174 réponses à ce sujet

[Akrabra]

Yes they did and so did countless straight men. And they did so in the same uniform of their services and under the same flag of their country, not some rainbow flag of attention-craving activists who want to make some childish political/social statement 60+ years later.

While i do not like the way you phrase it, i do have to agree a tiny bit. The Rainbow flag agenda is getting abit to extreme, even for me and forcing it on a historical event is maybe uncalled for. I am not that offended, i just don't see the point either. Like Lady Artifice pointed out earlier, it is not the first time someone has used that image to prove a point or for parody/comedy. I don't see why it is different this time. 

[DEUGH Man]

Yes because that's all that James Obergefell has been doing for the last 2 years, refreshing his browser. It's not like he was trying to get his legal marriage to his terminally ill husband recognised by the state he lived in or anything. I'm sure it was all a walk in the park

True, there are people who have been fighting legal battles, and there have been people who have died for being gay. I was referring to people like this artist and others who use tactics like his to piggyback off of other people's struggles. Even in the man's case, is going through a court case, as important to him and as emotionally charged as it is, really in the same realm as fighting in Japan during WWII? I don't really see it at all. That's not to say that people who support the cause and the people who went through this court case and the many other failed ones are not strong and brave, or their cause is invalid, but it takes a much different type of bravery to fight in a war against a brutal and ruthless enemy than it is to fight tirelessly for your beliefs. Both types of bravery are necessary, but they are not the same thing, which is why I think trying to draw parallels is silly.

[Inquisitor Recon]

 

 

You seem a little offended to me, but maybe I'm misreading. It's hard to tell the difference because you are complaining about social issues (one might say, social justice for Iwo Jima veterans, particularly since you are doing so for a group of people who you do not belong to) on the internet. I'm sure you can see how I'm easily confused, right? I have such a hard time figuring out who is a communist, er SJW, amid all of the accusations that fly around on the board......

Also the "SJW" that was 'pissed' at Jennifer Aniston was complaining about how tasteless and disrespectful the gay Iwo Jima pic was. And if he's a SJW........just saying.

So the notion of respecting the past is a social issue now? If somebody decided to annoy the Russians by turning this:

 

into some sort of gay pride thing, would the Russians be the SJWs versus the guys who edited the photo?

 

And comparing communists to SJWs? Damn man, not even the commies deserve such an association. Also why would this guy pretend to be Jennifer Aniston if he was the one actually offended by it and not offended by whatever her views may be?

 

someone who thinks Jennifer Aniston is just a random minor actress probably hasn't been paying attention to comedy movies in the last few years

I don't keep track of celebrities, wouldn't recognize most of them if I bumped into them on a street.

[Sion1138]

I think it's great.

[Dobbysaurus]

Don't forget "The Rachel," the women's hairstyle of the 90's. 
 
I absolutely had that cut in high school. 

I had it too. Didn't look good on me though.

[daveliam]

I'm pretty sure the SJW would be the keyboard warrior complaining on a message board about how tasteless and disrespectful the image is on behalf of a group to which they don't belong.....

At least that's what I've gathered from the many complaints about SJWs on the BSN.

[Inquisitor Recon]

I'm pretty sure the SJW would be the keyboard warrior complaining on a message board about how tasteless and disrespectful the image is on behalf of a group to which they don't belong.....

Says the guy defending what is essentially more awful "modern art" because of the message it sends or some other nonsense excuse.

[daveliam]

Says the guy defending what is essentially more awful "modern art" because of the message it sends or some other nonsense excuse.

Right but I also don't claim to NOT be a SJW. That's the difference. I own it. I don't pretend not to be when I act that way about something that I care about.

[TheOgre]

I'm pretty sure the SJW would be the keyboard warrior complaining on a message board about how tasteless and disrespectful the image is on behalf of a group to which they don't belong.....

 

My smug shades

[Sion1138]

 

So the notion of respecting the past is a social issue now?

 

Well, what is it then?

[Cyonan]

7 pages later and I'm still wondering why is it that when gay people parody the image, it's disrespectful.

 

But when countless other people do it, nobody seems to care.

 

Also amusing: Many of the people claiming as such are the ones who I see saying that SJW's get upset over things too easily.

[Billy-the-Squid]

While i do not like the way you phrase it, i do have to agree a tiny bit. The Rainbow flag agenda is getting abit to extreme, even for me and forcing it on a historical event is maybe uncalled for. I am not that offended, i just don't see the point either. Like Lady Artifice pointed out earlier, it is not the first time someone has used that image to prove a point or for parody/comedy. I don't see why it is different this time. 

 

It's not the first time, but this is a symptom of a wider problem which is present in western society, you have a clique of hard-line left wing radicals which are grandstanding and attention whoring on all of these types of issues, while the Political sphere currently leaning left catering to their whims at every turn irrespective of the fact those claims can be based on complete horseshite, while the hacks in the left wing media are screaming at everyone that there is a rape culture, feminists being oppressed, gays being victimised and how our society is so institutionally racist and homophobic we should be disgusted and ashamed, but you can't question it and asking for evidence of that is just being a bigot. 

