Synco
Lucio's #1 Fan
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2014
- Messages
- 6,726
You could have answered my post above where I explained why I don't think to have done so. You say I made that connection to play the Nazi card and bully a user, I say I made it because there simply is a connection (again: not an identity), and it's important in this context.Indeed there is and don't think anyone here has suggested it. Just somebody is making huge jumps even trying to equate people to the Nazi's.
One doesn't have to look very far to see why it's an issue here. Here's your post from further above:
I still perceive that as some kind of tongue-in-cheek joke that uses the same schtick as the Darwin Awards. I'm sure they are actually the reason this kind of humour is pretty popular by now. In their own words:I know this will sound heartless, but I do with they had pulled this stunt BEFORE deciding to procreate. Not just for the two kids who have lost a father and will have a mother behind bars, but those are some genes that did not need to be passed on to the next generation.
The prime tenet of the Darwin Awards is that we are celebrating the self-removal of incompetent genetic material from the human race. Therefore, the potential winner must be deceased, or at least incapable of reproducing. The traditional method is death. However, an occasional rebel opts for sterilization, which allows her more time to enjoy the dubious notoriety of winning a Darwin Award.
http://www.darwinawards.com/rules/rules1.htmlThe purpose of Darwin Awards is to applaud victims for removing their genes from the gene pool. This act can have varying degrees of merit, depending upon whether the victim has procreated, and if so, how frequently. Removing ones genes from the pool clearly has less merit if the genes have already been passed on to several offspring, unless you can rely on the offspring to also find creative ways of eliminating their genes before they reproduce.
So I don't have to invent some kind of connection of this with biologism and euthanasia - that very connection is what's considered to make it so funny. Which doesn't make anyone an actual Nazi, I'm well aware of the difference @Ødegaard mentioned (plus many others), as well as the difference between the real thing and degrading, but inconsequential humour. But it's certainly an example for 'a little thrill people get out of barbarism without really meaning it', as I put it earlier.