• spujb@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Under a cartoon representation of a quite standard-looking Palestine supporting protester.

    “The cartoon isn’t about those who support Palestine.”

    What textual or external evidence do you have for this? Genuinely what could I be missing here lmao? Open to correction but this sounds like you are gaslighting urself?

    Edit to be very specific: The comic depicts what might be called a “generic” protester. And then puts words in their mouth that are not often heard: “I’m busy.” Not a popular slogan or anything.

    There’s one protester, one speech bubble. That’s 100% of the protesters on the page, where the uncommon speech is inserted into the generic. Hence my interperetation that the artist is representing all pro-Palestine protesters here as single issue obstructionist bad actors, which is an obvious non-truth

    It’s kind of a visual strawman, in other words.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s a political cartoon. They’re visual generally not textual. So there’s at least your first problem of many. Though I think your problems are all of your own design. That you think that represents all Palestinian supporters says more about you than it does about Palestinian supporters.

      But let’s analyze your own claims using your own required proofs. Where does the textually say anything you’ve implied?

      • spujb@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Hi there, just wanted to mention that visual texts are quite prevalent in rhetorical media (e: of which political cartoons are very much a part despite your strange assertion.) Thank you for considering this perspective. I would appreciate it if you could provide evidence from the visual text or another source to support any alternative interpretations.

        An example of my perception: in a political cartoon, a white guy wearing a red MAGA hat might be perceived as representing Trump supporters. There would need to be considerable evidence for me to believe that such a symbol represented a specific subset of that group, of such a kind at least that I do not see here.

        I may not engage in further answers to your questions until I receive a response addressing the evidence provided. Thank you for understanding, and I value your perspective.

        Edit: I do see that you blocked me. So, that’s excellent :/

        • Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          15
          ·
          7 months ago

          Your link has nothing to do with political cartoons. Could you be any more smarmy disingenuous or obvious. You can’t even defend what you said. Nor can you admit it. Worse you resort to lemmygrad posting and making shit up. Proving that you’re not engaging in good faith. The least you could do is make my name bigger on that image so people would know to laugh and ridicule you quicker.

          • spujb@lemmy.cafe
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            hilarious interaction:

            • i state my interpretation of a text, ask for clarification
            • ”prove it to me”
            • i provide a parallel example to defend my understanding
            • ”you won’t even defend what you said, also i am gonna compare you to violent communists”

            i am still open to evidence by the way. :) it’s insane how quickly you devolved into personal attacks tho