03-05-2019, 03:09 PM
(03-05-2019, 12:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: Three of the four sites with that photo were "blowback" against the event. A google search of that phrase you suggested show plenty of people question the offensiveness of the event. (An event I wouldn't even have known about with out your posting it.)
Oh, you mean "blow back" in the sense that people were offended or commented on it. If that's the case then literally everything that happens in this country now generates "blow back" as there's always someone that's going to be offended or had their feelings hurt. I'm referring to actual "blow back" in the sense that the event generates media attention, wide spread outrage, calls for people to be fired, calls for a boycott or, in the most extreme examples, actual violence.
Quote:Never said it was acceptable. I said the larger/more influential the group the more likely they will get mocked/criticiszed. And more likely some of the their members will react to it.
It is certainly true that the larger the target the more often it's going to be hit. I think you're missing the specific point being made though, that being that a similar event coopting the imagery and symbolism of Judaism or Islam would never have been put forth in the first place. Certainly not by any mainstream organization and certainly no event attended by high profile celebrities.
Quote:Full disclosure I believe one should have a healthy disrespect for all institutions lest they get swallowed up in believing everything they are told about it.
Honestly, I'm fine with respect or disrespect regardless of the institution. What I must insist upon is a consistency of view and reaction that is not predicated on the group being targeted, i.e. you can make fun of white protestants, transgender Hispanics or Buddhist Asians. No group should be above ridicule and no group should be able to claim exemption or a special form of outrage. Logical consistency is all I'm asking for, and I'm pretty sure that was Sunset's point as well, if I may be so bold as to speak for him.
