Turkey threatens legal, diplomatic action over Charlie Hebdo’s caricature of Erdogan

[Bodonius]

I mean, he quite clearly *did* provoke it.

I assume your joking, its a bad joke that showing a picture is provoking death penalty. Or your a sick person

[Ripster42]

I assume your joking, its a bad joke that showing a picture is provoking death penalty. Or your a sick person

Saying someone provoked an act doesn't mean the retributive action was proportional.

[Bodonius]

Saying someone provoked an act doesn't mean the retributive action was proportional.

Hmm ok, then its fine saying a woman having sexy cloths provoke getting raped?

[PC2]

I mean, he quite clearly *did* provoke it.

Nah, non-violence isn't a provocation of violence.

[AeneasBK]

I assume your joking, its a bad joke that showing a picture is provoking death penalty. Or your a sick person

I didn't really feel the rider "The reaction was of course totally unjustified" was needed.

[Bodonius]

I didn't really feel the rider "The reaction was of course totally unjustified" was needed.

But then you also agree on a woman that dress sexy provoke getting raped?

[Ripster42]

Hmm ok, then its fine saying a woman having sexy cloths provoke getting raped?

IIRC, clothes don't have anything to do with how rapists choose victims. Great strawman though?

[Bodonius]

IIRC, clothes don't have anything to do with how rapists choose victims. Great strawman though?

It does 100%. Try to deny it and you just look silly. Muslim rapists have said so many times, I rape her because she dress like a slut

[AeneasBK]

Interesting implications of the comparison you've chosen there. I'm out, have fun.

[Zaktar]

IIRC, clothes don't have anything to do with how rapists choose victims. Great strawman though?

It's as asinine as saying that showing a cartoon provokes violence. The cartoon didn't provoke the violence, the perpetrator's stupid beliefs provoked the violence.

[Ripster42]

It does 100%. Try to deny it and you just look silly. Muslim rapists have said so many times, I rape her because she dress like a slut

You're really trying to press this. Fine. The word provocation does not attribute blame for a disproportionate reaction. This is still a strawman, and is trying to conflate one definition for provoke (a deliberate attempt to anger) with another (to engender a reaction from someone).

- - - Updated - - -

It's as asinine as saying that showing a cartoon provokes violence. The cartoon didn't provoke the violence, the perpetrator's stupid beliefs provoked the violence.

Yes, great, most non-religious zealots don't choose their victims based upon dress. I don't care.

[Bodonius]

You're really trying to press this. Fine. The word provocation does not attribute blame for a disproportionate reaction. This is still a strawman, and is trying to conflate one definition for provoke (a deliberate attempt to anger) with another (to engender a reaction from someone).

Ok so feminists are fine that women provoke getting raped? Dont you see that your point is kind of weird?

[Zaktar]

You're really trying to press this. Fine. The word provocation does not attribute blame for a disproportionate reaction. This is still a strawman, and is trying to conflate one definition for provoke (a deliberate attempt to anger) with another (to engender a reaction from someone).

- - - Updated - - -



Yes, great, most non-religious zealots don't choose their victims based upon dress. I don't care.

Yes yes, you don't care that you're tacitly offering justification for murder based on someone showing a cartoon because you want to get technical over the word provoke. Cool.

[AeneasBK]

It's as asinine as saying that showing a cartoon provokes violence. The cartoon didn't provoke the violence, the perpetrator's stupid beliefs provoked the violence.

Yeah, far be it for me to second guess the guy, but he chose to provoke muslims.

[Bodonius]

Yeah, far be it for me to second guess the guy, but he chose to provoke muslims.

Sounds like its his fault, not the muslims. Your sick, she dressed to sexy so she begged for it

[Ripster42]

Dont you see that your point is kind of weird?

I can see that you apparently don't like the idea of the english language using more than one definition for many words, and are having a shitfit that someone used one of those definitions correctly.

