BIB: What about political cartooning, which relies on ridicule and the exaggeration of physical features. Is that "unacceptable behaviour"?
An excellent question. I respect cartooning as physical art medium, realizing that it can rely upon exaggeration. The difference in political cartooning lies in the message; satire for policies and actions of the subject. While political cartooning may exagerate physical features for comedic effect, the entirety of the piece is usually not "Look at Obama's giant ears, that stupid _____, hur hur hur." While a political cartoon showing Trump holding hands with Putin would have a point, a drawing of Trump simply as a cheeto with small gloves serves little purpose other than to attack the subject and make the drawer feel superior.
Well, the comment that started the complaint about complaining about Trump's appearance was SisterX calling him "a tiny handed orange buffoon", which you described as "poor form". I think SisterX was using satire rather the personal abuse, and doing so in order to point up the extremes of support he was getting from KBecks -
1. Does Trump have tiny hands? I've no idea. It's become a "thing" because Trump himself has made it a thing - Obama didn't make a "thing" of his ears. "Get your tiny hands off my uterus" was one of the Women's March signs: that is the sort of satire that SisterX was referencing in her comment, and it's not about the size of his hands per se, it's using his fixation about the size of his hands to emphasize a political comment.
2. Is Trump orange? Pretty accurate statement, but it's not because of race or accident of birth: he deliberately chooses to make himself orange, over and over again. A man of 70, "leader of the free world" (although I suspect not many people are going to be using that designation seriously after his recent pronouncements) who shows as much care and less taste about his appearance than Kim Kardashian is worth mocking for that. See also: mangomussolini, the Angry Cheeto and Agent Orange.
3. Buffoon seems entirely accurate to me. Trump's claim that his uncle was an intellectual doesn't really cut it as a reposte.
Not to mention, it's so much easier than typing out that he's a raping, misogynistic, racist, cheating, lying, opportunistic, amoral douche hole. 'Sack of crap' and 'waste of human skin' are good, but they don't quite cover
all the things.
Yeah, the tiny hands thing would never have become a thing except that
he used it to talk about himself, specifically to defend the size of his dick. It was a comedy show that first brought it up and then
he brought it up in the fucking debates. And then it still wouldn't have been a thing except that that's his MO for everything! Someone said something mean? Quick, tweet out a clearly insulted and ridiculous butthurt response! The media is accurately reporting that there were larger crowds at the women's marches than at the inauguration?
Nuh-uh!So, yeah. MetricMouse you're going to get on my case for mocking him? Yes. Clearly you have the moral high ground. It's
so much better to spend your time
defending a guy who will make fun of others for their appearance and disabilities, remove the rights of millions, and further divides in our society by taking advantage of racism, xenophobia, and economic inequality. You sure showed me!