Charlie Hebdo Directly Invokes Imagery of George Floyd to "Satirize" Meghan Markle

RustyNails

Member
Oct 26, 2017
17,284
but I never got people getting up in arms (in some sad cases, literally) about drawings.
It's likely that you are coming from a privileged background. Minorities and marginalized communities see the world differently than you do. They have been subjected to centuries of torture and abuse through various means, including drawings and art. Orientalism is still a massive problem in western societies where presumption of immigrants/immigrant culture can be seen as an academic past time and even profitable if you know your audience. Same goes for artists and writers in America talking about how black people are lazy and/or prone to violence, for literally hundreds of years. I would ask anyone here who see nothing wrong with Charli to imagine for a minute they are an average black man living on the streets of America and the terrible injustices they face every day of their lives. The institutional racism. The designed poverty. The struggle to find good jobs. From going to a store, walking in your neighborhood, to getting pulled over for no reason. And then opening TV and listening to white gammons talking about how lazy you are and how you all should just listen to cops. Why dont you just listen to the cops??? And what about the black on black violence in Chicago??? There is literally no end to the amount of crap minorities face in America. Going back to drawings, we have a sordid history of "cartoons" and drawings for centuries in the form of Jim Crow stereotypes.

Marginalized communities KNOW when they are being picked at. Listen to them. If they tell you it's hurtful, stop. Please. We can fight for the ideals of free speech in some other ways but leave the marginalized communities alone. For far too long we have barreled forward without giving a single fuck about what black/brown people want, for far too long we have trivialized their experiences, for far too long we have brushed away their concerns under disguise of free speech and patriotism. It's time we stopped the bulldozer and listened to people who say it's hurting them.
 

Loudninja

Member
Oct 27, 2017
24,680
This is gross to me especially when the trial is about to start they dont knee stupid shit like this.
 

G.O.O.

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,026
French opinion : Charlie hebdo sucks and we give them attention because of the tragic 2015 attack. But we shouldn't. The attack kind of made them part of our identity as a country, very much for the worse.

It's a paper that is little more than poor taste and shock value, not a beacon of enlightment, and criticism of their style always turn into arguments about free speech and the fact that some of their guys literally died for it (which shouldn't have happened, to make that clear).

So it is what it is, and what it is is bad. I think we just should accept that and leave it at that.
 

ginger ninja

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
2,627
What an absurd thread. They are literally making fun of the way Floyd was killed just like a lot of the white supremacists have been doing since last year and we still got people here saying 'but what about the intent tho ??'

Seems to me that some people here get really concerned as soon as there's even a slight hint that Europe is just as much shit when it comes to issues of race as US is.

Why else would people defend this ? Don't say censorship, nobody has said anything about censoring them in this thread, the whole conversation is about how blatantly racist this is and how they should know better.
 

Richiek

Member
Nov 2, 2017
7,516
For those saying this cartoon only shits on the Queen and the royals, Charlie Hebdoe wouldn't have drawn Meghan Markle in such a grotesque and distorted manner if that was really the case.
 

Royalan

Always make room for flowers.
Moderator
Oct 24, 2017
5,998
The problem with Charlie Hebdo's satire, and the trap people keep falling into defending it, is that Charlie Hebdo routinely tries to have it both ways. As a publication, they want to pilfer in crass, disgusting, racist, low-brow humor aimed at edge lords, but they also want the acclaim and social protection that comes with being labeled as satire. And because white people, and white things, are afforded the luxury of being able to define themselves and have that definition defended to the death, people will go so out of their way to protect CH's content from criticism that they will remove the discussion from a real world context and place it in a vacuum, where we are then arguing satire for satire's sake.

But...even that doesn't work? The point of satire is using humor to expose a social truth. To shine a light on an ignored reality or highlight an unexplored perspective. But rarely do I ever see Charlie Hebdo actually doing that. To be clear, Black people didn't need this cartoon to understand the racism of the British monarchy. Hell, non-Black people didn't need this cartoon to understand the racism of the British monarchy, not when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex just went on global broadcast with the world's most prolific interviewer and called it out. And that's not even accounting for the inherent depravity in using the imagery a Black man murdered by the police in the US to make any sort of point about British royals.

