Print

[Comeekz]

This disclaimer may not be new, but I just noticed it tonight:

Mission and Disclaimer: The mission of Comic Book Plus is to present completely free of charge, and to the widest possible audience, popular cultural works of the past. These records are offered as a contribution to education and lifelong learning. They are historical documents reflecting the attitudes, perspectives, and beliefs of different times. We at Comic Book Plus do not endorse the views expressed in these, which may contain content offensive to modern users.

There?s an old saying, ?don?t point out the hole in the donut.? What this means that you should not deliberately call attention to something that somebody might find to be a negative if you don?t have to.

This is a classic saying, I believe, of salesmen. For example, if you were selling a used car, why call attention to the high mileage rather than to the new tires?

If you?re a doctor, you don?t want to say to your patient ?Gee, you must feel terrible! Your complexion is pallid!?

If you?re advertising food on TV, you do not point out that this food has a lot of calories and will probably make the consumer fat.

I guess what I am saying is, you don?t want to point out things that you would prefer the person not think of on their own.

The disclaimer is OK except for the last phrase of the last sentence. By saying the site may contain content ?offensive? to some users, I fear you are making the psychological suggestion that indeed some users will and maybe even should find some content offensive! They may not have even thought of this on their own until they notice this disclaimer. Then it may cause them to consciously seek out material that they can find offense towards.

In our modern world, there is much that I personally find offensive. I find it offensive that the device on which I am viewing this site may have been assembled in China with the use of slave labor. However, I do not notice that the manufacture of the device feels the need to print a disclaimer pointing out this fact. I may find the car I drive offensive because of the number of automobile deaths that occur in this country every year. However, the manufacturer of my automobile does not find it necessary to print a disclaimer pointing out this fact. I may find it offensive that the TV show I watch does not perfectly match a certain ideal percentage of every member of every existing racial group on earth, but the producers of the television programs do not bring up or apologize for this fact.

So I?m wondering why comic book plus must ?point out the hole in the donut.? Did somebody complain? Or is comic book plus trying to address a problem that does not exist?

What I?m suggesting is that you please rethink this disclaimer, especially the last sentence. If people have not raised complaints in the past, I fear that this disclaimer will surely cause them to start thinking of and possibly even looking for trouble.

Remember that the word ?offensive? is an extremely loaded and dangerous word today. Some people are hyper sensitive and constantly looking for things that they can find offense to. People have lost their careers because someone claimed offense at this, that or the other thing. Some companies have lost millions of dollars. Indeed, some sites have been taken down entirely because a tiny minority found something they could claim they were ?offended? by.

I think this is a sickness of our society today that some people are hypersensitive and are constantly looking for things to be offended by. This is dividing our country and creating contentiousness and division where none previously existed, and where it shouldn?t exist.

I would leave the word ?offensive? out of the disclaimer entirely, just as I would leave the word ?fat? out of a television ad for food or ?accident? out of an ad for an automobile. This is to avoid implanting a psychological suggestion into the minds of people which is exactly the opposite of the type of thing that you want them to think of on their own.

I remember the old adage which people seem to of forgotten today but if you don?t like something on the television, you can always change the channel.

So please rethink your disclaimer very carefully to avoid implying that there is perhaps something on the site which reasonable people should find ?offensive?, when this is not true and they don?t have to read it in the first place.

[The Australian Panther]

Comeekz,

The disclaimer is OK except for the last phrase of the last sentence. By saying the site may contain content ?offensive? to some users, I fear you are making the psychological suggestion that indeed some users will and maybe even should find some content offensive! They may not have even thought of this on their own until they notice this disclaimer. Then it may cause them to consciously seek out material that they can find offense towards.   

I see what you are driving at, and the perspective is that there is probably nothing that is not offensive to somebody and in this day and age it makes sense to try to protect the site against the consequenses of such.
I don't know who derived the wording, or even if its a real problem, but maybe, if it wasn't already, it should be checked by a Lawyer and reworded if necessary.
Thanks for pointing it out.   

[The Ghost Man]

I'd like to add to this conversation that I do not believe in censorship of any kind. We're all adults (for the most part) and if something is genuinely disrespectful or offensive it should be taken as an opportunity to scrutinise and learn from it. TCM (Turner Classic Movies) doesn't use any disclaimers before showing vintage movies, and I've seen content on there once in a great while, that could definitely be considered legitimately offensive. However that doesn't mean it should be banned, censored, or have scenes redacted, for it is what it is. You wouldn't hate a child for the rest of their life just because they once said something vile and hateful. Cringe-worthy content should be viewed in the context of the era it was produced in.

In an actual free and uncensored society, people always have the ability to avoid viewing or reading content they find offensive. I don't watch current TV or Hollywood movies because I find the agenda driven, propagandistic content repulsive. I don't scream and throw a tantrum, I just vote with my dollars and take my attention elsewhere. Taken to an illogical extreme, the advocation of censorship is like someone with an allergy to cats, lobbying to have all cats banned and exterminated. Virtue signaling and offense flagging are at an all time high, often leveraged by people screeching tolerance who are ironically THE MOST intolerant group of cultists I've ever seen.

We are not one homogenous global society and everyone has value and diversity of ideas and cultures. There are legitimately offensive things that humanity would unitedly find repugnant based upon a universal understandings of what is right and wrong and what is just or unjust. Currently there are members of society that are pursuing politicising agendas to force social engineer society into the narrow confines of their particular cultish beliefs.

What is lost in the analysis is the INTENT and in some vintage media content, things were stated or depicted out of ignorance and not specifically done with malice aforethought. Censor-happy individuals want it all removed and any attempts at discussion are summarily drowned out in a raucous cacophony, calculated to cancel individuals and groups wholesale.

