and I engaged in laughing at the "project", but it's that I believe that all of us are owed a certain basic recognition of our humanity.

That's a high standard. One I frequently don't live up to. I'm less concerned about the Donald Trumps of the world, the comfortable, than I am about those most vulnerable- from prisoners to the poor.

to shame Trump.

As to the missing balls, I have a brother-in-law with one missing ball - to cancer. I didn't mention that particular aspect - but just as women with breast cancer often feel disfigured, and less of a woman, because of a mastectomy - the same is true of men who lose testicles to cancer (or for other reasons).

Imagine my brother-in-law witnessing all of the laughter at the (implied) less-of-a-man Trump because he has no testicles. I suspect he wonders if people think the same about him.

The thought of having a President who uses all of those ugly facial expressions makes me want to hurl, and is just one of the many reasons to shudder at the thought of the Trumpet in the WH. But you've just ramped up the naisea for me, JG - I had forgotten about Manson's face-making habits. Ugh! I said recently that an ad could be made with all those stupid faces Trumpet makes - just use the Brady Bunch style of multiple faces on one screen (or if you're old enough to remember, the ad where the tag line was "and she told one friend, an so on, and so on" - it used a similar style) to show all his faces at one time. I'd love to see that ad, although I probably would throw up!

There are other commonalities:
Both racists advocated violence.
Both sociopaths tricked their followers, repeatedly.
Both criminals ignored the law, when it impaired their plans.
Both monsters sent others to do their dirty work to avoid prosecution.
Both perverts had a sordid sexual past.
These faces, they both still make would induce a police officer to send anyone he saw acting this way in public to a mental institution.

Who wants this to be our next first lady?

And Trump has been showing his ass, metaphorically, all year.

to shame Trump, becuase they only effectively shame Trump if you believe the characteristics are negative.

Please, lets not shame stupid bigoted narcissists.

at the base says "The Emperor has no Balls."

It just so happens that the particular "Emperor" involved -- who has been extremely critical of women's bodies -- has a very imperfect body himself.

I think what people are really laughing about is Trump's hypocrisy and massive ego -- and the allusion to the fable.

feels about his body being used to shame Trump.

Regardless of the target, or the intent, the reality of displaying Trump with, what is an almost certainly exaggeratedly fat body, is hurtful.

Last edited Sat Aug 20, 2016, 04:03 PM - Edit history (4)

And this is the man who constantly disparages the appearance of women and chortles about how handsome he is. And so much more Presidential than Hillary.

He has also mocked a person at his rally for being "seriously overweight" and suggested he must be on food stamps.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3558470/Trump-raises-Clinton-s-appearance-calls-handsome-asks-Does-Hillary-look-presidential-shouts-No-thousands-college-rally.html#ixzz46wIC3cZE

Donald Trump introduced Hillary Clinton's physical appearance into his presidential campaign for the first time on Monday, asking a rally audience in suburban Philadelphia if she looks 'presidential.'

The move indicates that Trump is looking past the July Republican National Convention to a general election campaign – and that there will be no holds barred if he faces the former secretary of state.

'Do I look like a president? How handsome am I, right? How handsome?' a preening Trump asked nearly 5,000 supporters during a rally at West Chester University. 'Somebody said, "He really does look good, but you know, I don't know if he's presidential".'

'And I'm looking at this stage of people – my competitors,' he pivoted, landing squarely on Clinton.

'Does Hillary look presidential?' he asked. 'No!' came the audience's response.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/25/politics/donald-trump-how-handsome-am-i/

Despite the vitriolic rhetoric, Trump insisted Monday that while he may not yet sound presidential, he certainly looks it.'

And he also appeared to cast doubt on whether Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton has the looks of a president.

"And I'm looking at this stage of people -- my competitors. Does Hillary look presidential?" Trump said after praising his own looks.

Trump then continued, "Was she there at 3 o'clock in the morning to answer the call? No, now and she won't be, she won't be, she won't be there. She doesn't have the strength and she doesn't have the energy to be president, I will tell you."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/18/nine-things-that-happened-during-donald-trumps-visit-to-worcester/?hpid=hp_rhp-more-top-stories_no-name%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&tid=a_inl

One of the outbursts came as Trump questioned the number of Americans on food stamps, a topic he rarely brings up on the campaign trail. As the man who caused it was led away, Trump said: "You know, it's amazing. I mentioned food stamps and that guy who is seriously overweight went crazy. He went crazy... That's an amazing sight."

