Is This Cartoon Racist?

It's hard to remove the baggage of history from this and that makes it racist.
Even coming from the NY Post I find this shocking.
It's insulting the President, the NYC police, the primate that was killed and
the woman who was mutilated. Perhaps if it was funny you could just pass over it, but it's not even funny.

What a lame insult.

Police shooting of a chimp?

This is rather important information!!!!

Am I the only one who knew naught of this poor chimp? Or did everyone not know of the poor chimp?

However, if you DID know about the chimp (which most everyone who's complaining, did) then to think that this is racist is sort of far fetched and reaching. Almost like they're looking for a reason to find racism. Wonder why they'd be doing that.

Now, precisely how strongly we react to the cartoon, where we pick our battles, what the consequences are of protesting a few square inches of black and white ink versus, I don't know, hate crimes and institutionalized marginalization, is another thing entirely.

I could see if you didn't know about the chimpanzee how this cartoon could be thought of as racist.

How is it far fetched?

As a matter of fact, I said in another post, that is the incident of the chimp attacking an maiming a woman had not taken place, this cartoon would have made no sense whatsoever, and people would have been scrathing their heads wondering what it meant. In fact, the cartoon would never have been drawn.

Either way, whether you knew of the attack or not, the cartoon is racist, and, since it was "evolved" (pun intended) from a tradgic incident, it's not only racist, but sick as well.

It would have been just as sick to make a humorous attempt about 9/11 within a few days of the event.

Actually, I'm much more offended by the fact that this cartoon was thought up as a result of a poor woman being attacked, then by the obvious fact it's racist.

Racism doesn't surprise me.
People saying the racism isn't obvious doesn't surprise me.
People saying if you see the racism in something makes you a racist doesn't surprise me.

Kicky is so right. The racism in this is so obvious however this is looked at, it's impossible to think that the people saying it isn't aren't just playing stupid.

Well, unless you live in another country, but you would have your own issues there that I wouldn't perhaps be able to see.

Since there's all this beating around the bush about not seeing it's racist, I'm going to go out on a limb and just say it straight out...

I suppose those who say they don't see the racism have never heard black people referred to in an ugly way as "jungle bunnies, porch monkeys", or other nasty things.

Unless you have truly lived in some kind of cave while living in this country, and have never heard these expressions, you either have you head in the sand, or more likely, up your ass.

Tell me you have never seen black people represented in drawing as being monkeys, apes, primates, etc. Indicating, if you are going to play so stupid, that they are not human, or not quite human, and are a lower form on animal, and not as intelligent.

Jesus Christ, I guess we all danced around it long enough. THAT's why the cartoon is racist, and acting bewildered and saying "oh no, the monkey represents congress" is a huge crock of ****.

Why does everyone feel so free to call anyone who doesn't agree with them 'stupid' or assume they have their head up their ass?
When did it become part of the American experience to have to interpret everything - even political cartoons- exactly the same way as someone else- unless you want to be considered stupid or unenlightened?

That's the attitude that seems sort of unenlightened to me.
I don't interpret it the way you do - and that doesn't mean you're smarter than me. It doesn't mean you hate racism more than I do. It doesn't mean anything except that I don't interpret this the same way you do.

kickycan wrote:

What a lame insult.

It was lame. I apologize.

But I'm convinced that President Obama will make me cleverer in the years to come.

If it'd been a pit bull that attacked the woman - the cartoonist would have used the pit bull as the animal that was shot to stop the rampage.

Quote:

If it'd been a pit bull that attacked the woman - the cartoonist would have used the pit bull as the animal that was shot to stop the rampage.

No, apparently you still don't get it, aidan. If it had been a pit bull, the cartooist would have had no subject for a cartoon. The cartoonist would not have been tempted to identify President Obama with a pitt bull. There is no racial precedent for that. Ah, but an ape . . .

I can't believe that there are people on this thread who actually, apparently in all seriousness, are trying to deny the obvious racial overtones in this unfunny piece of editorial art.

it's from the NY Post, how can they spin this

ummm...no. Not racist in any way I can imagine.