Did Magazine Go Too Far With Michelle Obama Cover?
AdriHead
2012/08/30 23:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
1,307 votes
|
|
73% | |||
|
477 votes
|
|
27% | |||
These days, publications will do just about anything to be controversial and get more eyeballs and press coverage. And this time, a magazine called Fuera de Serie went a little politically incorrect. On the August cover of its publication, the first lady's face is superimposed on a famous painting that depicts a slave in a simple white headdress and gown, with a breast exposed. Did the magazine go too far?
NYDAILYNEWS.COM reports:
NYDAILYNEWS.COM reports:
A Spanish magazine this month depicts Michelle Obama as a 19th Century French slave — a controversial move that has left critics wondering if the image choice was more provocative than political.
Read More: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/michelle-...
Top Opinion
-
Yes
+55Really makes me a bit sad that so much has been put in print that is distasteful regarding this family. I have seen quite a few Presidents and their families come and go but can truthfully say since the dawn of the computer age there was not the hate and anger spewed that we have seen against President Bush and Obama. These gentlemen have been slammed. I agree neither has been a great leader but they both have tried and did their best. For that they have received more garbage on the net than we have heard or seen before. Tells us all the direction we are headed.
Did you know that there are more "minorities" in the US than whites?
White people are already in the minority.
It isn't fair, and affirmative action only makes us unequal.
What does Affirmative Action have to do with the media?
"Wretched 60s"?? It was wretched because blacks stood up for themselves & stopped tolerating whites telling them that they were not allowed to drink from the same water fountains or use the same toilets. They refused to be treated as sub-human & the era was difficult & full of strife. So, that was bad... but the results were very very positive. Whites are better off now as well. Everyone is better off. Back then, when a white person befriended a black person in the South, the white person was just as much in danger as the black person. Of course you're too young to realize or remember that. Maybe you should ask your grandparents or read some of the books that have been written about those days... by the people who lived through them.
I think that Affirmative Action had its place & its time. It was a tool to move our nation's employers forward & get them used to thinking differently about employees' (etc) skin color. Maybe its time is past. I don't know. But the initiative was positive & beneficial in many ways, in my opinion. It seems to me that people h...
&&&
What does Affirmative Action have to do with the media?
"Wretched 60s"?? It was wretched because blacks stood up for themselves & stopped tolerating whites telling them that they were not allowed to drink from the same water fountains or use the same toilets. They refused to be treated as sub-human & the era was difficult & full of strife. So, that was bad... but the results were very very positive. Whites are better off now as well. Everyone is better off. Back then, when a white person befriended a black person in the South, the white person was just as much in danger as the black person. Of course you're too young to realize or remember that. Maybe you should ask your grandparents or read some of the books that have been written about those days... by the people who lived through them.
I think that Affirmative Action had its place & its time. It was a tool to move our nation's employers forward & get them used to thinking differently about employees' (etc) skin color. Maybe its time is past. I don't know. But the initiative was positive & beneficial in many ways, in my opinion. It seems to me that people have found out that they like working in a more diverse atmosphere than a monotone atmosphere. Like I said, I believe it was a good, useful tool. Maybe it's time to reconsider its current benefits. But I don't think it needs to be disparaged.
...& I don't know that it needs to be completely done away with, especially on the university level. But, I'm not an expert. I haven't studied its pros & cons thoroughly. I'm just giving my opinion based on experience & talking/listening to others.
If you support affirmative action, then you oppose equality because equality, by definition (Merriam-Webster "equal" 1c), supports the right of "each member of a group, class, or society," rather than disenfranchise one group of that society.
And about your comment on whites as living in the minority, whites constitute the majority in the United States but only approximately 8% world-wide as of 2011.
There are currently more minorities in the US than there are whites... not even counting the illegals.
I believe that affirmative action was necessary for a time. I don't know that it is now. I also believe that it did some good. It might, indeed, be time for it to go. But I'm glad that we had it when we did.
The forced busing was cumbersome & difficult for most people. But it was also a good thing. The integration HAD to be forced. White would not have allowed it at all were it not forced. Black people have contributed hugely to our nation. The idea that they be disenfranchised & marginalized is simply ludicrous. It shows the weakness & insecurity of the white people. It certainly doesn't show any sort of strength or superiority.
The 60s didn't surpass its purpose... & if it did, EXCELLENT!! Yay!! It is always good to do better than one intended.
There is no such thing as Utopia. There is no way that situation was ever going to have a perfect outcome. However, had there not been forced integration, what do you suppose would have happened? The continuation of segregation, basically, I'm sure. Nothing would have really changed at all. Racism tends to be a very very deep seeded characteristic... not easy to change, much less get rid of. The only way to get started is to force it. Getting the kids to go to school together & get used to each other, realize that no one was going to get sick from drinking from the same fountains or using the same toilets, etc. was the only way to start getting the younger generations out of that perpetual loop of hate & fear.
Nothing's perfect. Was forced integration? Nope. It was difficult & frustrating... on both sides.
But was it necessary?
I believe so.
What was the alternative?
Come up with a better plan to get people integrated & stop the institutionalized segregation/hate/racism instead of just criticizing what was. Where's your perfect plan?
In the case of allowing "voluntary segregation," I'd say that I choose a liberal position, considering that it allows people the freedom to conduct their business on a level currently denied by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Oh right.
IT DOESN'T.
Liberal BS.
I'm a republican have been since i weighed both sides of the isle making sure i knew how the political circus ran. However the dehumanization of any politicians family regardless of the party is both STUPID and Toxic to me. THAT Miss **StarzAbove** is what I was talking about.
And while I honestly hope you aren't so simple as to just chant 'Oh yes your right" and "Exactly." and "You tell em" to anyone who gets on a soap box on these political forums without taking the time to see just what it is being said.......
that you please stop acting like you are.
There is nothing wrong with my behavior, take a look at yourself before you try demeaning me. Now buzz off, kid, go tell your Mommy she wants you.
I don't hate you, nor do I hate her, what I do hate is being accused of saying one thing when another is clearly the case. Your behavior as you put is simply championing someone who believes that because I am republican I must therefore be a bigot of some kind or form, which in of itself, IS bigoted.
She would never have posed for that picture. More Rethug lies. (And I agreed)
And this one:
I doubt that she really posed for this picture. More Republican propaganda. They are experts. (And I agreed) My comments had nothing to do with what you said.
And you chose to comment on my behavor, what was that all about, just because I agreed with someone or is it because I had the audacity to be a liberal.
"I doubt that she really posed for this picture. More Republican propaganda."
the post you agreed to was one in reply to me, either stating I was of the opinion she posed for it, or bringing it up out of the blue...and too me. And it is on those terms that I decided to speak with you.