• Szymon@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel like naming something Q is about as tone deaf, or as much of a dog whistle, as making something have the acronym ISIS

      • Szymon@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        When a major cultural event occurs, symbols and words can be forced into new meanings in that society after having gone through the significant or traumatic event.

        The swastika, historically a symbol symbolizing representing well being and prosperity, now cannot be seen without associating it with hatred fascism.

        I think it’s relevant for a western country to consider the concept that “Q” can be interpreted in different ways than it was before but a significant number of people, and a large company should have something like that on their radar, especially for a marketing/branding perspective.

        • StormNinjaPenguin@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well comparing Q to the swastika maybe reasonable on the basis on both of their background ideas being deranged to a similar degree, but the Q movement’s historical insignificance is just laughable in comparison.

          Blacklisting the letter Q because of a handful of dipshits that most of the world doesn’t even know about is preposterous.