Slashdot Mirror


Anti-Defamation League Declares Pepe the Frog a Hate Symbol (time.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from TIME: The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has declared a popular internet meme depicting a cartoon frog to be a hate symbol. Pepe the Frog's beginnings were unoffensive: he is the creation of comic book creator Matt Furie, who featured the frog as a character in the series Boy's Club beginning in 2005. The character subsequently became a beloved meme, often called the "sad frog meme" and shared with a speech bubble reading "Feels good man" or "Feels bad man." But recently, as the Daily Beast reported in May, the character has been co-opted by a faction of Internet denizens who decided to reclaim it from the mainstream, and began sharing it in anti-Semitic contexts. "Images of the frog, variously portrayed with a Hitler-like mustache, wearing a yarmulke or a Klan hood, have proliferated in recent weeks in hateful messages aimed at Jewish and other users on Twitter," the ADL wrote in a statement. "Once again, racists and haters have taken a popular Internet meme and twisted it for their own purposes of spreading bigotry and harassing users," wrote ADL CEO Jonathan A. Greenblatt.

20 of 398 comments (clear)

  1. Who said what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who the fuck is the ADL? Why the fuck do I give a shit?

    -- Internet

    1. Re:Who said what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The ADL is a bunch of butthurt SJW's that want to make peoples lives miserable because they have no life and will never lead a happy life.

    2. Re:Who said what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think when your hair trigger sensitive response to things is to go straight to blaming things on SJW's and that social justice has become an entirely bad thing to you, you've lost sight of what matters. I have a strong dislike for the nonsense that SJW's do as well but you have to remember, we do need people who are aware of social destructiveness and people need to frequently push back on hate.

      Internet hate has been growing for a long time now and if you reflect on some of the things that you and your friends think and say, and compare that to ten years ago you might be shocked to realise that hate has crept into your attitudes in a pretty insidious way.

    3. Re:Who said what? by Hylandr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      social justice has become an entirely bad thing

      Any 'Justice' that denies the legal system it's due process is an absolute aberrant evil that must be destroyed at every opportunity. We send soldiers to other countries to kill powerful SJWs that hold the reigns of a regime that squashes dissenting opinions. You should read "Mein Kampf". It's the SJW to Dictator roadmap.

      and people need to frequently push back on hate.

      Damn right we do. Which is all SJW's spew. If they don't get their way they throw giant child tantrums.

      Internet hate has been growing for a long time now

      That's a mixed bag there. There's anger growing at the people that have appointed themselves the 'champions' of self appointed arbiters of orthodox intolerance that themselves oppress the majority. Then there's the hate SJWs themselves level at anyone that doesn't bow to their will.

      'Justice' should be dealt with by the court systems according to the laws elected by the majority. Not meted out by a minority population with no concern for the anything but their own perverted sense of right and wrong.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    4. Re:Who said what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Internet hate has been growing for a long time now.

      At basically the same rate non-techies have started adopting the internet in their every day lives I suspect.
      The internet was a nice place before all the normals started using it.

    5. Re:Who said what? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As opposed to getting in line and do what the outraged, loudmouthed minority says?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Who said what? by Maritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm no ADL fan, but this is from their website:

      "However, because so many Pepe the Frog memes are not bigoted in nature, it is important to examine use of the meme only in context. The mere fact of posting a Pepe meme does not mean that someone is racist or white supremacist. However, if the meme itself is racist or anti-Semitic in nature, or if it appears in a context containing bigoted or offensive language or symbols, then it may have been used for hateful purposes."

      Kinda makes you look stupid going off on that rant, to be honest.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    7. Re:Who said what? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Kinda makes you look stupid going off on that rant, to be honest.

      This story makes Slashdot look stupid, if we're being honest. The summary is bullshit. How did it make the front page? Either a bunch of dipshit slashdotters voted it up from the firehose, or a dipshit "editor" promoted it. Either way, it's stupid bullshit that helps make Slashdot grate.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    8. Re:Who said what? by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Keep in mind that this is exactly what the left keep pushing with their "hate crime" laws, and wanting to implement kangaroo courts for them. We have them in Canada, they're abused. Up until Ezra Levant and Mark Styen won they had a 100% conviction rate. The head of the CHRC was also found to have been deliberately planting evidence against his political enemies then running them against the system to ruin them.

