Just me poking a little fun at the Reddit drama surrounding the Pride Logo, and giving an in-universe explanation for it while I'm at it. Hopefully, this doesn't offend too many people.
Thanks to everyone from chat who gave feedback.
Over(thinking) the Rainbow / Discussion
Forum
» Per Page Discussions / Per page discussions
» Over(thinking) the Rainbow
This is the discussion related to the wiki page Over(thinking) the Rainbow.
Hey it's not spam if I comment to get in a screen-cap right?
Well… I think it’s pretty well written and the “nazi frogs” bit cracked me up.
+1
Fairly straightforward "Foundation life mirrors real life", but I had to upvote for the last line, it made me laugh. :)
EDIT: On reflection, I think I'm gonna novote. :/ That last joke does hit wrongly, and if it's the only thing that made me upvote, well…
Also, you've kind of started more drama via gently mocking existing drama.
(account deleted)This makes me wonder about the demographics of this site's dwellers. I am very confused about the overall message of this.
The overall message is: "Having our logo be a rainbow is about support and inclusion. If it offends you, you've probably got an issue."
The article neatly sums up the idea of support, and counters several arguments commonly made.
Most of the site's demographics are available in the community survey. If you mean LGBTQIAP+ individuals, quite a few, including a propensity of site staff.
If you're trying to slyly imply that this is somehow inappropriate, I am watching this post like a hawk. 😉 <3
stop using emojis, chief do you have a link to the community survey?
Maybe it's my lack of a sense of humor, because I personally couldn't tell who this was mocking exactly.
At any rate, I am content to novote this, it is a bit of a polemic satire, I think, and therefore neither the sort of thing that I generally enjoy or my preferred method of opposing systemic bigotry (though I will take your word for it that was the intent).
"If it offends you, you've probably got an issue."
Way to strawman their entire argument Magnus. Oh, and I'm sure people really appreciate you nazi-modding any and all potential instances of opposition. God forbid someone have a different opinion than mine, or want a website to remain apolitical, lest they be bigots.
The story itself, in my opinion, makes no sense. It's very clearly politically biased, and seems like it exists solely to prove a snide offering to a circlejerk of staff members. Just because society is divisive doesn't mean that expressly apolitical entities need to become politically charged and pick a side. All that will accomplish is alienation of their clientele, fanbase, etc.
On top of this, I'd like to bring up that the "you're either with us or against us" mentality you all seem to be pushing is honestly disgusting. Whatever happened to political discussion, or agreeing to disagree? It says a lot about the character of those who run and are a part of this site if you can't even sit down to have a chat with "the enemy" in the hopes of compromising/working towards a better future for the site.
Now to prevent myself from getting suspended or banned, I will proceed to point out the blatant abuses of power enacted by the staff over the last month, that resulted in some "graciously stepping down". This is so that if I am smited I will become a minor-scale martyr while proving a point.
This seems to be discussion that should be taking place in the thread for it: http://scp-wiki.net/forum/t-6242173/sticky-regarding-threads-about-recent-drama as opposed to someone's tale.
Furthermore, if you have a specific complaint to levy against staff, we always have the Complaints Thread.
How is it a strawman, really? The original commenter asked about the message of the story, and Magnus explained it, hence the quotation mark. Magnus didn't accuse the original comment of anything: he simply answered a question.
Magnus clearly supports this viewpoint enough to threaten disciplinary action blindly, so yeah, I see Magnus and the author's very clearly expressed beliefs as strawmen of those who were opposed to them.
You're correct, he didn't accuse; he threatened smugly like someone with a power complex.
and I'm sure people really appreciate you nazi-modding any and all potential instances of opposition
If you feel that my behavior has been in violation of a reasonable standard for staff, feel free to contact my Admin contact for my Team (Quikngruvn) or one of the other admin staff in order to make a formal complaint.
If not, I'm gonna have to ask you to refrain from comparing me to a Nazi.
Seeing as how you've called me out directly, I'm gonna point you to Deci's response below. I didn't write this story. I summed up what the story said, and accurately at that.
If you're going to call me out, please do so when it's appropriate.
