#but if discussion devolves into discourse and accusing anyone of things then reblogs are getting turned off | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

stardust-falling · 1 year

Text

This is probably swinging a bit of a bat at a hornet’s nest on this website, but I wonder if the rise of purity culture in fandom, aside from other influencing factors, could have something to do with the fact that so many young fans tend to consume primarily media intended for children.

After all, children’s media is usually at least in part focused on teaching life lessons and providing kids with role-models. That’s why you’ll rarely find an anti-hero protagonist in children’s media. In fact, “protagonist” seems to have sort of been conflated with “good guy.”

Of course, not all media follows these standards. First and foremost, you have to remember that characters aren’t people, they’re literary devices, and they serve a variety of purposes. Some might be role models. Some might be anti-role-models. But honestly, sometimes they literally serve to show “what happens if you put a funny little guy in situations.”

More under the cut.

See, the fiction vs reality debate is interesting in this at. We’re humans, and humans are curious things. Sometimes, humans get morbidly curious and speculate about what might happen in some fucked up situation to some fucked up people. They don’t want any of it to happen in real life, but they still want to have an idea. Literally just because we’re curious.

So what do you do? You make a fucked up little man and put him in situations. He’s not meant to be a good person— honestly good and bad don’t matter here because the story’s not about morals but about cause and effect. Characters can show bad things, they can’t do bad things.

Because humans are curious and like thinking about “what ifs,” sometimes people get really attached to these funny little horrible guys. They like seeing them go through situations and imagining how they’d react. Purely because it’s a fun sequence of cause and effect and way easier than trying to enact it in real life. Now, obviously, stories are influenced by creators’ personal biases, but then that just becomes another dimension to the puzzle. That’s how you get character archetypes who end up telling completely different stories. Sometimes, people really like the way one particular creator has figured out a cause and effect sequence for their archetype. So, people end up with blorbos. Funny little imaginary guys, good and bad, who they just take an incredible, scientific joy in watching. Humans have always been doing science.

And that’s where purity culture comes in. Because, with purity culture, these characters are treated like they’re humans with accountability for their actions. Even though they haven’t hurt any real people. It is, in fact, impossible for a fictional character to hurt people. Even if they are treated as a role model— it’s still the fault of the person who decided to view them that way.

Because characters aren’t intrinsically role models. Even protagonists.

Children’s show creators often make their protagonists to be role models for kids. And in that case, when that’s the stated intent, it’s perfectly reasonable to judge that character’s morals. But you’re not judging a person, any more than evaluating a school textbook for accuracy and correct information would be evaluating a person. You’re evaluating the literary device that is a character. Of course, if you primarily consume children’s media, where many characters are role models and teaching moral lessons is often an intent, what happens when you read something with a different premise? What happens when you read, for example, speculative fiction about what goes on in the mind of a horrific dictator?

If you’re used to judging the worth of characters on a moral rubric, then of course you’ll apply that rubric to protagonists of the new media you read. So naturally, you’ll start thinking that, of course the protagonist of this story is a terrible guy and a horrible role model. What about the people who like him? Well, they must look up to him and agree with him in some way, especially if they’re rooting for him. So of course their morals are in question.

Except, they’re not rooting for him because they agree with him. They’re just rooting for him because they’re invested in seeing where his fucked up actions take him and how it ends up.

Same with relationships. Someone who ships a “problematic” pairing might have absolutely no desire to see any relationship like that in real life, ever. But regardless, it’s a very scientifically, morbidly interesting thing that they can’t take their eyes away from.

Anyway, genre awareness is a great thing to have when consuming media. A romance story isn’t about “what makes a good relationship,” it’s about “what makes an interesting and complex relationship to think about.” A horror story isn’t “what should you do in a fucked up situation,” it’s more of “what might people with these kinds of personalities do instinctively in fucked up situations.”

Genre awareness is cool. You don’t need to think about how good of a role model or representation a character is, so much as you need to think about “what is the purpose of this character in this genre and narrative, and how well are they fulfilling that purpose?”

#fandom #fandom culture #purity culture #writing #ramblings #I just wanna study fictional people like bugs tbh #and I think more people should have that outlook about fiction #it’s way more fun #no I don’t like this character because I’m ignoring that they’re a messed up person #I like this character BECAUSE they’re a messed up person #anyway feel free to discuss on this post. I probably won’t reply to anything but I’d be interested to see people’s thoughts #but if discussion devolves into discourse and accusing anyone of things then reblogs are getting turned off

45 notes · View notes

zucca101 · 6 years

Note

With furries like you around allowing people like Trump to ruin their lifes its hard to believe your words of life not being hopeless to be honest. You want mexicans to go back and die instead of improving their lifes. According to most of your reblogs, you want ALL democrats to be silenced and made fun of. Those cute answers you give when people confront you are just a big wall of lies that you use to justify your hatred towards other human beings. And this is why you are antagonized.

