with Staff and benevolently appreciated their input and concerns, either revoke, mitigate, or uphold, but never tighten the measure, with additional requirements and conditions set forth or not. All such complaints that do not follow these proceedings, in particular all those that are posted publicly, shall be simply deleted and ignored, at best tightening the measures.


You have been a member of this board for how many years now, Æmeric? 3 years, right? I think you know all to well which is the correct route to address disagreement with a Staff measure. Posting a public thread is not the way to go there.

Alas, lads, for this matter, the thread will be closed. We would have been all too willing to explain what type of avatar is allowed, and under which circumstances, if asked politely - but this is just another one of those "Staff have an Agenda against me and double-standard" type of threads, which will continue to be closed without further notice.

So, next time, if that is the issue you wish to concern - post an actual question than an accusation if at all ... and complain via PM. Staff have extensive inboxes, much larger than our patience for people not learning over and over again that complaining publically abotu a measure is not the way.

And no, just because others also publically whinged doesn't mean you have to do it, too. Actually, I am mightily disappointed by you for taking it to the same level as some well-known "drama queens" (which have for the most part been banned by now), I had thought that you were above that and were a rule-abiding member who would make use of the PM-complaint function instead.

Even some of the most hardy thread-complainers had that one figured out after the third or fourth attempt at a public thread: PMs are much more likely to be heard, and don't end in warning/infractions for the wrong way of complaining either. :)