Is this making fun of the disabled or is it pandering to them?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

I saved this on the 4000+ low populated realm page on the eu wow forums,which is worth a thread in itself sometime, shortly before it got deleted and it got me wondering.

image

Is it offensive to the disabled or are we giving them too much special treatment.

The only way I can see it's offensive is to those who have that condition but are not as badly affected as the picture.

However you could contrast it to numerous jokes and memes about basement dwellers,fat people or nerds.
For example take this meme.
image

Is it about people being too fussy or that the person on it's ugly and should have no standards and just take whatever they can get.

Or should we consider it in the same light as the first picture and ban it because it's offensive to the socially disabled,do they not deserve the protection as the person in the first picture?

I've edited the original picture but is it now offensive to babies or people with bodies of men,heads of babies. I mean technically there's some genius babies capable of IT but most of them will drool on keyboards given the chance.

image

Maybe this would of been better in the politics section. Does anyone know how I can get it moved there.

FreedomofInformation:
Maybe this would of been better in the politics section. Does anyone know how I can get it moved there.

Just ask in the moderator's group chat room.

I don't know what's worse....

That baby being, quite possibly, the ugliest baby face i've ever seen (insert Stephen Lynch song here) or the fact that someone tried to pass those pictures off as humour.

It may or may not be an insult to disabled people but it sure as shit is an insult to comedy.

FreedomofInformation:
snip]

I dont understand what you are saying

and yes the first picture is offensive to disabled people..arguably more so than the guy in the second picture because we can assume his "condition" is a result of his own actions/lifestyle rather than somthing he was born with(aside from being geneticaly predisposed to certain things but you have to draw the line somwhere)

The first picture is offensive to mentally disabled people.

The second picture is satirising the gaming culture's attitude towards women. The irony is that he is objectifying women while apparently unaware of his own undesirability. It's not saying that he shouldn't have standards. It's saying that if you want to judge people solely on their looks you should look in a mirror first.

Also I'm slightly disturbed that you think "having standards" means only pursuing attractive people. All it requires is a shifting of standards from "someone who has super-hot-elf-tits" to "someone who is kind, accepting, enjoys things that I enjoy, etc."

As a general rule, mocking people because of their own decisions and actions is perfectly valid. Mocking them for things out of their control most definitely is not.

So, making fun of the mentally handicapped for being mentally handicapped isn't right.

Making fun of the hypocracy of certain groups like the second pic is doing is perfectly fine, but doing so by calling them ugly is not.

The third is a bad strawman, which deserves mockery.

In what way is it a strawman and is the first post really mocking the disabled or insulting that companies employees?

It's curious that some of you deem it acceptable to make fun of people based on their so called decisions. Does that mean it's ok to go into a cancer ward and start laughing at people with lung cancer for smoking or someone who's been in a car crash?
What happens if they do have something like autism then it wouldn't have anything to do with choice or are certain disabled people worthy of more political correctness?

The second picture is satirising the gaming culture's attitude towards women. The irony is that he is objectifying women while apparently unaware of his own undesirability. It's not saying that he shouldn't have standards. It's saying that if you want to judge people solely on their looks you should look in a mirror first.

Why? We don't need to be 7 foot to call some basketball players rubbish.
Objectivism in this context is a feminist myth and most of the people that do get commented on are either celebrities whos job is in the public eye or people trying to promote themselves on their looks and get criticized the same as anyone else.

FreedomofInformation:
is the first post really mocking the disabled or insulting that companies employees?

I feel this is the point really. It's taking someones complex difficult life condition and using it as a one note insult to compare other people too.

Would you feel comfortable making this joke in front of someone who actually is mentally handicapped?

I reckon that's a pretty good rule of thumb. To be honest I don't really like the basement dweller joke, although to a lesser extent, I'm not going to mock someone for their appearance in front of them. It perpetuates stereotypes. But as people have said, at least there's a life decision partly responsible there.

And I'd feel fine calling someone a toddler in front of a toddler. Everyone grows up, they'd probably find it funny to here a big grown adult describing as behaving like them. Can you see why a disabled person wouldn't necessarily think the same way?

...What? Maybe it's because I generally don't care about/follow MMOs, but I have no idea what this is discussing. Anyone who likes to use proper grammar want to help a man out?

It could just be me, but the person in that picture doesn't look mentally handicapped, maybe I'm missing something, but to me, it just looks like a picture of a slightly gormless dude in an office and we all have those moments at work.

manic_depressive13:
The first picture is offensive to mentally disabled people.