Let’s break this sordid little lump of bitterness down...

With furries like you around allowing people like Trump to ruin their lifes its hard to believe your words of life not being hopeless to be honest.

I am but one furry and therefor, one vote. Second, I think you have an overinflated idea of what a president is capable of. You either don’t understand civics or do, but are abandoning that knowledge in favor of ideological bigotry.

How has Trump ruined anyone’s life? I dare you to give a solid, sourced answer.

Is he a nice man? Of course not!

But there were enough people in enough places that didn’t care if he was nice or not, voting for him based on their regard for whether or not they figured he could get the job done.

And thus far, the numbers vindicate that decision.

Black people are enjoying historically high rates of employment.

Tell me how I, one furry, am allowing anything.

You want mexicans to go back and die instead of improving their lifes.

Liar.

You know I have passionately described how Mexico could be a glorious superpower overnight.

A rich culture, a treasured history, a wealth of natural resources, culturally family oriented and with a powerfully strong work ethic... If the corruption were erased, Mexico would prosper.

But if I were like you, the sort of person to make half-witted lies and besmirching your motives, I would say that you want Mexicans to be second class citizens here and enslaved so that your ass can have cheap groceries, fast food and manual labor.

But I don’t know you. So I don’t make those assumptions. That was an example though, of what it feels like to have your motives impugned by baseless accusations.

It doesn’t feel very good, does it?

According to most of your reblogs, you want ALL democrats to be silenced and made fun of.

If that’s your interpretation, there’s nothing I can do to change it. Gandhi said that a closed mind cannot be forced open.

But perhaps you’re willing to listen to reason.

I do not want Democrats silenced. Far from it. Not only does that go against my egalitarian and Libertarian principles, but why would I want to stop the thing that has caused people to wake up to the failed policies and sentiments of Democrat politicians?

Every time a Democrat politician or media shill of sufficient Social Justice inclination has opened their mouth, it’s cost the Dems hundreds of votes.

Now, I do not want the Democrat party to stay in such a state. The pendulum will need to swing back eventually. And when it does, I want the Democrat citizens to be represented by political figures who aren’t full of shit and who will actually serve the people’s interests, not corporate or media or foreign interests.

I want the Democrats to have good leadership because I am an advocate of balance.

But such leadership is hard to find examples of.

From Democrats throwing Japanese Americans into concentra-I mean, INTERNMENT camps, to Democrats fighting tooth and nail to keep their slaves, to Democrats voting for ACTUAL KKK members... it’s a bit of a scarce pool to draw from.

Even certain big name Democrats who did some good have serious black marks. Andrew Jackson? Mr. $20 bill? Dude’s responsible for the Cherokee Trail of Tears.

So forgive me if my hopes for the future of the Democrats is less than favorable.

And as for making fun of them...

Tough fucking titties, cupcake.

Humor is a way of airing out the bad feelings and invoking some laughter in order to cope with things.

And considering I have to suffer being called things that I am not every, single, fucking day, thanks to ideologues such as yourself, I think that your side could take a few jabs, teases and jokes. :D

Those cute answers you give when people confront you are just a big wall of lies that you use to justify your hatred towards other human beings.

Big wall. Hahahaha...

But seriously though...

Does that mean you don’t actually read any of my responses? Can’t much hope for civil discourse when you don’t bother to respond...

If I’m mistaken there and you have been reading, I apologize.

Regardless, if I’m lying, there’s a vast ocean of information at your fingertips that you can use to disprove me.

Yet you never do.

It’s just one broad, generalized lie of antagonism after another.

You need to stop with the nonsense and start over again.

Or you can once again devolve into demagoguery.

The choice is yours.

And this is why you are antagonized.

No, I’m antagonized because my detractors build strawmen made from ludicrous stereotypes of Leftist propaganda manufacture and attempt to impugn my motivations based on those manufactured perceptions.

I’m antagonized because I don’t fit neatly into a box of lies.

I’m antagonized because I am an uncomfortable reminder that someone from their communities can believe things differently than they do.

I am antagonized because the fetishization of diversity is shallow and literally skin-deep, obsessed with aesthetic rather than spirit and essence.

I am antagonized because shrieks, insults and violence has been exchanged for sense, reason and calm discussion.

I hate to break it to you, but I’m not a bigot.

If you’re going to break down my position, it must be on merit, not cheap tricks that no longer work anymore.

3 notes · View notes