she said someone looked like a monkey... so?

am i truly supposed to believe you have not insulted someone in a similar fashion at any point?

I was just pointing out the situation is not that simple at all. To make it worse, Gunn even supported Roseanne getting fired by ABC for her tweets.

Live by the sword, die by the sword. Live by the pen, die by the pen. Be careful what you wish for.

can you expand on why?

"In this day and age, comparing a black person to a monkey is basically an instant racism flag. "

so you are telling me that you think its ok to say a white person looks like a monkey but not a black person and you are trying to stop racism? lmao

" It's something that has been done offensively countless times and is simply not socially accepted"

so are you against all methods of offending people?

"Anyone defending what Roseanne said is wrong, as is anyone defending what Gunn said. "

well i personally have no problem with what roseanne said because i'm not constantly trying to racialise everything and accept that people should have the right to say offensive things

in terms of what gun said i think that goes beyond mere offense into something much much darker

"this is great and all, but what you fail to understand is that social values and morals are not defined by your opinion"

i'm critiquing them and pointing out how they are counterproductive to the stated aims

why are you defending them when you seem to agree that they are counterproductive?

"but it's quite clear and obvious why and how she got fired for it."

well it is sadly, but i'm pointing out that i think its stupid and a lot of the people going along with it are fixing the noose that will hang them later on if they do not wake up to how they are being manipulated

with regards to gun i'm not trying to make the argument that people do not change over time, just that joking about child abuse to me is not at the same level as saying someone looks like a monkey, i myself have heard people say that other people look like pigs or beached whales or whatever

in both instances i don't think either person should have been fired

What if I was the stupid person who wrongly/mistakenly was accepted to the school and you were the smart one who was denied and it was indirectly because of me? I've received 3 years of education that I never should have, and you've been held back when you shouldn't have. I didn't know the details as to why and neither did you. Should I be kicked out? Should the school be sued?

Wasn't another director indirectly held back by the fact that Gunn was selected for the Guardians movies if Disney made a mistake by hiring him, instead of someone else who fits their companies values? Should Gunn have been fired? Should Disney get sued?

Some people would just say life isn't perfect and mistakes are made so no big deal. Others would say you must right the wrong, especially if they themselves were wronged. The question is which is more wrong and more important when you include his tweets and what recently happened to Roseanne?

I can't help but mention the tie to Trump here. Shouldn't everyone have left Trump alone after he was elected? Shouldn't he only expect the regular hardships a President typically deals with since he was already voted in and now holds the position?

This is not a simple black or white situation unfortunately. This may be why both Roseanne and Gunn were fired so quickly. Why drag it on and put your company at risk when there seems to be no definite right or wrong decision that will please the majority?

Reading through this thread I'm really disappointed.

Please tell me, why should he not be allowed to joke about rape and paedophilia? I hear people joking about 9/11, Jews and all sorts of controversial stuff all the time. You trying to dictate what people can/can't joke about, is you being against freedom of speech. Comedy, regardless of how bad the humour, is an art form like music, painting, film etc.
James did not have to apologize in my opinion, but I'm glad he did. He realized that his words had hurt some people, and being the compassionate guy that he is he apologized. It is also my understanding that he wished to distance himself from his past conduct and show that he had changed.

From what I read about it, Roseanne said that she didn't know that person was part black. Objectively, that woman looks like the actress playing that character. Also, ALOT of pedo comments and jokes from 8 to 10 years ago is alot worse than a few racially insensitive jokes/digs.

o_O.Q has a point.

I think people should be allowed to joke about anything, but regarding Gunn:

1. They honestly don't even read as jokes. There's no punchline, he's just saying stuff that people will gasp at. I don't think he's serious, mind you, but they are barely even jokes. It's bizarre.

2. You can joke about anything you want, but not while expecting to work at Disney. This is what people are missing. Disney will not have any relation to pedophilic statements, jokes or not. They will not. Everyone in the world knows that, whether they want to admit it or not. Maybe things had been different if Gunn worked for Universal or something. But this is Disney.

It's subjective. How we as readers interprets his tweets is on us, not him. That is at least my opinion. The reality is that some jokes reads just as while others don't - we all communicate differently. Instead of assuming the worst in people how about we give them a chance to explain themselves and/or apologize? Which is what he did - James did explain himself and he did apologize. What more do people want? 

Many were familiar with his past behaviour before these tweets "resurfaced", and Disney had to have been too. Suggesting they weren't would be ludacris. Back in 2012 Disney vetted James and decided hired him, dispite knowing about his "controversial" background. And not once, at least to what I'm aware, has he made similar jokes while working at Disney. If it wasn't a problem then, it shouldn't be a problem now.