What are some examples of demolitionism in Yea Forums media?

I can't argue with the first two, the She-ra one is just dumb.

I would say Steven Universe. The diamonds were redemend even when we knew they were space nazis who destroyed thousands of planets and civilizations.

Attached: 1544386739482.png (1280x1280, 830K)

It's only bad if it's done for change sake or without reason. You could have more masculine females but give a reason in story. Say they are an ice tribe where men will leave for months to hunt meat and raid so the women have to do basically all the tasks. Boom you did it. Context is important. But instead OP just shit in front of us and thinks it's genius.

Surely you can do better than that for your pre-gun rampage manifesto white boi

I think you should try to invest some time into developing your own opinions and personality, rather than basing them on what the crowd says - going along with the crowd is bad but blindly hating things for being liked by others is no good too

This is beyond just a silly cartoon, user. I believe you can be a greater man than that

I think the Diamonds could have been redeemed in a more realistic way if Steven forced them to atone in some way. Make new worlds, help out other planets, something. It'd still be kind of dumb, but better than what we got. He just outright lets them go with no repercussions at all.

old is bad because old-fashioned
new is good because progressive

Old is bad cause it's outdated
New is bad cause it's useless
Nothing is good cause it has no downsides

Attached: 1550289175821.jpg (390x380, 25K)

Old is good because it worked
New is good because it works
Everything is good because it has nothing but upsides

>who destroyed thousands of planets and civilizations.
Gems and humans are the only civilizations in the SU universe. All the planets the Diamonds invaded were planets of plants and primitive animals

TLOK case is forced pandering but it's right about the fandom being a blind bitch about that.
>"Korrasami is just a letter and a dialogue about Hiyoshi" - Me.
>"That's a lie, there are more scenes where there is dialogue between them" - Some tumblrite shit in 2014.
>"Of course, dialogue that leads to nothing and if it was because of Korra's paralysis is generic" - Some defender of my first comment in tumblr.
>"No, it's not" - Same tumblrite shit.
The point of reaching that level of blindness was repeated with AT fandom.
They prefer a thousand times to ignore the enormous shortcomings of the products they follow so as not to commit suicide.
And that is a fact.
A terrible modern fact

Nice Pasta
Also if you bothered to read what I posted you’d know the shit drawings were a huge reason why i disliked it
But I’ll be fair tell me what was your favorite part of she ra

That's the fun of tribalism; kids compulsively need to slap a label on everything to make the world seem smaller and safer
>I don't have to listen to you because you're X!

It feels like that X is changing once a month now and it's absolutely retarded. I believe the current ones are NPC and tranny.

>kids compulsively need to slap a label on everything to make the world seem smaller and safer
In fairness, the world is genuinely a big, dangerous, terrifying place.

She-Ra isn't subversive, you bitch. It's not the greatest show, but it's pretty good and downright traditional.

That's why you get a gun.

Attached: 1550470094765.png (246x246, 121K)

It's evolved into "clown world" which is basically "everything is stupid and I'm above it all for pointing it out" and "your liberal ideas are ridiculous and I'm owning my victim complex because I enjoy making fun of the liberal dystopia you created for me".

Wasn't Clown world just shitposting?

Korra is not a good example of demolitionism, they all followed classic structures of narrative except they failed to do it properly.
I can't say that for She-Ra cause i haven't watched it yet.

Unless you're New Zealand, or the UK, or basically any Anglo country... in which case: NO GUNS FOR YOU!

Attached: soup nazi.jpg (617x425, 41K)

Reminder that demolitionman, or someone claiming to be him, abandoned the concept after being shown that his idea came about due to suspicions that things he didn't like were made to offend him.

Could be, but it was appropriated to be more anti-liberal.

It's really the same case as when people said pepe was an alt right simbol, there might be some versions that are like that but the core of the meme is just another form of shitposting

I think the 'clown world' stuff is supposed to refer to stuff that's so outrageous and ridiculous it makes you question reality. Though I might be misunderstanding it.

Don't you have an autistic meme filled manifesto to write before you shoot up your school?

Then you get the blade.

Attached: 1543346419230.gif (360x276, 2.42M)

Nothing actually works. The farther I venture away from my NEETdom, the more I realize the big part of an average normy's daily life is willingly ignoring how fucked everything is

>it's this thread
Go away.

And rejecting everything to live the cloistered life of NEETdom is facing reality as it is?
Return to the sterile safety of your self delutions loser

>what? you don't want to have your ability to defend yourself and your loved ones stripped away by reactionaries? you must be a crazed school shooter!!!

No it's specifically anti-liberal. It's a couple of years old.

More specifically, liberal stuff you don't agree with.

>1
That's just not planning ahead. Roadmaps people
>2
I'm pretty sure rule #1 of any showrunner is to never listen to the fans because they can and will derail the show.
>3
That only applies to properties that had any values to begin with.

Unless you're referring to societal values in which case, how is antagonizing traditional values a bad thing?

Attached: 1548695346547.png (349x427, 251K)

Redeemed implies they ever apologized or regretted or were made to answer for any of their ruthless deeds. And with the exception of how they treated Pink Diamond, that didn't happen at all. All their actions were stuff that was either neutral or beneficial to them, and there's no reason to think that'll change in the future.

Like fuck, I don't get how that's hard to grasp since you could farm just as much outrage out of the implicit idea that revolution against authority is impossible, and the best you can do is help them act in their best interest and hope that trickles down to make your situation better.

star wars - probably since the prequels but definitely now

early dceu (though they have course corrected it appears)

transformers probably? seems like it fits this description pretty well

>STOP CRITICIZING MY FRIENDS WORK ;;

It's okay when Sherk does it ironically.
It's not okay when there's any post-irony liberals involved.

>It's okay when Sherk does it ironically.
>It's not okay when there's any post-irony liberals involved.
Not that user but I hated how Shrek turned most animated movies into reference-filled quipfests.

Don't blame the original, blame the shitty imitations.

Attached: green_curtain_by_silhouette_txd-d64mqij.gif (650x450, 134K)

That might be Word of God but it's not revealed through the narrative (at least it wasn't by the time I stopped watching that garbage in S2), and even then, humans are considered primitive to gems. There's no telling how much sapient life was destroyed. The more relevant lesson SU teaches is Might makes Right. The Gems absolutely deserve to be eradicated by this point, but who's gonna?

Because traditional vales tend to work out a lot better than new wave bullshit.

He can't k33p getting away with this.

Attached: a2907966241_10.jpg (350x350, 38K)

If your government doesn't let you buy guns, a criminal will give you bullets for free.
The NZ shooting had an opportunity to end a handful of kills into the event when one of the Mosque-goers got the drop on the guy, but surprise, he didn't have a gun! NZ has strict gun laws that discourage peaceful citizens from being armed, so that guy was left trying to bare-handed handle an armed assailant and lost his life along with 49 others. In fact, in New Zealand's current gun laws, personal protection/self defense is not considered a lawful and proper use for a gun.
An armed society is a polite society.

What the fuck is this bullshit?

dude, Adventure Time dedicated a shit ton of episodes to resolving all of its plot lines

>Because traditional vales tend to work out a lot better than new wave bullshit.
Edgy tragic endings were the norm centuries ago and the happy ending were the hero gets the girl was the new wave bullshit.

>bullshit
Exactly.

Attached: tumblr_mr8apgTFjR1s5ykbco1_500.png (500x536, 150K)

Not really. Cartoons, by nature, subvert tradition. Comics too. They're both relatively new, unconventional and untraditional methods of storytelling that are reaching their peak during the postmodern era. Sure, you can say that the disjointed lol random shit is useless garbage, but some of the best works come out of subversion.

Because I’d rather have female characters that don’t look like A gendered abominations like dyke ra

NPC's are out. It's full-on Incel on Tranny action. "T. tranny vs Have sex".

How many other times have you been antagonized by dfc?

What values does She-ra antagonize?

Attached: 1500369330043.png (482x372, 176K)

I agree with what some have said before. In itself, we could eventually give the term of the approach of some works that are subversive for the subversive with nothing behind. However, the term is problematic on other points. He mixes structural issues with receptivity to fan service and the fact of embracing and promoting non-traditional values. These are separate objects. Named in a single term is to make an amalgam not necessarily very good. In addition, the term is based on the intentions of the artist. It can be difficult to judge the intentions of the author on the sole basis of his work. The term could end up becoming a snarl word.

None, just the need for all girls to have big bewbs. It was actually in that point that demolitionkun backed off from the concept; the idea of deliberate antagonism is rooted deep in a childish mentality that anything made not to your liking is made to spite you.

