Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Have Charlie Hebdo cartoon gone too far? Watch

    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vickidc18)
    Its about how fickle public opinion is, Aylan dies and everybody is saying open the borders cologne sex attacks close the borders all male refugees are perverts, they are right we are fickle.
    When you put it that way, I get the joke. Although I still don't find it particularly funny. To be honest, Charlie Hebdo is often quite offensive and says things which many view as unacceptable. The whole point of Je Suis Charlie however is that no matter how offensive a cartoon on a piece of paper is, it can never justify murder or forced censorship in itself. You don't have to get the joke to accept that nearly everyone has an opinion which is offensive to someone, but it is important for the functioning of a free society that we are allowed to express our opinions and make our distasteful jokes, otherwise dissenting voices will be silenced and will manifest themselves in more harmful ways than just cartoons and jokes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    "Simply disagreeing" doesn't usually involve caling it "rubbish and ridiculous" that someone gave a range of reasons why they interpret it as satire. Likewise stating that it is "nothing of the sort" as if you have it all figured out.
    And in my response, I clearly outlined why I thought that their interpretation was rubbish and ridiculous.

    Have you read it? Do you disagree with my analysis?

    It would have been irrelevant. If I ridicule someone for telling me God doesn't exist, the later of appearance of said God wouldn't diminish the fact that I was making statements as fact that I couldn't back up.
    Looks like the point sailed way over your head there. Gosh, how very like satire this is.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    And in my response, I clearly outlined why I thought that their interpretation was rubbish and ridiculous.

    Have you read it? Do you disagree with my analysis?
    Yes and yes, beginning with you thinking that it can't be satirising newspapers because it doesn't say it's about newspapers, as I already mentioned.



    Looks like the point sailed way over your head there. Gosh, how very like satire this is.
    My point was very clearly that I find the assumption that hearing an answer one way or another from CH would render your rubbishing of the opinions of others and more or less valid to be unreasonable.

    This isn't really very much like satire at all.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    Yes and yes, beginning with you thinking that it can't be satirising newspapers because it doesn't say it's about newspapers, as I already mentioned.
    It's not satirizing newspapers not because the word newspaper is not mentioned, but because of the text that accompanies the picture.

    It's not talking about Aylan and the migrant crises now, but in the future, 18 or so years down the line.

    My point was very clearly that I find the assumption that hearing an answer one way or another from CH would render your rubbishing of the opinions of others and more or less valid to be unreasonable.

    This isn't really very much like satire at all.
    It would clear up the matter but again, it's unlikely that they would say anything that would be prejudicial to their cause.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vickidc18)
    Its about how fickle public opinion is, alyan dies and everybody is saying open the borders cologne sex attacks close the borders all male refugees are perverts, they are right we are fickle.
    Some people just won't get it
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    It's not satirizing newspapers not because the word newspaper is not mentioned, but because of the text that accompanies the picture.

    It's not talking about Aylan and the migrant crises now, but in the future, 18 or so years down the line.
    So it is strictly talking about what might happen in 18 years or so, and is not in any shape or form concerned with the here and now? I don't think so.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    "gone too far" is a meaningless phrase.

    What it usually boils down to is "done something I don't like". In which case every episode of Downton Abbey has "gone too far".

    If you use it to mean "should not be allowed to say/publish it", you are talking about freedom of speech plain and simple.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    That particular cartoon isn't to my taste, but it's ironic isn't it? If those blockhead murderers didn't do what they did last year, none of us would have even heard of Charlie.

    Now, thanks to their actions, everyone does and their cartoons get world-wide media coverage.
    Wrong. Charlie Hebdo is as bad as the religious extremists. They would always find some excuse to execute their vile objective. They would always find reason to insult,incite and provoke people for rewards. Extremists do it for divine rewards, Charlie Hebdo do it for earthly gains...money.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    No. People just don't understand the cartoon and the point they're trying to get across.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bardnnyc)
    Wrong. Charlie Hebdo is as bad as the religious extremists. They would always find some excuse to execute their vile objective. They would always find reason to insult,incite and provoke people for rewards. Extremists do it for divine rewards, Charlie Hebdo do it for earthly gains...money.
    Yes...Charlie Hebdo is as bad as religious extremists. Charlie Hebdo are killing people, and enforcing their beliefs and views on others...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    He's just showing his true colors. He tries to spread hate and now it's quite obvious. That's no different than what hitter did when comparing Jews to rats.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bardnnyc)
    Wrong. Charlie Hebdo is as bad as the religious extremists. They would always find some excuse to execute their vile objective. They would always find reason to insult,incite and provoke people for rewards. Extremists do it for divine rewards, Charlie Hebdo do it for earthly gains...money.
    Cartoonists are as bad as people who advocate murdering people over a cartoon:

    - Bardnmyc

    Retard.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    Yes...Charlie Hebdo is as bad as religious extremists. Charlie Hebdo are killing people, and enforcing their beliefs and views on others...

    You don't have to kill people to be as bad. Making of fun of everything is not funny. Charlie Hebdo is not that funny.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bardnnyc)
    You don't have to kill people to be as bad. Making of fun of everything is not funny. Charlie Hebdo is not that funny.
    Comedy is subjective.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Cartoonists are as bad as people who advocate murdering people over a cartoon:

    - Bardnmyc

    Retard.
    Charlie Hebdo is not the only cartoon outfit out there. Provoking and insulting people's sensibilities is not funny. If I have a child and anyone does that to me face to face. The idiot will never talk again. They should be called to order.

    Some things shouldn't be objects of ridicule. I can't insult disabled people. It's much like fools who urinate on veterans tombstones. If I had way, I will chop off their penises in the public.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Farm_Ecology)
    Comedy is subjective.

    Making mockery of a dead child is subjective? Urinating on tombstones of dead soldiers are subjective? Whoever find such funny should be sectioned.

    Those who work at Charlie Hebdo need to be analysed. There might be very insane people in there. Someone need to talk to them. It's getting out of hand. They are not creative. They are disgusting and hideous.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Maybe a little too far, but as far as I'm aware they haven't stormed the offices of an Arabic newspaper, massacring all in sight.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jebedee)
    The Bible and the quran both have far more disgusting content than anything Hebdo can scribble onto paper. Until those two books are banned I won't entertain any opinions over Hebdo.
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    "gone too far" is a meaningless phrase.

    What it usually boils down to is "done something I don't like". In which case every episode of Downton Abbey has "gone too far".

    If you use it to mean "should not be allowed to say/publish it", you are talking about freedom of speech plain and simple.
    Agree with both of these.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    No, they haven't.
    Offline

    14
    Gotta love the rustled jimmies
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Should Spain allow Catalonia to declare independence?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.