Note: This is not a stop order, or disciplinary action. This is an official response as a staff member rather than just a user.
This is a plenty appropriate time. You can't just be snarky about how much this article made you smile and threaten potential dissent, and then tout about like you weren't just acting like some hot-shot mod.
Instead of dealing with this endless rigmarole of going through various links and forums that ultimately lead to nowhere or deaf ears, just respond honestly. You weren't "just answering" a question, or else your little comment at the end would've been unneeded. You do support the views expressed in this tale, shown through your in-depth involvement in the drama as a driving force since day one. Just because you didn't write the story, doesn't mean you're exempt from being questioned when you express your viewpoints, even as a means of clarification for the author's sake, and if you want proof of you talking about your views, and how they relate to the author's, look further down this very page.
No, I'm not going to refrain from comparing you to a Nazi, as you and others have thrown your fair share of insults and similar comparisons (i.e "bigot, racist, homophobe, transphobe") yourselves during this debacle. Do not be hypocrites. Besides, I was using a saying that describes an overly strict or dictator like mod, not calling you a nazi. You should know this, or are we that removed from the chans now?
I'm not going to run around in circles with your useless "report" system. So either step down a few notches and talk to me like a user as opposed to a dog, or just ban me.
I'm absolutely disgusted at how political one of my favorite hobbies has become, when there was no reason for it to end up that way other than attention seeking and grandstanding.
The story itself, in my opinion, makes no sense. It's very clearly politically biased, and seems like it exists solely to prove a snide offering to a circlejerk of staff members.
(A) This was not written by a staff member, (B) it can easily be read as a mockery of all sides and (C) this site was never apolitical.
A. I didn't say that.
B. Care to explain how?
C. How long have you been here?
A. I didn't say that.
You seemed to imply that, based on randomly mentioning staff.
B. Care to explain?
Okay, so I might go a little to indepth here, but here it goes: Gears is basically acting as the straight, "rational" person who doesn't particularly care for pride one way or the other in the tale, while Clef is meant to be the person being all inclusive. The way *I* personally read the dialogue, Clef is going overboard, and intending to be all inclusive, but not for any real love of gay people but just so he can get to a wedding. Depending on how you look at it, Clef can be an over the top imitation of what people think of when they think of a staff member here, while Gears is meant to be the "every man" who doesn't care one way or the other. Of course, that's one interpretation, one out of millions you can think of.
C. How long have you been here?
You don't need to be here long, we've always had socio-political elements here. Certain articles that have political themes, or at least mentioning them.
Here are some,
….and others, I'm sure that are out there, but these are just the ones off the top of my head. Either way, our site has, and always will be, political in some of our articles. There are other apolitical articles, totally. But lets not pretend for a moment that this site doesn't have political elements.
A. No. I never implied it. I said it was contributing to the staff's circlejerk. That doesn't explicitly mean that only staff can contribute to it.
B. I can see that. But Clef still seems very much in support of the "movement" per se, and his reasoning just seems like the edgy person who's really a deeply seeded progressive at heart. I was inclined to believe what I was thinking a lot more based on this discussion page, otherwise, I would've given it the benefit of the doubt.
C. I think I've read most of those over the years, but I'll have to refresh my memory of which is which. Just so that we're clear: political elements =/= politically motivated. This is what I'm referring to when I say "apolitical".
A. Alright, must have misread it then. Apologises.
B. Well, that's just the motive of a character isn't it? Although, I don't see Clef as that in this tale. He's either a caricature or, as it's later revealed, to be just a guy exploiting the situation for other motives i.e. getting invited to a wedding.
C. Alright, but, personally, I don't particularly care if a piece of media is written for expressively political purposes — some of my favorite pieces of fiction are. 1984, Homage to Catalonia, Huckleberry Finn, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, etc. are some of my favorite books, and they were, in some part, heavily motivated by politics. But they're (in my eyes, at least) good stories. I guess I try reading them in terms of "is this a good story" or "was I entertained rather instead of"do I politically agree with this?" And while, yes, don't get me wrong there are probably are some 'politically motivated' articles, but I highly doubt they're written with the sole intent of politics. People write for many reasons. Story, character, theme, politics, other personal motives (such as a person writing about a character's struggles with depression when that writer struggles with depression themselves as an example), etc. Plus, our site is still primarily apolitical in terms of content — yeah, articles with a political message exist, and are often very popular for the fact they take chances, but apolitical articles are the main draw, because most of us don't tread on such uneasy ground as politics on the internet.