Big reason why everything sucks now. Post modernism has no place in mainstream storytelling.

Attached: notthisshit.jpg (800x450, 82K)

Right, and this speaks to the larger problems have with the modern world; this over cynicism imagines problems through assumed intentions. This creates an unfalsifiable pretense that fills in the blanks if how someone couldn't possibly like the things you don't like. It's a concept as old as time, but it hardly ever gets highlighted as perfectly as it does here.

Is Demolitionism another one of those accursed courses at the mythical Frankfurt School?

Pretty much. It's nothing no one would admit to, but a vague accusation idiots make when they think there's something sinister in poor writing and character designs they don't find attractive.

The Lich was explored in full and received a full arc and more.
He doesn't have any business being there.

Attached: big picture show.jpg (814x542, 92K)

>An armed society is a polite society.
But Americans have guns.

THIS IS WHAT THE NRA ACTUALLY BELIEVES

Jesus Christ

Attached: elementareee.jpg (247x204, 9K)

>that she-ra one
that's how you ruin the credibility of your argument

OP has been posting this here and bumping his own threads for months. It's not a real word but proof that if you don't have a job or family you can just sit here and keep doing literally anything and it will become a meme even if it's not clever. Anyway OP first threads were just bitching about the shows and it was clear he wanted a fancy way of saying "bad writing" and bitching about cartoons he was mad at.

>5 cents have been deposited into your NRABUX account

There aren't any, because demolitionism doesn't exist.

In the US, guns are used in self-defense against violence FAR more than in acts of violence.

>it's another fucking "demolitionism" thread that'll probably get a shitload of replies

Anyone who ever tries to make this a thing is a fucking moron. The definition and first two points are just universal cardinal sin for writing. You will never make a good story by doing any of these things. Subversion for the sake of subversion and at the expense of structure, development, and purpose makes for a story about as intelligently written and memorable as a fucking jumpscare and twice as insulting. Mass fan input rarely makes for anything other than a good suggestion, maybe there are some singular intelligent ideas hidden among the trash heap but when you lump them all together it'll never amount to anything more than pandering dogshit that generally involves shipping. Embracing themes that antagonize traditional values or dynamics is the only potentially salvageable concept, because there's nothing inherently wrong with, for example, writing a story about a piece of shit where the moral is that being yourself can be bad.

What's even the point of this? It's phrased like it's a neutral term, like there's nothing inherently wrong with writing a story that doesn't have a solid structure or development. That's the most basic fucking step to writing a good story. Don't fucking try to put a definition and term on "bad writing" as if it's anything other than BAD WRITING, because that's all any of this shit is. There's no grand scheme out to attack the white man that explains why shitty shows are shit, you cocksucking mongoloid.

Attached: 1514515294713.jpg (1920x1080, 134K)

Sure, but you can't act like you're mentally superior online when you're throwing labels around everywhere
It's like claiming to be a professional doctor when you can't even show off a high school diploma

That would be an incredible piece of information, and a valid defense of your claims, if it was true. The reality is that a US citizen is more likely to injure a friend or family member, whether by malice or simply by accident, than to defend themselves.

Haven't you heard of the old saying keep your friends close and your enemies closer. It's all apart of our plan to rid those who wish to cause harm.

Attached: 1552751863331.gif (300x159, 1.55M)

That feels like trying to push teenager mentality and Yea Forums contrasism as a school of politics.

But some women are masculine because that's how they feel and what makes them comfortable. How is that an inherintly unbelieveable phenomenon?

That's what it is. It's the natural progression of trolling as the Trump camp falls apart with what happened during his presidency. The politics of lowering standards and discourse for the sake of sticking it to the SJW oppressors in some round about way are excused when you see the whole structure, the whole system as the enemy. They won't openly express hatred for anything in particular, but see the whole thing as stupid while they're so smart. People like that will go out of their way to excuse real evil, real normalization of homicidal actions, while condemning petty shit like drag queen story time which, as uncomfortable as it makes me, doesn't compare to joking about suicide rates. Have a conversation about mental health in regards to transexuals, that's fine, but be constructive.

You know we're surrounded by cancer when people are outright triggered by itty bitty titties, unconfirmed lesbians, and reverse traps.

Attached: She Ra Catra IuI.jpg (1200x1200, 178K)

>UK
>Anglo country

Attached: UK Pakistan.gif (375x304, 778K)

Funny how all this shit is present in anime and manga but it's only bad when westerners do it.

>white people in Britain: 81.9%
>white people in the USA: 61.3%
Why are racists always wrong even about which cultures are doing 'better' in their imaginary culture war?

Attached: hahaaaa.jpg (584x600, 36K)

But this is Yea Forums you faggot, maybe try thinking and addressing the issue next time.

Attached: IMG_20190308_100634.jpg (1112x640, 42K)

Funny how quick you were to cry racism over a joke.

Attached: Britain 15.jpg (312x445, 46K)

Being a contrarian for the sake of contrarianism is obnoxious. The reason why traditional has been around for so long is because it works. Questioning and examining the traditional isn't bad. It's how you improve and progress. The problem is when you reject it for a worse alternative. That's not progress. That's devolution and destabilization.

>Thread has nothing to do with anime
>Guy who made image is making no comparisons to anime
>No indication that the guy who made the image even watches anime
>Hurr durr but you don't complain when anime does it
Not everybody on Yea Forums watches fucking anime

Attached: incredible but i still dont understand.jpg (324x375, 52K)

It was a racist joke.

When was it rejected for a worst alternative in animation?

Are you STILL at this? Fucking kill yourself, you pathetic pseudointellctual

This. He's mad because the evil sijjews and their horrible college degrees kept using big words to call him out on how infantile and stupid he is. Now he wants a big word so he can feel like his heroes Jordan Peterson and Ben Shapiro. He's basically a fucking caveman angry about how people are living in houses.

I don't think it's him. He's been shying away from his original terrible pic that lays out his thoughts with specific examples that can be easily debated with one that's more vague. He tried to save it by being less specific, a sign his word was doomed to fail.

Attached: 1537362432357.png (957x769, 106K)

The dumb shit is there are already words that get at this idea (that are themselves stupid: absurdism, or a post-structuralist/postmodern/deconstructionist approach) but it's better applied to something like Beckett's Waiting for Godot than "I hate this cartoon because it has lesbians in it because I hate real life lesbians/Democrats" and this other dumb crap. That's not what that is at fucking all. It's not even an argument about whether those shows are well written or not, his early thread made it obvious he was so fucking mad about yuri as if yuri is inherently Theatre of the Absurd which = bad. It's like someone who's watched a YouTube video that mentions this shit so makes up more shit to say "yuri makes me angry" instead of just saying that.

>embrace of themes that antagonize traditional values or dynamics
This looks like reactionary conservatism very thinly disguised as a literary analysis.

It doesn't help when SJWs who actually LIKE this tripe defends the crap writing AS a good thing, and implies that it's fighting against "the Patriarchy/Heteronormative values etc etc.

There's no grand scheme yes, but the other brand of crazies aren't helping.

Ugh, did the maker of this pic use a thesaurus to write that?

>questioning the wisdom throwing out social structures for the sake of brownie points with small cadres of lesbians
>conservative

yea ok

Adventure Time.

Less the romance at the end (though two immortals getting over their unspoken divide with unspoken logic and unspoken passion is pretty piss poor writing), and more the fact that Finn didn't really have a finale, it was more everyone else around him did.

Which is a little fucked up when you realise that includes his rapist. You can have your open ended stories, or you can have lumpy space princess, pick ONE Muto.

Really strawman. Discussions are rarely actually about the writing. It's just a bunch of yelling and outrage about ideas, often by people on both sides who didn't watch the fucking thing and just want to rant about politics. But the supposed problem or virtue is there's gay people, there are women or poor people or other races than white or foreigners or other dumb shit. Sometimes when you watch the fucking show none of that was even in it, some social media "influencers" with their "hot takes" jumped the gun to make click bait headlines for articles or videos people don't read or watch, just link to post rants somewhere.

Threads like this are why Trump will win in 2020.

i dont need to convince myself
all 3 examples range from "painfully mediocre" to "bad"

None of that crap has anything to do with literary analysis. It's like bitching that Black Panther is "Demolitonist" because it's about black people, which I've seen people do about that or Spiderverse in different words. But BP is a pretty fucking standard narrative, just say "I'm a white supremacist" instead of pretending it's about literary criticism. There are plenty of classic works that are really trying to be subversive or nihilistic and undermining the idea of "meaning" or narrative purpose, you're slapping that on unrelated complaints about race or politics.

