Gun Attack on French Magazine Charlie Hebdo kills 12.

@KingKinect: So the Templars aren't so bad after all? I think I need to play some AC rogue to find out for myself haha.

@BboyStatix:

In some ways they are awesome. I like the red T they wear. In many ways they are kind of like Mr T but unlike Mr T they don't pity the fool and I find that disappointing.

LOL!

Why do people keep saying the comics are offensive? Just because you are offended by by it that doesn't mean it's offensive. Prudes are offended by the human body, does that mean the body is offensive? Of course not.

@toast_burner:

Stephen Fry is great... and I agree, plus the cartoons aren't even that offensive, I'm pretty sure they could get a lot more brutal on a guy that was married to a 9 year old (well actually I know they could have because I've seen it on twitter).

@toast_burner said:

Why do people keep saying the comics are offensive? Just because you are offended by by it that doesn't mean it's offensive. Prudes are offended by the human body, does that mean the body is offensive? Of course not.

Wow mind-blown

i love Stephen Fry and that quote makes a lot of sense actually.

New Charlie Hebdo Cover Creates New Questions for U.S. News Media

"Adding to the debate over publishing the cartoon, some online commentators have also asserted that, if viewed upside down, the image could be seen as a depiction of the male anatomy. Many previous Charlie Hebdo images satirizing religious leaders have also included subtle or explicit pornographic references.

Laurent Léger, an investigative journalist with Charlie Hebdo, shrugged off the idea, circulating on social media, that the new cartoon of Muhammad contained one or even two drawings of male genitals.

“People can see what they want to see, but a cartoon is a cartoon. It is not a photograph. Who’s to say what Muhammad looks like. I haven’t seen him myself,” Mr. Leger said."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I guess the word the New York Times is looking is penis. Penis NYT, PENIS, you prudes. Liberal beacon my ass.

lol, wouldn't that be the final insult.

@toast_burner said:

Why do people keep saying the comics are offensive? Just because you are offended by by it that doesn't mean it's offensive. Prudes are offended by the human body, does that mean the body is offensive? Of course not.

That's stoopid. The definition of offensive is "causing resentful displeasure; highly irritating, angering, or annoying:" If you have noticed, drawing Muhammad and such seem to cause annoyance, anger and resentful displeasure, with many. Those cartoons do just that, so they are offensive. And I'm pretty sure that's the intention of the writers.

If the human body cause resentful displeasure then it is offensive. Now prudes are not offended by the human body at all. But by the display of it. That's why you know have censoring, special camera angles avoiding it etc. etc. Cause it is, apparently and silly enough, offensive to display it.

I'm sure when someone would say something offensive about gay people, both of you would be offended.

Then literally everything is offensive. So what's the purpose in saying "this picture of Muhammad is offensive" when everything else in existence and fiction is also offensive?

No, not everything is offensive.

but that IS acting like an asshole

Yes it is. For every single thing there is at least one person who is offended by it.

Here's an idiot saying they were offended by a scene in doctor who where the doctor plucks out a hair.

Is she wrong to be offended by it? Of course not. But thinking that they should do something because of her personal feelings is downright stupid. Just like a Muslim expecting people not to make a joke about Muhammad because it offends them is also stupid.

I very much doubt that. Do you think that anyone is offended by the star Epsilon Cygni? In any case I would say that their are various degrees of offensiveness.It's not black and white. Plucking out hair has a low degree of offensiveness as it offends a low amount of people. Depictions of Muhammad has a very high degree of offensiveness as they offend a lot of people and very intensively.

I don't think Muslims should expect that. But it can still be offensive.

So how many people need to be offended for something to be a high degree of offensiveness? You seem to be arbitrarily drawing lines.

Yes it can be offensive TO SOME MUSLIMS. It's is not objectively offensive. And like I said before why does it matter if they're offended? When people say "it's offensive" what they really mean is "it's offensive to me"

If 100% of all people (~7000000000) offended it is 100% offensive. If 33% of people are offended, it is 33% offensive. What a high degree of something is is already arbitrary. How many people does there need to be in a room until you consider it many people? It is also arbitrary.

