Post a picture, entertain me!

farley3k wrote:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/NDaGFJv.png)

Sister sustains six servile servals.

That is a small giraffe

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/GR4gOQu.jpg)

farley3k wrote:

*image removed by mod - Amoebic*

Fuuuck off with that ableist bullsh*t.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

Fuuuck off with that ableist bullsh*t.

That's a stretch, even for the professionally offended. The joke is that you assume someone is going to help, but the advice is to take advantage of the situation. There's an entire genre of this kind of joke that has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination.

Coldstream wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

Fuuuck off with that ableist bullsh*t.

That's a stretch, even for the professionally offended. The joke is that you assume someone is going to help, but the advice is to take advantage of the situation. There's an entire genre of this kind of joke that has absolutely nothing to do with discrimination.

It's the "caring is for suckers" genre, and it can f*ck off even if it isn't about discrimination.
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/Vd2BKGv.jpg)

Coldstream wrote:

That's a stretch, even for the professionally offended.

You really, really need to stop throwing this out there every time someone points out an issue with something. It just smacks of being too privileged to stop and consider what someone is saying. Maybe a new term for that would be "professionally privileged"?

It's also reductionist and trivializing. As though someone makes it their purpose to find things to be offended by. As though such things don't actually cause damage, or that the people who are bringing it up aren't actually damaged by it, therefore they don't get to be offended.

I don't need to be disabled to recognize the problems with that image. If I am to consider myself interested in compassion towards others, I might even say it's my duty to recognize those problems, or at least open my ears when someone identifies something as problematic.

I hope my two cents might give a different perspective on this matter.

“Everything is funny until it’s about you” is a saying that is certainly true. Meaning, I can easily laugh at things that are horrible because they haven’t affected me. Unfortunately however, I also laugh because my brain needs somewhere to dump all this energy it just got from someone breaking a cultural taboo making it hard to be sensitive to everyone at all times .

My understanding of mental health ,from my own experience and career choice, makes it difficult to laugh at suicide jokes. I remember a Jerry Seinfeld joke about how he didn’t understand people who weren't successful with their first time at suicide, “give up” and don’t follow through on a second attempt. The joke fell flat and insensitive on me and it struck me as if he had never struggled with depression or was close to someone who did. I also realized, however, that I couldn’t take it personally for the same reason. Because he didn’t know anyone like me, I don’t think think he was directing that joke towards me or anyone with depression.

From my understanding of him I don’t think Jerry would want anyone to take offense to that joke or for someone to be worse off because of it. If someone was able to laugh at the joke -especially if they struggled with suicide - I’m in support of that.

It’s certainly a judgement call because I don’t think all dark humor is acceptable, but I also know that being able to laugh at dark humor is a powerful coping mechanism. Would the meme be acceptable if it was a blind person that made the meme? I know it probably wasn’t, but if it was, it shows a person that has become well adjusted to their circumstances.

I guess what I’m saying is that I think it’s okay to laugh at that but also okay to be offended. Not everyone is at a place where they can laugh at their stuff, which is completely okay, but I also support those that can.

Side note: The idea of taking a disabled person’s wallet is unconscionable, but I also learned today that seeing a support dog without its owner probably means the owner is In trouble and needs help.

Do we see posts like this on GWJ where the butt of the joke is African Americans? Or women? I don't think we do.
Maybe it's worth having a think about why we don't have those sorts of jokes, but a joke where the target is a disabled person is something that "even the professionally offended" shouldn't care about.

CptDomano wrote:
Coldstream wrote:

That's a stretch, even for the professionally offended.

You really, really need to stop throwing this out there every time someone points out an issue with something. It just smacks of being too privileged to stop and consider what someone is saying. Maybe a new term for that would be "professionally privileged"?

"Professionally offended" implies that Clocky makes a living out of being offended, in which case: did I miss a Patreon or something?

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/zzxLZF3.png)

D&D pls?

CptDomano wrote:

You really, really need to stop throwing this out there every time someone points out an issue with something. It just smacks of being too privileged to stop and consider what someone is saying. Maybe a new term for that would be "professionally privileged"?

When it's always the same few people, dropping F-bombs and accusations of "-ism" at other forum members, in the context of being consistently, unrelentingly negative about damned near everything, then "professionally offended" seems pretty accurate.

I'm on board with not punching down and I'm heartily against discrimination in all forms, but let me give you a different perspective. My community is military aviation, which is heavily male and has a long tradition of inter- and intra-squadron teasing. We use everything from callsigns to inside jokes to poke fun at each other. I'm sure other military communities have the same thing. Dark humour is the mainstay of military joking too, so there's a huge amount of that.