Because it happens randomly, not to prove any kind of point, but instead for the sake of doing it and done inconsistently.

>It's like bitching that Black Panther is "Demolitonist" because it's about black people
Which no one is doing because...

>But BP is a pretty fucking standard narrative
...it isn't demolitionist. It doesn't substitute identity for story.

>just say "I'm a white supremacist" instead of pretending it's about literary criticism
Nah, there's no such thing as wypipo. It's a meme invented by literary critics.

>it isn't demolitionist
Because there's no such fucking thing as "demolitionism" don't be a fucking faggot. You made that up. It's like saying something is or isn't loopcheeseoujeprtionist. There now that's a real word because I typed it user on Yea Forums. Retard.

Back to plebbit with you then.

>you
Now hold on, friendo. You may have me confused with someone else.

>loopcheeseoujeprtionist
Ah! You've read Boudrilliard? Lacan? You never told me you were a literary critic.

>You've read Boudrilliard? Lacan?
You don't even want to fucking go there, I did before I got real degrees and a real career. Whatever the politics, literary criticism is, in fact, worthless and for faggots. The shit in this thread isn't it, but it's retarded in similar ways as idiots try to pretend their stupid takes matter. There's a damn good reason the liberal arts are a joke and a ticket to fast food jobs.

I'll say it before and say it again. We are in a post tv-tropes environment. Its safe to say the newer generation of writers are intentional/unintentionally trying to avoid being tropey because they have it in their heads that being tropey is bad. I know when I tried to write stuff I actively attempted to avoid them or to end up frustrating because I felt like walking on egg shells. But is being done here isn't inherently bad.

>embrace of theme that antagonize traditional values or dynamics.
This the one that gets me the most. There is nothing wrong with breaking from tradition. the 90s and early 2000s were fucking filled with shows that intentionally broke from tradition or took the piss on society in some form. Oblongs, Mission Hill, Daria, Beavis and Butt-head, FUCKING MORAL OREL probably one of the most beloved show on the board takes the fucking piss at fucking Christianity. There's nothing fucking wrong with breaking away from tropes, it just has to be written good. The reality is the whole "Demolitionism" thinly veiled attempt to make bitching about SJWs more mainstream by aiming at the "FACTS AND LOGIC" retards.

Attached: morel orel.png (638x477, 523K)

His story was endless adventure though. He found his family, his people, his dad, saved PB from her stupid war, and helped Sweet P become the Lich patrolling badass we see in the future. Everyone he saved saved him in the end. Also it's network television that thought it was getting another season.

Right and they do that so it feels justified. If there's a word for it and people agree with it, then it must be real criticism. I think the patient zero post was someone who asked why liberals ruin everything and then someone explained postmodern writing and the concept of subverting expectations and used some examples of where it was done well. As it often happens, when someone gets an answer to a political loaded question that's simpler and more straight forward than they were looking for, they hate the answer as if it's some sort of argument or defense. Shortly after the first thread was made as the hatred for subverting expectations was seen as "fuck you straight white male viewer we hate you". The term was an accusation that no one could confirm and was based on the feeling one gets when Adventure Time ends in a way you don't like.

t.cuckservatard

>postmodernism
Fuck off, /pol/

"Reeee why are people free to do stuff i don't like"
You are fucking autistic and i depise postmodernism but you are acting exactly like the SJWs you hate so much.

>meanwhile Watchmen is one of the best comics

Your definition sucks because the stuff that most closely fits it is slice of life anime with surrealist comedy elements.

youtube.com/watch?v=jR0eBWDVAtw

The first Yea Forums media that comes to mind as fitting your definition is The Dover Boys,

>Intentional Disregard of Fundamental Structure, development, and purpose in storytelling for the sake of subversion of expectations

These are more commonly referred to as "jokes"

>Developments are random

Seems to fit, especially the old dude in the sailor hat

>Integrity is rare

I have no idea what this means

>Overly receptive to fan input/Embrace of themes that antagonize traditional values or dynamics

It's Chuck Jones taking the piss out of network execs who wanted certain things in his cartoons

>Lack of structure, planning, and care

That's just you saying "it sucks"

Attached: Azumanga.jpg (205x246, 11K)

>Deconstruction is brilliant when I like it and terrible when I don't like it.

Attached: download (2).jpg (292x173, 25K)

When YOUR comics have butch lesbians with swords, that's "pandering"

When MY comics have half-naked catgirls spanking a woman in bondage gear, that's "traditional values".

Attached: 1550946470-EMP5 p122.jpg (730x937, 275K)

>There is nothing wrong with breaking from tradition
No one is saying it is. They're saying that breaking from tradition AS A TROPE IN ITSELF, for no philosophically informed or narratively important reason, is shitty. Taking the piss on society is not breaking from tradition, anyway.

>Demolitionism" thinly veiled attempt to make bitching about SJWs more mainstream by aiming at the "FACTS AND LOGIC" retards.
Kek, gatekeeping loser.

Literally no one says this.

All three example from OPs pic are hated shows on this board. In in turn having the example stated are bad traits to have in any story telling medium.

>You could have more masculine females but give a reason in story

I hope one day the cruel archdeacon lets you out of the bell tower so that you can see that there's more than one type of woman in the real world.

Attached: screen-shot-2018-11-13-at-8-42-24-am-e1542120194442.png (752x392, 437K)

considering that image of she-ra is clearly from the promotional material when it was first announced, this is a stale fucking bait thread in desperate need of refreshing.
Hell, fucking Big Mouth would be a more appropriate image to slap on there

Because all three shows consider what they do transgressive when it isn't. It's peak pretension. It also happens to be poor storytelling in the first two examples.

The final example just pisses me off. It's a perfect example of subversion for its own sake, without anything approaching a legitimate reason for the supposed "dangerous" redesign. The whole purpose of the original She-Ra, besides selling toys of course, was to show a traditional female being just as, if not more, powerful than an idealized traditional male. It was WAY MORE TRANSGRESSIVE. It was an actual, real subversion. "I can kick He-Man's ass in heels" is much more of a dangerous idea than portraying the same character with masculine traits and making her a meathead.

They're hated because they're a mish-mash of unrelated and contradictory ideas presented as social progress and no one is buying it. It has nothing to do with tradition.

As awful as Big Mouth is, it still isn't part of the Triad of Hatred.

They don't consider it peak transgression. What's this based on?

>to where it effects the original story

it did jack shit besides add them in at the end as being together. People reading into shit is one thing but that didn't actually affect the plot of the fucking show because this was brought up entirely in the last episode.

i'm not saying it was good writing, I'm just calling out the hyperbole of this somehow wrecking or misdirecting the plot...

Attached: What the fuck did you say.png (326x293, 212K)

You cut to the point of how bullshit all that was. Maybe demolition man is gone, but hopefully he understands why his word was rejected beyond "you just don't like me making new words".

Korra/Asami effected the original story? It happened in literally the last minute of the show.

The sole reason for doing these things is to seem transgressive and to score intersectional brownie points. See for justifiable confusion.

It's the equivalent of "edge" in the mid-90s. It's a marketable idea portrayed as something dangerous or socially unacceptable, but they just don't UNDERSTAND MAN. It's silly to call it "necessary" or "innovative" or anything approaching narratively important.

youtube.com/watch?v=gqJTMl1F9Wg

It's hard to tell when exactly that's done for that reason. You have assume that is what the writer's room is actually thinking, which they probably won't admit to.

>Demolitionism
So is it just me or does anybody else see that dude from TF2 taking this as a class in college or something?

That's all assumption though. To think that it's just for intersectional brownie points, you have to believe that the creatives are actually conservative marketers begrudgingly packaging their gay kiss for Korean networks to censor later. It doesn't make sense to be so cynical.

That's the whole thread, though. If a comic has a thing I like that's because it's good, if a comic has a thing they like it's pandering.

>traditional female

they de-aged she-ra and took away her boobs, that probably in part with kids being more receptive with character closer to their own age as its easier to fill in as them. She's doesn't have eye shadow, big fucking deal. In all honestly its a fucking good thing what with the rise of make up related youtubers and Instagramer. There a more pre-teen girls that are fucking obsessed with make-up not knowing that having your pores clogged with powdered pigment is gonna wreak havoc on your face in the long-run. And she still has a fucking skirt. Just because she's wearing bike short ( which in part is just to avoid making panty shots) it doesn't make her less of a female.