Instead of censorship we need to examine, evaluate, look what we fear, is ugly or painful straight in the face and discuss it. This is how we all grow and learn to truly appreciate one another. Shoving things underneath the carpet never solves anything, and removes an opportunity to learn, converse  and share, even if we arrive at an agreement or not.

On my blogsite TVIA I host vintage art instruction books that sometimes displays ignorant material. I have a short disclaimer just as a show of respect and acknowledgment for my visitors. I study The vintage lessons of The Landon School of Illustrating and Cartooning and in the reproduced book of the lessons, the editor had a short disclaimer about potentially offensive material. I had no issue with it and found it beneficial and it sure didn't make me stop using and learning from it.

[Comeekz]

Getting back to the psychology part of it, let?s say you met a beautiful woman and you started flirting with her and she immediately discounted her own beauty, mentioning the size of her nose or her acne problem or her gangly arms and legs. After that you might not think she was attractive as you had previously. All you might notice thereafter is what she called your attention to.

Or maybe somebody said something less than complementary about you that you had never thought of previously and it impaired your self-confidence from then on. I think we?ve all had that experience.

Extending that out, if you?re afraid of  overly sensitive people being offended, the last thing do you want to do is call something OFFENSIVE.

It?s like the power of hypnosis. We know that if you suggest something to someone, such as they have a serious itch running across their back, it will make them want to start scratching.  Its called the power of suggestion.

Likewise, if you don?t want to someone to be offended, and the last thing you want to do is use the word offensive.

You probably would not post the most politically incorrect thing from this site on Facebook. People are banned from Facebook all the time.

A new video just came out about people being banned from Facebook merely for talking about the vaccine in an unapproved way. Then there was the jeopardy contestant who got in trouble merely for holding up three fingers to signify three wins.

How did that whole thing get started? Probably because someone SUGGESTED that the hand signal might be racist. Then it just snowballed from there. THE POWER OF SUGGESTION.

I?m just saying leave off the last few words of the disclaimer, particularly the word OFFENSIVE. Don?t use the power of suggestion to suggest the very word or concept that you don?t want people to think of in the first place.

[Captain Audio]

The thing I find most offensive is those who seek any opportunity to feign offense at nothing then cook up convoluted tales to explain why something entirely innocuous is somehow offensive to them.

PS
While some rampant # Me Too activists might make a case that the TV Girls and Gags booklets objectify women, the answer is simple enough, just don't read them.

[The Australian Panther]

When I was growing up in the 50's I heard the saying [and saw it as a firm principle for life. ' I may not agree with a word you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.'
Of course you need to be prepared to give me the same latitude if you disagree with me.
And lets not pick fights with each other, [Metaphorically speaking - and not in reference to anything on this thread, I hasten to say.]

As a teacher also I have found that you don't change peoples minds by force. Even facts don't convince people to change their minds immediately,if doing so is a bridge too far. The best you can do is to state your case, hope you've planted a seed and that change will occur sometime later.           

We live in a different world now, unfortunately.

How did that whole thing get started? Probably because someone SUGGESTED that the hand signal might be racist. Then it just snowballed from there. THE POWER OF SUGGESTION.

Two reasons really -
The Social media sites make a virtue of anonymity and therefore give power to the mob.
And there are few people left in Authority - in government or industry - prepared to stand up to the mob now. 
Secondly - The Advertising industry has made an art of influencing, mostly without principle. Repetition of even the silliest things inculcates them in the mind and people accept them.
I have stopped watching free-to-air TV and rarely these days listen to radio. As much as I can,  I want to be in control of what I let influence me.
I sat in a pub last night for a meal - in an Aussie pub there are screens everywhere and so I was bombarded with three channels at once. Everything - including the news and the current affair programs was plastic and scripted and bombarded with ads.
I think, when you reach your 3 score years and 10, you can get to a point where the messages you've been bombarded with for decades are not only repetitive but monotonous and lose their power. If you can't see through them by that time you never will.

Cheers!     

Cheers!             

[Comeekz]

While some rampant # Me Too activists might make a case that the TV Girls and Gags booklets objectify women, the answer is simple enough, just don't read them.

Perhaps the intention of the disclaimer is to acknowledge peoples objections in the belief that will be enough. But that will never be enough. The jeopardy contestant initially tweeted a clarification of what his hand signal meant, but that was not enough. A couple hundred former Jeopardy contestants, if you can believe it, jumped on his back and forced him to issue a groveling apology.

But I fear an apology would not be nearly enough if the rabble rousers and troublemakers decided to make this site a target. This is what I am afraid of. I am afraid they will demand the site do much more then post a mere disclaimer and much more than to merely apologize. I am afraid they will demand that certain content be removed from the site.

The webmaster might believe that it will only be the most egregious material that will be found offensive, but I can guarantee you that somebody can find virtually everything on the site to be offensive in some way or another. Not only Girls and Gags, but everything.

Some of our favorite, most beloved content here could be found offensive. Any western that depicts Native Americans as the enemy could be found offensive. Anything that shows women in stereotypical roles like Fritzy Ritz could be found offensive. Any depiction of American history that is not sufficient condemning of slavery, the confederacy or similar things could be found offensive. Anything that shows African-Americans as servants (that is, pretty much anything created before around 1950) could be found offensive. Our friend Blackhawk could certainly be found offensive because he has an Asian sidekick. Anything that fails to show the proper mix of racial diversity could be found offensive.

I?m sure you get my point. There is no way that a mere disclaimer or a mere apology will ever satisfy the cancel culture mob if they are riled up. It?s best to keep from riling them up in the first place. That is why I think quite a bit of psychology must be used in order to avoid doing so. So please avoid making a suggestion that they should start looking for things that they might find offensive. They will certainly find plenty to take offense at if they choose to do so.