Urophilia! Frottage! Black-varnished toe nails! Consorting with transvestites! Bring me the salts, for my delicate constitution cannot take the outrage and I'm about to get the vapors!
PS: Adam, mah dear, I've seen worse in an U-Bahn station in Berlin during daylight hours. Get thee a grip, honey.
Don't pretend like you'd rather go to boring ass law school than cover the multifacted, ever-evolving beast that is TRANNYPEEGATE. Dig deeper, my friend. This story could make you.
I feel like he's still trying to balance out the naked lady pics from the Details shoot. Tweeting about being (fake?) peed on by a tranny + AMA fake fellatio = "HI, I'M GAY."
Calm down and take a nap, this is the internet. Let's see what else is on here:
- a video of Ukrainian teens murdering a hobo with a hammer and screwdriver
- a guy shoving a Tom Collins glass up his ass, the glass subsequently breaking and then him dealing with those consequences
- a shitload of racist websites hating every type of person you can think of.
I get that outrage/counter-outrage/chance at zingers gets interest but you are coming off as a bit of a harumphing dowager or worse, a college freshman. You're damaging the legitimacy of your future posts and that makes me cry.
@FitnessMadeSimple: So you find it "ridiculous" that posting a picture of black woman made to look like a monkey crosses the line into a realm of offensiveness that Gawker wouldn't want to enter?
As compared to, you know, the regular Gawker stuff that you find "offensive"?
It's all just on a par to you, is it? "Black-people-are-monkeys" pictures and standard snarky Gawker fare?
@MisterHippity: I wouldn't call it standard snarky Gawker fare. To be sure, it's more offensive than what's typically posted here.
But it's not as if offensive images haven't been posted here before. Perhaps "ridiculous" was an overstatement on my part. "Surprising" would have been more accurate.
@Pope John Peeps II: No, not something as bad as a black person photoshopped to look like a monkey. Gawker does have some fairly clear lines that it won't cross.
Well ... at least it has does ever since the departure of Owen "Travolta's Rumored Gay Lover Discovered Dead Son" Thomas.
@MisterHippity: After posting the michael jackson death photo, suddenly people start caring? This is arguably more interesting, since it's about racial politics in the US.
Someone, I hope, has already said this, but of course Google should NOT remove the image. No more than they should remove any "offensive" text. I'm sorry, but this shit gets my goat. Access to everything, good and bad, is key to a free society. Duh.
I'm amazed at even the suggestion here that it should be removed, because that is totally assholish and misguided.
Seriously, a balderdash thing to say. I'm disgusted. Chen, you call yourself a writer? I'm sorry, no. You are not allowed to call yourself that. You obviously cannot be trusted to protect what I consider to be the most important freedom we have, therefore I shall lobby that your name never come up in any search result.
You are a bad person. Or, perhaps, a decent person with an inability to make a point without failing badly and being misunderstood. Either way. Not appreciated.
@Senor_Wences: Uh, Chen's response was that it would be better if it was gone. Not that Google should remove it. Here, let me scroll up a whole page length and copy/paste it for you: It's hard not to agree with Google on this: If they start removing every image someone finds offensive then the only results left will be pictures of babies dressed up as flowers. (Although: child labor!) But it's also hard not to really wish that picture was gone.
You know, that sounds just like "Google should remove it", doesn't it?
Talk about trying to make a point and failing badly.
@Go Like Hell Machine: Disagree completely. That was at the end, and weak. The overwhelming flavor of this post is that the image should be removed. #gfail? Please.
But there is no debate. No controversy, even. This is what I meant by failing at making a point. There was not, in fact, any reason to bring the image up. This is the point of the bad stuff. You don't like it, ignore it.
Oh, and go to hell, Go Like Hell, for that last crack of yours there. I'll send the ACLU a couple bucks in your name.
@Go Like Hell Machine: Exactly. I think this post makes it pretty clear that, yes, we would LIKE for images like this to not get pulled up with a Google search. But that is hardly the same thing as advocating that Google take the image down. To the contrary, the post says pretty clearly that Google shouldn't.
It's the distinction between saying the KKK is disgusting and shouldn't exist vs. saying the Government should prohibit the KKK from existing. Big difference--HUGE difference.
@Atilla the Bun: Meanwhile, people are searching this image, a dumb, dopey, inconsequential image, because of this post, and, as Chen points out, helps move it to the top. So, uh, why do it?
There is not a shortage of Obama monkey images. It's neither here nor there, and not worth discussion. It really isn't.