What is objectively offensive then? It matters because if someone is offended they are being harmed in some way. I wouldn't consider it very serious but some kind of harm is inflicted upon them. It is something I think is best to avoid to do unless it's necessary.

I mean what is offensive or not is determined by what people think of it. In which cases is something offensive but not offensive to someone?

Nothing is objectively offensive. Why does it matter if they are being harmed? If you're reading a magazine and you don't like what it says just put it down and don't pick it back up again. It really is that simple.

@toast_burner said:

Why do people keep saying the comics are offensive? Just because you are offended by by it that doesn't mean it's offensive. Prudes are offended by the human body, does that mean the body is offensive? Of course not.

Bullshit. Comics make a statement, and it's entirely possible that the statement is made for the purpose of offending people. It's chickenshit and cowardly to make a statement with the intent of offending someone, and to then act as if it doesn't matter that people got offended. Say whatever the hell you want, but at least have the balls to own up to it. If the fact that people get offended is irrelevant, then you wouldn't have made the intentionally offensive statement in the first place.

so a 50 year old women cartoonists is going to take up arms and face the enemy on the glorious fields of battle?

Cause harming people is bad, or generally considered to be so.

The human mind is not that simple.

stephen fry is a pompous windbag and toast burner should be shamed for this

QI's pretty good. needs to make david mitchell a permanent member though

You're right, nothing is OBJECTIVELY offensive. Hell, words are just sounds, if you ignore all context and all meanings which are attached to those words.

So, like...I hate to make this personal, but I kind of have to. I don't know your personal situation but chances are that at some point you've probably had something approaching family or friends. Maybe parents, maybe a teacher/mentor, maybe a girlfriend, maybe a male friend, maybe a sibling or a son or a cousin. I'm just gonna go out on a limb and wager that at some point in your life you probably got mad at one of those people and said something that made them feel bad.

So, what now? Do you admit that the words you said, in that contextual situation, had no meaning beyond just being sounds that were coming from your mouth? Or do you accept that you actually may have said something offensive?

Is this the stance that you take with your girlfriend or wife whenever you say something that hurts her feelings (whether it's intentional or accidental)? If you insult the shit out of your wife, you're a piece of shit if you respond to her criticisms by basically saying, "nothing I say can be offensive, it's just sounds; if you don't like what I say then stfu and stop listening to me." That's not just cruel and mean-spirited, it also demonstrates a shocking lack of understanding of how communication fucking works.

Where did I say I've never been offended by something? Being offended is personal, it has absolutely nothing to do with anyone else. If someone insults me then yeah I probably wont like that person and won't want to be around them much longer, but I'm not going to demand that something be done about it because "I am offended" being offended does not grant you special rights.

way to miss the point, larry literal. not everyone can ( nor should ) "make war" and be chivalrous? chivalrous? seriously?

Being offended has to do with what statements mean. Statements clearly mean something, or else people wouldn't bother to make them. Yes, being offended has something to do with someone other than the person who is offended: it also has something to do with the person who is making the statement. You don't get to just say shit and then pretend like that shit didn't mean anything when people get offended.

Yeah I'm sure terrorists look at gun control laws and say "**** me, I'd better not use a gun that's illegal" and then stop being terrorists.

Yeah I'm sure terrorists look at gun control laws and say "**** me, I'd better not use a gun that's illegal" and then stop being terrorists.

You don't get peace by submitting to terrorists.

Are you even reading what I'm saying? being offended does not grant a person special privileges. I get offended when people say that homosexuality is a sin, does that mean people shouldn't be allowed to think that? Of course not because the world doesn't and shouldn't revolve around me. If I don't like what a person has to say then I simply won't listen to them, nobody is forcing anyone to read that magazine so why does it matter?

That doesn't mean it's ok to harass people or spread hate speech.

Doing research for my OT nominations (I know) I came across this, which includes my insightful analysis:

Do you find this incredibly offensive?