      You guys in the US have gotten your first taste of it, it's called a Title IX tribunal.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    9. Re:Who said what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      So we shouldn't be able to point out someone is a hateful bigot until it's legally proven? Most people I've heard use the term "SJW", including you, seem to fit the definition to a tee. You act like people shouldn't be able to point out what they see as immoral behavior unless it's mandated by the your government, which is a terrifying concept akin to an ISIS democracy.

    10. Re:Who said what? by Hylandr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You act like people shouldn't be able to point out what they see as immoral behavior unless it's mandated by the your government,

      That's fine. Everyone can point out what they think is wrong all day, then draft laws and vote on it, with measures for enforcement.

      SJWs rarely work that way, opting to mete out their own version of justice by harassing and finding ways to ruin the victims lives by getting them fired, evicted, etc.

      --
      ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
    11. Re:Who said what? by Rakarra · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Shut the fuck up with the "SJW" tag.

      I swear, you assholes who overuse SJW calling SJW-this and SJW-that have turned a once delightfully trollish term that describes people wandering into a situation they don't understand and shitting over the discussion with shrill screeching and white-knighting, and now "SJW!!!" is thrown at anyone who has even a shred of conscience about how to treat each other with respect. Don't like the KKK? You're a fucking SJW. Think that a full-time job ought to pay a living wage? Shut up, you fucking SJW.

      SJW is the new "Nazi." Now, when someone starts yammering on about SJW's, you can immediately dismiss them as blithering idiots. That's how badly the term has been abused, and that's how meaningless it has become.

  2. Time got trolled by sinij · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The only logical explanation is that Time got trolled. I certainly don't recall reading anything about Hitler or Third Reich using frog symbols.

  3. Star of David used by Neo Nazis... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and then we can declare that a hate symbol too?

    What about the rainbow flag? If sharia enforcing islamists start using rainbow colors, can we declare that a hate symbol?

    What about the word "HATE"? Can we declare that a hate symbol, and ban it?

    WTF, guys, seriously?

  4. This Is How They Raise Money by alternative_right · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If you have a non-profit group whose goal is to save the whales, you raise money by writing about a new threat to whales every week and asking for donations afterwards.

    The SPLC/ADL do the same thing, but with Nazis or anything that could possibly be argued to have one spoken to someone with a Nazi-like thought, because this is how they scare their readers into making more donations.

    At this point, Nationalism -- the idea that a nation is defined by its founding ethnic group, and that it has the right to self-determination and to exclude all others -- is taboo only for European-descended people. Every other group can do it.

    Now European-descended groups want the same thing because they do not want to abolish themselves and be replaced by mixed-race groups like we find in much of the world. They want Western Civilization back, and this is an important first step.

    The SPLC/ADL would be smarter if they recognized that much as Zionism is Nationalism for Jews (read Theodor Herzl if you can) European-descended people have something similar for themselves. Everyone benefits if each group can have Nationalism, and preserve itself.

    However, that threatens the globalist idea and its parent ideology, and so there are clumsy, ham-handed and laughably shrill attempts like demonizing Pepe which are just going to backfire on these watchdog groups.

  5. I don't know the secret handshake. by swell · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Obviously all this is related to some inside joke in some obscure neighborhood on the internest. Since I'm not a denizen of this sub-division of the netisphere, I'm left out. But I do have something to contribute:

    Certain portions of our world community claim special status based upon historical events. Anyone who says anything they don't like is subject to being labeled 'anti-Semitic' and being blackballed by certain elements of the Power Structure.

    I look forward to the day when we can all see this labeling as the new McCarthyism. It's time to override the 'special status' of Israeli Jews and look critically at what they do and whether they are respectable citizens of the world. Are they deserving of billions of dollars in military support?

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
  6. Lemme get this straight by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some internet trolls take a meme and dress it up to be anti-semitic. For some odd reason this (out of the thousand others that work just the same way) gets the attention of the ADL and they declare the meme, not the dress-up, but the meme, to be anti-semitic.

    Seriously, if I was the troll, I'd feel on top of the world. This must be the apex of trolldom. Ultimate validation.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. Re:OT: another Clinton troll - "IS IS" by ArylAkamov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This.

    It's like how everybody forgot where that "bowl of skittles" meme Trump Jr. posted came from. It was originally a feminist argument for why all men are monsters/rapists.

    Pretty good troll, considering the reaction it got.

  8. Re:Who are these people? by meta-monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How do these groups justify their existence over 40 years after the junk science of "race" was completely debunked?