If you read the article carefully you would see neither of the actors are actually supporting the movement. One side was calmly displaying doubt even to the end and the other was simply acting for an ulterior motive. It's a parody making fun of the supporter, if anything: portraying Clef with obviously exaggerated excitement for inconsequential shit while Gears faced him as if a tired parent with hyperactive child.
Both of them simply argued for the sake of arguing: in the end, both agreed that the entire thing is bullshit.
I told someone else this, but I can see this argument to an extent. However, I'm just going to copy paste my previous response so you get my point.
"I can see that. But Clef still seems very much in support of the 'movement' per se, and his reasoning just seems like the edgy person who's really a deeply seeded progressive at heart. I was inclined to believe what I was thinking a lot more based on this discussion page, otherwise, I would've given it the benefit of the doubt."
I also don't see them agreeing that it's bullshit in the end. I see Clef teaching Gears about pride month, and then explaining to Gears that his "offensive" behaviour was just trolling, and afterwards they go their separate ways, with Gears having learned something new. Calling Pepe a "Nazi frog" is really not doing any favours either in the whole "this article hates both sides" department.
Pepe was christened by Matt Furie, his creator, who isn't a Nazi and did nothing wrong. Don't do him like this.
if your reading this your gay
While I do like trying to put an in-universe explanation for the logo change, I really hate when people say Pepe is a nazi or something overtly racist. You can make anything a 'symbol' of nazism or racism. Pepe just unfortunately became the posterboy for it.
Symbols take on meanings, whether we like them to or not.
It's not like the swastika was originally a nazi symbol, but now it's indelibly marked as a symbol of nazi ideology.
I know, I know but seeing the "Pepe is a Nazi" meme being propagated really grinds my gears. did you like my pun?
I mean…it's not inaccurate that neo-nazi's use pepe's image to further their agenda.
I can understand that you don't enjoy having something you found inoffensive become offensive, but that's part of adjusting to changing times.
Or we can have a discussion like this, to tell people the truth and stop using Pepe as a Nazi symbol. While the swastika has been a Nazi symbol for decades, and can probably never be reversed, Pepe is relatively new, and can be stopped. So rant over, please stop using Pepe as a fucking nazi symbol.
I'm really not sure why people care so much about the "loss" of a frog meme so much.
Frankly, it doesn't matter how much you try and "reclaim it" on the internet. In popular media, it's a lasting symbol of the alt-right, and basically always will be. Unless you're a hardcore internet dweller, you probably didn't hear of pepe until it became an Alt-right meme, and you most likely won't ever change it.
Especially since the alt-right is still using it as a symbol, which actively works against your argument.
(Also, I have no idea what that picture is supposed to be of, and the moment I see the word "leftist" I get pretty suspicious of the source.)
Replying to prototype as it's a response to this, and the parent comment.
I'm really not sure why people care so much about the "loss" of a frog meme so much.
Presumably Furie is irritated for the same reason that you would be if Dr. Magnus was adopted as a white supremacist symbol.
I personally would have good reason to be upset, yes.
This is more comparable to Dr. Magnus being a racist symbol, and the Reddit fandom being unable to move on from it.
There's ten billion memes out there, I don't know why people latch on so hard to this one.
I think it's more of the fact that Pepe was originally created this one way, and that saying "who would name a frog pepe" almost makes it sound like the original creator is a nazi, when, he isn't.
Yeah, this is what I was getting at.
if your reading this your gay
As such, inevitably, the Pepe debates begin. let the internet boil with the flame of the memes, and the masses be cleansed of racism and bigotry.
i should make a GOI
/forum/t-6128481/over-thinking-the-rainbow#post-
page revision: 2, last edited: 15 Jan 2023 15:06
