I don't see how it's homophobic. The cartoon portrays Trump and Putin as lovers, supposedly to mock their alleged closeness. It doesn't attack homosexual people.
If the cartoon were portraying e.g. Merkel and Putin, in similar roles, would you call it "heterophobic" (is that a word?), or would it be perfectly acceptable?
> The cartoon portrays Trump and Putin as lovers, supposedly to mock their alleged closeness. It doesn't attack homosexual people.
It does attack homosexual people. You can't use "gay" as a slur or as a punchline to a joke anymore. The punchline of the joke isn't "they're close", its "they're so close they're gay".
That makes "being gay" an active of derision or humour, which is an attack on gay people.
>It does attack homosexual people. You can't use "gay" as a slur or as a punchline to a joke anymore. The punchline of the joke isn't "they're close", its "they're so close they're gay".
No, the punchline of the joke is "they're so close it's almost like they're in a relationship". Of course it has to be a gay relationship, because they're both men.
As I said before, the joke would work just as well if the cartoon depicted a woman and a man.
> The punchline of the joke isn't "they're close", its "they're so close they're gay".
Equally, the implicit punchline could even read as “Trump’s cheating on America with Putin”. It would work just as well with leaders of any combination of genders.
Criticising Israel and pro-Israel policy != antisemitism
>https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-york-times-trump...
I don't see how it's homophobic. The cartoon portrays Trump and Putin as lovers, supposedly to mock their alleged closeness. It doesn't attack homosexual people.
If the cartoon were portraying e.g. Merkel and Putin, in similar roles, would you call it "heterophobic" (is that a word?), or would it be perfectly acceptable?