My guy you need to take a chill pill, your making Mountain out of Ant hills

Attached: MJadvice.gif (480x358, 1.14M)

In fact, if I recall correctly, the whole reason Yea Forums hated it so much in the first place was because it came out of nowhere.

It's hard to assume otherwise when Mike and Bryan, in response to wide criticisms of Korra's final season, accused critics of viewing the show through a hetero-lens. Instantly put a stop to the criticism and even lent the show new credibility in the woke blog circuit.

It's pretty obviously done for brownie points.

My guy, you need to read a book or three and endlessly analyze the psychosexual significance of Korean children's cartoons.

Or are you here for a different reason?

the horror-verse thread but that shit is slower than a turtle with ankle weight.

>the sex-obsessed BDSM father fellator thread
Oh, that one.

>To think that it's just for intersectional brownie points, you have to believe that the creatives are actually conservative marketers begrudgingly packaging their gay kiss for Korean networks to censor later. It doesn't make sense to be so cynical

It can be a bit of both, but a lot of the people who hate SJW cartoons are anime fans, and nothing panders as much, as hard, or as shamelessly as anime. It just panders to straight dudes, so they don't mind it.

Attached: killlakill05.jpg (1366x768, 88K)

The woke blog circuit are right though, it's a significant moment. It's not an AMAZING moment well done and executed, but it's appreciated. They weren't there to review the series but reflect on LGBT representation in children's programming. I'm not sure how they used it to deflect criticism, but in the demolitionism threads before no one provided examples. If anything, they'd be using their LGBT relationship to deflect criticism of their choice to have an LGBT relationship, but I don't see how that could be mentioned if someone has a problem with Kuvira and the pacing in general.

How is it done for brownie points?

what?

Attached: F74A6991-AC69-E78C-6171B06519DCDCB4.jpg (615x409, 31K)

It cuts to the hypocrisy of this prejudice where anything outside of the acceptable norm is forced. Nevermind that when one accepts their complete pretense, a story about a straight white male Chad saving the Stacy princess would be completely forced subversion.

Remember this is another piece of media that isn't particularly good but is also remembered to have the first interracial kiss televised.

Attached: 20181129_083813_pvgcLS_112918_starkiss_400.jpg (400x310, 22K)

>They weren't there to review the series but reflect on LGBT representation in children's programming.
No they weren't, because the show wasn't about LGBT representation in children's programming. They were trying to move themselves closer to what they perceived as a cultural moment. When it turned out that wasn't it, they moved on. Who "appreciates" it? Honestly, I want to know. It's like asking someone if they appreciate kiss.

I have never in my life met anyone who thought Kill la Kill wasn't embarrassing. It's embarrassing to project that embarrassment on other, similarly embarrassing media.

But seriously, this recent and genuine example of somebody fucking their story up on purpose. He flipped the narrative table when the game was almost over and then sucked all the pieces and his head into his ass like a hoover vacuum.

Attached: 1545106361674.gif (245x173, 931K)

"Anti-pandering" types want every mainstream comic to be Rob Liefield and every indie comic to be Rob Crumb

>The same board that loved Black Panther, Wonder Woman, and Spiderverse just can't handle stories about non-white, non-male protagonists.
At a certain point you have to ask yourself if you've adequately examined your own bias and whether or not projecting it into a space like this isn't the least bit embarrassing.

I'm gay and I appreciate it. It's nice to see that people are willing to take risks on you, that we're at that point in society where this is able to happen with little consequence. It makes me feel safer holding hands with the one I love in public.

Still bad writing though.

except there have been multiple threads bitching about spider-verse because it message was about "anyone could be spider-man" because it was a means to devalue peter parker's importance as spider-man .

>take risks on you
Do you honestly believe they did it for you? That it wasn't a shallow cash-in designed to pander to the Almight Wokest who use you and yours as emblems on their Intersectional Merit Badge sash? Do you really feel safer knowing that you aren't so much a person as you are a vague gestalt whose identity is acceptable only so long as it's subsumed by what your handlers deem appropriate and sufficiently progressive?

And holding hands in public is cringeworthy regardless of sexual orientation.

Attached: OP.jpg (567x422, 59K)

It's really ironic when people complain about pandering in comics when it's an industry built on legacy characters that have been around for more than 50 years. It's pure marketing with very little integrity, but market it wrong and people are upset that it's marketed at all.

>multiple threads
And there are daily threads about how it was the best Spiderman movie ever made and robbed of an Oscar.

Promps to this autist for always push his shitpost again and again and again...

It could be both. It is a group project. Some might have done it to be inclusive. Others might have done it, either subconsciously or not, to virtue signal. The ones with the pursestrings might have been ahead of the game with wokecnomics.

>and robbed of an Oscar.

Was this before it won the Oscar and everyone assumed Disney/Pixar would win, again.

Yeah, they see me as a marketable demographic rather than someone who is to be avoided. "Gay" is synonymous with "bad". Feeling less like a leper in public is nice and being pandered to makes me feel better about being open, like I have to hide less.

>your handlers
You're being absurd.

Holding hands is a sweet gesture, though it's annoying when done too often. Still nice to feel better about seeing as an option.

What are some examples of incelism in Yea Forums?

You cannot subconsciously virtue signal, but that's besides the point. I can't speak for you. I can only say, from where I'm sitting, identity seems to be getting corporatized. It isn't being accepted so much as it is being transformed into something marketable. That worries me.

"Inclusivity" always bothered me anyway. I never saw the presence or absence of a person indicative of acceptance of one of a bevy of woke clubs that person may or may not belong to.

I'm not even sure when to call it virtue signalling when it's both something that exists and something that is actually controversial. Again, you'd have to imagine that the creatives are a team of conservative marketers looking to make a buck and don't really care about the gays rather than the Californian liberals who actually make up these teams.

>Feeling less like a leper in public
No one can tell you're gay just by your walking around in public, user. That's paranoia talking.

Depends on the person. Some you can tell right off and some you really have to make an effort to figure out.

>I can't speak for you. I can only say, from where I'm sitting, identity seems to be getting corporatized. It isn't being accepted so much as it is being transformed into something marketable.

This was always the case. You strike me as the person who sees identity politics as a new thing social media SJWs started, completely disregarding Jim Crow and the identity politics that have existed since before then.

If you're walking with a significant other or you and your husband are bringing your child to school people know. When people know you as a friend of a friend or maybe they're you're coworkers, you can't assume they're all cool with you.

It's not but like left handedness why should I care? Unless there is a backstory, a setting reason or something there's no reason to bring heavy attention to it.

It's literally illegal to own a gun for self defense in NZ. The government won't license you if your purpose for the license is to protect yourself. You cannot "Possess a firearm with the anticipation that you will need it to defend yourself". That's part of their actual arms code.

Attached: nzselfdefense.png (374x312, 61K)

You should go to vegas with that kind of luck.
Take a look in the Love, Death and Robots threads and see the autism unleashed over the Sonnie's Edge short.

It's funny that I strike you in that way seeing that I haven't once used the term "identity politics," specifically because the term is pointless and is literally recursive. I'm referencing the identity politics of SJWs, not Jim Crow.

Gaydar's a meme son.
Well thank goodness they all watch Korra then. Certainly feel safer now, don't we?

How is resisting any time an LGBT character gets used in a story not conservative?

I know you didn't use the word identity politics, that's not what I was saying. It's just pointing out that worrying that marketers care a out identity NOW as if it's a new trick is absurd.

Because that doesn't happen, dude.

I'm not talking gaydar. I'm talking about just simple mannerisms, tells and personality quirks that give a person away, especially if you associate with people in the community or have a lot of gay/bi friends.

The Shera reboot is made up of standard-as-fuck themes. Unresolved plotlines is standard as fuck. Fanservice is standard as fuck.

OP is a fag.

Attached: 1.jpg (640x480, 46K)

This is "gun free zone" sticker levels of stupidity.

I'm alive now. I wasn't alive when Jim Crow was a thing. I'm commenting on trends happening now because that's when I live.

I don't understand why you think that's absurd.

That's literally gaydar.

>Well thank goodness they all watch Korra then. Certainly feel safer now, don't we?
That's not implied at all. The idea is that "we're at that point in society where this is able to happen with little consequence". It's a sign of the times in my country and it's comforting.

I've been here long enough to see that it does. There's not a single time a lesbian's been added to a cartoon where some contingent of Yea Forums pisses and moans about it.

Stop calling deconstructionism "demolitionism".

Or stop having FAR too high a view of deconstructionism.

I can't tell which, but stop it.

>listening to shippers
>Make every one of them angry

Because I'm sure you had enough history lessons if you're old enough to post here.

