Cheers. :)

And yes, he was indeed trying to hit on you.

He just needs a more masculine hook next time.

awesome photos, laura!

Neither of them are actual jokes. There are no punchlines, nothing at all to them other than making someone out to be smaller or less competent or just marking them, again, as “other.”

I think that hits the nail on the head. I grew up white, straight and male in a very rural area, and ended up in big cosmopolitan cities. I used to get alot of stuff like this from people and family back home, and responding the way lmb did is how I got most of it to stop and some of the people who sent it to think long and hard about why they were sending it on, and whether or not it was really funny.

I’ve heard the theory that the only good “insert racial/ethnic/regious group here” joke is one where you really can insert any group into that slot and the joke still works, still has a punchline. To do this it can’t depend entirely on racial stereotypes. I’m not totally convinced that this theory accurately demarcates the line between “off-color humor and outright racism” but I think it might at least point to the region where that line lies.

Is it okay if I assume the role of humorless pedant? (if only I could pretend that I’m good at that role because I’m a terrific actor)

Both the picture and Zoeller’s comment are reactions to instances of a group of people in an isolated, insular community (pro golfers, occupants of the White House) suddenly having to accept something considered as “other” (with connotations of “lesser” and “anathema”) in their midst.

Both are examples of a powerful element, a majority, being uncomfortable with suddenly having to play nice, to share the clubhouse. It is, I think, a reaction born of fear. A deplorable fear.

Neither of them are actual jokes. There are no punchlines, nothing at all to them other than making someone out to be smaller or less competent or just marking them, again, as “other.”

Did you ever ask/get a response as to why the forwarder thought the image was worth forwarding?

I can understand the desire to lampoon the powerful, but there’s nothing other than an asinine stereotype to tie watermelons with President-Elect Obama, and lampooning and satire without a specific connection to the target falls, at best, short of the mark.

To move on to something else, I don’t know if there’s genuine pleasure in propagating racism, just like I doubt there’s genuine pleasure in propagating sexism or homophobia. Or if there is, it’s the pleasure in control and assuring that the propagator is exerting the control, or is at least part of the group that’s on top. It [propagating a negative -ism] is an act of smallness, and like above, fear. It’s an act neither necessarily intentional nor conscious, it can be picked up from parents, friends, and media and transmitted while there’s no critical thought about what, precisely, is being said, what that might mean, what the possible intent of phrasings and word choice might be.

I think the maybe about having the racism exposed so close to you is why it was so affecting. The sender blindsided you with this, no? And I think that if you tried not to offend when you explained why you found the image offensive you did exactly the right thing. Argumentation (in the debate/discussion sense) in good faith is good and right.

Kristy