• dingus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Is that what I’m supposed to be looking at? Does it really count as a racist caricature if it is just some sort of weird uncanny valley image?

    I’m guessing you mean blackface. But the person doesn’t look at all black or even like blackface. There is just some weird tinting effect happening. It’s like if someone described what blackface is to a blind person…but while trying to describe it, they had a mouth full of marshmallows

    Sorry for my ramble and I hope this isn’t offensive to comment. I’m just confused. Is it really even attempting to be blackface?

    • garbagebagel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      This is the original image. I cannot imagine any reason at all (other than a racist one) to do what they did in the post.

      Does not change the meaning, does not add humour. Why would someone edit the tinting for it to look that way?

      Also, adding in the Ebonics in the title (which I realize the poster also copied from reddit) doesn’t seem to help the argument that this wasn’t intended to be racially charged.

      • dingus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I guess what my ramble was trying to say is that I didn’t even clock it as blackface because it’s so “poorly done” that it didn’t even come across that way until I read the comment and then stared at it in confusion. I’m not saying that it “doesn’t count if AI does it”, just that it’s a confusing photo.