Well, I'm glad you feel comforted. Hope it lasts.

The guy's original intention was to create a separate category that fell into "I feel like these creatives are SJW tumblrinas and they're doing this to spite me".

>Yea Forums = American society writ large
lol ok

I know what Jim Crow was, but I'm not informed enough on the details of American culture at the time to make valid opinions on it. That's why I'm commenting on what I'm familiar with in the present.

Again, that this escapes you is confusing. It's not absurd or weird or odd to comment on current social trends, user.

I call it observation. Gaydar is just acting like you 'feel' out a person's gayness without any effort.

They assumed the latter because for awhile, it's always been the case. For a LONG time, what they actually liked didn't matter in the least. If there's a Disney/PIXAR movie on the list, it will win regardless if they theink another movie deserves it better.

This is one of the first few times that the trend has bucked.

I didn't feel that from the ORIGINAL original post back like 2 years ago probably. I just felt he thought he was being clever pointing out something that he saw and just assumed nobody had ever seen it before despite the fact that it's been talked about since Dostoevsky. But maybe I was blind to the pettiness then and haven't seen it with new eyes since.

Either way the prescription is the same: get some worldliness in your pettiness... towards the OP, of course.

Threads like this (and many others) make me ashamed from ever expressing my own tastes in fiction, especially when it comes to depicting women. Because who wants to be put on the spot for pandering to SJWs/Incels/Misogynists/Ancap etc etc. I can't even depict whatever female character I want or dress however I like because no matter what I do, SOMEONE will think I'm cancer/problematic/Nazi/commie etc.

Atm though, I suspect the only reason why people pander to SJWs is because Incels are technically harmless in the grand scheme of things. Piss off a SJW and say goodbye to your career FOREVER. That's why they'd rather depict modest/plain SJW women, because it's safer to piss on those who like a little bit of skin. I mean, what are INCELS going to do? Boycott your game? (See also Mortal Kombat 11)

The existence of Kate Leith and Gabby Riviera doesn't do much to dispell that feeling.

>Piss off a SJW and say goodbye to your career FOREVER
Well sometimes you just become president of the US or the voice of Hades.

The same joke the NAZIS THEMSELVES jailed the perpetrator for. Because it was at their expense. Now people are getting jailed for the same joke because they think it's ENDORSING them.

Only if you have "fuck you" money. If you have neither of those, well you're fucked. And god forbid you becomes a comedian who pisses off SJWs lest some crazed Gunman will use your meme to get attention, hereby giving SJWs an excuse to want you ban and cut off from everything forever.

>That spacing between comments you replied
It's that you, Murrlogic?

>Yea Forums = American society writ large
Who are you quoting?

I see. Still though

>from where I'm sitting, identity seems to be getting corporatized. It isn't being accepted so much as it is being transformed into something marketable.
lacks a lot of perspective of what marketing is. Selling an identity is ancient if you want to get technical, about 70 years old if you don't.

>Gabby Riviera

she aint worked in comics since her run on America ended.

Does Murrlogic get super angry about /leftypol/ on Yea Forums?

>who wants to be put on the spot
YOU FUCKING WEATHER IT. They're self defeating and adhd riddled. Wait them out till the next person gets hit.

Or you could just not give any fucks about either side and enjoy your shit proudly. Its just a matter of not going full retard like most do with it.

Cho is doing fine and he directly fought with feminists. Stressing over this pointlessly trying to play the hypothetical victim in some hypothetical world.

I don't know how James Rolfe does it. Many corporations BREAK when they get that amount of negative attention.

James however just keeps trucking like nothing happened.

Because he does what nobody on Yea Forums will and just ignores them.

And don't forget the success of South Park. If we were truly some SJW hell, it would have caught flack for many of it's episodes. Instead, it's adored on tumblr.

I think the point of contention is that you keep framing it as "current"

South Park HAS caught hell before. Often. Back in the 90's and even as recently as the last season.

They openly mocked the cancel south park hashtag in the last season, which was started to, well, cancel it.

Because the truth is you don't have to actually care. Just give an apology that costs you nothing and wait it out.
The only people that keep forcing the issue one way or another and turn it into a culture war do so because they have nothing else going on.

I thought they started their own #cancelsouthpark. I didn't see it mentioned before and it was mentioned as something they started themselves in preparation for their own new season because Matt and Trey were sick of it themselves.

>Just give an apology that costs you nothing and wait it out.
Rolfe didn't apologize. Nor should he have, and nor will he ever.

In some cases, you shouldn't apologise, because that's an admission you did something wrong, and in some cases, saying you're sorry only makes the recipient more likely to hurt you.

>I thought they started their own #cancelsouthpark
You know at first I was pretty sure they didn't, but they might have been making fun of the #cancelcolbert thing. Which was the same thing.

It's not the same thing, it actually shows that SJWs are more caught up in "rallying" against liberal shows than libertarian/centrist satire. Kind makes it seem like not a big deal.

See, that's you caring.
That's what you're doing wrong. You think your pride matters instead of picking your battles wisely.

You make yourself vulnerable to the people you care about. An apology, if not stated correctly, can be interpreted many ways, some cynical, some logical.

He's not wrong that you shouldn't apologize.
But I think it's because they should just be ignored because they shouldn't be dignified with a response.

Is it prideful to just ignore them and move on? Because that's what James did. HE didn't apologize for his actions.

Depends, shirtgate went away after the apology. The only ones still bringing to up are people who want to talk about shit like how disgusted they are that feminist clickbait would rather talk about feminist things than a triumph in astrophysics.

Said feminist could have celebrated the women who took part in project that happened if they truly cared about "feminism". Instead, thanks to that apology, now it has gotten a LOT WORSE for everyone.

When James criticized Ghostbusters, it didn't came across as "This has women in it, therefore bad". It came off as "This looks like another cash-in remake, therefore bad". He wasn't really a part of the Girlbusters controversy, just caught in the crossfire.

You don't need to come up with a brand new word just to complain about new media.

>Instead, thanks to that apology, now it has gotten a LOT WORSE for everyone.
How?

We live in the current age of #Metoo and people are now adopting the Pence method unironically.

I know that, you know that, we ALL know that. The people who rallied the troops to try and attack him en masse? (Like Devin Faraci) They didn't care. In fact, they basically went "You said X, but you really meant Y". For some people, it doesn't matter what you said. If you're marked, NOTHING you say matters.

People became more aware of sexual misconduct because a guy apologized in a small fringe "controversy"?

Netflix castlevania.

It's like that Sinfest comic with the "Patriarchy Goggles".

I do not. I choose to focus on what is currently happening, namely the identity politics of SJWs.

That is not framing identity politics as a current invention. That windmill's not a giant, Don. Pay attention.

Again, how? Slacktivists have gotten people to apologize before, how did this make #metoo happen?

>defend yourself
>from unarmed, harmless people
>one of them a 3 year old

Attached: 1542087281697.jpg (240x240, 4K)

>It's funny that I strike you in that way seeing that I haven't once used the term "identity politics," specifically because the term is pointless and is literally recursive.

Attached: 1549055261820.gif (500x362, 496K)

...where in that post do I say that identity politics is a current invention?

>Build up main antagonist of the series to be an all-powerful threat that should not be fucked with.
>Reduce him to a literal blubbering giant baby for the sake of visual gas because muh forced teenage romance and drama is more important.

Fuck Adventure Time fags and fuck anyone who likes this shit past S2.

>from where I'm sitting, identity seems to be getting corporatized. It isn't being accepted so much as it is being transformed into something marketable.
>seem to be getting corporatized
>it is being transformed into something marketable
This seems to suggest that you see these as recent developments.

post S4 Adventure time is almost unwatchable. Regular Show got kinda dumb with the romantic plotlines but still managed to pull through with some awesome episodes and even ending well.

If you kept watching you'd see the Lich exists in every timeline and in every universe. It wasn't over.

Again, I don't see how you can infer that I believe this has never happened before.

Let me ask, are you arguing this pedantically because you disagree with what I'm saying or are you choosing to focus on a strawman point for some other reason?

Am I wrong or are you still charging that windmill?

>In fact, they basically went "You said X, but you really meant Y".
Everyone does this.
Aren't people on this board doing this to Brie Larson right now?

Nothing you said was true.
First, you misquoted the study you are thinking of. Specifically:
> US citizen is more likely to injure a friend or family member, whether by malice or simply by accident, than to defend themselves.
The study specifically and EXCLUSIVELY looked at suicides. In homes of primarily police officers. Who killed themselves. With their service weapon.

