Comparing one tragedy to another: How to be an Insensitive Buttvomit™ - by june gloom
Scots Taffer on 2/9/2009 at 01:18
Quote Posted by Gingerbread Man
oh
that WWF...
AND WHEN I GET IN THE RING WITH THE TWINNNN TOWERRRSSSS THEY'RE GOING TO FEEL A HURRTTTTINGGG THAT THEYYY AINTTT NEVERRR GONNNNNAAA FORGGETTTTTT
Yeah, the tsunami part of the whole ad is dumb... but if it were something else that is manmade or man contributes to and not just random sea movements, then yeah, I could get behind the advert.
Fafhrd on 2/9/2009 at 01:40
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
dethtoll - I don't think it matters whether it was nature, deliberate or an accident. Why do you care? All that matters is they were both tragedies.
Then what's the fucking point of the ad? 'Respect Nature' is dumb. But respecting nature doesn't stop FUCKING TSUNAMIS.
Quote:
(And of course the sub-text is that man-made environmental change was partly/wholly responsible for the Tsunami; the merits of this theory are beyond the scope of the thread).
It's entirely within the scope of this thread, because the theory backing the subtext that drives the ad is utterly nonsensical. Using the fucking TSUNAMI, of all natural disasters, as an example of 'Nature will fuck your shit up if you're not careful' is retarded. Hurricane Katrina would have made sense since Katrina could arguably be blamed on global warming, which is a man made phenomenon. The tsunami was caused by an EARTHQUAKE. There's nothing anybody could've done to prevent it. The loss of life might have been reduced significantly if they'd evacuated all the coastal areas of the islands that were effected (providing those islands were large enough to have places to evacuate to), but thousands
still would have died.
The only reason the tsunami was used instead of Katrina is because it wasn't an 'American' disaster (and
only around 1800 people died), and that makes the creators of the ad shitheels of the highest calibre.
heywood on 2/9/2009 at 02:06
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
dethtoll - I don't think it matters whether it was nature, deliberate or an accident. Why do you care? All that matters is they were both tragedies.
Who says it's a "contest"? I think you've missed the point (as have many in the comments on the page you linked to).
It's not "exploiting" tragedies or having a "contest" - its a warning. Its essentially saying "
9/11 was terrible, 1000s of people died. It was the efforts of men trying to kill that did it and look how horrible it was. However, there is a greater threat than terrorism - nature. Consider the terrible tragedy of 9/11 and now compare that to the Tsunami. Did you know that 100 times more people died during the Tsunami? Did you realise how destructive nature can be? It is our duty to remember that nature, if we abuse it, can also be a devastating killer. Don't abuse nature." (And of course the sub-text is that man-made environmental change was partly/wholly responsible for the Tsunami; the merits of this theory are beyond the scope of the thread).
What's wrong with that?
Yeah, but
we didn't cause it did we?
I don't see how anyone can actually argue that mankind's pollution of this planet isn't damaging it. Look at the ozone layer that we are destoying for starters, never mind greenhouse gases.
My reaction to the ad was "huh?" I'm not offended, but I don't see the point of comparing the two things. The subtext you mention is not even remotely plausible. The Tsunami was caused by a 9+ magnitude earthquake in a subduction zone. Earthquakes happen periodically in these zones when the subducting oceanic plate "sticks" against the continental plate, builds up stress, and then breaks free and releases all the potential energy at once. Plate tectonics has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with man and is not caused or really affected in any way by pollution and/or global warming.
If their intent was just to remind us that natural disasters kill more people than terrorism, fine. But like you said, I think they were trying to make a larger point, and in that respect the ad fails because they chose a disaster with no connection to pollution. It just comes across as absurd to me. They could have picked a natural disaster that has some plausible connection to climate change, like hurricanes/typhoons, droughts, or floods. Or, to be more direct, skip the "planet is brutally powerful crap" and reference Bhopal, where 20000 deaths were directly caused by pollution.