The second picture is satirising the gaming culture's attitude towards women. The irony is that he is objectifying women while apparently unaware of his own undesirability. It's not saying that he shouldn't have standards. It's saying that if you want to judge people solely on their looks you should look in a mirror first.

Also I'm slightly disturbed that you think "having standards" means only pursuing attractive people. All it requires is a shifting of standards from "someone who has super-hot-elf-tits" to "someone who is kind, accepting, enjoys things that I enjoy, etc."

Beaten to the post again.
This.

I don't see how acknowledging that the first image is horrifically offensive to people with mental disabilities is giving them special treatment. Or is the majority pissed off that they have to be PC about people with Down's Syndrome too?

FreedomofInformation:
Does that mean it's ok to go into a cancer ward and start laughing at people with lung cancer for smoking or someone who's been in a car crash?

No, but then that's not analagous to what's being discussed here. Laughing at someone's suffering to their face is a dick move no matter why they're suffering.

Laughing about it on a forum they aren't a member of, that's quite a bit different.

The second picture is satirising the gaming culture's attitude towards women. The irony is that he is objectifying women while apparently unaware of his own undesirability. It's not saying that he shouldn't have standards. It's saying that if you want to judge people solely on their looks you should look in a mirror first.

Why? We don't need to be 7 foot to call some basketball players rubbish.

You do realize that this is talking about criticizing someone for their looks, not for their basketball performance, right? The difference being that a basketball player's job is to play basketball. There are actually very few women in the world whose job is nothing more than being sexually attractive to internet manchildren.

Colour-Scientist:
Or is the majority pissed off that they have to be PC about people with Down's Syndrome too?

Isn't that a basic component of privilege? The inability to notice the irony of demanding one's right to say any damn fool thing one wants while complaining any time someone responds to the damn fool thing one just said.

FreedomofInformation:
the socially disabled

Dear fucking christ. Please tell me you're joking. Please tell me that's not a thing now.

As a long time gamer, life long pen & paper rpger and sci-fi fan I do find the basement dwelling nerd stereotype extremely tiresome, but the thought that there might be people who fit part of that stereotype and are now wanting to be treated on the same level as groups who are the victims of actual real discrimination... I don't know what to say.

I'm not inclined to use image memes or .gifs in my posts, but if I did I'd be looking for an "I don't want to live on this planet anymore" right about now.

Sixcess:

FreedomofInformation:
the socially disabled

Dear fucking christ. Please tell me you're joking. Please tell me that's not a thing now.

As a long time gamer, life long pen & paper rpger and sci-fi fan I do find the basement dwelling nerd stereotype extremely tiresome, but the thought that there might be people who fit part of that stereotype and are now wanting to be treated on the same level as groups who are the victims of actual real discrimination... I don't know what to say.

I'm not inclined to use image memes or .gifs in my posts, but if I did I'd be looking for an "I don't want to live on this planet anymore" right about now.

There are people that call themselves "transfat", because they are really large "on the inside", and not really skinny like they are on the outside.

There are people that call themselves "transracial" because on the inside they are some bizarre racial stereotype they've dreamt up, not whatever ethnicity they were born as. Cosmetic surgery to look more like their chosen ethnicity isn't unknown.

And you fucking well better believe they are just as oppressed as people actually being discriminated against in the really real world, or there will be sulking. Hell, look at those furries that believe fursecution is a massive societal ill.

Thread moved by request. =]

As long as it's not outright, hate-bashing, idgaf in all honesty. A joke is a joke, people need to learn how to get less sensitive to shit and just lighten up.

FreedomofInformation:
I saved this on the 4000+ low populated realm page on the eu wow forums,which is worth a thread in itself sometime, shortly before it got deleted and it got me wondering.

image

Is it offensive to the disabled or are we giving them too much special treatment.

The only way I can see it's offensive is to those who have that condition but are not as badly affected as the picture.

How is that guy even disabled? By working at blizzard, or being stupid? That's the joke right? Hah hah, blizzard employees are stupid? Is blizzard employee a new race or protected sect or something that I was unaware of?

FreedomofInformation:
However you could contrast it to numerous jokes and memes about basement dwellers,fat people or nerds.
For example take this meme.
image

Is it about people being too fussy or that the person on it's ugly and should have no standards and just take whatever they can get.

Or should we consider it in the same light as the first picture and ban it because it's offensive to the socially disabled,do they not deserve the protection as the person in the first picture?

