this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
283 points (86.8% liked)

The Right Can't Meme

883 readers
495 users here now

About

This community is about making fun of dumb right wing memes. Here you will find some of the cringiest memes that the right has ever posted on the internet.

Rules

  1. All posts must be memes containing right wing cringe

  2. No unrelated content

  3. No bigotry

  4. Spammers and Trolls will be instantly banned. No Exceptions.

Other Communities

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

You find the tattoos distasteful for a reason of your own. I share such a reason, but it's your own. Therefore you find the display graffiti-like: a blight on the visual landscape (in that interpretation of grafatti)

Edit The significance of Nazi iconography being distasteful is an easy one, and that's why it was used as an alternative display to prove the point.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I've already stated that I do not find the tattoos themselves distasteful. It's the meaning behind them.

We're assuming that the owner of the building didn't do that themselves, but if they did it's not my problem.

I've already stated elsewhere that the real difference between a women getting her body tattooed and a building getting tagged is one consented and the building owner(presumably) didn't.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Consent is not part of the point being made. The woman, the Nazi dude, whatever. It's the perceived appeal. You identified you have no issue with the art of the woman, but do with the art of the man. That's the point. Don't conflate into other topics, of course the woman is free to choose her art, even a swastika. The point is the others perception of that.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I disagree. The Consent is the point.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 14 hours ago

A building is inanimate , so it's irrelevant to consider what it likes.

Therefore comparing tattoos to graffiti is about the style/perception of the art. (Especially as all involved tattoos are clearly applied with consent)

Therefore it isn't a point of comparison or distinction. The top comment in this chain is suggesting "for those that think tattoo don't look like graffiti, consider this:...". It is a relevant point because it challenges the viewer's possible acceptance / enjoyment of the woman's tattoos, by showing obviously, (or at least widely) distasteful tattoos. Conclusion being that some tattoos could be perceived as junk.