›
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

Does "cute" media make you nicer ?

2»

Comments

  • AnneBeecheAnneBeeche
    edited 2011-12-12 06:30:36
    I stand on Grendel's shoulders
    well apparently liking a kid's show about independent and proactive young pony-women doesn't make misogynists less misogynist, so sadly no.

    edit: if by author you mean lauren faust she communicated with the brony community on da and the show has made at least one shoutout.
  • glennmagusharveyglennmagusharvey
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Re thread topic: Sadly, watching moë does not turn people into LouieW clones.
  • RedEyedAbyssRedEyedAbyss
    edited 2011-12-12 13:53:37
    Instead, they more often are Travis Touchdown clones.
  • SaigyoujiSaigyouji
    But you never had any to begin with.
    I have yet to meet someone who cuts people into pieces for a living. Especially with a lightsaber beam katana.
  • PonicalicaPonicalica
    (void)
    «If the author admitted to it being open to much more demographics, then it's merely eccentric.»
    Lauren Faust's explicit goal was to destroy the stigma of liking girly things.
  • MalkavianMalkavian
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    ^^Well, that's because I use a scythe-rifle.

    In any case, this entire concept is absurd. If you're accepting that MLP or K-On! or Nichijou or whatever can make you a nicer person, then you're also saying that Black Lagoon, South Park, or Hellblazer could make you a mean or vicious one. This means you accept the idea that violent media could make you more violent.

    This means you see credence in the arguments people have to ban violent video games.
  • RedEyedAbyssRedEyedAbyss
    edited 2011-12-12 15:19:26

    Well, not directly, but I do think that certain people's glamorized view of war had to come from somewhere. Which of course is not the violence itself, but the message sent.

    Also, your argument comes dangerously close to thought-terminating cliché territory.

  • MalkavianMalkavian
    edited 2011-12-12 15:22:31
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    Not everything violent has to do with war. The logic would also stand that Nightmare on Elm Street has a glamourized view of serial killing and would encourage serial killing.

    Can this media all have an effect? certainly.

    But it's not going to define what you do. Only you can do that.

    As has been pointed out, many pony and moe fans are assholes and many horror and action fans are very nice.

    ^That would require it to be a cliche, and provide no point for a rebuttal which you clearly did.
  • RedEyedAbyssRedEyedAbyss
    Yep. I do think it's a more cultural thing than a media thing. Though I am interested in what precisely does cause the chickenhawk mentality.
  • MalkavianMalkavian
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    Social propoganda from war profitteers? 

    The fact that violence is almost always exciting no matter how it's portrayed?

    Fear?

    An 'Us and Them' mentality?

    Things way more complicated an insidious than John Wayne war movies?

    Which isn't to say I don't find the dehumanizing efforts of Modern Warfare an issue, I'm just doubtful it's going to be the most immediate effect on someone's psyche.
  • BeeBee
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.

    That never stopped Pinkie :D
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    Well, not directly, but I do think that certain people's glamorized view of war had to come from somewhere. Which of course is not the violence itself, but the message sent.

    War and violence being romanticized started first and foremost as patriotism and sense of belonging to a country and second as a media main stay.
  • MadassAlexMadassAlex
    One foot in front of the other, every day.
    I'd dispute that; the glamorisation of violence starts well before anything approaching the concept of a modern, centralised nation appears.

    Instead, I'd say that the glamorisation of violence is near enough to inherent to us. Almost all power, modern and historical, is coercive and thus tied to violence (although not necessarily combat). Given that coercive force has amounted to power for thousands of years, I'd rather ask why it wouldn't be glamorised; it seems only natural.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    I was thinking more of the sense of going to war in the name of honour and victory, rather than in a hunter gatherer sense. And even then, weren't cavemen supposed to be tribal anyway? you know hunt in packs, killing people and taking their territory? as a group?
  • MadassAlexMadassAlex
    One foot in front of the other, every day.
    Depends on the culture; European tribes, for instance, were individualistic. This meant that violence was an individual measure of validation rather than a collective one. A collectivist tribe might consider things differently.
  • InsanityAddictInsanityAddict
    Diet NEET
    We need to get some Agamben up in this bitch.
Sign In or Register to comment.