Second:
The number of self defenses with a firearm per year STILL exceed the number of deaths by firearm: INCLUDING suicides and accidents.
Suicide by firearm accounting for about half of all deaths by firearms. The rate of gun accidents is so low that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission doesn't even mention them in their annual safety reports.

And Brie Larson did it too. It's fucked.

They ended well because everyone was on board with it ending two seasons ahead of time. The AT crew were told they were going to have another season after the piece of shit bubblegum wars but the execs changed their mind and told them to wrap it all up, the current arc and the entire fucking series in one hour.

The 1986 study in question was of 47 deaths.
37 of which were suicides.
The study was:
Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-RelatedDeaths in the Home, Arthur L. Kellerman, D.T. Reay, 314 New Eng. J. Med. 1557-60, June 12, 1986

>trying to push this once again

just because you made an image macro doesn't make your philosophy any more valid.

What would the name for "focus grouping a well-established and well-received show to death" be?

>Again, I don't see how you can infer that I believe this has never happened before.
Because you literally said "identity seems to be getting corporatized" as if it wasn't before. It's fine if you want to correct this, just tell me you mean to say "identity seem to be getting MORE corporatized".

I disagree, it's just as shallow as it was before, but it just seems like it's more because marketers are going after more demographics.

The "windmill" comment was made at another user.

Actually it might be less shallow since the trend is towards sincerity. This would get into the mess semantic territory of is marketing can ever be sincere or if all sincerity is marketing. Is being good marketing yourself? Is it all just virtue signalling like all cultural memes and religion?

Marketing.

>That would be an incredible piece of information, and a valid defense of your claims, if it was true.

The most conservative estimate for gun defense usage (GDU) per year is about 235,700 per year.
The 235,700 number comes from theNational Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). One important methodological difference in the NCVS is that it entails personal, face-to-face engagements with government employees (per their methodology documentation "all interviews are done by telephone whenever possible, except for the first interview, which is primarily conducted in person").

Even at this extremely conservative estimate -
INCLUDING suicides. INCLUDING accidental deaths AND justified killing by self defense:
The rate of self defense with a firearm is 7 times greater than that of deaths by firearm in the united states. Again, using the smallest estimate.

Other estimates place this defensive use of firearms at roughly 2 million to 2.5 million, with much more exhaustive study. Regardless of which number you want to use:
Yes. Self defense in the united states is far more prevalent than death by firearm.

This is where he would say "people make new words all the time". God I miss him.

>This autist is still getting hundreds of replies
/co has got to have the dumbest, most easily worked users on this whole site.

Attached: 1498201632706.jpg (2849x3474, 784K)

If that will help you get out of this rut, fine. I stand by what I said and submit you're arguing against strawmen.

Wouldn't going after more demographics, by necessity, make the tactic shallower? Again, it's interesting that you aren't disagreeing with my point overall (it is inarguable a shallow, corporate consideration), you're instead focusing pedantically on a single irrelevant factor I've already admitted I know very little about.

They aren't talking about him much, mostly the concepts he brought up.

>the trend is toward sincerity
In what sense? Whatever sincerity that gets marketed is by definition shallow. Even within the so called identity groups, no one's experience matches anyone else's. The blanket assignment of oppresed or unoppressed status, or of privileged or unprivileged status more broadly, seems more tailored to a countercultural force than anything actually sincerely reflecting a group's experience, ignoring entirely, of course, an individual's experience within that group.

Which is what he wants. As I said before- easily worked.

the flaw in OP's pic is that you cannot prove intent of the artist.

even with proper context, the audience must make a determination as to
>if the story really has a lack of structure
>story was affected by outside factors including fan input.
>if there was an effort to embrace any such themes beyond a reasonable doubt.

meaning that any intention to inject an art piece with these ideals cannot be proven true.

in the case of AT, It cannot be proven through the audiences eyes that Adventure Times plot lines were intentionally left unresolved, in the case that they were unintentionally unresolved, the case is then even made stronger that this art philosophy isn't valid or true.

simply put. These traits cannot be defined by the artist, If you watch something like Twin Peaks Season 3, according to several people, the plot line never resolved, however, I can say with certainty that the intent of the artist (David Lynch) that the goal of TPS3 is a surreal piece of art, because of what is portrayed on screen, (I.E. something that cannot be refuted, In other words, I can't say that a sequence of events filmed and shown on TV; did not happen.)

This was the problem that post modernism has presented us with. speaking from a strictly art philosophy viewpoint, Demolitionism is just a way to label something you didn't personally feel didn't capture integrity (among other things) however, offers no philosophical truths, I can tell you why something is considered Neoclassical without a doubt, and why that art piece differs from cubism or dadaism, however, I cannot simply say "This art feels cubist, because I think the foot was drawn well" and accept this as true.

This is why demolitionism isn't a real thing.

tl;dr learn about aesthetics and philosophy before you attempt to post this stupid forced meme

Attached: 241.png (308x454, 168K)

It's amazing how it's a strawman even when I'm replying to your statement you misstated. I corrected it for you because I understand what you're trying to say you said and replied to that. It wasn't a strawman before, it was a misunderstanding.

But you bring up an interesting point that I thought would be the case; the more you include in your marketing demographics, the more obvious it becomes that it was all marketing to begin with. Publishers and networks are essentially marketing firms looking to hit with demographics. When they are confident with a base in the majority and want to branch out, those who were marketed to this whole time get to see what the corporation was this while time. It's not a new development, it's not getting shallower, it's just more obvious to those who weren't in the know.

What's sincere is unknowable and marketing is a cynical enough topic.

Commercials are often made to target a specific reason, cultural experience. Often in embarrassingly stupid "does this ever happen to you?" to more currently, a yogurt commercial that frames eating their product as a white straight mom break as dad takes over the baby for once in his busy male life. There's a way this could get shallower, so I'm sure there is a way to be more sincere.

I didn't misstate anything. You deliberately misinterpreted something I said, taking it wildly out of context, and accused me of misstatement. You literally invented an argument against something I outright admitted I wasn't familiar with and chose not to engage in. That is a strawman. I flat out stated I was limiting my observations to that I was familiar with, which you ignored in favor of a strawman about shallow marketing.

It is by definition getting shallower. The point isn't even branching out to demographics, it's signalling to cultural gatekeepers that you acknowledge the existence of those demographics in exchange for access. It's why the new tactic is attacking the companies advertising on certain shows or with certain figures. It has literally nothing to do with the product itself, but the marketing of a vague moving target of "identity" and what is viewed to be helpful or harmful towards it.

While we're on the topic, could you explain more on the Jim Crow marketing thing? That seemed to really trigger you. What do you know about 19th century American advertisement trends?

I knew what this thread was gonna be. It's like stonetoss threads, they can be a treat.

>You deliberately misinterpreted something I said, taking it wildly out of context, and accused me of misstatement.
You agreed to the correction and cried strawman replying to the same post. You're being silly.

>The point isn't even branching out to demographics, it's signalling to cultural gatekeepers that you acknowledge the existence of those demographics in exchange for access.
Where did I acknowledge cultural gatekeepers?

>It's why the new tactic is attacking the companies advertising on certain shows or with certain figures. It has literally nothing to do with the product itself, but the marketing of a vague moving target of "identity" and what is viewed to be helpful or harmful towards it.
You're talking about internet activists and their relationship with marketers, right? Can I get a specific example of this? I agree that there's more hashtags then there were 50 years ago.

>While we're on the topic, could you explain more on the Jim Crow marketing thing?
I brought it up as a comparison. When you said identity was becoming corporatized, before the correction, I said "you strike me as someone" who would say identity politics is new, as if the identity politics of Jim Crow didn't count. That's not to say that you would say that, but it follows the logic.

I said "If it helps you." You seemed pedantically focused on that irrelevant point. It IS a strawman, one based on an overreach on your own point. You're hyperfocusing on an irrelevant point for no reason than masturbation. Stop it.

>Where did I acknowledge cultural gatekeepers?
Nowhere? Unless I missed it. I use this only to mean that marketing in the traditional sense of appealing to potential purchasers isn't applicable.

As for examples, jeez oy. Lots. James Gunn is probably one you're familiar with. Several right wing political figures as well. Alice Walker, curiously, because she reads literal "Elders of Zion" Nazi propaganda. None of it had anything to do with the marketing of a product or even appealing to the demographic supposedly affronted, but rather appealing to the cultural gatekeepers designating the affront valid.

>"you strike me as someone"
And I responded directly that identity politics was not a new phenomenon, that the term itself was recursive, and that you were, and still are, charging at windmills.