What's worth discussion is the suggestion these images be pulled. I say again, that is the overwhelming flavor of this post. Or, almost as bad, it's "tut tut, this is bad" and leading people to Google image it, which they have now, and it's still, what? Just another Obama monkey thing.
A story might be about who is posting these. A piece about Google refusing to take it down? Makes me mad that it is disappointed they will not. Saying again: #gfail. Failed how? "Racist picture...will live forever..." Well, yeah, that's the idea of a library. Respect the Internet as a library of everything.
I can't believe this is even an issue. No, I can. It's why I'm pissed.
Fiercely protect it, yer stupid freedom of speech, or yer screwed.
@Senor_Wences: You know, as someone mentioned earlier, if this is your first amendment hill to die on, then so be it. But you're seriously, seriously overreacting and intentionally misinterpreting the entire point of the post. #comprehensionfail.
06:56 PM
Urophilia! Frottage! Black-varnished toe nails! Consorting with transvestites! Bring me the salts, for my delicate constitution cannot take the outrage and I'm about to get the vapors!
PS: Adam, mah dear, I've seen worse in an U-Bahn station in Berlin during daylight hours. Get thee a grip, honey.
06:26 PM
I'm pretty sure there are transexuals who are willing to pee on straight men, bi dudes, lesbians and hedgehogs.
06:11 PM
04:37 PM
03:46 PM
02:56 PM
03:22 PM
05:25 PM
02:36 PM
02:08 PM
11/25/09
- a video of Ukrainian teens murdering a hobo with a hammer and screwdriver
- a guy shoving a Tom Collins glass up his ass, the glass subsequently breaking and then him dealing with those consequences
- a shitload of racist websites hating every type of person you can think of.
I get that outrage/counter-outrage/chance at zingers gets interest but you are coming off as a bit of a harumphing dowager or worse, a college freshman. You're damaging the legitimacy of your future posts and that makes me cry.
11/25/09
11/25/09
Seriously? I realize Gawker slants left, but that's a bit ridiculous for a blog that has never seemed to mind being offensive to anyone.
11/25/09
As compared to, you know, the regular Gawker stuff that you find "offensive"?
It's all just on a par to you, is it? "Black-people-are-monkeys" pictures and standard snarky Gawker fare?
O-0-oh ka-a-ay ...
11/25/09
But it's not as if offensive images haven't been posted here before. Perhaps "ridiculous" was an overstatement on my part. "Surprising" would have been more accurate.
11/25/09
That history is: they ALWAYS post them.
11/25/09
Well ... at least it has does ever since the departure of Owen "Travolta's Rumored Gay Lover Discovered Dead Son" Thomas.
11/25/09
11/25/09
Ok, maybe Gawker doesn't have any lines they won't cross after all ...
11/25/09
I'm amazed at even the suggestion here that it should be removed, because that is totally assholish and misguided.
Seriously, a balderdash thing to say. I'm disgusted. Chen, you call yourself a writer? I'm sorry, no. You are not allowed to call yourself that. You obviously cannot be trusted to protect what I consider to be the most important freedom we have, therefore I shall lobby that your name never come up in any search result.
You are a bad person. Or, perhaps, a decent person with an inability to make a point without failing badly and being misunderstood. Either way. Not appreciated.
11/25/09
You know, that sounds just like "Google should remove it", doesn't it?
Talk about trying to make a point and failing badly.
11/25/09
But there is no debate. No controversy, even. This is what I meant by failing at making a point. There was not, in fact, any reason to bring the image up. This is the point of the bad stuff. You don't like it, ignore it.
Oh, and go to hell, Go Like Hell, for that last crack of yours there. I'll send the ACLU a couple bucks in your name.
11/25/09
It's the distinction between saying the KKK is disgusting and shouldn't exist vs. saying the Government should prohibit the KKK from existing. Big difference--HUGE difference.
11/25/09
There is not a shortage of Obama monkey images. It's neither here nor there, and not worth discussion. It really isn't.
What's worth discussion is the suggestion these images be pulled. I say again, that is the overwhelming flavor of this post. Or, almost as bad, it's "tut tut, this is bad" and leading people to Google image it, which they have now, and it's still, what? Just another Obama monkey thing.
A story might be about who is posting these. A piece about Google refusing to take it down? Makes me mad that it is disappointed they will not. Saying again: #gfail. Failed how? "Racist picture...will live forever..." Well, yeah, that's the idea of a library. Respect the Internet as a library of everything.
I can't believe this is even an issue. No, I can. It's why I'm pissed.
Fiercely protect it, yer stupid freedom of speech, or yer screwed.
11/25/09
11/25/09
How's your head feel this morning? :-)
11/25/09
11/25/09