Bummed about the Onion.

Recently, the Onion did a thing. Someone on the staff tweeted that the tiny baby in the sparkly movie was a seaward... am I getting that right? Anyway, whatever they called her, some people got ab.so.lute.ly out.raged, which like, is kind of The Onion's M.O., am I wrong? To make an outlandish joke that will deeply offend the exact people the core of the joke is about? Like, for instance, all the weenies who sit at home to watch the Oscars and have no qualms about bitching over and categorizing and insulting the women on the red carpet, who then gladly sit through an entirely misogynistic pageant of women-hating and homophobia (and casual Old World racism)-- but who bunch their own panties into tight little balls to shove up their own asses in outrage and frustration when the butt of the joke happens to be a little too young for us to demonize yet without them actually having to examine their own consciences about how we treat women and girls in general.
And that's just my point, really-- Quvenzhané Wallis isn't and never was the butt of the joke. True to its core values, The Onion calling a little girl a cunt isn't about how much that little girl is actually a cunt-- it's about how much she isn't and couldn't possibly be, but how the catty and tactless news media portray other girls that way, constantly, even when they aren't or couldn't possibly be. The use of the striking word, cunt, is literally the only difference (and the source of the joke, if you'll allow me to explain comedy to you for a minute here) between The Onion's joke about Quvenzhané and the way women and girls are represented always and forever. 
And here's the heartbreaking part: The Onion, bastion of comedic integrity, actually bowed to the pressure and apologized. They broke character, broke the fourth wall for the first time ever in order to apologize for a joke that maybe wasn't very funny but still perfectly resonated with the spirit of the organization: that the disenfranchised aren't jokes, the people who do the disenfranchising are the jokes. 
So here's the part where I ask, speaking about the damn Oscars, when god damn Seth fucking MacFarland is going to apologize for his slew of vile and unfunny jokes against women and girls, some of whom were very recently little Quvenzhané Wallises. During the actual awards ceremony, on national television instead of one comment on a Twitter feed, MacFarland strung together the easiest, laziest line of jokes I've heard since The Honeymooners made spousal abuse into a side-splitting (literally!!!) half-hour laugh riot. If comedy is an art, we just watched MacFarlane shit out a macaroni necklace and paid him handsomely for it. Then we hung it on the fridge for everyone to see, because good for him for trying, little guy! 
But my point is this: while The Onion felt it had to apologize (and I still can't read any of their articles the same way after that atrocity--I am of course speaking of the apology, and not the tweet) after making a joke with rude word in it, (also, shut up @thedailyshow for bitching about how nine-year-olds don't understand irony, the tweet @wasntmeantforQuvenzhané) we, as a nation, don't feel any need to take MacFarlane to task for his purposeful, hateful jokes where the women actually are the butt of the joke, the girls and minorities are the disenfranchised that we're additionally shitting on. Guys, I know irony is hard, but like... get a grip before you go ruining another amazing thing.