Jump to content



Toggle shoutbox Shoutbox Open the Shoutbox in a popup

@  Oblivion Knight : (26 February 2024 - 11:30 AM) Whoa I can edit a typo. The technology.
@  Oblivion Knight : (26 February 2024 - 11:29 AM) Obligatory message.
@  Elwood : (02 January 2024 - 04:19 AM) Happy New Year!!!
@  Aaron : (13 February 2023 - 09:19 PM) I'm still out here alive. If you remember me, I hope you're doing well!
@  Aaron : (13 February 2023 - 09:09 PM) 2023 and this place is still up huhh
@  Elwood : (05 January 2023 - 07:58 AM) Ah a Christmas greeting from Wolfie! Even if I saw it way late Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to everybody!
@  Cero : (31 December 2022 - 09:27 PM) Man that bot went crazy
@  Whitewolf8 : (24 December 2022 - 10:02 AM) I return once more on the eve of Christmas to haunt you all again!... Mainly Elwood. Hello!
@  Elwood : (25 November 2022 - 04:58 AM) A bot! Ah the nostalgia!
@  Elwood : (02 November 2022 - 02:30 PM) Yo ho ho ho! Thar be the white wolf!
@  Whitewolf8 : (24 October 2022 - 12:29 AM) Well, blimey it's been a while. Hoy there! If anyone's still alive here anyway.
@  Valke : (21 April 2022 - 12:12 PM) im taking the 2nd shout of 2022 😂
@  Elwood : (03 March 2022 - 10:12 PM) Mwuhahaha! The first shout of 2022 is mine!
@  Fire Blazer : (12 November 2021 - 05:22 PM) *also stretches arms a little*
@  xcrash1998 : (07 November 2021 - 08:42 PM) "streches arms"
@  Ezra : (07 May 2021 - 05:20 AM) Maybe I'll pop on the discord soon
@  Fire Blazer : (01 April 2021 - 08:08 PM) Aaaaaaand done~ :P
@  xcrash1998 : (29 March 2021 - 08:52 AM) I guess we are one more post away from counting to 2500
@  Fire Blazer : (10 March 2021 - 11:39 PM) but I have bad memory and can't remember ;(
@  Elwood : (15 February 2021 - 10:23 AM) I'd like to but I've told you about my issues with discord before.

Photo

People are so sensitive and easily butthurt


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Fire Blazer

Fire Blazer

    You ready?

  • Creator
  • 12,103 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.S.A.
  • Interests:Too many to list. =P

Posted 03 March 2016 - 01:49 AM

[7:56:45 PM] ballin1337: remember the Fates video from ScrewAttack I linked yesterday? Well, they self-censored/altered it probably because it was causing such a huge fuss that they criticized Fates and the fans literally could not handle it.
[7:57:07 PM] ballin1337: People are literally so butthurt over other people's opinions that you can't even criticize something they like. (facepalm)

 

 

 

 

seriously though, people need to get some thicker skin and learn how to DEAL WITH IT. deal with hearing things they don't like. it happens all the time in the real world and you can't police it or throw a temper tantrum or just say "it's bullshit" or "they're just a hater" all the time. people can criticize stuff and be valid.

 

the people who just hate on stuff because it doesn't go along with their opinion are... ugh. idk. it's fine to dislike stuff or dislike other people's opinions, but people could stand to be a bit more mature about it. seeing stuff like this I feel like I'm surrounded by middle-schoolers, or worse. (middle-schoolers are supposed to the pinnacle of arrogant think-they're-mature-but-aren't people last I checked, but meh, YMMV lol)


Bblazer2.png

Signature thanks to Shu.


#2 kirant

kirant

    I won't go until it's over

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,420 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 March 2016 - 06:59 AM

Thank god one YouTube user actually gave a time stamp for when then hell I was supposed to care.  I would haven ever listened to the whole thing.  The first time in a long time YouTube comments have made me do more than want to throw myself off a cliff.

 

Apparently the video title changed?  The original one, according to the same comment section, read "Fire Emblem's story is anime trash". 

 

Either way, I really actually don't mind the commentary...the two minutes of it I could stand.  They are right.  FE: Fates, if it's even remotely close to Awakening, has a jarring disconnect between how the characters act outside battle and how they are inside.  I've certainly heard it takes weird and crazy shifts in tone and there is pretty much no doubt in my mind that it probably deserves this type of criticism on both sides to the ocean.  The whole design of the light-hearted supports against the darker world that they wrote just...doesn't mesh.  If was bad in Awakening and I can only imagine it got worse due to the translation choice.

 

The only interesting term they use is "anime garbage".  It's probably a bit of a generalization...one I can understand given the typical names of anime bandied around with it...but still a generalization.  Particularly jarring is what looks like Attack on Titan pieces in the background as, while I can't get into the series myself, it typically shows that anime series are quite capable of exactly what they want.  I think the better way to look at it is that anime's traits and animation provide space for creating unique stories (something you'll hear from a lot of older anime fans as these series typically target the seinen audience), but the more common threads typically come of the "high school semi-comedy, semi-action, fan service heavy" builds.  You know, A-1 stuff...it sells for the largest anime crowd.  The same way we could argue video games are blood and gore simulators full of online opponents who ALL seem to have had sex with my mother: the biggest sellers are still multiplayer FPS games.  Their comment doesn't bug me as much as interests me as it reflects what I've thought about anime's public perception for a long time and how nothing like that has changed despite the ardent plea from fans of bigger "serious" series like Attack on Titan.

 

You're right though...I think we're entering a new era of intolerance and refusal of middle ground.  If you listen to the recent Canadian election and the ongoing American one, you'll notice the politics are becoming more and more polarized.  People can't take the nuanced stance of "well, that person has a point...but they also don't in this other case because...".  And this absolutely kills me as I like to sit back and analyze the facts then figure out where to go by making decisions with your head, long after the heart has had time to settle.  Yet the world is shifting more to "you're either with me or you're a hater/troll/radical/reactionary/SJW/MRA/etc who is obviously wrong. No questions asked"...a stance I hate.  We see more and more that reasonable points get lost in this.  Both major sides of (and I guess it's clear I've got friends who yell and scream both sides of this to me) the third wave feminism debate are capable of very good points.  Yet they never acknowledge it nor admit fault when they end up on the wrong side of research.

 

(Even worse as I suspect, for salary reasons (I'd apparently earn 15-25% more per year in the US due to the power of private practice), I'll probably end up an American...and I already hate your news media without having to listen to it more than monthly)


RedBlue.png
Shameless Self-Plug - Updated May 30 - A Letter to a Younger Me – Anime Edition


#3 Mankut

Mankut

    Mega Member

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 635 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:You

Posted 03 March 2016 - 07:26 PM

 

You're right though...I think we're entering a new era of intolerance and refusal of middle ground.  If you listen to the recent Canadian election and the ongoing American one, you'll notice the politics are becoming more and more polarized.  People can't take the nuanced stance of "well, that person has a point...but they also don't in this other case because...".  And this absolutely kills me as I like to sit back and analyze the facts then figure out where to go by making decisions with your head, long after the heart has had time to settle.  Yet the world is shifting more to "you're either with me or you're a hater/troll/radical/reactionary/SJW/MRA/etc who is obviously wrong. No questions asked"...a stance I hate.  We see more and more that reasonable points get lost in this.  Both major sides of (and I guess it's clear I've got friends who yell and scream both sides of this to me) the third wave feminism debate are capable of very good points.  Yet they never acknowledge it nor admit fault when they end up on the wrong side of research.

 

 

 

 

On the contrary. Bernie Sanders is pretty popular right now (although as a college student my perspective might be skewed) and even though he has some leftist views, he has a long history of bipartism. It's one of the reasons why a lot of people I know are voting for him, because he would probably have the ability to get stuff done by working with the republicans and democrats. That's just one candidate, obviously, but ti isn't as black and white as you've made out


user posted image
user posted image
user posted image

QUOTE
Fire Blazer -- Man Cute is on

#4 kirant

kirant

    I won't go until it's over

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,420 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 March 2016 - 02:44 AM

On the contrary. Bernie Sanders is pretty popular right now (although as a college student my perspective might be skewed) and even though he has some leftist views, he has a long history of bipartism. It's one of the reasons why a lot of people I know are voting for him, because he would probably have the ability to get stuff done by working with the republicans and democrats. That's just one candidate, obviously, but ti isn't as black and white as you've made out

I think your context might, as you point out, be skewing that.  The results of Sanders over the nation makes it pretty clear that his audiences so far is pretty much contained within "young and Caucasian" and in his own "backyard" states.  Clinton has close to a lock on the place...and Clinton is just slowly pulling further and further ahead as the preferred candidate.  I think the biggest advantage to Sanders right now is the anti-Clinton vote as she has so much baggage/disasters at this point that you probably have votes out just to spite her.

 

I honestly don't mind Sanders myself.  He's close to a Canadian Liberal/NDP hybrid (Conservatives being close to Democrat equivalence, Liberals and Republicans having no equivalent on the other side's political scale) and on surveys, I'm split evenly between his and Clinton's point of view at very event rates. 

 

(Not that youth vote politicians aren't possible...my city's current mayor won purely by dominating through use of social media to spread his name initially...and now we love him)


RedBlue.png
Shameless Self-Plug - Updated May 30 - A Letter to a Younger Me – Anime Edition


#5 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,409 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 04 March 2016 - 11:14 AM

For someone that is such an advocate for growing thicker skin and dealing with it, you sure are sensitive and butthurt over them.

 

If anyone is to be reprimanded for going against criticism, it's whoever decided they should censor themselves. They are, after all, the ones who wanted to avoid being criticized enough to turn back on what they had to say.


I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#6 Fire Blazer

Fire Blazer

    You ready?

  • Creator
  • 12,103 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.S.A.
  • Interests:Too many to list. =P

Posted 05 March 2016 - 12:30 AM

Thank god one YouTube user actually gave a time stamp for when then hell I was supposed to care.  I would haven ever listened to the whole thing.  The first time in a long time YouTube comments have made me do more than want to throw myself off a cliff.

 

Apparently the video title changed?  The original one, according to the same comment section, read "Fire Emblem's story is anime trash". 

 

Either way, I really actually don't mind the commentary...the two minutes of it I could stand.  They are right.  FE: Fates, if it's even remotely close to Awakening, has a jarring disconnect between how the characters act outside battle and how they are inside.  I've certainly heard it takes weird and crazy shifts in tone and there is pretty much no doubt in my mind that it probably deserves this type of criticism on both sides to the ocean.  The whole design of the light-hearted supports against the darker world that they wrote just...doesn't mesh.  If was bad in Awakening and I can only imagine it got worse due to the translation choice.

 

The only interesting term they use is "anime garbage".  It's probably a bit of a generalization...one I can understand given the typical names of anime bandied around with it...but still a generalization.  Particularly jarring is what looks like Attack on Titan pieces in the background as, while I can't get into the series myself, it typically shows that anime series are quite capable of exactly what they want.  I think the better way to look at it is that anime's traits and animation provide space for creating unique stories (something you'll hear from a lot of older anime fans as these series typically target the seinen audience), but the more common threads typically come of the "high school semi-comedy, semi-action, fan service heavy" builds.  You know, A-1 stuff...it sells for the largest anime crowd.  The same way we could argue video games are blood and gore simulators full of online opponents who ALL seem to have had sex with my mother: the biggest sellers are still multiplayer FPS games.  Their comment doesn't bug me as much as interests me as it reflects what I've thought about anime's public perception for a long time and how nothing like that has changed despite the ardent plea from fans of bigger "serious" series like Attack on Titan.

 

You're right though...I think we're entering a new era of intolerance and refusal of middle ground.  If you listen to the recent Canadian election and the ongoing American one, you'll notice the politics are becoming more and more polarized.  People can't take the nuanced stance of "well, that person has a point...but they also don't in this other case because...".  And this absolutely kills me as I like to sit back and analyze the facts then figure out where to go by making decisions with your head, long after the heart has had time to settle.  Yet the world is shifting more to "you're either with me or you're a hater/troll/radical/reactionary/SJW/MRA/etc who is obviously wrong. No questions asked"...a stance I hate.  We see more and more that reasonable points get lost in this.  Both major sides of (and I guess it's clear I've got friends who yell and scream both sides of this to me) the third wave feminism debate are capable of very good points.  Yet they never acknowledge it nor admit fault when they end up on the wrong side of research.

 

(Even worse as I suspect, for salary reasons (I'd apparently earn 15-25% more per year in the US due to the power of private practice), I'll probably end up an American...and I already hate your news media without having to listen to it more than monthly)

 

haha, I think there's a time-stamp in the description too but I also think I saw another one that was a minute earlier or so... bleh, I don't even know lol

 

yup, forgot to comment here but it changed, probably because they were getting so much hate from their viewers/claims they were going for "clickbait" that they felt pressured to self-censor themselves. :\

 

yeah, there's definitely a bit of weird contrast there... My Castle and the actual game in general... and the way Corrin is written in all the sides... ugh, so many inconsistencies lol

 

I think I get what you mean, with generalizations and all. As much as I dislike anime in general (or say I do) I still really like certain niche anime that manage to break away from whatever stereotypes and generalizations it has to some extent. Sometimes they DO have those weird things but still aren't terrible due to X or Y, and yeah, it'd be like judging a gamer based off of the most games that sell most, FPS and the like, lol

 

I hate that too, people are always trying to judge people based off of one thing they say or whatever. Like if I criticize Fates' story they'll start defending other parts of the game. If I criticize Nintendo or point out the fact that Sony consoles are selling way, WAY better, I'm a hater, maybe even a "Sony Pony" lol. That kind of stuff. When in actuality my thoughts and opinions on things are very complex and often changing as I think about and discuss them. :\

 

Eh yeah the news here sucks *shrugs* I'd say "welcome to America" but I'm half considering moving to Canada myself, I just don't want to live in the cold anymore so... >_>;

 

 

 

 

On the contrary. Bernie Sanders is pretty popular right now (although as a college student my perspective might be skewed) and even though he has some leftist views, he has a long history of bipartism. It's one of the reasons why a lot of people I know are voting for him, because he would probably have the ability to get stuff done by working with the republicans and democrats. That's just one candidate, obviously, but ti isn't as black and white as you've made out

 

as someone who doesn't follow politics much, that's kinda good to know. gives me some fraction of hope, I guess, that someone out there is willing to compromise/work things out and not just be on one extreme or the other.

 

 

For someone that is such an advocate for growing thicker skin and dealing with it, you sure are sensitive and butthurt over them.

 

If anyone is to be reprimanded for going against criticism, it's whoever decided they should censor themselves. They are, after all, the ones who wanted to avoid being criticized enough to turn back on what they had to say.

 

woah, don't be mean now. (I'm assuming that's directed at Kirant.)

 

Unfortunately I don't get the second paragraph so while I'm open to an explanation that someone like me can understand as it stands now I can't really say much to that :\


Bblazer2.png

Signature thanks to Shu.


#7 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,409 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 05 March 2016 - 08:41 AM

 

woah, don't be mean now. (I'm assuming that's directed at Kirant.)
It's directed at you.
 
There is only one thing criticism actually has to say, in every situation: "X part of Y is bad." 
 
If it does not say this, it isn't criticism. The purpose is simply to point out faults. (Matters that concern both merits and faults when it comes to fictional works are reviews, not limited to criticism.) I haven't watched the video because I didn't actually have to, but considering that kirant mentioned that the original title was something along the lines of "Fire Emblem is anime trash" it's obvious that plenty of people that like anime (or hate it but like Fire Emblem) are going to get pissed.
 
On that note, I read kirant's post too, and politics aside, I know what he's talking about when he says that the world is moving toward the use of labels to brush someone off.
 
However, this is really only because it has become easier to find the acceptable "escape route", there have always been people that don't want to listen to others, whether as a group or as an individual.
 
One of these "escape routes" to get people to shut up is labeling them as immature. It's much easier to make yourself look like the good guy, as all those others who want someone else to shut up, when you put emphasis into a value that is widespread as a status you should have as a human being, or emphasis onto another's value that one shouldn't have as a modern member of society. (ex. "it's 2016, people" and stuff to get others to keep up with what a person of 2016 is to think.)
 
There are many, many people out there who will say that criticism is necessary for intelligent discussion, and easily use that factor in an attempt to reprimand others to appear above them and have an excuse to go on with talking about what others don't want to hear. But frankly, it's extremely rare for criticism to actually be accepted amongst those who have different feelings on the matter, and that's especially the case when it is presented in recorded form of one group talking without the other.
 
Most importantly, when is it that someone will most frequently use this claim that criticism is necessary for intelligent discussion? 
 
When they berate someone else for criticizing them.
 
Perhaps it would be easier to parallel it to when the phrase "I'm entitled to my opinion" comes up. Almost every time this appears, it is not because someone is threatening silence of what the person has to say. It's usually because two people of relatively similar status (ex. on the internet, it's not between a moderator and a normal member) are trying to duke it out over who's opinion is better, and are deflecting attacks on their opinion on the matter by invoking that to claim they are unassailable.
 
In order to have a successful discussion(for the purpose of getting out of it learning anything anyway), respect for everyone involved by everyone involved is a necessity for it to go as smoothly as possible. Criticism almost never does this, because it is rarely used as anything but a declaration of righteousness by the one who uses it. A difference between a lecture and a proposition, to make it simple. In most cases where someone gets pissed, it will be because they do not believe they are being given sufficient respect as one of the invited participants.
 
Now, at the point this has happened and someone is emotionally charged, making the atmosphere much more difficult to communicate in, many people will tell that someone to either agree to certain terms coming into their environment or to remove themselves from the premises if they are no longer willing to behave themselves. That or insult them until they quit.
 
Except, if you consider that the emotionally charged member themselves should be removed for their disruptive behavior, then it's also true that they are removing someone because they don't want to hear what the disruptive participant has to say. A lot of people say they hate circlejerks, but this kind of thing is essentially doing the same.
 
Everyone has things they don't want to hear, and groups are made among people in an attempt to socialize over crafting an educational environment. Any attempt to overcome that for the sake of adding to one's knowledge will either be emotionally violent or demand too much control over what people get to feel to get this ideal discussion in place.
 
If we are to come to the defense of discussion for education's sake, whoever censors(whether it is themselves or another) should be shamed rather than those that attack what someone else has to say, no matter what the attack consists of and who it is coming from. Because there is always something to learn, there simply isn't always something you want to know.
 
Those with "who need to grow thicker skin", those who are "too sensitive", they are ones who are too good at receiving information, either from themselves or someone else. There is frankly no particular reason as to why scolding someone for that can't be used for any situation where you want them to avoid listening, either to themselves or to someone else. Someone could rape your spouse in front of you and tell you to grow the fuck up if you try to stop them, and make all sorts of other criticisms about you that would be just as valid. But who would want to listen to that? How many would want to keep their pretense of being one of the matured ones by refraining from taking action against them? Is there really so much the emotional should be berated for, when we are supposedly beings of such great empathy, that we take pride in having it?

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#8 Fire Blazer

Fire Blazer

    You ready?

  • Creator
  • 12,103 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:U.S.A.
  • Interests:Too many to list. =P

Posted 07 March 2016 - 05:31 AM

It's directed at you.
 
There is only one thing criticism actually has to say, in every situation: "X part of Y is bad." 
 
If it does not say this, it isn't criticism. The purpose is simply to point out faults. (Matters that concern both merits and faults when it comes to fictional works are reviews, not limited to criticism.) I haven't watched the video because I didn't actually have to, but considering that kirant mentioned that the original title was something along the lines of "Fire Emblem is anime trash" it's obvious that plenty of people that like anime (or hate it but like Fire Emblem) are going to get pissed.

 

woah dang that plot twist

 

ok

 

fair assumption

 

*reads more of what you say*

 

you seem to have thought a lot about this because you have a lot to say and as someone who can't see into the inside of your mind or relate to whatever experiences you've had or trains of thought you've had run through your mind, most of it isn't something I can really reply to. I understand some of it but it all feels very... broad and abstract. Granted, you've shown on multiple occasions you're a more intelligent person being than me, so that probably factors into this somehow, but even so, it's difficult to discuss this kind of topic without a specific situation or the like that we can both refer to: some common ground, basically.

 

 

Those with "who need to grow thicker skin", those who are "too sensitive", they are ones who are too good at receiving information, either from themselves or someone else. There is frankly no particular reason as to why scolding someone for that can't be used for any situation where you want them to avoid listening, either to themselves or to someone else. Someone could rape your spouse in front of you and tell you to grow the fuck up if you try to stop them, and make all sorts of other criticisms about you that would be just as valid. But who would want to listen to that? How many would want to keep their pretense of being one of the matured ones by refraining from taking action against them? Is there really so much the emotional should be berated for, when we are supposedly beings of such great empathy, that we take pride in having it?

 

So basically what I'm getting is, you don't like the saying "get thicker skin"? And I don't mean to dumb down everything you said, but I need something specific to go on.

 

So going off that, I get where you're coming from. Being sensitive isn't inherently bad, and yes, people can use that as an excuse to just like... basically say "you shouldn't react to this, it's your fault for being weak" or whatever. Or "it's not that big of a deal" or "you're being too sensitive" instead of actually tackling the matter at hand. Yeah, I get that.

 

But at the same time it feels like you're taking some frustration directed at people doing this in general out on me. What bothers me about the Fates situation is that people will throw temper tantrums over the subject of a video game, and not just any video game or whatever (I mean, it is a billion dollar industry and I'm a huge gamer so I get being invested in it), but over what I consider a really insignificant issue in the grand scheme of things.

 

Of course, a lot of people are better than this and won't waste time throwing fits over the smallest things, but the people who constantly do (once in a while is fine; we're all human) bother me, and I was basically venting on that. I threw it in this forum and not in another forum because it was just that, venting, and I wasn't trying to add a bunch of fuel to the YT fire or start my own fire or anything. I know the best thing to do would be to shut up and take it, but I felt like voicing myself in a way that I figured was unlikely to hurt anyone else.

 

I went back and re-read this a couple times:
 

If anyone is to be reprimanded for going against criticism, it's whoever decided they should censor themselves. They are, after all, the ones who wanted to avoid being criticized enough to turn back on what they had to say.

 

 

It's still a bit confusing with your ambiguous "anyone" and "whoever" and "themselves" and such, but if you're referring to ScrewAttack censoring themselves by changing the title, yes, I think that's kind of lame. I also sympathize with them though in the sense that ideally, the fans wouldn't have pressured them to do that. In other words, it may not be the best course of action or the one I would take but I can understand why they did it.

 

As for the fans, if they want to criticize the video or whatever or even be upset (though being upset over stuff like this in general is dumb; you threw out a vulgar example in your post that just isn't anywhere near the level of getting upset over Fire Emblem bullshit, at least if you ask me, lol), that's fine, but I think that can be done in a way that doesn't make a fool out of themselves. For me, if I want people to actually listen to what I have to say, I say it in a mature and convincing manner without being insulting or condescending. Or I try not to, anyway. Maybe I unintentionally offend someone because communication and controlling one's feelings are both hard but like, if you're just raging or going "rawr I'm going to dislike this" or just denouncing something like it's made by some evil tyrant when the other side of the video (the creators) consists of human beings too then it's hard for me as another party involved to not look at the guys and go "ya'll are being dumb".

 

I'm a super sensitive and socially inept person myself but even I manage to not be that guy on YT who instead of coming off as someone with a disagreeing opinion is just coming off as a whiner or a hater. It's all about tone, showing that you're reasonable and respectful, showing that you're open to other ideas and that you understand there are opinions outside of yours. Understanding that the other people involved are just as prone to being hurt as you are for just as dumb reasons.

 

I probably expect way too much of people but alas, all I can do is try to better myself since I'm pretty flawed myself, and then keep my own frustrations isolated such that I don't cause my own little storms of rage and butthurt, lol.

 

Though again, some things are worth getting upset for. Just... a Fates opinion video, is not worth getting that upset over. Coming from someone who cringes everytime he sees any mentioning of Fates' waifu and fan service, haha. Again, I'm sensitive but I have enough self-control to keep my cringing to myself and not go on a rampage over a video game, even when that video game is more precious to me than any anon could possibly comprehend, lol. (And that's not me trying to be arrogant, that's just a matter of me and my experiences/memories over a long period of time taking shape into something that encompasses more than just me playing a video game.)


Bblazer2.png

Signature thanks to Shu.


#9 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,409 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 07 March 2016 - 06:09 PM

 

What bothers me about the Fates situation is that people will throw temper tantrums over the subject of a video game, and not just any video game or whatever (I mean, it is a billion dollar industry and I'm a huge gamer so I get being invested in it), but over what I consider a really insignificant issue in the grand scheme of things.

For the record, I never said they aren't being idiots. I'd probably get pissed if I actually bothered to watch ScrewAttack's video too...but I don't. I mean I have to go out of my way to listen to something at their pace with a voice I probably don't want to hear + imagery that I don't want to see. I can't be assed to do that, it's not like I'd have a response they would want to read either and they already set up the thing into becoming a matter of "watch our video" rather than "let's talk" so...
 

 

But at the same time it feels like you're taking some frustration directed at people doing this in general out on me.

In any situation where someone is doing X, like the people who do X, there's no reason for them to not be part of group of people who do X as far as no other conditions are necessary. That said, personal attacks are less useful when it comes to re-reading stuff I say to see if I can find insight in my own words, and it's rare that I ever have a problem with a certain person's action but not another who does the same thing, so there's usually little purpose in directing it towards a particular individual.
 

 

if you're referring to ScrewAttack censoring themselves by changing the title, yes, I think that's kind of lame. I also sympathize with them though in the sense that ideally, the fans wouldn't have pressured them to do that. In other words, it may not be the best course of action or the one I would take but I can understand why they did it.

It's easy for me to understand why they would do it, it's just that in matters where criticism should be left out in the open for educational purposes (like for people such as kirant) the one that straight up censors it is obviously the one doing the most damage for that purpose. ScrewAttack did not consider such a goal to be valuable enough to bother with letting the consequences continue as-is, so they took a certain course of action to avoid as much damage to their reputation or something of the like.
 
Which is also to say, ScrewAttack doesn't care enough about expressing things the way they want to to keep it that way in spite of whiners.
 

 

I think that can be done in a way that doesn't make a fool out of themselves. For me, if I want people to actually listen to what I have to say, I say it in a mature and convincing manner without being insulting or condescending.

The whiners probably don't want to expend the effort that goes into doing that anyway. Especially when they have the power of the group backing them (and also, the lack of control over what the group has to say and who is in it obviously provides an excuse to go ham.)
 
It's also likely that they just know better than to try doing that, because to some level, it will make them humble themselves before the other. If they are going to say something to someone who is already criticizing them before they even say anything about it, who is to say they would respect them enough to even listen if they had gone through the effort to be polite about it? 
 
This is the reason people will usually tell you to ignore a troll, any form of attention toward them will probably get them to attempt further provocation. (Of course, usually just saying that you should ignore the troll in itself is pointing them out, meaning they have lost either way.) If you're going to get pissed over someone like that, might as well get it out the easy way.
 
As someone who tried too hard to be polite and detailed in my responses out of anger in the past, I know too well how much easier it is to effectively go "fuck you, asshole." (although, I still make walls of text regardless of which I decide to go with.)
 

 

Though again, some things are worth getting upset for. Just... a Fates opinion video, is not worth getting that upset over.

I do not understand such matters simply because my feelings are not under control. They are entirely reaction-based. They are not decisions, only consequences.
 
----

 

but even so, it's difficult to discuss this kind of topic without a specific situation or the like that we can both refer to: some common ground, basically.

You can probably get half of the necessary context behind why I get agitated over matters of what someone should be, particularly when maturity is involved, by recalling how Nagisa's mother thinks of her son, prior to when his meal is spiked so that he is transported to his school to burn it down.
 
It's clear that whatever Nagisa's mother says is really so she can exercise control over someone else to be her successor- everything is just an excuse to reduce Nagisa into something she wants him to be. But they are all common excuses said so that one takes a higher position, to look like the "bigger person", to be justified. These are all things adults say to children to belittle them, and yet they demand respect for their age and the resources they use for those below them, even if those children may have never asked for it.
 
It's no wonder children are not likely to behave in a pleasant manner for them, there is little reason they can perceive for such beings to be worth respecting. (Nagisa himself is actually an exception to this in that for whatever reason he is still thankful to his mother and respects her.)
 
And of course, in this discussion, those that are behaving in the manner you find them undesirable is likened to that of children.
 
Where have these commentators found enough reason to treat ScrewAttack with respect, and why would they want to oblige to your wish that they behave differently? Of course, it is not as though you are communicating with them in an attempt to make it that they do, but this is more just so you have something to say without having to deal with a shitstorm. It's very likely that they really can't find a worthy reason to bother being civilized about the matter.
 
Then, there is the other half of the context you probably need for why I say the things I do.
 
Why is someone revered for offering mercy to sinners?

This is a question that I had to review several times in my life, because I personally never wanted who I found disgusting to have anything nice in their lives.
 
For all the judgment we pass, heightening or lowering people for the quality of their morality, for some reason, humans have come to a conclusion where the one that does not ostracize another when they believe it is warranted is above them.
 
At first I had thought that this was primarily related to the notion that just because you don't bother to take action against something, you are better for it, "bigger", "mature." Consider how many stories there are out there that denounce going through with one's revenge. Even if whatever they are seeking revenge for remains entirely legitimate, they will still be looked down on as people who are engulfed in their feelings, and others will elevate themselves for not engaging in such petty matters, yet again, with justification.
 
But there are plenty of people who do not take action on others, typically more out of cowardice or lack of motivation than anything, who can still find themselves respecting the one that offers kindness toward criminals, sinners in the form of the unacceptable.
 
The famous example, is of course Jesus, who tells the crowd that the one who has not sinned, should be the first to throw a stone. But more important than his declaration is that the audience actually listened to him, at least, as far as my observation and experience can tell. There was not one to believe that they were without fault, in spite of how popular it is for many to say they have done no wrong.
 
It's not enough to simply say, that we are all human, and thus flawed. This is simply the excuse we take when we stray from our principles, and wish to forgive ourselves.
 
The ones before Jesus had not left the woman alone instead of throwing stones at her for the sake of preserving their status as mature beings, but rather, out of guilt and revelation.
 
I think that what the Bible itself is trying to say is simply that only the sinless is allowed to punish sinners, but that takes away from why the individuals in the crowd made their own decision.
 
It's not likely that they did so simply because they believed that was the right thing to do, but rather, because they could not bring themselves to throw stones when they knew they were guilty themselves, that they are sinners. It may be to say that they throwing the stones at her would be tantamount to throwing the stones at a reflection of themselves, broadly speaking given how shallow the situation at hand was to begin with.
 
Those people of the crowd are portrayed very ideally, or at least, Jesus is portrayed ideally for managing to convince them so easily.
 
Because humans of our age and before us are far more blind to others, may not realize their blindness, and even when they do, will remain blind to another.
 
Then, it is to say that someone who does not look away for their convenience and someone with sufficient wisdom to understand sinners, must be seen as beyond themselves, who may not be able to admit it, but know that they are further ignorant than they. It is a point where they recognize that it turns out they were not suitable for the role that is higher than the sinner they wish to ostracize after all.
 
In other words, the one who exercises their authority by virtue of their age is on nothing but a power trip that blinds them to the one they perceive as being below them. They do not try or want to respect children, and yet demand respect in return. They do not understand that children are persons as they are themselves, to the point of which it seems as if they do not even remember when they were in the same position.
 
Once someone tells another to grow up, they have reduced that person into what they perceive to be a child. A status that means little but "I am better than you. Get on my level before you think you're worth anything."
 
They have ceased to understand and have blinded themselves.
 
I resent and never wish to be the one who will refuse to understand, in favor of projecting what one want them to be for their or anyone else's benefit. (Even when I was very young, I had never thought of fixing someone else to what I'd want them to be, I would rather that anyone I hate go die in a fire or be killed in some other painful manner. For those I loved and knew, what I found the most painful were not flaws that I wanted them to change, but rather fear of them changing from my influence. I have never emotionally understood justice, the excuse most often used toward children for why elders act as they do, and have only ever used it for creating pretenses for smoother social interaction.)
 
I don't want to be an adult, so obviously, I hate maturity, the value that they most often demand out of others and use to elevate their positions, typically used as whatever definition would suit them depending on the situation.
 
But I have only found the willingness to understand valuable on my own terms, do not find it to be worthy of reverence, and do not earn the supposed wisdom that comes with it which will turn you into "the bigger man".
 
Because I am completely fine with condemning others out of disgust and impatience, these feelings of mine do not invalidate themselves simply from learning more information about the other.
 
The vast majority of the time my hatred applies to something or someone, other details about it that lead me to greater understanding of them do not actually interfere. It is never that I hate a human for being less than human after all, it is because they include elements of humanity that I despise. So as long as that factor remains true, there is no change in opinion that will overtake those feelings.
 
I have these strong feelings, which do not falter and unleash themselves whenever there is a provocation they have to answer.
 
I understand those with strong feelings, which they will refuse to bring to submission for the sake of upholding a status perceived as being above them.
 
It's no matter if they are being petty, haters gonna hate. That is what I understand, and I do not believe it is for their own good that is taken away from them unless they feel that way themselves.
 
Are the ones making a fuss being petty? Are they being foolish? Are they annoying? Are they a shame to believe they even enjoy the same hobby that you do?
 
I have no issue with anyone seeing them that way. But coming up with a pretense that says they should be correcting themselves (by saying they should grow "thicker skin") when this is no more than their natural reaction? You have blinded yourself, and ceased to understand.
 
I of course, do not understand many either. I made that topic named "Likes : Serious Business?" after all. But I have no problem accepting that it is indeed, serious business, there is simply dissonance due to my lack of empathy. There are questions to be asked over demands to be made, there are answers to accept rather than expectations to be met.
 
This is of course, all a matter of the goal we are aiming for. When pretenses are discarded, and it comes down to what we really want, I've little concern over what happens, understanding or not. Because at this point, I've grown thicker skin, and thus cannot give enough of a shit for all kinds of happenings that may occur around me. That is how I have evolved from looking further into human's vulgarity rather than evading it, after all. (I feel that I have lost something as a result, and the regret that followed defeated any pretense I had of being above another. Perhaps part of why I had written out this much on the subject is because I actually don't want to think about more people ending up like me, I don't want to think about the inured in favor of the ones who feel more freely, and thus, go against its promotion.)

I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#10 kirant

kirant

    I won't go until it's over

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,420 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 09 March 2016 - 05:21 AM

However, this is really only because it has become easier to find the acceptable "escape route", there have always been people that don't want to listen to others, whether as a group or as an individual.

 

Absolutely.  It's much easier to deflect than to analyze and critique.  A simple out, even if it's an ad hominem fallacy or constructs a straw man to make it easier to support their own case (points the internet is amazingly bad at actually using...I'd be rich if I got money for each improper use), becomes simpler than seeing if their own opinion is wrong.

 

In any situation where someone is doing X, like the people who do X, there's no reason for them to not be part of group of people who do X as far as no other conditions are necessary. That said, personal attacks are less useful when it comes to re-reading stuff I say to see if I can find insight in my own words, and it's rare that I ever have a problem with a certain person's action but not another who does the same thing, so there's usually little purpose in directing it towards a particular individual.

Going to go out on a limb here and suggest that a single post makes it difficult to discern if someone is sensitive or butthurt on an issue unless they specifically state it.  I would posit that sensitivity is characteristically shown through repetition or fixation.  That is, if Blazer continually came here to post how "butthurt" people are over ScrewAttack/???/??? (honestly, I don't know enough of these videos to even provide more examples) slamming an aspect of their game OR if Blazer came here to continually express how much he hates the sensitive people group downvoting the video and how he loathes them for getting riled up about it (while refusing to let go of the point because he hates that group of individuals that much), then it could be a case.  A single and isolated rant is uncharacteristic of the individual but could easily stand as an outlier and wouldn't be enough to go on to suggest a pattern.

 

 Why is someone revered for offering mercy to sinners?

This is a question that I had to review several times in my life, because I personally never wanted who I found disgusting to have anything nice in their lives.
 
For all the judgment we pass, heightening or lowering people for the quality of their morality, for some reason, humans have come to a conclusion where the one that does not ostracize another when they believe it is warranted is above them.
 
At first I had thought that this was primarily related to the notion that just because you don't bother to take action against something, you are better for it, "bigger", "mature." Consider how many stories there are out there that denounce going through with one's revenge. Even if whatever they are seeking revenge for remains entirely legitimate, they will still be looked down on as people who are engulfed in their feelings, and others will elevate themselves for not engaging in such petty matters, yet again, with justification.

I think you may be conflating two different issues here.  One is the notion of revenge, the cathartic experience.  The other, the choices made when in power.

 

The wording of your original statement directly uses "mercy".  This implies that the victim is helpless.  That you've got everything in your hands and can choose to do whatever you want.  This is different that what you state below...the quest of seeking revenge.  In many senses, and this comes off a bit cliche, the journey and the destination are far different.

 

I love my sports examples, so we can always consider that.  Let's say you're on magical sports team X.  Pick a sport where there's only one champion/winning team.  Let's say you lose to generic rival Y last year.  So you can choose to train hard to beat Y this year.  That's the act of pursuing revenge.  Now let's say that you know you've won and have some time left with Y (ex - the last 10 minutes of a team sports game where you're running away with the score).  You can see in their eyes they know they've lost.  How you act in that situation is much more relevant to the question you pose whereas what you put down after is related to the former.  The question you pose regards whether you rub it in their face and mock them for their weakness or if you keep playing and shake hands at the end of the game (in a sport where handshakes at the end are tradition...ex - tennis).

 

In other words, the one who exercises their authority by virtue of their age is on nothing but a power trip that blinds them to the one they perceive as being below them. They do not try or want to respect children, and yet demand respect in return. They do not understand that children are persons as they are themselves, to the point of which it seems as if they do not even remember when they were in the same position.

I think it's also important here to separate the exact desire of the authority and the nature of the relationship.  It is important in some cases to consider this as study does indicate that children do not have the same thought process as adults and we can't approach them as simply smaller adults.  So if I tell you something and some rule system, you and other adults are likely not going to have the same interpretation as a child.  I'm not acutely aware enough about exactly what the best approach is to children (and nor do most people given how much people bicker about whether or not another person is raising their child properly)...but suffice to say that the guiding principles will be slightly different than the way we treat adult-adult situations.

 

One of the biggest issues, and one of the most often fictionalized, is the struggle to determine when exactly children develop specific mental tools for functioning as adult.  This, at least from my understanding, is a field of great exploration and why we have psychologists specifically researching the field.  The old realm of thought was very close to Taoism...that we let people mature by walking, stumbling, making their own mistakes...and hopefully coming back smarter and wiser.  A newer realm is emerging...the one associated with "helicopter parenting" or keeping too close to the child.  That is, we act as if we know better than the child and that, one day, they'll hopefully understand us.  And many try to mix the two...how they should is another question...but they try.

 

Absolutely in the case of two mature people, however.  Exploiting authority by saying "I'm the expert in this field.  I've put 30 goddamn years into this company and I'm not going to listen to some snot nosed kid out of college tell me what to do" is nothing but denial and a power trip.  Of course, it actually IS entirely possible that the older individual is right...but that's the wrong approach to the situation.

 

Once someone tells another to grow up, they have reduced that person into what they perceive to be a child. A status that means little but "I am better than you. Get on my level before you think you're worth anything."

I have to admit, I read this part in the voice of Naoto Shirogane.

 

I agree though.  It's a statement used for belittlement and often encases no hard facts other than "I'm right because I'm older"...a case which really doesn't hold much water.  I can kind of understand why it's used (mostly by fatigued adults who feel that, from their experience, would represent a situation much less important in hindsight than it is currently made out)...but it's still a poor argument and one wrought with fallacies.

 

I don't want to be an adult, so obviously, I hate maturity, the value that they most often demand out of others and use to elevate their positions, typically used as whatever definition would suit them depending on the situation.

The issue is that maturity are loosely associated notions.  It's literally just the idea that you've reached advanced emotional and mental development.  There are few principles which define this and makes it shaky as all hell to discuss.  I mean, I personally define maturity as the ability to stow away the current set of emotions and discuss the topic in a professional manner (something which I don't feel I'm capable of in all circumstances as of yet...there are situations where I will roll my eyes or walk off so I don't explode).  But that doesn't match everybody's.

 

Personally, becoming an adult in my mind is simply understanding and defining exactly what you are as an individual.  Knowing your strengths and weaknesses and going forward with them while acknowledging whatever society you happen to be in at the moment (ex - If you work in a private industries environment, outward appearance is heavily valued...right or wrong, and that you'll need to wear what they deem as professional clothing to work there).  If you don't like that society, you're free to move to one which better matches you and gives you the ability to succeed in the way you wish to.  In other words, simply understand that hand you've been dealt.  Where you go with that hand is your choice


RedBlue.png
Shameless Self-Plug - Updated May 30 - A Letter to a Younger Me – Anime Edition


#11 Mercurius

Mercurius

    Ars est celare artem

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,409 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Interests:Digital art, idealistic stories, MMOs, SRPGs, hunting games, FAAAAAAAAAAABULOUS-ness, and staying out of the social order.

Posted 09 March 2016 - 06:32 PM


I think you may be conflating two different issues here.  One is the notion of revenge, the cathartic experience.  The other, the choices made when in power.

 

The wording of your original statement directly uses "mercy".  This implies that the victim is helpless.  That you've got everything in your hands and can choose to do whatever you want.  This is different that what you state below...the quest of seeking revenge.  In many senses, and this comes off a bit cliche, the journey and the destination are far different.

 

I love my sports examples, so we can always consider that.  Let's say you're on magical sports team X.  Pick a sport where there's only one champion/winning team.  Let's say you lose to generic rival Y last year.  So you can choose to train hard to beat Y this year.  That's the act of pursuing revenge.  Now let's say that you know you've won and have some time left with Y (ex - the last 10 minutes of a team sports game where you're running away with the score).  You can see in their eyes they know they've lost.  How you act in that situation is much more relevant to the question you pose whereas what you put down after is related to the former.  The question you pose regards whether you rub it in their face and mock them for their weakness or if you keep playing and shake hands at the end of the game (in a sport where handshakes at the end are tradition...ex - tennis).

Perhaps it would have been better to refer to it as kindness in favor of mercy, as what I had thought of at the time was more in reference to solace toward those who have committed offense over condemnation.

 

That said, your sports example seems to use revenge in a manner that is detached from the emotions associated with it. Is magical sports team X really trying to beat generic rival Y, so much as simply take back their position? If they were to conclude with sportsmanship at the end without reluctance(as opposed to only doing it for public appearances or as a more subtle way of rubbing it in via obscured sarcasm), how much was it that they really wanted to beat generic rival Y, as opposed to simply becoming the winner again?

 

Then, even in that case, if there is a fixation on generic rival Y instead of opponents in general, there may be those who scoff at those petty enough to put in so much effort into defeating generic rival Y, especially if this were not connected to professional sports and was instead an unofficial match or between unaffiliated parties in general. Korea, for example, can be seen as really petty by outsiders, because even if they don't get first place or any medals or anything, they are totally cool with it as long as they beat Japan. But to Koreans themselves, it is of course serious business, and the only thing they have to say to outsiders is that they don't understand.

 

It is true that usually the decision at the end of the journey tends to mark what it was all for, but even before that, in stories where seeking vengeance is known and involved, it is common for others to tell them all sorts of things about how it isn't worth it, that they will be left empty at the end, that they shouldn't lower themselves to that level, and so on. Essentially, it all comes down to "You shouldn't feel that way", and there are not many attempts to actually empathize and try to find a way to give them an actual reason to feel otherwise about the subject.

 

The one that offers mercy does not have to be the one that was seeking revenge, usually, they will actually harbor little to no ill will towards the sinner from the beginning. The matter where revenge was in reference to was more to speak of my initial impression on the reason why the one who refrains from exacting punishment is revered, but this was a conclusion that I had abandoned upon continued contemplation, because the revered was more than one who only makes the decision to refrain once they have been put in their position of power.

 

I think it's also important here to separate the exact desire of the authority and the nature of the relationship.  It is important in some cases to consider this as study does indicate that children do not have the same thought process as adults and we can't approach them as simply smaller adults.  So if I tell you something and some rule system, you and other adults are likely not going to have the same interpretation as a child.  I'm not acutely aware enough about exactly what the best approach is to children (and nor do most people given how much people bicker about whether or not another person is raising their child properly)...but suffice to say that the guiding principles will be slightly different than the way we treat adult-adult situations.

While I have heard the same, and do not have issues considering it credible, that is actually different from the point I was making. It is less that adults do not treat children as adults, but rather, that they do not treat them truly as if they were persons with their own desires and troubles that make their own decisions from their experiences and emotions. In truth, for the most part, children tend to be an idol for their bloodline's next generation, they are not really treated as individuals and a large part of the frustration that adults have dealing with them is from not realizing that they have their reasons to be uncomfortable with anything they have to do to them. Even in cases where they will tell themselves this is rationally the case, they will not understand on an emotional level. Whether they are helicopter parents or not, they will still believe they know better than children as to how children think than children themselves.

 

That of course, stops when they become adults (at least, externally) because it's like suddenly adults have a switch turned on to provide some default amount of respect towards this new being before them. It's just easier for them to assume fellowship and understanding, whether in cases that they never met each other before or in cases where they have had to put up with each other for a long time. it's natural when your positions are closer. The same kind of thing occurs between the aristocrats and the commoners, between the pros and noobs, between the administrators and members with little to their name, etc. (However, because parents will never have the distance in position between themselves and their children reduced, differences in opinion will not really occur.)

 

Of course, this is not to say that this applies to all adults, because there are of course adults out there who are willing to understand and communicate successfully. However, the rarity of such individuals is high enough for their value to be incomprehensibly high to a great deal of people. How else am I supposed to be so into the whole older girl x younger boy thing.

 

 

Personally, becoming an adult in my mind is simply understanding and defining exactly what you are as an individual.  Knowing your strengths and weaknesses and going forward with them while acknowledging whatever society you happen to be in at the moment (ex - If you work in a private industries environment, outward appearance is heavily valued...right or wrong, and that you'll need to wear what they deem as professional clothing to work there). If you don't like that society, you're free to move to one which better matches you and gives you the ability to succeed in the way you wish to.  In other words, simply understand that hand you've been dealt. Where you go with that hand is your choice.

What, but even I've become an adult by that definition.

 

...shit.


I believe in judgment of humans through their judgment of fiction, for nothing else tells better of their disposition freed from apprehension.


#12 kirant

kirant

    I won't go until it's over

  • Staff
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,420 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 March 2016 - 03:26 AM

That said, your sports example seems to use revenge in a manner that is detached from the emotions associated with it. Is magical sports team X really trying to beat generic rival Y, so much as simply take back their position? If they were to conclude with sportsmanship at the end without reluctance(as opposed to only doing it for public appearances or as a more subtle way of rubbing it in via obscured sarcasm), how much was it that they really wanted to beat generic rival Y, as opposed to simply becoming the winner again?

 

Then, even in that case, if there is a fixation on generic rival Y instead of opponents in general, there may be those who scoff at those petty enough to put in so much effort into defeating generic rival Y, especially if this were not connected to professional sports and was instead an unofficial match or between unaffiliated parties in general. Korea, for example, can be seen as really petty by outsiders, because even if they don't get first place or any medals or anything, they are totally cool with it as long as they beat Japan. But to Koreans themselves, it is of course serious business, and the only thing they have to say to outsiders is that they don't understand.

 

I have to admit I wrote this with specific teams in mind and just filed off the serial numbers.  The example I had in mind is a bit of a long story so I'll just say I think an excellent comparison would be if you were a South Korean speed skater and you were up against Apolo Anton Ohno.  tl;dr version - You feel he's screwed you (or your nation if you're being pedantic about all this) out of Olympic medals.

 

It is true that usually the decision at the end of the journey tends to mark what it was all for, but even before that, in stories where seeking vengeance is known and involved, it is common for others to tell them all sorts of things about how it isn't worth it, that they will be left empty at the end, that they shouldn't lower themselves to that level, and so on. Essentially, it all comes down to "You shouldn't feel that way", and there are not many attempts to actually empathize and try to find a way to give them an actual reason to feel otherwise about the subject.

 

I'm not sure if I agree.  The tendency I think might lean more towards the culture of the storyteller.  Again, I find there's a greater tendency towards Confucianist and Daoist styled narratives to what you say.  However, revenge narratives in other cultures can easily come off as righteous and morally correct.  They run the full gamut from justified (The Princess Bridge, both in novel and movie if memory serves) to morally ambiguous (Moby Dick, The Count of Monte Cristo) to stupid and/or petty (The Cask of Amontillado). 

 

that they do not treat them truly as if they were persons with their own desires and troubles that make their own decisions from their experiences and emotions. In truth, for the most part, children tend to be an idol for their bloodline's next generation, they are not really treated as individuals and a large part of the frustration that adults have dealing with them is from not realizing that they have their reasons to be uncomfortable with anything they have to do to them. Even in cases where they will tell themselves this is rationally the case, they will not understand on an emotional level. Whether they are helicopter parents or not, they will still believe they know better than children as to how children think than children themselves.

 

At some level, I think it's part of the pressure of becoming a parent.  You always want your child to get the best and to not take the same mistakes you do.  A small example could be swimming lessons.  You're a kid and deep pools of water are scary to anybody with a sense of self-preservation as, well, you could drown.  From a child's perspective, you don't want to go.  I went through this and I recall distinctly a couple times trying to feign stomach issues to get out of it since I didn't understand the point.  I've asked them about this before and they have mentioned that it's because neither of them can swim and they think it's a practical skill which could save my life someday.

 

It's a balance.  Sometimes you need to consider that the child knows themselves better.  That they just don't like [x].  Using personal examples, I knew when my heart was no longer in piano.  I knew when it was time for me to quit.  Luckily, I was old enough that I could discuss this and end that chapter of my life.  On the other hand, sometimes the child's perspective does change.  I've always been a fan of the idea of trying it once.  You can make a decision once you've had a chance to try it out.  This goes double for children as children often learn through experiences first and foremost.

 

As a side note, this tends to extend to adults for me.  I always encourage someone to try something out before making up their mind as to whether or not they like an activity.

 

Of course, this is not to say that this applies to all adults, because there are of course adults out there who are willing to understand and communicate successfully. However, the rarity of such individuals is high enough for their value to be incomprehensibly high to a great deal of people. How else am I supposed to be so into the whole older girl x younger boy thing.

 

 


RedBlue.png
Shameless Self-Plug - Updated May 30 - A Letter to a Younger Me – Anime Edition





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users