So what truth is being exposed here? What ignored perspective is being laid bare? What important conversation is being had thanks to Charlie Hebdo's bravery and conviction in editorial? Seems to me like the only conversation we're having is the one we always have with Charlie Hebdo: minorities enraged, and out-group "allies" explaining to us why the piss really is rain.

And you can see that in this thread.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid - One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,157
I don't get why the "this is for French people and not Americans" defense is supposed to make me more willing to give Charlie Hebdo the benefit of the doubt. I mean that purely from a practical sense as an argument trying to convince of anything, not even considering the ethics of the matter.

When I try to think of racism in a French context, the first thing that comes to my mind is that over half of the prison population in France is pulled from 5-12% of the French population, and that Charlie Hebdo's international attention is when their satire targets that 5-12% percent of the French population. So trying to think it from what the French perspective might be, I'm looking at a magazine that is mocking the people most targeted by police domestically and trying to judge whether or not they might be mocking people being targeted by police internationally.

I'd be more sympathetic to Charlie Hebdo if I'm looking at it out of context, trying to judge it based entirely on the cover and ignoring who is creating that image.
 
Last edited:

Hoot

Member
Nov 12, 2017
1,075
I don't get why the "this is for French people and not Americans" defense is supposed to make me more willing to give Charlie Hebdo the benefit of the doubt. I mean that purely from a practical sense as an argument trying to convince of anything, not even considering the ethics of the matter.
Lol, for real. And also, it's very much bullshit. You'd believe, listening to some peeps, that French culture is this inscrutable thing where satire is actually this very clever 5D chess that is too complex for anyone outside of their borders.

Quite frankly tho, it's mostly just chauvinism. And as someone else pointed, it's not like other french people also shit on Charlie Hebdo constantly.

A big reason that some people will still come to bat for them, even when by their own admission they don't even like them, is that Charlie Hebdo has this history of positionning itself as an "anti bourgeois" magazine that speaks "uncomfortable truthes" (you know, the usual shtick), that and the attack from a few years ago has made them into some sort of national treasure that has to be defended at all cost.

My personal take too is : They're also kinda callbacks to older french BD and publications and remnants of the student revolts. This kind of dirtbag activism and "fuck you, i'll tell it like it is" has been long running. But since it's always the same type of people who occupy those spaces (and boi have they not evolved with the times), you get something today like Charlie Hebdo: a magazine desperate to seem edgy and punk but are mostly just one step removed from your average rightwing youtube skeptic.
 
Last edited:

Daphne

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
2,378
I'm surprised OP has received so much disagreement.

Markle's interview was widely reported as talking about feeling suffocated and experiencing racism.
This cover seems to be clearly using that with the most obvious and lazy (and vile) comparison, and it's difficult not to see it as intentionally trivialising Markle.

Regardless, it's disgusting and shit at being satire.
 

hobblygobbly

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,381
DEUTSCHLAND
Charlie Hebdo‘s satire is always in very bad taste, which often makes it racist, as in this situation - even if the meaning is not intentionally racist towards Meghan Markle or George Floyd, the way they depict their satire is.

The question of taste and satire has been a long running argument. I feel in general there is a line somewhere with satire. It‘s basically the same debate around what you can and can‘t joke about. I‘m personally disapproving of jokes/satire that severely trivialises important issues/events
 

B.O.O.M.

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,882
It's likely that you are coming from a privileged background. Minorities and marginalized communities see the world differently than you do. They have been subjected to centuries of torture and abuse through various means, including drawings and art. Orientalism is still a massive problem in western societies where presumption of immigrants/immigrant culture can be seen as an academic past time and even profitable if you know your audience. Same goes for artists and writers in America talking about how black people are lazy and/or prone to violence, for literally hundreds of years. I would ask anyone here who see nothing wrong with Charli to imagine for a minute they are an average black man living on the streets of America and the terrible injustices they face every day of their lives. The institutional racism. The designed poverty. The struggle to find good jobs. From going to a store, walking in your neighborhood, to getting pulled over for no reason. And then opening TV and listening to white gammons talking about how lazy you are and how you all should just listen to cops. Why dont you just listen to the cops??? And what about the black on black violence in Chicago??? There is literally no end to the amount of crap minorities face in America. Going back to drawings, we have a sordid history of "cartoons" and drawings for centuries in the form of Jim Crow stereotypes.