How long are you going to keep on that point? It has nothing to do with the discussion.

But by that logic, wouldn't that mean you could just say you not like something without giving a reason for it, even if someone starts badgering you for one? Kinda frees people up without having to get into debates over shit.

I'm also going to stop posting. I'm tired, going to bed. I have to say this was one of the more productive discussions I've had on this site in many years. I hope you can reconcile that you and I agree on many of our points, and that the majority of our disagreement seems to stem from a misunderstanding on your part regarding my actual position on the issue. Wish you'd have let that go. Thanks anyway, though. Take care.

It's not a strawman if it's a misunderstanding based on what you actually wrote.

James Gunn being fired and then rehired? Bojack Horseman talked about how the outrage cycle is an old song and dance. I was told that there was a sports caster in the 70s who said "look at that monkey run!" in celebration of a black athlete and was fired despite his intentions because you just don't say that. That's pre-social media.

You didn't bring up the windmills bit until you were talking to a different user, but it's an easy mistake to make.
I'm only still on the point because you asked me about it.

When Blue talks to Pink in the Can't go back flashback she said.
>The buildings were too difficult to dismantle
It's implyied that they killed the civilization of a planet and Pink was supposed to dismantle their cities and other remaning things, so, yeah, there are many civilizations appart from Humans and gems, user.

youtu.be/5caPtS9RZWo

Yeah, this has been fun though I wish you'd see it was an honest mistake based on how you presented information. I really didn't mean to twist anything or be dishonest. Regardless, you're right in that we agree generally, there's just something nuanced in the metaphysics of marketing that we're not seeing eye to eye on.
Thanks, you too. Wish more discussions were this good.

I believe his point was that OP tried to sugarcoat what was ultimately "thing bad because I said so".

>thinking your anything but a raging homo for liking ugly dykes who look like, act, and are men in every conceivable other way

She was talking about the human buildings. Pyramids and shit.

He got burned by AT's ending and I thought that it and Korra and She-Ra on the horizon was an assault on western civilization.

OLD GOOD
NEW BAAAD

>big part of an average normy's daily life is willingly ignoring how fucked everything is

No, that's just you. You're such a pedantic little loser you take every half-step of inconvenience as a travesty of nature instead of the non-issue it really is. This is what's led to you being a NEET in the first place. The unwillingness to face literally anything of even the most remote challenge or difficulty or effort, and so you chose to stagnate and in effect, died without realizing it, so you walk as a cynical narcissist unaware of the your own failure as you shamble to and fro pretending to have meaning in a world that you've very clearly come to despise because the only reaction to being rejected by the world is to reject it back.

Oh, I only watched a couple of first episodes.

I thought some of characters were really charming and the main girl's voice actress did a really good job. I think I'll watch more of it when I have some time and in the mood.

I enjoyed the art, didn't really see it as "ugly", but everyone has their own feel for aesthetics, so it's pretty silly to argue about it.

>Which no one is doing because...
>no one
It's not that uncommon to see anons ranting about the evils of BP, usually summed up as "the movie tries to fool you into thinking africans are more civilized than whites" and other nonsense of the sorts

So what you're saying is that I HAVE to agree with EVERY SINGLE liberal value, even if it contradicts the previous liberal values? Because if I don't, I'll be an evil conservative?

The funny thing about this is that anime has had gay characters, and trans characters, and bi characters, and etc etc etc for fucking decades. It's never been shy about characters being if various races either.

Motoko is a goddamn raging bisexual. Cowboy Bebop had a full frontal nude shot of an intersex dude. This stuff has been around in anime far, far longer than in western cartoons.

Compare the cartoons of the 90s with their shadows, their complex backgrounds and their more detailed designs to the Thin Line style with it's lack of shadows and extreme simplicity in both characters and backgrounds.

Because if something worked very well for thousands of years (like traditional nuclear family structure, traditional gender roles, etc.) we should be cautious about jettisoning it.

I wish anime could take some pages out of western media.

>new anime of any kind
>instead of showing the world as it is, an invisible narrator spells out a brief history of the world, the kind of magic system, factions, types of monsters/humans/etc

I can not think of a single anime at all that doesn't do this exposition infodump.

You have shown nobility in your selfless surrender to the greater good. There can be no glorious collective without the individual. Therefor, each one of you is better than any other one of you or the group. Don't let anyone put their parts over your hole and squeeze out commujism. You should reward yourself decadently for your lack of greed and selflesshnessnessness.

>dyke ra fan
>calling others cancer

Attached: 2BF12BFB-5BD8-4596-9812-B27D8C50535C.jpg (879x743, 113K)

I DON'T LIKE IT

Attached: Abloobloo.gif (500x500, 23K)

Yeah. How did we go from this

Attached: JB.png (841x472, 840K)

>affects the original story

The Korra example doesn't make any sense for that. I mean, that shot literally is the last thing we see in the show.

TO THIS?

Attached: 1293c7b2-2c12-4a02-9f6c-de6cfbba0355.jpg (640x344, 45K)

shut the fuck up peasant and give me your fucking grain

Fair enough, and while they are not canon, the comics went off the rails because of this one single moment. "Ozai banned gayz"

>I didn't like the Lich's resolution so I'll say it was left unresolved
Ah, to be 14 again.

>doesn't make any sense
Like everything about OP's pic. His complain about the Lich affect like 90% of all media ever.

>Compare the cartoons of the 90s with their shadows, their complex backgrounds and their more detailed designs to the Thin Line style with it's lack of shadows and extreme simplicity in both characters and backgrounds.

Attached: Jarob2.png (1366x768, 1.24M)

>The reason why traditional has been around for so long is because it works
No, the reason why tradition has been around for so long is because it's easy. Not changing anything about your behavior, your work, or the world around you, is one of the easiest way to live. Anybody can just passively imitate what everybody else is doing, and many people choose to.
In turn, change - whether for worse, or for the better - is always more difficult, at least in the immediate.
Even when something is being objectively improved, the process of alteration always requires extra work and causes unintended short-term side effects. Changing your job requires you to learn new skills, move your things, and get along with strangers. Changing your nasty underwear requires you to get up from your desk, get naked, and then dispose of dirty clothing.

Or it's harder to follow established rules and easier to just say "fuck it I'm a rebel, progress!"

What you consider established rules were once "fuck it I'm a rebel, progress!"

No, in fact, it isn't, the entire reason why for most people, "rebel phase" is just a phase is that it's very hard to keep being a rebel once you stop getting free money from your parents and you need to start worrying about your own survival. The moment any real stress and struggle comes into play, people fall back on acting exactly like everybody around them.

The main reason why the modern age is associated with so much "rebelling" is because life in the west has become incredibly easy. Which is good. "Life being hard" is not a value on its own.

People generally only rebel if they have nothing better to worry about, or if they are driven to desperation by a lack of alternatives.

A lot of it, yes. Which is why real conservatism and traditionalism is much harder.

Why is why we are "rebelling" to be a progressive and degenerate as we are right now. Easy times make weak men and all that.

>Which is why real conservatism and traditionalism is much harder.
how the fuck do you define "real traditionalism" then?
Do you sing songs to praise Enkidu as you crush barley for bread with your bare hands?

My god is Perun but no. In my opinion, traditionalism is trying to keep things from our ancestors that works, and I do not even mind a slow and consistent progress. We live in times, however, where we do change for the sake of change, where everything old is considered boring and troglodyte. Everyone is trying to be a revolutionary for the stupidest and damaging of things.

So is that why these bored drama queens enjoy tearing apart media to shove in their dyke shipping and other assorted idiocy?

Because MUH CHRISTIAN SERVER

Attached: 1406427177045.jpg (640x640, 56K)

>defend yourself
>against a third trimester fetus

>Everyone is trying to be a revolutionary for the stupidest and damaging of things.
That is what people said about the industrial revolution

Geez, another /pol/ bullshit thread, with lots of replies and political trolling. It's not like there is thousands of those already.
I sure love cartoons and comics...

Attached: 1332707165516.jpg (447x473, 111K)

Yes? You can't say it was not damaging. Now, the same type of people are trying to close every single coal mine.

>You can't say it was not damaging
It was but it was worth it. Pre IR europe was an absolute shithole.