While I would concede there are some people who are disabled in a way that damages their ability to socialized, I don't find that everybody who chooses to not be that social of a person as 'disabled'.

But that's the problem with 'acceptable targets'. Either all targets need to be acceptable or none, or else you're just playing favoritism with who you can call names and who you can't.

FreedomofInformation:
I've edited the original picture but is it now offensive to babies or people with bodies of men,heads of babies. I mean technically there's some genius babies capable of IT but most of them will drool on keyboards given the chance.

image

I think that improves the image, so now it can be about both blizzard employees AND the people who bitched about the first joke.

I don't think it was offensive. Disabilities have been used to mock people since god knows when and this is what the pictures does, mocking blizzard with a visual representation of a mentally handicapped.

I mean every time you call someone stupid because they do something wrong/stupid you are effectively being offensive towards everyone who is born with a low IQ. And the same could be said about the insult "retard" which would be considered offensive towards people who suffer from retardation. If we're going to start censoring the use of mental predispositions to insult people things are going to get weird.

The thing is saying Blizzard is retarded.

Which is an insult to a company, as those are normally run professionally. The implication used - that people with mental retardation can't run a company - isn't some offensive devaluation of them, it's undeniably true! Now, most people with Down's Syndrome can of course turn on a computer, but hyperbolic exaggeration is an integral part of humour.

So no, it's not offensive to the mentally disabled.

I don't really think it's offensive. Not in the last place because they make no clear reference to down syndrome, nor is that man the clearest 'down face' I've ever seen.

If anything it's an insult towards people who play Wow. ^_^


Also I have no idea what LFR or CRZ is. I guess I'll take that as a good sign. ;-)

Pictures that insinuate something or someone is retarded are A-OK with me. Because let's be honest: only in the most bizarrely relativistic sense could being retarded be considered a good thing. There is absolutely nothing wrong with using negative characteristics as pejoratives. It is a standard way to describe things with language. Of course, such descriptions can be turned around if the act of describing something as retarded is based on an untruthful premise.

Blablahb:
I don't really think it's offensive. Not in the last place because they make no clear reference to down syndrome, nor is that man the clearest 'down face' I've ever seen.

If anything it's an insult towards people who play Wow. ^_^


Also I have no idea what LFR or CRZ is. I guess I'll take that as a good sign. ;-)

While i'm guessing LFR = Looking For Raid i'm actually quite glad i'm also unaware of what CRZ stands for.

I don't understand.

That said, I don't like using people with a genuine illness to make fun of healthy idiots. For one because it diminishes the relevance of the illness, but also because it diminishes the responsibility that healthy idiots carry for their decisions. I only tangentially follow news about Blizzard, but from the things I read (and the things I myself made fun of) this has a lot more to do with greedy, lazy jerks screwing over the fanbase than it does with genuine stupidity. Being stupid is one thing, being an ass is another. So don't let them off that easily.

someones complex difficult life condition

first image is horrifically offensive to people with mental disabilities

If someone was a little slow wouldn't they be offended at the extremely condescending attitude expressed with those statements.

Right, hopefully this explanation will be straightforward enough, and hopefully educational for some of you too.

It's really really simple.

It is offensive because it is clearly stating that people with Down's Syndrome are idiots who aren't even capable of turning on a PC, and that being compared to someone with Down's is an insult. Not only are both of those statements untrue, but people with Down's Syndrome also suffer greatly from associations like that every day.

The reason why statements like that are such an issue for the central key things like race, sex and disability is that those false negative stereotypes actually make a huge difference to people's lives, by repeating their use you're directly contributing to things like their employment chances, their likelihood of further insult and abuse, and so on.

The kind of suffering involved is not in any way comparable to that second image of the stereotypical basement dweller. How likely are you to be denied employment or tortured and murdered because you don't see much daylight and like RPGs?

Disabiltiy discrimination and hate crime are both very real and very common. A staggering 9/10 people with learning disabilities suffer abuse and violence. Perpetuating the stereotype that people with learning disabilities are sub-human contributes to things like this:

http://www.wmur.com/news/nh-news/Health-care-provider-accused-of-assaulting-man/-/9857858/18193398/-/w7de7oz/-/index.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-461727/Man-learning-difficulties-tortured-forced-viaduct-death.html
http://brennybaby.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/man-with-learning-difficulties-tortured.html
http://www.king5.com/news/local/disabled-metro-passenger-assault-on-video-108879484.html
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/crime/pair-accused-of-torturing-people-with-learning-disabilities-1-3407962
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2243567/Horrific-pictures-gruesome-injuries-sustained-vulnerable-man-bullied-tortured-humiliated-bigoted-couple-special-needs.html

This stuff is real. I've had it happen to a close family member.