The ratio of female pilots has been steadily climbing, which is excellent. Interestingly, a fair number of female pilots confided in me that they were uncomfortable in the ready room not because of the jokes, but because the jokes stopped when they walked into the room. And it's not that sexist jokes were being told before they walked in, but that people were suddenly just more careful about what they were saying in case they accidentally caused offense or made the female pilots uncomfortable. Basically, people were trying to so hard to create a positive environment for the growing number of female pilots that it was making the women super uncomfortable and hindering their ability to integrate into what by necessity needs to a tight-knit group. The fix? I encouraged the women to let the ready room know that they were comfortable with being on the receiving end of wisecracks regarding stature, mannerisms, screw-ups, and everything else, just like every other pilot. Then the women could respond with the traditional grinning "f**k you" or some thrown object to indicate their appreciation of the other person's wit. Worked like a charm, and suddenly they were tightly bonded into the group not just professionally but also socially.

In the picture above that Clocky took such offense to, the humour is in the juxtaposition of expectations, which is fundamental to probably the lion's share of comedy. The fact that this one involved a guide-dog (and, by extension and implication, someone with sight issues) is entirely incidental. The same dark humour could be used for a car-crash ("Send any bystanders to call emergency services so you have time to get wallets") or for any other situation in which the reasonable expectation is positive and the punchline is an unexpected negative. A joke that is clearly aimed at a group because of race, religion, disability, etc. is clearly unacceptable, but the sheer mention of a protected group in any context shouldn't lead to screams of "-ism"

So here's my point: in my opinion, when we unilaterally determine and declare in a public forum that a certain group of individuals cannot be mentioned for fear of causing offense, we make those individuals "other" which--I believe--causes far, far more harm to inclusiveness and equality. Vulnerable populations require some special consideration, especially in some social and historic context, and I'll accept that it's possible that the meme-in-question could be considered ill-aimed, but the principle of charity suggests that this was not the intent and should not be interpreted as such unless a member of that particular community says it crosses a line.

Okay, I'll step off the soap-box. Apologies for a wall of text in the picture thread, which I've managed to avoid doing over the last decade on this forum. Happy to take it elsewhere if anyone feels they've more to say.

Stengah wrote:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/Vd2BKGv.jpg)

this makes me realize there are people with the personality of edgelords, but are on the right side of history, so hey--at least their actions are being funneled in a socially productive direction.

Because this thread is supposed to be fun and I don't want anyone to feel like not opening it because they might see something that make their day less enjoyable I have taken down the image.

Up to others if they want to remove their reposting of it.

~mod~ thanks and done. -Amoebic

Coldstream, it's kind of fascinating how you managed to come up with an analogy and example that both perfectly shows why that picture isn't funny AND are not be able to see it yourself.

To brighten things up I think it is an Earthporn type day.

Camping with 7 yo kiddo here in Finland
By Mattijii

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/FihR60g.jpg)

Manuel Antonio Beach, Costa Rica [OC] [2917x3646]

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/ln9soeba19i61.jpg)

[OC] lac de Thorenc , Andon, France (1334X750)

IMAGE(https://i.redd.it/l68f8xx2t8i61.jpg)

~mod~ Removed. Off-topic, stop jabbing at one another. -Amoebic

~mod~ Removed. Off-topic, stop jabbing at one another. -Amoebic

Coldstream wrote:
CptDomano wrote:

You really, really need to stop throwing this out there every time someone points out an issue with something. It just smacks of being too privileged to stop and consider what someone is saying. Maybe a new term for that would be "professionally privileged"?

When it's always the same few people, dropping F-bombs and accusations of "-ism" at other forum members, in the context of being consistently, unrelentingly negative about damned near everything, then "professionally offended" seems pretty accurate.

I'm on board with not punching down and I'm heartily against discrimination in all forms, but let me give you a different perspective. My community is military aviation, which is heavily male and has a long tradition of inter- and intra-squadron teasing. We use everything from callsigns to inside jokes to poke fun at each other. I'm sure other military communities have the same thing. Dark humour is the mainstay of military joking too, so there's a huge amount of that.

