Originally Posted by memarcus

@ torikat and serafim_azriel - i thank you for your comments, and as a general comment towards the impact of offensive imagery, i would also like to add that when an image is used to portray stereotypical and offensive imagery, then in certain instances it can be seen as promoting a racist mentality, and in other instances directly used to promote actions of hatred or violence towards minority communities.

in regards to further information as to why this image can be viewed as so offensive, there was an image in a pro-slavery advertisement during the civil war (and unfortunately i cannot find it because it was in a history book that i owned a long time ago) that portrayed a very similar image to the cartoon drawing in the original post, although this image was not portrayed in a cartoon way, but rather in a more realistic artistic format. in this image, there was an african man standing with a spear and a bone in his nose in the middle of a jungle. this image was meant to be a realistic depiction of a typical african. directly next to this image was a well dressed white family at a plantation and their black slave dressed in a nice suit. in this advertisement, the caption read that white people should not be ashamed of slavery but rather embrace it because white people were obviously saving black people from a primitive and inferior culture, and reforming african lives for the better by guiding them towards a more "civilized" european/american lifestyle. this mentality that white people were doing black people a favor by promoting slavery and black people should be grateful for the culture being enforced upon them was an argument that was used for the promotion of slavery during the time of succession/civil war. the image was meant to promote this mentality by showing what was supposed to be viewed as a primitive, inferior african compared next to a well-dressed african slave in a white owned plantation.

similar images were not only used to provide justification for slavery, but were also used in other hate filled propaganda that were used to promote actions of violence and degradation towards black people. the concept behind this image is also where the term "jungle bunny" comes from, a degrading term used to describe black people. the fact of the matter is, images like these were extensively used to dehumanize the black community.

now, towards serafim_azriel's comments, i think that everybody, regardless of background, understands the different concepts behind racism, how the desire to be sensitive can sometimes lead to unsubstantiated allegations, and that no culture can be completely exempt from personally experiencing some form of discrimination. however, given my background, as a jewish individual, members of my family witnessed first hand during the holocaust how images based on hate filled propaganda were used in order to promote feelings of hatred and violence towards the jewish community. so, sometimes images can be taken seriously, be viewed as very powerful, and have a very devastating impact.

now, given a modern context, and the fact this particular image is so silly and cartoonish, this image would most likely not be considered as offensive as the examples used earlier in this post, and it really is difficult to compare this image to the far more serious examples i used earlier in this post. but the fact of the matter is, similar images to the one originally posted were used in a negative manner and have a very offensive history behind it. once again, when people create images such as these, they really should be far more sensitive and aware of the history behind images such as these, or at the very least take responsibility for the reaction that might result from an image of this nature. an image in itself may not be necessarily considered racist, however, when an image portrays similarities to other offensive imagery that was used to promote degradation, dehumanization, and even violence, then an image can be viewed as unacceptable.

and even though blocking one image will not cure racism entirely, it does show that people desire, out of simple human decency, to treat other cultures, identities, and communities with respect. it is also out of simple human nature to try to identify with others, and treat others with mutual respect. this type of behavior should be promoted as a means to treating others better, and there's no proof that treating others with respect causes others to turn to hatred. if anything, it promotes awareness, education, and cultural understanding. essentially, the more accurate information people have on different cultures, the less chance there is for false or inaccurate impressions on other communities. since the media can be viewed as an informative tool, the media should already be aware of this, as well as keep this in mind when providing either accurate or false imagery to the general public.

Originally Posted by serafim_azriel

Okay, so Jaded, I decided to help you get your point across and show EXACTLY what I believe you were trying to say. This is a modern racist cartoon from a racist website.

http://www.resist.com/CARTOON%20GALL...ig_image01.jpg

EDIT: I posted this because I believe this is what Jaded Geisha is referring to in an non-humorous way (unless you are racist).

Originally Posted by MasterChiefrei

Originally Posted by Jaded Geisha

Its the fact that the caricature utilizes offensive depictions of african features... IE the oversized red lips... That I find offensive... It's like drawing an asian person with really squinty eyes and buck teeth...