You're also missing the point of the argument (and so are many other groups). Saying that someone provoked an action does not attribute blame for that action, especially when the retributive action is disproportionate to the provocation. The blame lies with the person who took those actions. Acknowledging that certain behaviors do cause people to display reactions to those behaviors isn't a bad thing. Using that acknowledgment against the person who exhibited those behaviors in contexts like these is (and often has been, especially in your example). The point of acknowledging the provocation in these instances identifies an action/reaction chain that needs to be broken. The initial behavior isn't the problem. The connection between the action/reaction is the problem and needs to be addressed with the reacting individuals. Rejecting the action/reaction chain in no way solves that problem. If you want to use the euphemism action/reaction chain instead of the word 'provoke' go right ahead.

[Themius]

I fail to see how targeting a influential world leader is "punching down" from a satirical magazine, particularly as that particular world leader has been feuding with France for a decade now. Still, I do agree that a lot of Hebdo's work is in pretty bad taste, it is rude, crass, and deliberately offensive. But that is their brand, that is what they do, it is like South Park or Family Guy in that respect.

The offensiveness of the work in question is entirely not the point. The insane overreaction to it is the point. When they published "offensive" cartoons of Mohammad, they literally died for it, and a random school teacher got beheaded this year for just showing it. That is completely disproportionate no matter what the offense. The government of Turkey going after them because the Baby in Chief got offended is not quite as disproportionate as straight up murdering them, but still ridiculously over the top in any other context.

The faster Erdogan and other thin skinned extremists can get over the bullshit premise that the world must be inoffensive to their tastes, the better. This equally applies to PETA, various insane SJWs (Which is almost impossible to use unironically these days), the PRC, the RNC, the NRA, Hobby Lobby, Bernie Bros, Progressives, Conservatives, Moderates, and every one else under the sun who loses their damn mind when someone offends them.

Because they’ve done lots of punching down doesn’t suddenly make it okay....they punched down at Italy as well in again typical bigoted fashion.

[Ripster42]

Yes yes, you don't care that you're tacitly offering justification for murder based on someone showing a cartoon because you want to get technical over the word provoke. Cool.

Not justifying murder. Grats on both a desultory understanding of the english language and poor reading comprehension.

[Bodonius]

I can see that you apparently don't like the idea of the english language using more than one definition for many words, and are having a shitfit that someone used one of those definitions correctly.

You're also missing the point of the argument (and so are many other groups). Saying that someone provoked an action does not attribute blame for that action, especially when the retributive action is disproportionate to the provocation. The blame lies with the person who took those actions. Acknowledging that certain behaviors do cause people to display reactions to those behaviors isn't a bad thing. Using that acknowledgment against the person who exhibited those behaviors in contexts like these is (and often has been, especially in your example). The point of acknowledging the provocation in these instances identifies an action/reaction chain that needs to be broken. The initial behavior isn't the problem. The connection between the action/reaction is the problem and needs to be addressed with the reacting individuals. Rejecting the action/reaction chain in no way solves that problem. If you want to use the euphemism action/reaction chain instead of the word 'provoke' go right ahead.

Provoke rape dont meen its bad, ok... its not a bad thing that people then rape. The using sexy cloths isnt bad. The connection between getting raped and wearing sexy cloths is the problem. Rejecting that sexy cloths lead to rape dont slove the problem. Still, just say the problem is evil people that like raping or murdering with a lame excuse like a picture or sexy clothing would what a normal person would say.

[Lothaeryn]

Why can't turks just make a cartoon to ridicule Macron and publish it in all newspapers they can reach, show it on all TV stations, make it an official wallpaper in Turkish edition of Windows and so on? Easiest and most logical response.

Are there no talented artists in Turkey? I'm sure there are some.

There are, most of them get suppressed because free speech isn't a thing anymore.

Yeah, far be it for me to second guess the guy, but he chose to provoke muslims.

Because they’ve done lots of punching down doesn’t suddenly make it okay....they punched down at Italy as well in again typical bigoted fashion.

This, its more along the lines of spitting in the face of someone and then insulting them, and expecting NOT to get punched in the face for it; sure someone could walk away, but in the spur of the moment its usually not going to happen.

Lots of people seem to forget what Hebdo intends with their artwork. Its not exactly satire or making political commentary for comedic effect, its downright malicious mockery.

In the case of the teacher being killed, I do not recall what his intent was, was he showing it to his class as an example of political commentary and how it affects societal tensions? Or was he simply showcasing it because he liked the message/imagery depicted and wanted his students to feel the same?