The ratio of female pilots has been steadily climbing, which is excellent. Interestingly, a fair number of female pilots confided in me that they were uncomfortable in the ready room not because of the jokes, but because the jokes stopped when they walked into the room. And it's not that sexist jokes were being told before they walked in, but that people were suddenly just more careful about what they were saying in case they accidentally caused offense or made the female pilots uncomfortable. Basically, people were trying to so hard to create a positive environment for the growing number of female pilots that it was making the women super uncomfortable and hindering their ability to integrate into what by necessity needs to a tight-knit group. The fix? I encouraged the women to let the ready room know that they were comfortable with being on the receiving end of wisecracks regarding stature, mannerisms, screw-ups, and everything else, just like every other pilot. Then the women could respond with the traditional grinning "f**k you" or some thrown object to indicate their appreciation of the other person's wit. Worked like a charm, and suddenly they were tightly bonded into the group not just professionally but also socially.

In the picture above that Clocky took such offense to, the humour is in the juxtaposition of expectations, which is fundamental to probably the lion's share of comedy. The fact that this one involved a guide-dog (and, by extension and implication, someone with sight issues) is entirely incidental. The same dark humour could be used for a car-crash ("Send any bystanders to call emergency services so you have time to get wallets") or for any other situation in which the reasonable expectation is positive and the punchline is an unexpected negative. A joke that is clearly aimed at a group because of race, religion, disability, etc. is clearly unacceptable, but the sheer mention of a protected group in any context shouldn't lead to screams of "-ism"

So here's my point: in my opinion, when we unilaterally determine and declare in a public forum that a certain group of individuals cannot be mentioned for fear of causing offense, we make those individuals "other" which--I believe--causes far, far more harm to inclusiveness and equality. Vulnerable populations require some special consideration, especially in some social and historic context, and I'll accept that it's possible that the meme-in-question could be considered ill-aimed, but the principle of charity suggests that this was not the intent and should not be interpreted as such unless a member of that particular community says it crosses a line.

Okay, I'll step off the soap-box. Apologies for a wall of text in the picture thread, which I've managed to avoid doing over the last decade on this forum. Happy to take it elsewhere if anyone feels they've more to say.

~mod~

"I'm on board with not punching down and I'm heartily against discrimination in all forms, but..."
It's the 'but' and everything after it, which reads like justification. Either way, let's please desist from this unpleasant derail and take it elsewhere as its off-topic.

Sometimes it's the same few people who always brings up the same things every time because they're the only ones to speak up. It's often discussed offsite, but most would usually rather just disengage the conversation (and the site as a whole) than be around people armchairing on why it's okay for some to punch down based on certain circumstances. Seldom few folks are willing to take the heat for ruining other people's "fun" and just disengage rather than saying anything. The few remaining willing to say something stand out in contrast to that.

The image and "joke" was in poor taste, not funny, and I've also removed the quote-post for it as I have no interest in our site being associated with that.

Please move on, this really isn't the thread for this conversation. At all.

Sometimes it's the same few people who always brings up the same things every time because they're the only ones to speak up.

My son has a number of profound disabilities and will require lifelong care. As such, I'm engaged with disability advocacy groups and people with disabilities on a regular basis, and I see just how normalized jokes about the disabled and neurodivergent are and how willing people are to justify those things as just kidding around. Many people with disabilities are able to advocate for themselves and do so every day, but many are not. I will continue to call out ableism as I have the energy to do so because it is significantly more normalized than other forms of discrimination and because it personally affects me and the lives of my loved ones.

I'll try to be nicer about it in the future.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

I'll try to be nicer about it in the future, but I'm an asshole.

You're really not.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/ycJZLkF.gif)

Forget Farley3K's common earthporn! I bring you SPACE PORN!
IMAGE(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/coalsack_acs1_hpfinal.jpg)

IMAGE(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/pia16884_-_taken_under_the_wing_of_the_small_magellanic_cloud.jpg)

IMAGE(https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/thumbnails/image/potw2103a.jpg)

Images from NASA's Image of the Day gallery.

Proof that Chuu from the K-pop group LOONA can fly:

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/dykqw19.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/yd6vxyO.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/kDbpgDi.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/CxhHoBy.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/dJHKSX0.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/kE6w3bt.jpg)
IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/MdyDMMP.jpg)

That's called jumping. It's like flying but ballistic.

"There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." - The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Flying is a science.

maverickz wrote:

That's called jumping. It's like flying but ballistic.

IMAGE(https://i.imgur.com/JgVi72U.png)

Reminds me of Today's Levitation (the series is about 10 years old now).

IMAGE(https://yowayowacamera.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/img_ab9e652dc108dc43a699a66a36c004c2f51ae11f.jpg)

IMAGE(https://yowayowacamera.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/img_f99a19c45108254f87b143e9dc5a436ea9e57c12.jpg)