It’s offensive, and the fact that it sheepishly acknowledges its own offensiveness, supposedly an effort to make it more memorable. I’ve read the other (locked) thread on this same topic, and don’t agree with the other posters that if something says it’s trying to be offensive, that indemnifies it from any responsibility.
Additionally, “offensiveness” is not a blanket notion when the target of that offensiveness is a group of people who have suffered the effects of targeted hate for thousands of years. Other mnemonics might be shocking or disturbing in an effort to make them memorable (though I personally debate the utility of that as well) but there is a difference when, as the other thread mentioned, the mnemonic relies on cultural history that has led to the suffering of real people.
Furthermore, the mnemonic works against its stated purpose in that it’s offensive enough to disrupt learning by removing you from the context of what you’re doing entirely.
I don’t believe that this is the limit of the imagination of the authors of the mnemonics, so I’m asking you to please come up with an alternative. There is no compelling reason not to. I’m obviously not the first person to have strong enough feelings about this to bring it up, and I doubt I’ll be the last.