Marginalized communities KNOW when they are being picked at. Listen to them. If they tell you it's hurtful, stop. Please. We can fight for the ideals of free speech in some other ways but leave the marginalized communities alone. For far too long we have barreled forward without giving a single fuck about what black/brown people want, for far too long we have trivialized their experiences, for far too long we have brushed away their concerns under disguise of free speech and patriotism. It's time we stopped the bulldozer and listened to people who say it's hurting them.
This is really well said and I agree completely
 

Hoot

Member
Nov 12, 2017
1,075
Even if you don't think that it's racist towards Meghan in particular, it still uses the tragedy and violence against minorities as a springboard for white people to make their dosh and get a cheap laugh
 

Mulligan

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
1,466
They suck and have always sucked. They never say anything truly edgy in their content. They’re always punching down.
 

ZiZ

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,713
Charlie Hebdo have always been trash.
They are bigots and their comics are meant to offend.
 

Watchtower

Member
Oct 27, 2017
6,957
It is gross, it is offensive, it is tasteless, it is tactless. It carelessly appropriates imagery relevant to the plight of African-Americans, and in doing so misuses and abuses said imagery while also trivializing said plights. And it is a racist act of insensitive edginess.

Is it criticizing Markle for being too privileged? It honestly took me a while to see it, it's so subtle I honestly doubt it's intentional. Its tell is not what it does but what it doesn't do: it depicts Markle no differently than it does others. Had they actually cared for her plights they would've depicted and respected the realism of her pain rather than engage in this sanitized cartoon of it. I don't think that was intended to belittle her, I think they cared about nothing but shock value for its own sake.

That doesn't mean OP's take is invalid. It's what is invited when one entertains such a juvenile thoughtless blunt-force privileged edgelord-for-its-own-sake approach to commentary.
 
Last edited:

Emergency & I

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
6,634
User Banned (Permanent): Dismissing concerns around racist imagery over multiple posts, antagonizing another user; prior severe bans and history of dismissive behavior in sensitive discussions.
Hebdo sucks. Duh. They’re edgelord satirists that invoke whatever imagery they deem necessary to the point that it’s gotten their employees murdered. This is completely on brand and ugly.

However, it’s ugly for different reasons pointed out in this thread and the OP is completely warped and wrong. This is a very train wreck-y thread.
 

skillzilla81

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
7,343
You know how I know this is fucked up and racist? A black person would never use the imagery of George Floyd's murder for anything other than exactly what happened. Not as a metaphor for something else.

White people do that, and it's always to mock the event.
 

jeelybeans

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,022
Charlie Hebdo was always a shity magazine with very poor taste and the most ham fisted humor, let's not forget that.
Just because they were victims of heinous fanatics it doesn't mean they were ever funny, ingenious or tasteful.
It really pisses me off that people are willing to defend them on the guise of free speech. It really bought out the Islamophobia on the left. At the end of the day they are trash.
 
Oct 26, 2017
11,291
I mean they've always been a garbage magazine, only reason why they're relevant is because of that tragic event all those years ago.
 

Nappuccino

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
7,837
I'll admit, I didn't see this as anything other than trying to show the Queen/Monarchy in the worst light possible, so this thread opened my eyes a bit.
 

Desi

Member
Oct 30, 2017
2,213
I feel like I agree with several of the posters on the first page. That this is using imagery of an important tragedy and how racism jumps class. I as an African American would look at it, think it's in bad taste but understand what was trying to be said then moved on.
 

