I gotta be honest, the sea lion is not the bad guy in this comic. Lady randomly says some racist shit, and a member of the group she’s being racist against calls her out for being racist. And then the fact that the sea lion called the racist out is apparently justification for the initial racist statement.
Sea lion is slang for a type of behavior a person exhibits not an immutable characteristic of the person like the color of their skin. They didn’t have to prove the behavior because the behavior expressed IS the behavior.
Racism justifies harassment and home invasion? I don’t think I can necessarily agree with that. Consequences, yes. But harassment? I’ll have to think about it.
The point Malki was making, I think (and the way I take it) is less about the purpose or content of the discourse and more about the harassment veiled in false civility as a means of silencing discussion.
There’s also an element of Person C inserting themselves into a private conversation between Person A and Person B, even if that conversation is being held in a public place.
Pretend he’s not a sea lion, but a conservative, and you’ll get the intended effect.
Yeah. Not gonna cry over what the victims of racism do to racists.
and more about the harassment veiled in false civility as a means of silencing discussion.
How is the sea lion silencing discussion? They weren’t discussing anything, they were having a racist circlejerk. The racist lady said a racist thing and the sea lion invited discussion by asking, “Why did you say that racist thing?” and then they refused to actually explain why they’re racist against sea lions, treating it as self-evident that being racist against sea lions is correct and thus that it is unreasonable to question it.
Pretend he’s not a sea lion, but a conservative
He can’t choose not to be a sea lion. This is kind of incoherent. “Pretend he’s not black, but a conservative.” This sea lion could also be conservative, that doesn’t really have anything to do with the fact that he’s being criticized for immutable properties he was born with, not for anything of substance.
Again sea lioning is a type of behavior not a type of person or being. As a form of humor they rather than have a person embody the behavior be a literal sea lion because whimsical tension between the metaphorical sea lion also being an actual sea lion is funny.
That just doesn’t work, because the sea lion’s behavior in the comic is entirely reasonable, and it is the other characters who are being unreasonable. If the point of the comic is that the sea lion’s behavior is bad, they should have actually made the sea lion do something bad instead of call out someone being racist against him
I gotta be honest, the sea lion is not the bad guy in this comic. Lady randomly says some racist shit, and a member of the group she’s being racist against calls her out for being racist. And then the fact that the sea lion called the racist out is apparently justification for the initial racist statement.
Sea lion is slang for a type of behavior a person exhibits not an immutable characteristic of the person like the color of their skin. They didn’t have to prove the behavior because the behavior expressed IS the behavior.
Racism justifies harassment and home invasion? I don’t think I can necessarily agree with that. Consequences, yes. But harassment? I’ll have to think about it.
The point Malki was making, I think (and the way I take it) is less about the purpose or content of the discourse and more about the harassment veiled in false civility as a means of silencing discussion.
There’s also an element of Person C inserting themselves into a private conversation between Person A and Person B, even if that conversation is being held in a public place.
Pretend he’s not a sea lion, but a conservative, and you’ll get the intended effect.
Yeah. Not gonna cry over what the victims of racism do to racists.
How is the sea lion silencing discussion? They weren’t discussing anything, they were having a racist circlejerk. The racist lady said a racist thing and the sea lion invited discussion by asking, “Why did you say that racist thing?” and then they refused to actually explain why they’re racist against sea lions, treating it as self-evident that being racist against sea lions is correct and thus that it is unreasonable to question it.
He can’t choose not to be a sea lion. This is kind of incoherent. “Pretend he’s not black, but a conservative.” This sea lion could also be conservative, that doesn’t really have anything to do with the fact that he’s being criticized for immutable properties he was born with, not for anything of substance.
Again sea lioning is a type of behavior not a type of person or being. As a form of humor they rather than have a person embody the behavior be a literal sea lion because whimsical tension between the metaphorical sea lion also being an actual sea lion is funny.
That just doesn’t work, because the sea lion’s behavior in the comic is entirely reasonable, and it is the other characters who are being unreasonable. If the point of the comic is that the sea lion’s behavior is bad, they should have actually made the sea lion do something bad instead of call out someone being racist against him
How would you have written this comic to get the idea across, then?
I literally already explained that in the comment you’re replying to. The sea lion should have done something bad to deserve being criticized.