I swear, everything he says is simply projection. He is an ugly, stupid, vulgar individual. The fact that he sees himself as the very opposite is just a testament to his complete insanity.

That he identifies with that particular body style is coincidental. And if one can't see the particular point of these statues, which isn't fat-shaming, then one needs to check their sensitivity levels and dial it back a bit.
But his point is taken. And valid.

...not Hollis Easter. He needs to get over his big, bad self. It's not about him, and his attempt to make it about him reeks of blatant, narcissistic attention seeking and lazy, underdeveloped creative writing skills.

Move on, Hollis. This ain't about you! Next time, seek therapy for your dysmorphic body image issues.

Seriously, did the artist use Hollis Easter as a model for her sculpture? I didn't think so.

TYY

Geez this guy is almost as self absorbed and thin-skinned as The Donald himself.

he can control what goes on in and what goes into his own head. Trying to censor the outside world because of his own interpretations of it is a classic error continually committed by censors, bigots, authoritarians, control freaks and fundamentalists.

I was hoping to articulate this, but 3 glasses of wine make it difficult.

So if the author has a similar body, he should know that he is not the one being shamed. It is the self important man who will wear an " amazingly beautiful suit of nothingness" while parading as if he is in splendorous clothing who is being shamed.

I hope the org.poster realizes that their shape is not who they are. And Trump's shape is just his shape. It's because he is such an insulting person, that makes his naked image so laughable and vile at the same time.

If the most despicable person you knew was naked and out in public thinking they were in an amazingly expensive and exclusive outfit, wouldn't it bring a smile to your face even if he or she were well built?

Trump needs to be exposed to those who think he is some how wise and not the money grubbing bigoted fame chasing fool he really is.

caricatures of people who just happen to be black that exaggerated stereotypically black features?

When someone in the category being used to shame someone else tells me that being used as a tool to shame someone else, I tend to listen. Even with the best of intentions - or impeccable logic - and the best of intents - execution sometimes has unintended consequences. When it does, responsible adults own up to those consequences, apologize, and strive to avoid the stomp on the foot in the future.

It is about that person and their self importance. I feel the naked body is a vessel only and should not be used as a judgment of one's character. This is a caricature and an outing of his self aggrandizement. It is not about your neighbor or your bother or anyone but him and his foolishness.

Sorry. I will not make this about body shaming. His body is not the point. His unaware nakedness is.

We can see him. We know who he truly is. He thinks we can't. In this statue all of us can. The conman is exposed.

He's not a "strong man." He's a doughy bully who makes fun of others' appearance. He needs to look in a mirror. His fans need some perspective.

It is body shaming. If someone did this to Hillary we would have been horrified.

He called Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig, talked about Megyn Kelly bleeding out her "whatever", bashed the weight of beauty pageant contestants, body-shamed his employees, wigged out about Hillary using the restroom during a debate, etc. etc. etc.

Payback's a bitch. Give Trump a taste of his own medicine.

but it's okay to do it to him. Okay.

of shame against Trump?

When we do that, we are doing the same thing to fat people who see us laughing and joking that you accuse Trump of.

Condemn his language, condemn his body-shaming, but you can't poke fun at him being fat without also shaming all people who are fat.

massive ego. And it's making a political point with the "Emperor has no clothes" allusion.

Hollis Easter should not concern himself with the representation. It's NOT about "Hollis Easter." Or anyone else.

It's about DONALD TRUMP, who is getting a rich dose of his own medicine.


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Who knows, maybe Melania likes the statue?

That's an accurate depiction of Trump, minus his rhetorical balls, of course (that's the artistic statement in the piece) and the absence of said balls can't be observed without depicting him naked.

There's other editorial commentary in the piece--Trump boasts about his sexual prowess, but he's given a small dingaling, and he mocks the appearance of others, putting down everyone from Rosie O'Donnell, to Miss Universe, to Chris Christie for being "fat." The artist portrayed him as he looks under those expensive, fat-concealing suits he wears (and he's generous with the amount of hair he gave the wretch).

So let's have a look at the guy who says these insulting things to others, in all HIS glory, shall we?

Would you rather they gave him the body of an underwear model? Just so his feelings aren't hurt, or something?


It's not about "shame." It's more like an object lesson to help Trump understand how HIS words impact others.