    It's kind of the other way around. Evolution tells us that different environments create selection pressure for/against different traits, which causes species to differentiate into distinct haplogroups or entirely different species. Most everyone agrees that modern humans left Africa and spread throughout the world between 50,000 - 100,000 years ago. Now if I were to take any other animal, say a canid, and stick a bunch of them in northern europe and a bunch of them in Africa and then ask if you if it's possible that after 100,000 years we'd get very different animals descended from the common ancestors, you'd agree. And if I suggested those differences might be more than mere coloration, but extended to speed, strength, size, and even temperament and intelligence you would probably agree. But if that animal is man instead of a dog you'd call me an evil racist to suggest that perhaps the cold climates of northern europe selected against those humans who weren't intelligent enough to make long-term plans while the year-round abundance of food in Africa selected against the weak and slow but not against the unintelligent.

    We're basically having the Scopes monkey trial all in reverse, where the "progressives" take as dogma the claim that mankind is special and stopped evolving the instant they stepped out of Africa.

    The way the political left gets their power is by first declaring that different groups are equivalent (without evidence or proof), enforcing this false equivalence as a moral issue (you're not just wrong but evil and morally repugnant if you don't agree), then pointing out the differences in outcome between these groups (actually caused by their biological differences, not deliberate actions), but since you've already accepted the false equivalence, the only explanation must be that the more successful group is oppressing the less successful group. This justifies giving political power to the left in order to correct this injustice. If you recognized the fundamental inequality of ability, there would be nothing to do and the left would have no power. It would just be the way it is.

    For instance, in the United States the average IQ for blacks is 85, 92 for Latinos, 100 for whites, 108 for asians, and 115 for Ashkenazi Jews. This correlates very well to income levels for each group. In the US the median incomes for Jews is the highest, followed by Asians, then whites, then Latinos and then blacks. When confronted with this fact, politically motivated leftists will "debunk" the research by attacking the researchers, attacking the tests, and generally by making a bunch of hysterical and fallacious arguments. They then cite each other as proof the research has been "debunked" when in fact it hasn't, and any points they may have had (like for instance the idea that the IQ tests themselves are biased towards one group or another) have been addressed and either explained or corrected. But the results still stand.

    It would be nice if the left would acknowledge this and stop calling society (and whites particularly) evil because, say, the proportion of engineers working at FaceBook who are black doesn't match the proportion of blacks in society. That's basically impossible because when you look at the distribution of intelligence by race a much smaller proportion of blacks have the, say, 120+ IQ required to get through engineering school than whites or asians. No societal injustice is taking place, it's just that bitch Mother Nature.

    So if you want to know how these groups justify their existence, it's because the evil racists are factually correct and the leftists deny basic evolutionary biology because without their false premise of innate equality their ideology falls apart, and no one will give them power anymore.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  9. FIRST, they came for Pepe the frog by TheRealHocusLocus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First, they came for Pepe the frog.
    I didn't speak up, because I was not a Trump supporter...

    Then, they infiltrated ICANN and began matching expressions to block registration of new 'hateful' domain names.
    Then, the international copyright corpus paid lucrative fees to have trademarks added to the 'hate' blocking database.
    Then, root and 1LD servers began returning NXDOMAIN responses to 'non-compliant' names, regardless of prior existence or fees paid.
    Then, the servers began returning NXDOMAIN responses even if the 'non-compliant' match was in the subdomain portion.
    Then, the servers began silently completing 'non-compliant' name responses to build a database of 'non-compliant' ip addresses.
    Then, the tier 1 companies and consortium ISPs began black-holing non-compliant ip addresses.
    Then, the tier 1s developed the 'ICMP trace-ping' to centrally log attempts to reach non-compliant ip addresses.
    Then, the international non-compliance organization (managed by ICANN) began issuing automated 'takedown' requests for the source ip addresses.
    Then, consortium ISPs streamlined the takedown process and modified their TOS to support the suspension of non-compliant service.
    Then, the FBI and NSA joined TOR to issue a steady stream of 'non-compliant' traffic to ensure that all onion nodes remain suspended.
    Then, countries such as China are maintaining their own clone of the non-compliance framework for their own (eg, Falun Gong) reasons.
    Then, 'peace treaties' between countries are negotiated with conditions that member countries mutually share and implement their respective 'non-compliance' framework.
    Here, my dystopian Internet vision ends.

    Pepe the frog survives, though he is reading a book by candle light.
    Don't get me started on non-compliant books.

    --
    <blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>