If you see the picture of a family loving an adopted baby and you immediately think it's some kind of cuckoldry propaganda it's a you problem, not a Ranger problem.
Serious question: how do you know that's a picture of a family with an adopted baby? Was there some fine print in the original picture that got cropped out? A footnote on an adjacent page?
Does the flyer intend to exclude the potential interpretation that maybe it's a blended family with a child from a previous marriage?
Does the flyer intend to exclude the potential interpretation that maybe it's a family that had a child due to infidelity of one or the other of the spouses, but they reconciled and are now a happy family?
If there is a line drawn somewhere between the possible / acceptable / intended interpretation of the picture, where is it and why?
Or is it that "it's just a picture, man, it doesn't matter" - which is why advertising isn't a multi-billion dollar industry - because images don't have any known ability to influence people's thinking / mindset / behavior.
Screw it, I'll answer regardless. None of them are. And i doubt any of them were to the OP. They were just provided to show that you were making assumptions about facts not in evidence to slander people, while completely missing the OP's point.
Seeing a set of white parents with a black child isn't demoralizing. What's demoralizing is recognizing that it is at least partly propoganda - and is intended as such. And that portion of it that is propaganda is intended to undermine a culture that made and makes up a majority of this country. It is, to use the lefts terminology and values, a racist/racial stealth assault on a culture that makes up a significant part of this country.
Knowing that the orginazation you are considering joining that is supposed to defend this country is in the process of undermining it in this way could certainly be demoralizing.
I know that it's an adopted baby because that's the only situation that makes sense. I mean you can do all the mental gymnastics you want to try and justify your blatant racism, but nobody but you believes it.
Also, i seriously doubt cuckoldry was the intended message, that would be a bridge too far in the context. I suspect it was just trying to imply adoption, in an effort to bring diversity and inclusion to what would have otherwise been a "white-supremacist" photo - which the woke PR team that created it would be loath to do.
If you see the picture of a family loving an adopted baby and you immediately think it's some kind of cuckoldry propaganda it's a you problem, not a Ranger problem.
Serious question: how do you know that's a picture of a family with an adopted baby? Was there some fine print in the original picture that got cropped out? A footnote on an adjacent page?
Does the flyer intend to exclude the potential interpretation that maybe it's a blended family with a child from a previous marriage?
Does the flyer intend to exclude the potential interpretation that maybe it's a family that had a child due to infidelity of one or the other of the spouses, but they reconciled and are now a happy family?
If there is a line drawn somewhere between the possible / acceptable / intended interpretation of the picture, where is it and why?
Or is it that "it's just a picture, man, it doesn't matter" - which is why advertising isn't a multi-billion dollar industry - because images don't have any known ability to influence people's thinking / mindset / behavior.
which one of those scenarios is demoralizing?
Each one represents a reduction of European reproductive capacity and in a world on track to be 50% African in 30 years that’s a tragedy.
Tell you what, you take a shot at answering the questions i asked you first and then I'll answer the question you asked as a deflection.
Screw it, I'll answer regardless. None of them are. And i doubt any of them were to the OP. They were just provided to show that you were making assumptions about facts not in evidence to slander people, while completely missing the OP's point.
Seeing a set of white parents with a black child isn't demoralizing. What's demoralizing is recognizing that it is at least partly propoganda - and is intended as such. And that portion of it that is propaganda is intended to undermine a culture that made and makes up a majority of this country. It is, to use the lefts terminology and values, a racist/racial stealth assault on a culture that makes up a significant part of this country.
Knowing that the orginazation you are considering joining that is supposed to defend this country is in the process of undermining it in this way could certainly be demoralizing.
I know that it's an adopted baby because that's the only situation that makes sense. I mean you can do all the mental gymnastics you want to try and justify your blatant racism, but nobody but you believes it.
Also, i seriously doubt cuckoldry was the intended message, that would be a bridge too far in the context. I suspect it was just trying to imply adoption, in an effort to bring diversity and inclusion to what would have otherwise been a "white-supremacist" photo - which the woke PR team that created it would be loath to do.