Oh yeah. Back to that other computer here I had started typing this a while ago already (time flies) :
Vainamoinen: Wait, these dickheads shat out
YET ANOTHER transphobic tweet? You'd think they'd learn.
What was it this time?
/edit: Found it. Oh. Oh god. Just. Fucking. WOW. Jesus Melania Christ, you really fucked it up this time. Why why why why why why why why why why. These people are fighting for their right to be recognized in the face of a 100% fascist regime. Have an inch of respect for god's sake.
Know what ? I'm not above silly out-of-context references to stuff that I otherwise consider serious. Of course, I have a different, very different background culture (I was raised with Harakiri/Charlie/etc).
So yeah, no much OMGOMG from my side, there. I understand the postal thing was a mistake (the overlooked date on the tombstone implied endorsement of gg), but the rest doesn't feel as "sided" as it's blown out to be. The thing, with internet's universal public and echo chambers, is that the most spectacular sensitivities are the most visible. If someone's even innocent joke affects someone with a related trauma in the public, it becomes less funny, and the atmosphere is defined by this trauma. At the internet's global scale, there is always someone like that in the public, and people rightfully embracing their perspective. But it kills something. It kills the ability for joke to refer to anything dark or serious. And, again, I grew up in a culture where dark and serious stuff were fueling jokes in parallel (for the same author or public) to anger, sorrow and and outrage. It was not contradictory. There were joking references to nazism amongst antinazis. The lawyers I worked with in pro-refugees NGOs were making jokes referring to the atrocities that we were confronted to daily, in parallel to fighting them. Famous comedians who joke about their own cancer don't take cancer lightly as they die of it, but they refuse to sacralize it. Or anything at all.
As we lose the notion of how a joke relates to its subject (everything "diminishes" it, so a joke that refers to a serious matter is treated like a joke that derides it), we lose the ability to light-heartedly, quickily refer to any serious event or matter. Because there is always something real and grave at the root of a serious event of matter. But this taboo is a bad thing in itself.
Because this taboo functions exactly on the same principle as blasphemy. What is deemed unacceptable is the mere association of a Serious Matter (a serious mindset) with a Light Matter (a light mindset). This very thing is shoking. "You don't joke with [God, The Flag, The Cause, The Hero, The Issue]." And this is a culture that I reject.
I'm all for denouncing jokes that carry (as many jokes can do) a message, a discourse, an attack, an endorsement, when it conflicts with my views (propaganda jokes are propaganda vehicles). But not all jokes do, unless you consider that associating off-beat humour with something serious is an attack on its validity. If you do, then you scuttle a large range of non-committal jokes. And hypocritically so, because, in the private, we can all joke about -or more precisely here : around- our legitimate fights. You hashtag metoo all day long, you can lol metoo when ordering a coffee. It doesn't make you a traitor.
And people who joke about "grammar nazis" are not all holocaust revisionnists. But because you could argue it's insensitive to actual victims of historical nazism, the same outrage could be sparked around that.