THE210

Member
Nov 30, 2017
985
Didn’t we just come off of a week of various media outlets mocking the impact of racism on her because of her wealth. How can anyone view this picture any differently? Reminds me of how any well off black person is expected to shut up and just be grateful
 

jeelybeans

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,022
Apparently people of color have to have someone strangling them to death in order to be allowed to complain about racism
 

plau

Member
Oct 30, 2017
209
User Banned (1 Month): Excusing racist imagery
The thing that really bothers me about these Charlie Hebdo controversies is that if they were to change their style now or in the future, even if it was in response to sensible criticisms, that could be indirectly credited to the terrorists. I imagine the current staff are doing what they're doing partly as defiance against those terrorists by staying the course. They held nothing sacred before, they should hold nothing sacred now. I respect them for that.
 

stew

Member
Dec 2, 2017
3,959
The thing that really bothers me about these Charlie Hebdo controversies is that if they were to change their style now or in the future, even if it was in response to sensible criticisms, that could be indirectly credited to the terrorists. I imagine the current staff are doing what they're doing partly as defiance against those terrorists by staying the course. They held nothing sacred before, they should hold nothing sacred now. I respect them for that.
I think they could keep doing it without being racist.
 
OP
OP
excelsiorlef

excelsiorlef

Member
Oct 25, 2017
55,636
The thing that really bothers me about these Charlie Hebdo controversies is that if they were to change their style now or in the future, even if it was in response to sensible criticisms, that could be indirectly credited to the terrorists. I imagine the current staff are doing what they're doing partly as defiance against those terrorists by staying the course. They held nothing sacred before, they should hold nothing sacred now. I respect them for that.
So if they stop being racist the terrorists win?
 

Netherscourge

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,489
Charlie Hebdo has no idea how to use metaphors.

This is a totally failed attempt at satire. It comes off mocking the George Floyd murder more than anything else it was trying to do.
 

stew

Member
Dec 2, 2017
3,959
Charlie Hebdo has no idea how to use metaphors.

This is a totally failed attempt at satire. It comes off mocking the George Floyd murder more than anything else it was trying to do.
I'm willing to bet that there were better pictures on the table, when they had to choose which one they would use as a cover and in the magazine. They took the one with the best shock value, and that's it.
They don't care about Meghan, they don't care about George Floyd and his family, they don't care about black people, they don't care about racism. They're like "fuck them feelings".
As others said, they didn't try to come up with a smart picture, they just wanted "Charlie Hebdo" in the headlines.
 

L Thammy

Spacenoid - One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,157
The thing that really bothers me about these Charlie Hebdo controversies is that if they were to change their style now or in the future, even if it was in response to sensible criticisms, that could be indirectly credited to the terrorists. I imagine the current staff are doing what they're doing partly as defiance against those terrorists by staying the course. They held nothing sacred before, they should hold nothing sacred now. I respect them for that.
Marginalization causes radicalization, kiddo. If defiance is perpetuating racism, it further creates the feelings of oppression that radicalize people - especially in a French context, this being a country where they've literally had to make efforts to separate their prisoners to contain the radicalization that is happening in their jails.

The only thing your rhetoric serves is to justify the perpetuation of racism, which is why it's the sort of reaction you'd see from far right types. If you keep oppressing people forever, you can keep using their anger to justify your continued oppression forever.
 
Last edited:

SilentPanda

Member
Nov 6, 2017
6,821
Earth
Is it really so hard to believe that they're just racist?
Their french, they didn't have slavery, so they have no racism in their history

 

NHarmonic.

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
8,620
Everthing i’ve seen from this magazine strikes me as something made by people that never got over the edgyness of the teenage years. Basically it is like if a dude like Kaya Orsan from the official podcast had a magazine and published his crappy edgelord takes for funs.

Trash shit.
 
Oct 26, 2017
7,741
So many people ITT are arguing so disingenuously. Why are you focusing on the Queen and then hand waving away how Meghan is being compared to George Floyd. Like at that point, it goes beyond privilege.

The fact that some of you cannot recognize it (or refuse to), speaks to how problematic some of you are.