 

Funnily enough, people are getting tired and pissed off by it, this is the kind of thing which adds to an already long list of grievances, when most people really couldn't care less, most have better things to worry about than gay marriage being legalised, great it was... we're still talking about this how many weeks after?The cliques however always decide to play the holier than though art card and rub it everyone's face, while keeping it in the spotlight, and it's wearing thin. 

 

Especially as they're also abusive pricks, for instance, Christian Bakery in Ireland refused to produce a cake saying support Gay marriage because it was against their beliefs, they'd supply them with a cake, just not one with that lettering, the Gays sued them for discrimination, and the court found against bakery despite their own religious beliefs being impinged by the ruling. 

 

That kind of behaviour by the social justice crowd rubs a lot of people up the wrong way, they go looking for a fight and the political left wing and media will jump open it with glee. And the SJWs have been doing this kind of thing for a while, that's why they're hated so much, it's the same kind of behaviour they're doing here, they're antagonistic attention seekers, but when they're turned on they scream oppression or whatever flavour of the month ism they've come up with and attempt to censor and silence criticism. 

 

Personally, I don't like religions much for a whole host of reasons, but I despise and hate hypocritical attention whores, who hide behind a buzzword to cow people into silence even more. 

[DEUGH Man]

I'm pretty sure the SJW would be the keyboard warrior complaining on a message board about how tasteless and disrespectful the image is on behalf of a group to which they don't belong.....

At least that's what I've gathered from the many complaints about SJWs on the BSN.

Difference is that people aren't trying to get this picture banned from existence while also trying to get this guy fired from his job

[Inquisitor Recon]

 

Right but I also don't claim to NOT be a SJW. That's the difference. I own it. I don't pretend not to be when I act that way about something that I care about.

Well if you want to associate yourself with those crazies go ahead, SJWs try to get what they don't like removed/banned (and they attempt to destroy the lives of whoever is involved because they're vindictive scumbags) because they think their feels are more important than the rights of others. I'm not trying to do that here, I'm only pointing out that it is tasteless, disrespectful junk. The SJWs meanwhile are more likely to praise it because of their own ideology of victimhood.

 

Well, what is it then?

Pretty much one of the cornerstones of any healthy civilization.

[Lady Artifice]

So the notion of respecting the past is a social issue now? If somebody decided to annoy the Russians by turning this:
 
into some sort of gay pride thing, would the Russians be the SJWs versus the guys who edited the photo?
 
And comparing communists to SJWs? Damn man, not even the commies deserve such an association. Also why would this guy pretend to be Jennifer Aniston if he was the one actually offended by it and not offended by whatever her views may be?
 

I don't keep track of celebrities, wouldn't recognize most of them if I bumped into them on a street.

You've misunderstood the order of events. The gentleman who was personally offended by the image pretended to be Jennifer Aniston, not so that he could send any criticism in Aniston's direction, but so that he could use the force of her celebrity to draw attention to his opinion by tricking people into believing that she had the same opinion.

This doesn't imply any dissaproval of Aniston's views on his part, just that he considered her influential enough to serve his purpose.

[Sigma Tauri]

...yes it's an agenda, that's exactly what it is; we're here we're queer and we're all out to get ya! So don't drink the tap water...and don't breath the air either (better safe than sorry  )

 

The Gayluminati is everywhere! Shield yourself with artful tinfoil tiaras.

[Sion1138]

Pretty much one of the cornerstones of any healthy civilization.

 

But perceptions of history do vary across social groups, depending on what people are exposed to throughout their lives.

[daveliam]

Well if you want to associate yourself with those crazies go ahead, SJWs try to get what they don't like removed/banned (and they attempt to destroy the lives of whoever is involved because they're vindictive scumbags) because they think their feels are more important than the rights of others. I'm not trying to do that here, I'm only pointing out that it is tasteless, disrespectful junk. The SJWs meanwhile are more likely to praise it because of their own ideology of victimhood.

And I don't consider myself an SJW either. I just voice my opinions (logically and rationally usually). And I get called a SJW for it so now I don't care if I'm called that because, while people will claim that it has to do with 'Sarkeesian' and 'Tumblr' and blah blah blah, what it ACTUALLY means is 'someone who vocalizes opinions about social issues that I disagree with'. I just recognize that BOTH sides do the same complaining and bellyaching and pearl clutching. Only one side doesn't think that they do.....

[TheJediSaint]

Uh? Ooorah?

[Akrabra]

...yes it's an agenda, that's exactly what it is; we're here we're queer and we're all out to get ya! So don't drink the tap water...and don't breath the air either (better safe than sorry  )

hm? Your point beeing?

[BioWareMod01]

This thread is being closed because political topics are not allowed on the forums.