Changed w/o discussion: Stop Being Stereotypical

The mere fact that we're back here discussing it again is a testament to the fact that this image is causing problems. Even if we agree that it should stay, it'll only be a matter of time before somebody else starts another thread or removes the image, which means we'll have to go through this again. It's just more practical to switch to something less potentially offensive just so we won't have to worry about this.

If we didn't have a replacement, I'd be more inclined to keep it, but seeing as we have a perfectly usable replacement, I think it would be best nip the issue in the bud and replace the picture.

I'm starting to lean this way myself.

I second that much.

All that aside, is the point at issue the illustration, or purely the word in question?

Pardon my evident obliviousness but, why not remove the word itself?

EDIT: So, would "Crush Black Stereotypes!" make any less of an impact?

edited 30th Jan '14 1:50:19 PM by Paktra

It'd sort of take away the weight of the picture I think.

Changing the word, since it's integral within the image, is going too far.

What do you mean "within the image"?... it's off to the side, easily paintable... with permission of course.

I'm thinking maybe "Mr. Artist, we love your illustration so much that we would love to use it for our website for educational purposes however, because of the politically sensitive terminology contained within we would request an edited version or permission to edit it ourselves."

edited 30th Jan '14 2:52:13 PM by Paktra

It's not a caption it's part of the image, the way a speech bubble is. He put it in the image to produce a reaction. Taking it out is substantially changing the image. We don't change the words in speech bubbles to something else.

Okay I can understand not wanting to change the image but what speech bubble are you talking about?

The words look free float to me... is it because I'm on a mobile?

edited 30th Jan '14 3:25:13 PM by Paktra

There's no actual bubble, but it's the equivalent to one.

Ah... I see then.

There's been profanity in descriptions before, so why not just move the word in question to the caption?

edited 30th Jan '14 3:38:34 PM by Paktra

I think the image should be changed (I see the previous thread I started is linked to in the first page). I kind of like that gamer image, because it fits the trope, but doesn't have the "controversy".

My feelings on the current image is that while it was created by a black artist (and thus they have "N-Word Privileges"), it's the kind of thing that would otherwise be super racist (the idea of distinguishing between "good blacks" and "niggers" is something done by many a white racist). I also feel that in some ways having it as an image comes off as an endorsement- in the sense that it is a "controversial" image, and having it as the page image implies it is considered innocuous (which it isn't).

edited 30th Jan '14 7:09:29 PM by Hodor

My two cents: I was confused about why the image was there in the first place - not having looked closely, I thought the thug was just ground, making the picture just a collection of progressive black folk.

All the points have been made. Talking about this anymore is going to waste time. You either support changing or you don't. So, let's gather votes on what to do. for the gamer hygiene pic.

For gamer.

sure gamer.

Gamer

Gamer

edited 30th Jan '14 5:40:35 PM by Yinyang107

One or two more for the gamer pic and we can run with it.

Game on.

edited 30th Jan '14 8:07:28 PM by AnotherDuck

Good enough. It's up, potholed, and tagged. Caption or no?

At right, how the general public views Gamers.

At left, How I view the general public's view of Gamers.

edited 30th Jan '14 8:56:06 PM by Paktra

How about "How Gamers view the general public's view of Gamers."

Oh yeah... that's what I meant, sure.

edited 30th Jan '14 9:04:34 PM by Paktra

Rather not use a memetastic caption.

Not really crazy about that, either.