Machiavellian said:
My issue was not just the picture of Serena but the whole piece. Someone tell me why you need to make Naomi a blood white girl pleading with the judge to let Serena win, especially when you make her this obese gross looking black woman. Its not just the one image its the whole composition and what its trying to say more than anything else. This is more about how this piece stereotypes a black woman compared to a white woman and it tries to give off that the black woman is this angry beast while portraying incorrectly her opponent as some calm white woman contemplating letting the angry black woman win. |
Some things to consider:
Naomi Osaka is Japanese, people who can have different shades of skin color.
In the cartoon, it's not Serena's opponent asking the judge to let Serena win, it's the judge asking the opponent to let Serena win.
If the two players were meant to be compared, I would have placed them side by side. Clearly, they were not so perhaps the illustration is not inviting you to compare them.
Naomi has been seen sporting blonde hair. Don't worry though, I don't think anyone has accused her of cultural appropriation.
http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Toray+Pan+Pacific+Open+Tennis+2016+Day+1+uSFtzA2m7fyx.jpg
Machiavellian said:
You either forget or have no clue that during that picture, people were killed, murdered, beaten and thrown in jail. What people were saying about them at the time during those protest wasn't anything positive and they tried to twist everything to something else. The only reason that it was effective was because Dr King was a strong leader and kept anyone who wanted to retaliate out of the movement. The reason I bring up Dr King isn't for you to throw out some picture and try to paint the situation during those times as some happy adventure of black people. I presented his words because as he rightly stated, there must be tension to move the needle. Also with that article you linked you must have not read it. You believe his silence is not discourse but instead, silence can be a strong tool when you put action behind it. People are always looking to take your words and make them about something else. We already know what he is protesting and its been mentioned multiple times. Now action is what is needed and not giving anyone a chance to twist the message to their own purpose. If anything Kap has definitely grown since he decided to sit on the bench when this all started. You keep saying there is a better way to protest but in reality what you are saying that you would not protest this way. That is cool but it really only relates to you. For non violent protest, there is no good or bad way to go about it, there is only effective and ineffective protest. Case in point would be BLM (Black Lives Matter). The Aim of the group wasn't wrong but it was disorganized and it allowed anyone to protest under their name. The problem with that is you get every idiot with an ax to grind and thus violence happens. Anytime violence is introduced within your protest, then it doesn't matter what you say, everything will be about the violence. Even if you have only one person be violent then that one person will be your poster boy for everything. This is something Dr King understood very well and worked hard to keep even the hint of violence out of the movement. He made sure that anyone that was going to march with him understood that they could be beaten, murdered and killed and no retaliation can happen which results in violence. As Dr King was saying during those times, tension is what get things moving. There must be enough tension on all sides to get the protesters as well as the establishment to take notice. If you read the whole letters you would see that Dr King mentions that people always say do not do it this way, wait your time etc. I personally did not believe that Kap was ready to go all the way for what he believed in but then again, I never knew the guy beyond football. It seems he was alway this way and found his calling. Whether it ends in success or failure, only time will tell. |
"You either forget or have no clue that during that picture, people were killed, murdered, beaten and thrown in jail. What people were saying about them at the time during those protest wasn't anything positive and they tried to twist everything to something else. The only reason that it was effective was because Dr King was a strong leader and kept anyone who wanted to retaliate out of the movement."
>Well that is what I meant when I called this a peaceful march: King told his followers to practice non-violent resistance even if they were met with violence.
"The reason I bring up Dr King isn't for you to throw out some picture and try to paint the situation during those times as some happy adventure of black people."
>I attempted no such thing.
"I presented his words because as he rightly stated, there must be tension to move the needle."
>And I agree. It's inevitable an airing of grievance cause some tension but the grievance should be aired regardless.
"Also with that article you linked you must have not read it. You believe his silence is not discourse but instead, silence can be a strong tool when you put action behind it. People are always looking to take your words and make them about something else. We already know what he is protesting and its been mentioned multiple times. Now action is what is needed and not giving anyone a chance to twist the message to their own purpose. If anything Kap has definitely grown since he decided to sit on the bench when this all started."
>I'm sure people will always try to twist words and actions but it's better to supply your own words at all times than to stay silent and allow people to stuff words in your mouth much like how some misunderstand Kaepernick's gesture of kneeling during the anthem.
"You keep saying there is a better way to protest but in reality what you are saying that you would not protest this way. That is cool but it really only relates to you. For non violent protest, there is no good or bad way to go about it, there is only effective and ineffective protest."
>Protest where grievances are clearly communicated at all times is effective and good protest. Protest where poor or no communication facilitates muddying waters is ineffective and bad protest.
"Case in point would be BLM (Black Lives Matter). The Aim of the group wasn't wrong but it was disorganized and it allowed anyone to protest under their name. The problem with that is you get every idiot with an ax to grind and thus violence happens. Anytime violence is introduced within your protest, then it doesn't matter what you say, everything will be about the violence. Even if you have only one person be violent then that one person will be your poster boy for everything. This is something Dr King understood very well and worked hard to keep even the hint of violence out of the movement. He made sure that anyone that was going to march with him understood that they could be beaten, murdered and killed and no retaliation can happen which results in violence."
>Seems like good communication is key for any movement involving many people of many walks of life.
"As Dr King was saying during those times, tension is what get things moving. There must be enough tension on all sides to get the protesters as well as the establishment to take notice. If you read the whole letters you would see that Dr King mentions that people always say do not do it this way, wait your time etc. I personally did not believe that Kap was ready to go all the way for what he believed in but then again, I never knew the guy beyond football. It seems he was alway this way and found his calling. Whether it ends in success or failure, only time will tell."
>Well I suggest Kaepernick do more talking and less kneeling otherwise some will still think he is out to disrespect the troops.
Last edited by KLAMarine - on 14 September 2018