Thats retarded, time change everything, what once worked for our ancestors might not work for us anymore, society and culture are in a constant struggle between the past and the perceived fears of the future, you can Pat yourself in the back for your old style god but in the end your attitude it’s still “new bad, old good” the “conservative values” didn’t stick around because people nailed it on every house and family, they are around because people naturally stick around to them in moments of fear and weakness

hey, guess what, people have always been coming up with retarded new ideas. Ancient greeks were already complaining about stupid teenagers who don't value tradition and try to upset the natural order of the world. People in the victoran era worried that the civilization is on the brink of collapse. Not much has changed, it's just that a) in the modern day, you have more access to all those opinions and footage of those activists, and b)All the stupid ideas from times gone by have been forgotten. Just like bad movies, bad music and bad poetry are mostly lost to the sands of time, creating the illusion of old art being always better, and new art being always bad.

Everyone got pushed off /pol/ because of all the paid spam. Hilariously enough, we're refugees.

well congratulations, for the first time in my life you got me to agree with the idea that the refugees need to be killed on sight.

>in the end your attitude it’s still “new bad, old good”
Not really. My attitude is "slow progress and slow consideration is better than a rapid unfiltered progress with no vision"
Fair point. I just want people to be more considerate of changes and the disasters some of them might bring and not pat themselves on the back because they are "so progressive". Nobody on Yea Forums does that, of course, not talking about people here.

The rapid unfiltered progress with no vision gave us all the good shit we have now.

And how can you say that was unfiltered and with no vision?

Because it's history.

No. Where are you getting that from?

>I just want people to be more considerate of changes and the disasters some of them might bring and not pat themselves on the back because they are "so progressive".
That's not bad, but people rarely do that. That's more of an accusation based on limited perspective on the reasoning behind the action than it is an actual commentary on some "progressive" person's real reasoning.

And if that don't work, get more gun.

Attached: Use a gun, and if that don't work, use more gun.jpg (1280x720, 46K)

Traditional gender roles and the nuclear family also happened under economic and technological circumstances that are far removed from what we have today. Having a woman stay at home makes sense when washing clothes is an all-day operation, or making food is a substantially more involved process. This isn't the case now that we have electricity, modern appliances, and substantially improved logistics.

Horses worked very well for thousands of years, please tell me why we should be cautious about jettisoning them for a bike or a car.

Cause then we lose access to all that free horse pussy.

Smallfoot

>goback2tumblrfaggot.jpg

Fuck off Deus Ex Machina.

What happened with that?

user, if normies keep doing thing, and then keep complaining about the consequences of thing, it's an issue. It's just it's an unresolveable one.

You failed to provide a source to validate anything you said,

By that "logic" you could justify a badly written story by saying that the author intended to make a terrible movie.

Also you're assuming that it's impossible to prove any of these things true or false, when they can all be proven by analysing the movie and the circumstances surrounding it.

tl;dr relativism is idiotic, learn basic storytelling.

Attached: anime character plinket test.jpg (686x686, 118K)

>Also you're assuming that it's impossible to prove any of these things true or false, when they can all be proven by analysing the movie and the circumstances surrounding it.
Not necessarily true. The circumstances surrounding the movie's creation doesn't always match it's content or the writer's intent or the reason it's being released. It's like saying horror writers are nilhistic monsters that get off to torture because they can create a story about people suffering or being murdered. Or that a famous comedian must be the happiest person in the world because he's good at making you laugh. Or a studio releasing a movie as part of some sinister conspiracy and not just because they want to make money of a popular franchise.

It's still based largely on suspicion and accusation. No one has written a Demolitionist Manifesto that certain creators would adopt as a philosophy.

The Lich is resolved though. Did you even watch the show?

This is a pretty bullshit way of analyzing the characters to be honest. The first two points are indeed redundant, but it's the last two ones that reveal just how superficial the whole approach is. It's perfectly normal for a character, especially a secondary one, to be defined by their role in a story. And the profession is often an important character aspect as well.

For example, you can't exactly describe John McClane's character without mentioning his profession or role in the movie. His experience as a cop is what has led to him becoming as stubborn and charismatic as he is, and what makes his actions make sense. And the very title is pretty much an implicit mention of his role in the movie, that's literally the entire point.

For a more far-fetched example: you can't exactly describe Mephistopheles without mentioning his occupation and role in the story, because as a character, he pretty much exists to provide a merciless nihilistic presence that tries to taint Faust and subtly combats his very beliefs, providing a core ideological conflict for the story.

If you were to go with this approach, you'd have to say that all action heroes, all ideology villains, and many more character archetypes from critically acclaimed works of fiction are terribly written.

In the original context, it was just about Star Wars characters and it was used to display how much of a boring non-character Qui Gon is.

It’s called contrarianism, it’s existed for thousands of years, stop trying to rebrand the old as new.
Because being against something for being old is juvenile and only shows that you want the credit of being visionary without actually having any vision, kind of like making a terrible first post in your own thread to get replys, you pathetic samefag you.

Every book on basic storytelling will tell you that the rules aren't really rules. I think you're the one that needs to do some reading.

I find it ironic, considering I actually thought Qui Gon was a better-written character than Obi Wan in IV. Seriously, when Obi Wan originally died, my reaction was not 'oh shit', but "that's it? they've only known each other for like a week maybe? weird how I'm supposed to feel something here". Qui Gon's death, meanwhile, had quite a bit more weight.

Obi Wan had an air of mystery being an old desert hermit who was laid down some ancient wisdom of an old religion.
Qui Gon was a zealot who blindly followed his faith. He's wise and he's a mentor.

That's not what is implied though. Historically, most traditional values are bullshit. That's not to say that they are all bad, but from our American perspectives, we can clearly say that queen and country are bullshit and we'd like our taxation with representation. Maybe in the future taxation at all will seem barbaric, who knows?

>But from x perspectives we can safely say
Bold of you to assume i give a shit about your shit values or your shit taste. The only people who give a rats ass about a “modern” perspective, are those too daft to make their own judgements and just go with the times, like you apparantly.

Speaking of the image, there is something strange.
Only Yea Forums, Yea Forums, Yea Forums or Yea Forums media has these problems, but in Yea Forums are more variety.
My best example is a main character who is a female engineer, but she has a helpful and very loving personality towards the protagonist, as well as another main character.
If I put another example, I also have another main character who is the police chief of an eighties city with some cyberpunk in the aesthetic. She will be able to show authority and power but when that is for the protagonist she takes a maternal role.
I always say, the less complex the jobs are; more money they will get and mediocrity is the present.

Why are you taking this so personally? My taste was even in question as I said that taxation may be seen as barbaric. Classifying traditional values as always good and unquestionable is just silly especially since the complicated issues of whose values come into play.

It's because all those other mediums are highly based on marketing and mass consumption, so they find themselves more often relying on tropes and shallow characterization.

And you picked Steven 'Can't afford Character reference sheet' Universe for your example?

Attached: 1536041593910.gif (205x234, 96K)

It has nice backgrounds.

WTF! I thought tumblr was dead.

SHUT THE FUCK UP [L][I][B][E][R][A][L]

Is that a Turkish character?

Doing away with things that do not encourage excellence in humanity is fine and well. However, its not so obvious. Who gets to decide what is excellence? Who could dare claim that knowledge with absolute certainty?
At the very least, It must be done by people with intelligence, foresight, and wisdom that are dimensions above the average and who are unbiased because the possibility of it going horribly, nightmarishly wrong is very high and the likely outcome (and if one doesn't acknowledge that basic principle, you are a child that has no business in voicing their opinion).
Antagonizing traditional values or dynamics just because is the very height of destructive narcissism and those who practice or condone this should truly put time aside to consider ending their deeply miserable existence.
That this even needs to be said is baffling.

Attached: 1552608653949.jpg (720x709, 41K)

Absolutely based.

Fact

It really isn't. Sweatpea goes full lich and then everything's fine? What shit "resolution."

Cellfags are so fucking stupid. Most of what people consider "traditional values or dynamics" are relatively new. The fucking nuclear family is a new thing.

This. They lack perspective.

Maybe, let's return to arranged marriages

fall in a hole and rot there

she-ra doesn't really "antagonize traditional values" or at least no as much as any other show.

The Last Jedi?

That's why he changed it over the course of two threads before abandoning it because he realized that the bulk of his problem was he saw these decisions he didn't like being made despite the fact that the creatives were aware that people like him didn't like them.

t. haven't seen the show

>demolitionism
So this is post-post-modernism, what comes after deconstruction?
Are animation and comics lost?

Attached: 1538081238059.jpg (1200x1100, 146K)

Right looks like a Rugrats character. Why are people upset about this 25 years after the fact?

I hate both those writers, their idea of cultural philosophy whiny and self indulgent - I prefer Sloterdijk for my uninspired views on society