May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829 3031

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
sqbr: Are you coming to bed? I can't, this is important. Why? Someone is wrong on the internet. (duty calls)
Friday, September 21st, 2012 08:32 am
So, Pictures for Sad Children is a webcomic full of wry, self aware melancholy about dysfunctional people. I get linked it a lot but have always found it hit and miss.

The creator recently put up a post on his Kickstarter saying that he had been pretending to be depressed this whole time because that's just what artists do. Cue many depressed fans who had really connected with his comics feeling betrayed, and many ableist fans rejoicing at a chance to go on about how depression isn't really a thing.

But it was apparently all a joke, which anyone who was friends with him or familiar with his other work would have recognised, so all that outrage was for nothing HAHA TUMBLR. (The other, much more understandable "ARGH TUMBLR" reaction is to all the people who have been told that it's a joke but are still acting like it was meant literally, and the inevitable death treats etc. ARGH TUMBLR)

This attitude really pisses me off. I'm all in favour of satire and sarcasm (see: the title of this post, the previous paragraph), and not all humour has to be accessible to everyone. But if you tell a joke where it would be really bad if people took you literally, and most people DO take you literally, then you told the joke badly and you are responsible for the consequences.

Sure, there's only so much you can do about overly literal minded people, and it I think it's justifiable to cause SOME pain with art/humour, or we'd never get to use them at all. But having patchy reading comprehension or "not being a true fan" doesn't somehow make a person unworthy of compassion. Afaict most PFSC readers thought this was real, and a great many were deeply hurt. This could have been avoided if he made the satire more obvious, and I can't see any real advantage to being so opaque except...making the joke funnier for the people who get it? Being more effective on the tiny sliver of bigots who got the joke? Woo.

And even if we decide that everyone who doesn't get the joke is a humourless moron unworthy of respect, think of all the bigots who took it as support for hating on depressed people. Not actually being on their side doesn't magically make the pro-bigotry effect go away.

This is not someone's private blog that got taken out of context. It was a public and actively promoted kickstarter aimed at people who read PFSC, and it clearly failed at being clear to it's intended audience.

Since this apparently does need to be said: I'm not saying we should all go chasing after John Campbell with pitchforks, and the people who are harassing him need to step down. I do think he's a bit of a pretentious douche, but to be honest I kind of thought that anyway. Mainly I'm defending the people who are fans of PFSC and felt hurt from having their feelings dismissed.
sqbr: A cartoon cat saying Ham! (ham!)
Monday, November 30th, 2009 07:57 am
EDIT: I seem to have expressed this really badly. I'm not against ALL satire involving stuff like racism. I'm not even against all satire which offends (some) people from marginalised groups. I'm against a very particular brand of "satire", as described below. See the comments for further clarification.

A lot of the time I'll find something angry-makingly Xist etc and when I complain people say "But it's satire". And I'll admit, sometimes I really am being obtuse, but a lot of the time I think this is crap, because it hurts the people it's supposedly helping and is amusing to those it's supposedly challenging. I've been trying to articulate this for ages, there's probably holes in my argument.

I'm going to talk about racism since this seems to be where it comes up the most and I want to cut down on my "etc"s, but it comes up with disability, sexuality etc all the time too.

So. An action is racist or not based on it's effect, not your intention.

If your satire:
-makes POC feel attacked
-makes very racist white people think you agree with them
-makes less racist white people laugh at the more racist white people and thus feel good about themselves

How is it in any way anti-racist? Or even racism neutral? (since not all art needs to have a positive social effect) How is it less racist in effect than a deliberately racist action intended to make POC feel attacked and agree with very racist white people?
Read more... )
sqbr: A cartoon cat saying Ham! (ham!)
Thursday, August 20th, 2009 08:28 pm
Where are all the men bloggers? (via a bunch of people, but it's just so awesome I had to share)

When I look around my Google Reader feeds, I see so many insightful, intelligent political and technical blogs by women, but hardly any by men.... Is it just that they aren’t interested? Do they not have time what with all the sports and drinking and porn? Maybe they don’t feel up to handling tough subjects, or perhaps the conversational style is offputting to them?

Similarly, looking through general fandom places like [community profile] metafandom or Fandom Wank I don't see a lot of men, even in the discussions of "masculine" subjects like sports. I guess it's true what they say...there are no men on the internet.
sqbr: A cartoon cat saying Ham! (ham!)
Monday, July 27th, 2009 12:17 pm
The Onion has been "bought" by China and thus all the top level stories at the moment are basically a collection of anti-chinese stereotypes, eg Grandfather Disrespected In Own Home.

Although reading the first article I came across(*), Internet Adds 12th Website it took me awhile to realise what was going on and so I saw it as a somewhat amusing if over the top parody of the sort of censorship we have here.

Hmmph. (I'm tired and grumpy and didn't get much sleep. That's all the analysis you're getting)

(*)After being linked to one of their old ones
Tags:
sqbr: A cartoon cat saying Ham! (ham!)
Saturday, March 14th, 2009 08:09 pm
The first 2 minutes of this sketch exactly captures what my conversations with [livejournal.com profile] mandragora2003 were like when I was working at Scitech. It was uncanny :)

(Now of course, it's much the same but at least my life isn't as much fun. Yay?)
Tags: