MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: CrowdOf5 on March 27, 2021, 02:34:00 PM
-
Anyone see this crap? Contains a drop of human blood and 666 are available and are numbered as such. How did Nike approve these? I know these aren’t technically Jumpman but I had to tag Lovell and MU Athletics.
https://twitter.com/saint/status/1375532655551389696?s=21
-
Nike has nothing to do with that ::)
-
Anyone see this crap? Contains a drop of human blood and 666 are available and are numbered as such. How did Nike approve these? I know these aren’t technically Jumpman but I had to tag Lovell and MU Athletics.
https://twitter.com/saint/status/1375532655551389696?s=21
You know how when you buy a car or truck, and then add things onto it?
That is what these shoes are. They're not stock.
It'd be like if I took a plane white t-shirt and wrote something on it, and tried to pass it off like it was something Hanes had done.
-
Aftermarket customization. Nike's only participation is producing the original shoe that then gets adapted.
-
That's enough internet for you today
-
I don't know how Macy's marketed sheets as plain white but I saw one hanging outside somebody's house with a swastika on it. Doggone it, Macy's! What's wrong with you?
-
The real crime here by Nike is the black Air Max 97 (or really 98% of the Air Max 97 colorways) that is ugly as sin
-
Happy belated Air Max day to everyone, speaking of, the new Max Pre-Days are 🔥...just waiting for more color ways
https://www.menshealth.com/style/a35937228/nike-air-max-day-2021/
-
Nike has nothing to do with that ::)
Apparently Nike was concerned that CrowdOf5 wasn’t the only person confused about this. They filed a lawsuit for infringement.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/nike-lil-nas-x-satan-blood-shoe-mschf-lawsuit-2021-3%3famp
-
Where you one of the people who protested against Harry Potter?
-
whole thing is a publicuty stunt. and its working.
-
Anyone see this crap? Contains a drop of human blood and 666 are available and are numbered as such. How did Nike approve these? I know these aren’t technically Jumpman but I had to tag Lovell and MU Athletics.
https://twitter.com/saint/status/1375532655551389696?s=21
If you’d get off those right wing sites, you wouldn’t post anything this stupid. You should be ashamed of yourself.
And then you embarrassed yourself further by sending it to Lovell?
-
The good news is that this is an example of acceptable cancel culture. Way different than the Dr. Seuss or Mr. Potatohead bullcrap
-
If you’d get off those right wing sites, you wouldn’t post anything this stupid. You should be ashamed of yourself.
And then you embarrassed yourself further by sending it to Lovell?
I’ve seen these shoes and this story all over the place, not “right wing sites”. Maybe don’t automatically silo people.
Tagging Lovell is hilariously lame tho, won’t disagree with that
-
whole thing is a publicuty stunt. and its working.
(https://media.tenor.com/images/b88aaec19e0ceb4ca47c859f410f6908/tenor.png)
-
Ah yes. Back in the day it was Dungeons and Dragons and Dee Snider's teeth. Today it's the shoes.
-
I’ve seen these shoes and this story all over the place, not “right wing sites”. Maybe don’t automatically silo people.
Tagging Lovell is hilariously lame tho, won’t disagree with that
I should have been clearer. The stories were everywhere. But MSM sites also were clear about the fact that Nike had nothing to do with the re-purposed shoes.
-
Anyone see this crap? Contains a drop of human blood and 666 are available and are numbered as such. How did Nike approve these? I know these aren’t technically Jumpman but I had to tag Lovell and MU Athletics.
https://twitter.com/saint/status/1375532655551389696?s=21
Yup saw it. Saw lots of rubes fall right into the trap too. I didn't have a new Satanic Panic on my bingo card for 2021, but I'm here for it. It's an *excellent* way to identify the intersection of "sucker" and "feckless political hack attempting to cynically open fronts on their forever culture war."
Big fan.
-
Yup saw it. Saw lots of rubes fall right into the trap too. I didn't have a new Satanic Panic on my bingo card for 2021, but I'm here for it. It's an *excellent* way to identify the intersection of "sucker" and "feckless political hack attempting to cynically open fronts on their forever culture war."
Big fan.
If this was another religion outside of Christianity that was upset or offended by this stunt, would you still have the same response? Don't you think this is pretty intentionally antagonistic toward Christians?
-
If this was another religion outside of Christianity that was upset or offended by this stunt, would you still have the same response? Don't you think this is pretty intentionally antagonistic toward Christians?
I am totally amazed that to this day there are people thick enough to believe that the Book of Revelations is anything but high fantasy.
-
I am totally amazed that to this day there are people thick enough to believe that the Book of Revelations is anything but high fantasy.
Kind of speaks to my point here. Insulting Christians/Christianity doesn't really seem to be a problem, even on a page with not so subtle religious ties. If a similar comment were made about followers of other religions, most people would recognize how insulting that is and push back against it.
-
Kind of speaks to my point here. Insulting Christians/Christianity doesn't really seem to be a problem, even on a page with not so subtle religious ties. If a similar comment were made about followers of other religions, most people would recognize how insulting that is and push back against it.
For the record because Catholics don't follow the book of revelations it's actually a comment more on Protestants than it is Christians.
-
If this was another religion outside of Christianity that was upset or offended by this stunt, would you still have the same response? Don't you think this is pretty intentionally antagonistic toward Christians?
What's antagonistic here?
-
Kind of speaks to my point here. Insulting Christians/Christianity doesn't really seem to be a problem, even on a page with not so subtle religious ties. If a similar comment were made about followers of other religions, most people would recognize how insulting that is and push back against it.
Not really, do you take a literal interpretation of every word of the bible? You're just being argumentative because you want to play the victim here.
-
What's antagonistic here?
Using all the Biblical references as part of a production that essentially honors the seduction of Satan seems to be very purposeful. It mocks the Biblical guidance of avoiding sin and resisting the devil's temptation. Again, I doubt the question would even be asked if this was not a play on Christian beliefs.
Do you think a BBQ restaurant owner pricing pork sandwiches using a Quran verse reference would be viewed as antagonistic or mocking of Islam?
-
Using all the Biblical references as part of a production that essentially honors the seduction of Satan seems to be very purposeful. It mocks the Biblical guidance of avoiding sin and resisting the devil's temptation. Again, I doubt the question would even be asked if this was not a play on Christian Protestant beliefs.
Do you think a BBQ restaurant owner pricing pork sandwiches using a Quran verse reference would be viewed as antagonistic or mocking of Islam?
If you're going to get offended by something small then make sure you're intellectually honest about it.
-
Not really, do you take a literal interpretation of every word of the bible? You're just being argumentative because you want to play the victim here.
I'm saying that he's intentionally insulting a religion, and that only gets a pass because that religion is Christianity. Would you would tell someone from a different religious background that their feelings aren't valid if they were offended?
You actually went so far as to say that someone who believes in part of the Bible has to be stupid. That's incredibly insulting, and intentionally so. And I highly doubt you would go that far if you were referring to another religion. It's possible to criticize and share doubts without being insulting.
-
I'm saying that he's intentionally insulting a religion, and that only gets a pass because that religion is Christianity. Would you would tell someone from a different religious background that their feelings aren't valid if they were offended?
You actually went so far as to say that someone who believes in part of the Bible has to be stupid. That's incredibly insulting, and intentionally so. And I highly doubt you would go that far if you were referring to another religion. It's possible to criticize and share doubts without being insulting.
Yes, it is intentional. Anyone that takes that collection of works as literal and gets offended by someone 'insulting' it is an idiot.
Just like it would be if everything in the Quran is to be taken literally, I'd rip on that too.
It's stupid, and you'd just be looking for something to be offended about. If you value my stupid opinion of your story book, I can't help you.
-
Every time I hear you Sky Wizard believers playing victim I give a little money to The Satanic Temple. Keep it up you poor, oppressed peoples. Cancel those shoes!
https://thesatanictemple.com/
-
Using all the Biblical references as part of a production that essentially honors the seduction of Satan seems to be very purposeful. It mocks the Biblical guidance of avoiding sin and resisting the devil's temptation. Again, I doubt the question would even be asked if this was not a play on Christian beliefs.
Do you think a BBQ restaurant owner pricing pork sandwiches using a Quran verse reference would be viewed as antagonistic or mocking of Islam?
Meh. You must really struggle with horror movies, what with all the references to Satan and the Bible. Halloween must be especially tough, with the devil costumes and whatnot. And let's not get started on the Duke Blue Devils and DePaul Blue Demons.
Your Islam analogy doesn't quite work, by the way. To the best of my knowledge, nothing in Christian dogma opposes the wearing of shoes (even those as horrid as the Air Max).
That said, when a Muslim gets offended over a cartoon depiction of Muhammad, I think that person is being ridiculous. As I do of anyone upset about a shoe.
-
Gotta love Scoop.
-
If this was another religion outside of Christianity that was upset or offended by this stunt, would you still have the same response? Don't you think this is pretty intentionally antagonistic toward Christians?
"If this was another religion outside of Christianity that was upset or offended by this stunt, would you still have the same response?" - Yes I would. I think that exporting one's personal belief structure to exert external consequences on people who don't share that belief structure is at it's most charitable, dumb. Art exists on a spectrum of tasteful to tasteless, and while I can come up with examples I find tasteless (Piss Christ, for example) I can't come up with one that justifies a Satanic Panic. I wonder if people sat around hysterical at Milton when "Paradise Lost" came out. The shoe in a vacuum is silly, but reaction is the thing that merits ridicule.
"Don't you think this is pretty intentionally antagonistic toward Christians?" My reaction or the shoe? Of course the shoe is intentionally antagonistic toward Christians. That's the point. And it's working. My reaction is intentionally antagonistic toward incredibly sensitive Christians who lack the self-awareness to avoid doing EXACTLY what the people who are antagonizing them want them to do. If I hung a "punch me" sign on your chest, aimed you at a mirror, and you punched yourself and then threw a huge hissy fit about it I would call you a rube too.
-
Meh. You must really struggle with horror movies, what with all the references to Satan and the Bible. Halloween must be especially tough, with the devil costumes and whatnot. And let's not get started on the Duke Blue Devils and DePaul Blue Demons.
Your Islam analogy doesn't quite work, by the way. To the best of my knowledge, nothing in Christian dogma opposes the wearing of shoes (even those as horrid as the Air Max).
That said, when a Muslim gets offended over a cartoon depiction of Muhammad, I think that person is being ridiculous. As I do of anyone upset about a shoe.
Sure, the analogy isn't perfect, but it gets the point across. The shoes are just part of the release of the video; they're just being used to generate more buzz.
My overall point here is being proven over and over on a Catholic school's basketball page - you can insult Christians/Protestants (for you Galway) without being labeled as a bigot. I don't think this would happen with other religions.
-
Sure, the analogy isn't perfect, but it gets the point across. The shoes are just part of the release of the video; they're just being used to generate more buzz.
My overall point here is being proven over and over on a Catholic school's basketball page - you can insult Christians/Protestants (for you Galway) without being labeled as a bigot. I don't think this would happen with other religions.
Putting 666 on some shoes is an insult?
Setting the bar awfully low, aren't we?
-
Putting 666 on some shoes is an insult?
Setting the bar awfully low, aren't we?
I'm not referring to the shoes as an insult. I'm referring to the posts here.
-
Sure, the analogy isn't perfect, but it gets the point across. The shoes are just part of the release of the video; they're just being used to generate more buzz.
My overall point here is being proven over and over on a Catholic school's basketball page - you can insult Christians/Protestants (for you Galway) without being labeled as a bigot. I don't think this would happen with other religions.
He wasn't insulting him because of his Christianity. He was insulting him for being taken by a marketing campaign.
-
He wasn't insulting him because of his Christianity. He was insulting him for being taken by a marketing campaign.
These are insults to Christianity.
Every time I hear you Sky Wizard believers playing victim I give a little money to The Satanic Temple. Keep it up you poor, oppressed peoples. Cancel those shoes!
If you value my stupid opinion of your story book, I can't help you.
And these kinds of posts wouldn't be tolerated if they targeted other religions.
-
These are insults to Christianity.
And these kinds of posts wouldn't be tolerated if they targeted other religions.
I'm literally targeting all religions.
-
These are insults to Christianity.
Well, we are going to have to disagree on that.
-
I'm also not so sure I quite buy the premise of "okay to mock Christians but not okay to mock non-Christians." I mean <gestures broadly at the history of entertainment media>.
I'm Catholic, practicing, but I'm not so delusional as to accept this War on Christianity nonsense. Tennessee's state legislature just voted to adopt the Bible as its state book. I'm sorry, but Christian's aren't a marginalized group if things like that are happening.
Art in culture and humor punches up. The best play is to learn to take that punch. Be like the Mormons buying ads in the playbills for Book of Mormon that said something like "The Book is always better."
-
..
-
I'm also not so sure I quite buy the premise of "okay to mock Christians but not okay to mock non-Christians." I mean <gestures broadly at the history of entertainment media>.
I'm Catholic, practicing, but I'm not so delusional as to accept this War on Christianity nonsense. Tennessee's state legislature just voted to adopt the Bible as its state book. I'm sorry, but Christian's aren't a marginalized group if things like that are happening.
Art in culture and humor punches up. The best play is to learn to take that punch. Be like the Mormons buying ads in the playbills for Book of Mormon that said something like "The Book is always better."
Isn't that a violation of the first amendment: not exactly establishing a religion but strongly endorsing one. I agree it's not a war on Christianity but there is a war forcing an individual to violate their conscience.
-
Isn't that a violation of the first amendment: not exactly establishing a religion but strongly endorsing one.
Oh yeah there's a 100% chance it gets struck down. Stuff like that is either pandering to the converted or a devious way of funneling kickbacks to the lawyers who will bill lots of hours on both sides of the appellate process until it is officially struck down.
-
I'm Catholic, practicing, but I'm not so delusional as to accept this War on Christianity nonsense. Tennessee's state legislature just voted to adopt the Bible as its state book. I'm sorry, but Christian's aren't a marginalized group if things like that are happening.
This is the whole idea that I disagree with. You don't have to be in a marginalized group to be offended by someone's actions/words and for that hurt to be real. I'm not going to go so far as to say there is a war on Christianity, but I do think the idea that it's OK to insult group A but not group B is awfully hypocritical. To only view complaints from marginalized groups as valid doesn't make sense to me.
-
This is the whole idea that I disagree with. You don't have to be in a marginalized group to be offended by someone's actions/words and for that hurt to be real. I'm not going to go so far as to say there is a war on Christianity, but I do think the idea that it's OK to insult group A but not group B is awfully hypocritical. To only view complaints from marginalized groups as valid doesn't make sense to me.
Cool, conflict resolved: I don't think any group is immune from mockery.
-
This is the whole idea that I disagree with. You don't have to be in a marginalized group to be offended by someone's actions/words and for that hurt to be real. I'm not going to go so far as to say there is a war on Christianity, but I do think the idea that it's OK to insult group A but not group B is awfully hypocritical. To only view complaints from marginalized groups as valid doesn't make sense to me.
You're free to be offended by whatever offends you.
-
I'm literally targeting all religions.
Same.
-
I'm literally targeting all religions.
Except the Flying Spaghetti Monster I assume you mean. Don't you dare!
-
As a Christian, I find that the actions and words of many Christians offend me more than this does.
-
This is the whole idea that I disagree with. You don't have to be in a marginalized group to be offended by someone's actions/words and for that hurt to be real. I'm not going to go so far as to say there is a war on Christianity, but I do think the idea that it's OK to insult group A but not group B is awfully hypocritical. To only view complaints from marginalized groups as valid doesn't make sense to me.
Mostly, you just have to want to be offended.
-
Cool, conflict resolved: I don't think any group is immune from mockery.
...true, but if you mock the "woke" group you just may be out of a job.
-
...true, but if you mock the "woke" group you just may be out of a job.
Or be hired to host a prime time show on Fox News.
-
...true, but if you mock the "woke" group you just may be out of a job.
... but what if your mockery is releasing art designed to annoy thin-skinned performative Christians and the thin-skinned performative Christians you targeted do things like vow never to listen to your music again? Is that different somehow?
You're not immune from mockery based on your "woke" quotient, and you're not immune to social consequences for your mockery if you cross a line. That's free speech. People went ballistic when Kathy Griffin held up the decapitated trump head prop for a picture and she lost work because of it. Is that because her art was criticizing famous member of a woke group Donald Trump? Or was that the marketplace of ideas reacting to what was perceived as something "over the line?" Chuck Lorre seems to be landing on his feet releasing a show about an Afgan interpreter coming to America in 2021. Sure, people are grumbling on the internet... kinda exactly like what people are doing about Lil Nas X and his shoes/music video. The world is not carved into "okay to mock/not okay to mock" based on some kind of "woke" passport.
This didn't start as some grand statement about the cultural acceptability of speech in America. It started as a narrow observation that Lil Nas X triggered people in the most predictable way possible, and I find them falling for it to be very funny.
-
...true, but if you mock the "woke" group you just may be out of a job.
This is racist.
-
... but what if your mockery is releasing art designed to annoy thin-skinned performative Christians and the thin-skinned performative Christians you targeted do things like vow never to listen to your music again? Is that different somehow?
You're not immune from mockery based on your "woke" quotient, and you're not immune to social consequences for your mockery if you cross a line. That's free speech. People went ballistic when Kathy Griffin held up the decapitated trump head prop for a picture and she lost work because of it. Is that because her art was criticizing famous member of a woke group Donald Trump? Or was that the marketplace of ideas reacting to what was perceived as something "over the line?" Chuck Lorre seems to be landing on his feet releasing a show about an Afgan interpreter coming to America in 2021. Sure, people are grumbling on the internet... kinda exactly like what people are doing about Lil Nas X and his shoes/music video. The world is not carved into "okay to mock/not okay to mock" based on some kind of "woke" passport.
This didn't start as some grand statement about the cultural acceptability of speech in America. It started as a narrow observation that Lil Nas X triggered people in the most predictable way possible, and I find them falling for it to be very funny.
Jficke, you have had a couple of great post today. Like you, I feel anything is worthy of being mocked.
I don't care if I am mocked here - I already know if it is deserved (sometimes) or just the whining of one of those who complain about woke people and don't see the irony in their post.
-
Who's human blood is in the shoes?
This is an important question which will help me determine their value.
PS I am Christian and don't give a rip about the shoes. The outrage is hilarious.
-
The Onion always seems to hit the right note. Today's headline.
Conservative Christian Deeply Offended At Rap Video’s Implication That Satan A Homosexual