It really is a serious business, and I really do beg you to please think about the attitudes towards people with disabilities that seemingly innocent fun and jokes actually contribute to. The fun and jokes certainly don't make decent people decide to attack people with disabilities, but what they do achieve is making it that little bit easier for bad people to justify what they're doing.

And yes, 'retard' is extremely offensive, often people with learning difficulties regard it as being just as offensive as 'nigger'. Just because lots of people say it doesn't make it ok.

Here's a little explanation why, from an athlete with Down's Syndrome. His comments about Ann Coulter's 'retard' slur can just as easily be applied to the image :

--------------------------------------------------

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter's post-debate "retard" slur aimed at Barack Obama sparked an incredible amount of partisan outrage earlier this week, but a thoughtful open letter penned by a Special Olympics athlete urged readers to think about the word itself.

More than 3,300 people retweeted her latest misstep after Monday's final presidential debate:

@AnnCoulter
I highly approve of Romney's decision to be kind and gentle to the retard.

Among the people who saw her tweet was John Franklin Stephens, a 30-year-old with Down syndrome and an athlete at the Special Olympics - a separate games from the Paralympics - who tried to grasp the point of her message with the following letter, which the organization published Tuesday:

"After I saw your tweet, I realized you just wanted to belittle the president by linking him to people like me. You assumed that people would understand and accept that being linked to someone like me is an insult and you assumed you could get away with it and still appear on TV.

I have to wonder if you considered other hateful words but recoiled from the backlash.

Well, Ms Coulter, you, and society, need to learn that being compared to people like me should be considered a badge of honor.

No one overcomes more than we do and still loves life so much."

---------------------------------------------

Or reworded to be relevant to the original image in this thread:

"After I saw your photo, I realized you just wanted to belittle Blizzard staff by linking them to people like me. You assumed that people would understand and accept that being linked to someone like me is an insult and you assumed you could get away with it.

I have to wonder if you considered other hateful images, but recoiled from the backlash.

Well, you, and society, need to learn that being compared to people like me should be considered a badge of honor.

No one overcomes more than we do and still loves life so much."

ianhamilton_:

Exactly. It is so simple it shouldn't need pointing out.

I think at the end of the day the fact of the matter is that it would be better if people were all born healthy mentally and physically. However, they are not and its no ones fault and has no bearing on their character. Well that's not exactly true, what i mean is obviously living with a disability is going to affect your character in some ways but its your attitude towards life and others that makes you a good or bad human, so taking the piss out of a person with downs like that just seems cruel to me. Especially when its making a point that is so fucking trivial when compared with the amount of people who are going to be offended seeing that.

Its like your saying "WELL your genetically stupid so its my right to berate you about it" Fuck that attitude and fuck that you needed to ask whether this was offensive or not.

edit: im not saying you shouldnt be allowed to make offensive jokes, just that you got to expect people like me to lay into you for it when its for no good reason at all.

Also fat nerds could always lose some weight and use a flannel, whereas you cant willpower your way out of having downs

But what if they can't and why should willpower be an excuse for the abuse?

ianhamilton_:
Right, hopefully this explanation will be straightforward enough, and hopefully educational for some of you too.

It's really really simple.

It is offensive because it is clearly stating that people with Down's Syndrome are idiots who aren't even capable of turning on a PC, and that being compared to someone with Down's is an insult. Not only are both of those statements untrue, but people with Down's Syndrome also suffer greatly from associations like that every day.

The reason why statements like that are such an issue for the central key things like race, sex and disability is that those false negative stereotypes actually make a huge difference to people's lives, by repeating their use you're directly contributing to things like their employment chances, their likelihood of further insult and abuse, and so on.

The kind of suffering involved is not in any way comparable to that second image of the stereotypical basement dweller. How likely are you to be denied employment or tortured and murdered because you don't see much daylight and like RPGs?

Neither are the disabled relatively speaking.