EDIT: Sorry, Faf beat me to it.
Tocky on 2/9/2009 at 02:07
Agreed. I suppose it was brilliant in the same way a sucker punch is in getting your attention but I can't see the brilliance of thinking we can do anything about the plates moving.
SubJeff on 2/9/2009 at 02:18
Quote Posted by Fafhrd
Using the fucking TSUNAMI, of all natural disasters, as an example of 'Nature will fuck your shit up if you're not careful' is retarded.
Fair enough. But there have been Tsunamis that have just been caused by bad weather, no? Not in recent times (wasn't it a Tsunami that destroyed the Mongol fleet of the coast of Japan thus making Japan one of the few places within the Mongol's reach that they never conquered?), but still; its still the point of the ad - "don't mess with nature". Not this Tsunami, but perhaps the next.
I don't really care about the logic of using the Tsunami tbh. What interests me is the outrage that using that pic in regards to 9/11 in the ad is causing. I don't think the outraged have even though as far as the cause of the recent Tsunami, and for that reason its beyond the scope of the thread as dethtoll intended it anyway. The OP is an Outrage OP, no?
Volitions Advocate on 2/9/2009 at 02:47
I think it lacked tact, that's for sure. But I have to defend the people who printed it on just one small point, While reverence concerning the lives of people lost is demanded, everybody needs to unknot their panties. I for one am not terribly worried about what is PC because people will not say things like it is. This ad was definately in bad taste, but I have the feeling that if it were images of the tsunami doctored up... there would be much less of an uproar about it, which says a lot, and, in fact, proves the point of the ad.
I agree with the point about the fact that they were both huge tragedies. One thing that made me so mad going to university every day last semester was the bloody islamic solidarity booth set up in the atrium where people put tally marks to compare how many gazans' died vs. how many isrealies died. As though it would make things better if there were more tally marks on the isreali side. It made me sick.
june gloom on 2/9/2009 at 05:24
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
dethtoll - I don't think it matters whether it was nature, deliberate or an accident. Why do you care? All that matters is they were both tragedies.
Congratulations. You basically just repeated what
I just said.
Quote:
Who says it's a "contest"? I think you've missed the point (as have many in the comments on the page you linked to).
blah blah blah
What's wrong with that?
What the hell, man? Have you completely lost your reading comprehension?
I said it wasn't a contest not because someone else said it was, but because it fucking
isn't. Which I've said before, and then you repeated it and then act like I'm arguing
against it. It is disrespectful to the victims of both tragedies to act like one is somehow more of a tragedy than the other. The people who get offended because they have deemed 9/11 sacrosanct don't get it; the people who think this is brilliant for shattering some sort of social paradigm don't get it either. A tragedy is a tragedy- saying "my tragedy is bigger than yours" just makes you look like an asshole.
Scots Taffer on 2/9/2009 at 05:30
If a tragedy is caused because of man's inhumanity toward man trapped within the entanglements of global conflict and political machinations in the highest corridors of power then that's fucking tough titty said the kitty when it comes to criticising it for the purposes of buy-in into an organisation (say a charitable organisation aimed at stabilising former war-torn countries).
If a tragedy is caused because of ineffectual government responses and law enforcement with regards to man's selfish treatement of the environment then it's fair fucking game for a charitable organisation to attack the people and governments as selfish and lazy using whatever metaphors they see fit to illustrate the magnitude of their ineptitude.
Unfortunately a tsunami != 9/11 as a metaphor... if it were instead an example of a massive tragedy due to greenhouse gas emissions causing a portion of north america to get fried and people dying of cancer and so on, then it'd still be an extremely callous way to get attention but it'd at least be more appropriate.
SubJeff on 2/9/2009 at 08:07
Quote Posted by dethtoll
A tragedy is a tragedy- saying "my tragedy is bigger than yours" just makes you look like an asshole.
My point was no one is saying this.