This statue tells Trump, in no uncertain terms that the shoe pinches on the other foot. It's holding up a mirror and letting him feel the effects of his OWN words.

I think it's grand. And it's free speech, an American tradition, which can sometimes offend.

So please stop saying that.

Precisely

I agree, this isn't good.

and no one ever told him any subversive childhood stories, the one in this case being "The Emperor has no Clothes."

Had he ever heard that story, he'd know the point of that statue was its prideful nudity, not its shape.

Shame on Hollis for being ignorant and humorless.

tell me they find the "joke" hurtful, I tend to pay attention.

I have no sympathy for folks who are always sniffing for filth and looking for ways to be offended.

images, commentary, experiences, etc. that tell me - in no uncertain terms - that being fat is despicable and a moral failure, when I comment when people on my side use my body to shame I'm "sniffing for filth and looking for ways to be offended?"

Is the same true of blacks? Women? People with disabilities? when they point out subtle or blatant ways those characteristics are used as a negative?

This has nothing to do with anything you think you're being told.

It is an analagous scenario.

When people who are members of a group about which negative stereotypes abound point out that using those stereotypes to bash anyone also bashes them, people who care about justice, equality, and dignity don't dismiss their concerns out-of-hand.

It was to highlight his hypocrisy.

If people are looking at those statues and chortling about his fat, they are missing the point.

The statues are not mocking Trump's fat, they are mocking his nakedness: that he is so obviously an emperor with no clothes, and a cowardly one at that--hence the lack of balls.

If there is anything to criticize about the statute, it is the rather sexist notion of associating testicles --and penis size -- with bravery and strength.

Something like 80% of adult Americans are overweight. And yet most understand this statue is not mocking all of us who could stand to lose a few pounds.

And the statue isn't a "few pounds" overweight - it is obese, if not morbidly obese. Shame is a very heavy burden for most people who fall in that category. Whatever the intent of the artist, the reality is that people who are obese are being hurt by people laughing at the exaggeratedly obese Trump.

It is reality.

something.

I guess we'll have to go through all the museums and paint over the Reubens! Can't hurt people's feelings by depicting them AS THEY ARE, can we?

This is about the Emperor not having clothing. It was never meant to criticize his, or my, weight. I understand this because I read the story. I am sorry the author did not or lacks the comprehension to understand it. Trump exaggerates everything, believe me, and this statue is used to expose him for that exaggeration. Everything about the statue is exaggerated. The size of his hands, the belly, the veins, etc.....The fact that he has no balls is a commentary on who Trump is and how his followers see him versus the rest of the world.

This statue, pure and simple, is a statement about Trump the man. I have not heard a single person snicker as they say, "Look how fat he is!!!" And if I did hear this I would try to explain to them the truth behind the statue. thus exposing Trump like the emperor was exposed......so, perhaps the author of this article is doing a performance piece and getting people to talk about this and expose Trump for who he really is just as the fable did to the emperor. But if the author is being real then he obviously did not pay attention in English class and the moral of the fable is totally lost on him.

At any rate, you can see no one in this thread is making fun of the fat. We are all better than that. We have an understanding that transcends what the statue is projecting to others and let's us in on the lesson that Donald has no clothing. This is a commentary more on his followers and what they see versus reality than even Donald's personality. It cuts deep and to the heart of the matter. The message is too important to let people imagining slights to stop the message and get off topic. No, from one fatty who has had eating disorders most of her life, to you, this is not fat shaming and you are totally missing the point of this art.

It's hard to believe adults would think it's funny. Would they laugh if it was Hillary statues. When I heard the story of the trump statues. I thought how immature and childish.

It's commenting on the physical appearance as if that was the joke rather than understanding the symbolism of fat and genitalia in an art piece.

- or the obviously foreseeable reality of how the discussions have evolved.

In pursuit of your argument about the distinction between the two, I encourage you to point out to people who are missing the point that their comments focusing on weight and genetalia are not only missing the point, but hurting others.

Do you even hear yourself?

other than to point out that the features here are symbolic representations and not literal ones.

Last edited Sat Aug 20, 2016, 04:09 PM - Edit history (1)

...the insecurity that feeds his narcissism.

The artist should have made a naked statue that looks nothing like trump to avoid shaming people with similar body styles?

Sorry going to have to disagree with the authors victimhood on this one.

Is he actually obese, bordering on morbidly obese?

The answer is "no" to at least the latter, and likely all 3. So the statute's face - and hair looks like him, but the rest is a caricature that uses obesity and disfiguration to prove a point. (As to the lack of testicles, as another poster pointed out, if that was the point - it equates a gendered physical trait with character traits that presumably people without testicles don't possess, a sexist point in the first place.)

So the issue is less that the statue looks like Trump, but that it doesn't in the respects that are being used as points of shame. Which kind of proves my point: Those physical characteristics - not even possessed by Trump - are being used as negative characteristics, and hurting those who share them.

You are free to get your outrage on if you like. I am going to pass.

When you want to start sanitizing art you have traveled way too far down the SJW path for me.

When we all go SJW, and all that comes from our side of the aisle is scolding, don't wonder why we don't get support.

I'm all for ridicule, and for making people laugh, to get political points across. Much more fun that way. And doubly so if the fun is at Donald Trump's expense.

Look at the golf pics shown elsewhere in this thread.

If anything the artist was KIND in terms of his girth. AND his hair--which is a weave, a "hair system" and it's not that thick or luxuriant.

A good suit hides a multitude of sins. Men have it easier than women in that regard--there's a reason that men's fashion has not changed very much in well over a century. Once you've figured out what works it behooves one to stick with it.

The point you miss is that people who have negative characteristics--physical or otherwise -- shouldn't mock others for the deficiencies which they, themselves, possess. THAT is the lesson of these statues. They call out Trump by putting him in the same circumstances (physically, rather than with cutting words) that he used to mock Rosie O'Donnell, John McCain, etc.

Trump likes to call people "weak" and "losers" -- and the shorthand term for that is illustrated by the absence of gonads. He likes to call people fat and ugly--and here he is, in all HIS glory.

He's being hoisted on his OWN petard. This has nothing to do with anyone else but Trump. It's brilliant.

.....but, to your other questions YES the short fingered vulgarian is obese and I would assume he is morbidly obese.

An individual is considered morbidly obese if he or she is 100 pounds over his/her ideal body weight, has a BMI of 40 or more, or 35 or more and experiencing obesity-related health conditions, such as high blood pressure or diabetes.

Fat-shaming it ain't, although I can understand why people who have been body-shamed would be uncomfortable and hurt if they viewed this artistic expression as such. The genitalia references do call on a shaming meme because the size and presence of male genitalia have long been used as a proxy for strength in many cultures. Here however it is in line with the Emperor's new clothes reference.

While I appreciated the author's POV I see no evidence that the art is making a statement of shaming anyone but the Emperor Trump.

This isn't about shaming overweight people. It's not about them besides no one gets to go through life never being offended.

And artists shouldn't have to second guess their political art just because someone somewhere might make some huge leap and get offended.

Also in truth, I laughed when I saw it. Instead of seeing his body shape (or mine) mocked, I saw a mirror held up for his perusal. It lets him see what others feel every time he levels another demeaning insult. As for his diminutive or missing parts, he himself brought those into the conversation.

There are many times when I have taken very vocal exception to fat shaming, this is not one of them.



.

....out of shape and no better than the rest of humanity. The rest of it references his very own despicable behavior and words.

Or if someone thinks that a piece of satirical art is offensive, we can now start censoring that art?

I'm all for people not being shamed in public and would side with the author if HE was shamed without cause, but this is art and political satire and drumpf earned it.

Slippery slope... Don't trip.

...as the New York Parks department put it, "NYC Parks stands firmly against any unpermitted erection in city parks, no matter how small.”

I do hope the artist made an extra copy, for more permanent display somewhere, since it didn't take long for the kamikaze Trumps to be taken down.

Last I checked none of DU, Hollis Easter, nor I were state actors.

There is a difference between condemning something as morally problematic and making it illegal. One is a free speech issue. The other is not.

Throughout history censorship has been used to control the moral and political views of the people governerd. It always starts when someone's moral standards are valued more highly than those exercising their rights to speak freely.

I appreciate the viewpoint and the right to express it, I just don't feel as if one persons moral outrage outweighs another's right to express their art.

Peace

is not really in keeping with the spirit of freedom of speech.

If you're getting to the point where you have to say something along the lines of "well, it's not technically censorship because..." you may want to reconsider your position.

How many of you, when you saw one of those statues of Trump, thought "Oh, Christ. This is going to hurt Hollis Easter's feelings"? Those statues are a relentlessly effective weapon against Trump's massive narcissism. Those statues are a sharp counterpunch against every demeaning comment Trump has ever uttered in public about female attractiveness. Those statues have my full approval.

I have little patience for sanctimonious scolding. It's targeted at Trump, not every person with a beer gut.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Now he gets a dose of his own medicine. There's nothing "better than that." He is getting what he deserves.

I don't have a problem with that, and it has nothing to do with anyone else--it has everything to do with Trump.

There he is, in all his glory, a fairly accurate representation....only he doesn't have quite that much hair.


If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it. This is about telling a person, with a visual representation, what it feels like to do what he does on a regular basis. The shoe pinches on the other foot.

I think the statues are superb, and probably the only way anyone could get through to him. He doesn't pay attention UNLESS it's "all about him.

I wonder if Melania isn't making compare and contrast comparisons....?

The Emporer has no clothes

Nobody would want to see a naked statue of me, either. Or, for that matter, of most people. What these statues are doing, though, is not fat-shaming Trump, but shaming him for his narcissism and total lack of self-awareness. The reality is that a majority of Americans are overweight, at least to some extent. An awful lot of guys his age look like that, naked - the paunch, the saggy butt - and isn't that the point? Trump isn't some Adonis. He isn't special. He's just another overweight older guy with a big gut and a flabby ass. He went so far as to brag about the size of his dick, and the statue says, well, maybe not. I realize that it's arguably sexist to equate male genitalia with strength and courage, but Trump and his ilk do that all the time. Trump brags about what a stud he is. The statue says, no you're not, you're a flabby old guy like a million other flabby old guys, and you're not a stud, either.

The point is that this emperor really has no clothes. That folk tale is probably the best analogy for the Trump campaign - he says he's wonderful; his campaign says he's wonderful; his supporters believe it, and even continue to believe it when the truth about his "empire" comes out. Sorry, folks; he's naked, and naked he looks like everybody else.

He deserves it. He insults others and probably has about their bodies, even a disabled guy.

It's not using anyone's body. Only Donald's.

Not even someone who does it to others.

If we justify this type of behavior for whatever reason, then it's hard to simultaneously claim that behavior is categorically wrong.

I mean, Donald does it to others, and not doing it to him seems to be letting him get away with it. He would be a hypocrite to complain.

That's pretty much exactly the strategy HRC is and should be employing. When there are those on the left doing the same thing to him it undermines that effort.

Going beyond Trump I just don't think there's a valid reason to fat shame anyone. I don't go along with it when people do it to Limbaugh either. At some level it just seems to legitimize that behavior.

Principle: "It's wrong to body shame."

There doesn't seem to be a "unless the person body shames others" exception to the principle. That 'but he did it first, so that makes him fair game' line of reasoning is something that most folks leave behind in about elementary school, from an ethical development standpoint.

Being an ethical adult necessarily involves setting aside childish thinking.

Find my other post in this thread. I am dreadfully overweight to a point my doctor said I have 5-10 years to live if nothing changes and I do not think this is body shaming and nor do I think it was a commentary, at all, on his body. It was done to reflect the story and how Donald acts and what he says. I am not even referring to what he says about others. I mean what he says about himself. How thin skinned he is (veins showing in the statue), how he brought size into but he has lied a lot (thus his small penis), how he has not produced his tax returns (no balls to show his financials) and how his admirers see him (in glorious clothing) versus how the rest of us see him (his personality naked and exposed for how ugly (again, his personality, not body) he really is. The nakedness of the statue is him being exposed (everyone feels that way when they are naked) and we know what we are actually seeing about him - all of his bad character traits.

It has nothing to do with being an ethical adult. This has nothing to do with the actual body of the statue and was never meant to make fun of what he looks like. In the Emperor's New Clothes he, too, is naked but it never was a message about the ruler's body. It was a message about fools going along for the ride and pretending things are there that actually were not. Part of being an ethical adult is admitting when there is more there than you originally thought while you talked down to other adults.

It doesn't bother you, it does bother others. You think it's excused because it's a joke, a funny put-down of a political opponent.
But that's not shared by all.

In your mind it isn't about ethics, for others it is.

We all vary, and the line between edgy wicked cleverness and the inside of Pandora's box is not clearly defined.

Personally I don't want to see light-bulb shaped yard signs representing an ass sticking up in the air, with text saying 'Not HRC'

It is about the emperor being exposed. The ones who think it is about ethics just don't get it. And even the author does not say it is about ethics, he says it is about body shaming when it clearly is not.

Why are we assuming that for him? It is even likely he does not care. Men think their bodies are just fine the way they are. We are assuming he is sensitive about his body. I bet you he isn't. He has the supermodel wives. He's rich. He thinks he is just fine, believe me.

'No humor, no fun, we all must be serious at all times, for offending anybody is the worst thing you can ever do. Let's make the world a giant safe-space where there's forced agreement among everybody. Be very very careful of what you say, or we'll get you fired and send the internet mob after you.'

I'm really tired of it. These types aren't helping. They make a mockery of Liberals and Millenials (I am both). They make us look like soft, pipe-dreaming cowards who have all of the sense of humor of an angry Librarian who thinks the entire world should follow the rules of the library (oops! I offended Librarians. Guess I'm going to be witch-hunted now...).

Have these people ever heard of a caricature? I feel like these SJW would threaten to dox and ruin the life of a street artist because "people with big noses and abnormally large chins are people too!!!" Why bother? Can't win against uptight do-gooders who have taken social justice to laughable extremes.

What gets the better reaction for us progressives?

This?

or this?

That's what happens to memes, they get co-opted.

You have a nice day.

Nor are the people who copy them.

Being obtuse as a shtick? Needs work.

Lotta crazy shit in there.

Does it hurt when you talk out of both sides of your mouth like that?

It's a term used to describe the perpetually-offended, emotionally-immature complainers who have taken it upon themselves to be offended on behalf of others who haven't asked them.

Actual liberals who see these kinds of people forming "safe spaces" on campuses, bullying reporters, and shutting down any criticism of Islam as "racist" are rightly disgusted because, unlike SJWs, we value freedom of speech, open debate, freedom of the press, and the ability to criticize ideologies that run contrary to these principles.

Interesting to see the trolls try to defend it.

I remember it was used by the LGF site and Protest Warriors when DU started

Thanks for calling them out!

But this is about Rump lack of balls and tiny penis and thin skin.
I never even noticed the fat...
Actually the flat spongy butt was more disturbing.....

Fight fire with fire

That article was written by a "Special Snowflake".

It means everything you pretend to be is stripped away, and if you have anything to feel ashamed of, it's not your body, it's your soul.

Likewise, when Hans Christian Anderson wrote the story about The Emperor's New Clothes, he was playing a riff on this theme. Only a child, pure of heart and pure of intent, was able to blurt out the (ahem) naked truth.

Not everything is what it seems. Not everything is about "issues."

Although every month I ask my barber to make me handsome, we both know that that's not likely - or possible. Don't have the features, don't have the look. And, sure, it may have something to do with the fact that I can lose 40 or 50 pounds, and slim fit clothing is in my distant youth.

But I take no offense from the Trump statue stunt. I think it was a riot. And the response from NYC was brilliant. (And, no, it wasn't directed at men with small penises. Just at Trump, who may or may not have a small penis, though some people say. . . ) It wasn't directed at weight-challenged people. It wasn't directed at eunuchs. It was directed at one man, and, yes, the goal was to humiliate him. Why don't we take this for what it was and not make it something it wasn't.

it was a play on t-rump.....nothing else...touchy, touchy, touchy.

His words are quite enough to shame him. If he had any.

Judge people by their actions. Period.

Yes Trump is fat, but he is a fat cat and the author completely misses the reason those statues are so profound. They represent the emperor (Trump) has no clothes fable.

They miss what the statues represent. The way some blindly support him, the hate that he embodies, the fact that he IS the Republican Party.

Because lots of ordinary people are ignorant, and they're special snowflakes too.

Anyone who takes it personally is being silly. The statue is about Trump. No one else. Get over yourself.

Is that a case of me using "microaggression" against someone?

It's mostly funny to me because Trump tried to assure everyone, implicitly, that he had a large penis in a GOP debate. Good grief.

I'd say get some thicker skin, but that'd probably offend them too.

... a few other places from a genetic condition called PXE! How dare you!!

STOP TELLING ME TO STOP BEING EASILY OFFENDED




IT OFFENDS ME

as great as it is among republicans.

There is PLENTY of proof that Democratic Underground allows Chinese agents, Trump-trolls and paid D.N.C. operatives to post at D.U. on this thread!