Disabiltiy discrimination and hate crime are both very real and very common. A staggering 9/10 people with learning disabilities suffer abuse and violence. Perpetuating the stereotype that people with learning disabilities are sub-human contributes to things like this:

http://www.wmur.com/news/nh-news/Health-care-provider-accused-of-assaulting-man/-/9857858/18193398/-/w7de7oz/-/index.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-461727/Man-learning-difficulties-tortured-forced-viaduct-death.html
http://brennybaby.blogspot.co.uk/2011/09/man-with-learning-difficulties-tortured.html
http://www.king5.com/news/local/disabled-metro-passenger-assault-on-video-108879484.html
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/crime/pair-accused-of-torturing-people-with-learning-disabilities-1-3407962
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2243567/Horrific-pictures-gruesome-injuries-sustained-vulnerable-man-bullied-tortured-humiliated-bigoted-couple-special-needs.html

This stuff is real. I've had it happen to a close family member.

It really is a serious business, and I really do beg you to please think about the attitudes towards people with disabilities that seemingly innocent fun and jokes actually contribute to. The fun and jokes certainly don't make decent people decide to attack people with disabilities, but what they do achieve is making it that little bit easier for bad people to justify what they're doing.

Those things happened because they were vulnerable and different. It was the same situation when some goths got assaulted for their strange looks.

And yes, 'retard' is extremely offensive, often people with learning difficulties regard it as being just as offensive as 'nigger'. Just because lots of people say it doesn't make it ok.

Here's a little explanation why, from an athlete with Down's Syndrome. His comments about Ann Coulter's 'retard' slur can just as easily be applied to the image :

--------------------------------------------------

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter's post-debate "retard" slur aimed at Barack Obama sparked an incredible amount of partisan outrage earlier this week, but a thoughtful open letter penned by a Special Olympics athlete urged readers to think about the word itself.

More than 3,300 people retweeted her latest misstep after Monday's final presidential debate:

@AnnCoulter
I highly approve of Romney's decision to be kind and gentle to the retard.

Among the people who saw her tweet was John Franklin Stephens, a 30-year-old with Down syndrome and an athlete at the Special Olympics - a separate games from the Paralympics - who tried to grasp the point of her message with the following letter, which the organization published Tuesday:

"After I saw your tweet, I realized you just wanted to belittle the president by linking him to people like me. You assumed that people would understand and accept that being linked to someone like me is an insult and you assumed you could get away with it and still appear on TV.

I have to wonder if you considered other hateful words but recoiled from the backlash.

Well, Ms Coulter, you, and society, need to learn that being compared to people like me should be considered a badge of honor.

No one overcomes more than we do and still loves life so much."

---------------------------------------------

Or reworded to be relevant to the original image in this thread:

"After I saw your photo, I realized you just wanted to belittle Blizzard staff by linking them to people like me. You assumed that people would understand and accept that being linked to someone like me is an insult and you assumed you could get away with it.

I have to wonder if you considered other hateful images, but recoiled from the backlash.

Well, you, and society, need to learn that being compared to people like me should be considered a badge of honor.

No one overcomes more than we do and still loves life so much."

That's a different subject but just like homosexuals trying to control the word gay , disabled people don't have ownership of the word retard so I'd be inclined to ignore his argument on that basis.

ianhamilton_:
Disabiltiy discrimination and hate crime are both very real and very common. A staggering 9/10 people with learning disabilities suffer abuse and violence. Perpetuating the stereotype that people with learning disabilities are sub-human contributes to things like this.

Does it? You haven't substantiated that claim at all. You seem to just expect people to take you at your word.

Well I think pictures like the one in OP are fine.

I'm pretty sure many pictures with text are offensive to someone or something.

thaluikhain:
As a general rule, mocking people because of their own decisions and actions is perfectly valid. Mocking them for things out of their control most definitely is not.

Why is that the case?
When you really consider that everyone's actions are a result of either their upbringing or their genetics, how can you say they are truly responsible for their actions?

Arakasi:

thaluikhain:
As a general rule, mocking people because of their own decisions and actions is perfectly valid. Mocking them for things out of their control most definitely is not.

Why is that the case?
When you really consider that everyone's actions are a result of either their upbringing or their genetics, how can you say they are truly responsible for their actions?

Getting onto philosophy there. Generally we attribute some measure of free will to people, or all sorts of weird things happen.

thaluikhain:

Arakasi:

thaluikhain:
As a general rule, mocking people because of their own decisions and actions is perfectly valid. Mocking them for things out of their control most definitely is not.

Why is that the case?
When you really consider that everyone's actions are a result of either their upbringing or their genetics, how can you say they are truly responsible for their actions?

Getting onto philosophy there. Generally we attribute some measure of free will to people, or all sorts of weird things happen.

I find that playing with those weird things tend to reveal the most interesting results.
So if you weren't to apply free will to people would you consider it okay or not to mock them based upon their decisions?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked