Jamezz
Well-Known Member
I was aware of the less obvious things like those that you mentioned. I wasn't so sure about something as evident as changing the person who features on the bill.
A win for the Central Bank and it's puppet Obama
- Thread starter Jamezz
- Start date
I was aware of the less obvious things like those that you mentioned. I wasn't so sure about something as evident as changing the person who features on the bill.
Getting butt hurt about replacing a white man with a black woman on a $20 is more than enough evidence for internet.
Jamezz
Well-Known Member
She could be martian for what I care. You my friend are the first to bring up the racial component in this discussion, then you try to play innocent.
Look, if I offended anyone with the aunt Jemima comment I apologize, I don't find it that big of a deal and in no way I had any racialist thoughts in mind when I made such comment in the heat of the moment.
It was more about removing a figure that I admire from part of the bill than anything else.
I have to disagree. When you called her "aunt jemima" (you meant it as a joke) you brought the racial element into it. Roach merely commented on it.
My question is why would this give you a "heat of the moment" moment?
* = Can not confirm.
** = "Aunt Jemima" says otherwise
*** = No one thinks I'm Innocent, myself included.
Jamezz
Well-Known Member
That's your perception, I have a different one. I just saw it as a reasonable lookalike. I don't think Betty Crocker for instance would have been as fitting. Let's not all get too jumpy here.
Heat of the moment because I admit that I thought at first that it was removing Jackson entirely from the bill. And I think that featuring the Founding Fathers on the american bills is just fine. No need to stir that pot.
I don't have a problem with the change and I don't have a problem with the bolded.
Two points though:
1. Not all people on the bills are founding fathers. For example; Grant.
2. I still don't see why that gives you a "heat of the moment". To me that means at least a moderately intense emotional reaction.
As for the joke, the overall perception, I'm willing to bet, is that there is a clear racial tone to your joke. That will offend some and not others. I am not offended but I can still see it.
And with that I am done talking abot the racial joke. The money topic was much more interesting.
JimLes
Well-Known Member
Yeah, and it's pretty obvious which one that is. I mean, I know you're not so stupid as to be unaware of the connotations of Aunt Jemima character.
Jamezz
Well-Known Member
That's why I apologized after realizing that there could have been certain connotations to this character. In all honesty I wasn't even remotely thinking about them when I started this thread.
It just came up as a depiction of what it might look like once the change is implemented. I guess I am naive and simplistic enough to enjoy this kind of graphic humor without putting any more thought into it.
Miggs
Well-Known Member
This explanation seems way too convenient given your history for calling people out.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
Like, why'd they put a geisha on the new Korean money they made a few years ago when they could have put a "founding father" on it instead?
Same ridiculous argument, really.
Same ridiculous argument, really.