Does anyone else hate the "Its just kids show bro!" argument when discussing a show's flaws? Avatar was a kids show yet treated it's audience with respect. Hell, even Korra did a better job than shows like pic related.
Why do people still jump to say this in the current year?
I don't know, I just read comics
>>81175395
Because you need to remember that those shows are aired on networks whose main demographic are children.
People don't know how to handle criticism, even when it isn't directed towards them.
>>81175470
so?
>>81175395
Being a kids show affects tone and content not uality. That being said it does have to be simple. Having a dozen non-sequential episodes or something would confuse kids.
I dunno, he's not really being dismissive at all. He even said he enjoyed the critique. If you don't like the musical numbers in SU though, it's pretty logical that you'd be better off watching something else. No need to watch something you don't enjoy.
>>81175558
The critique was more about how the song made the who part of the episode tension-less. Also the fight looked like shit.
>>81175558
But what if I enjoy everything about the show except for the musical numbers?Which I do. Seriously everything else about SU is god-tier but I find the musical elements to be...tolerable, at best.
Who the fuck writes a 20 page critique of Steven Universe?
Hell, who even reads it?
>>81175523
What?
that critique was bullshit anyway
>>81175523
what the fuck? context?
>it's just a kids show!
Then why are you watching it?
>>81175395
Because it's made for children and autistic 19 year olds like yourself take it too seriously. just like bronies people see you sperging over little kid shows and feel the need to remind your poor soul that you're making mountains outta mole hills.
Maybe if you and Mr. 20 page critique were 12 you'd be taken more seriously by the creators.
>>81175622
>>81175616
That's fair, it's just OP made it sound like Ian JQ was being a dismissive asshole when he really just just said "Hey, maybe this show it's for you".
>>81175509
It means that some opinions doesn't matter as much as others.
>>81175822
>I watch serious shows for serious adults
>>81175924
Is he the origin of the wizard meme?
>>81175509
>so?
It literally is for children.
>>81175967
So is this site, but you're still using it.
>>81175395
Is there a place where you can read this 20 page critique?
Things made for kids apparently don't have to be held to any sort of standard, according to these retards, who probably were raised on the cartoons without standards and think they've turned out well.
>>81175800
>>81175711
The girl crying and getting here computer taken is one of the people who sent death threats to that suicidal SU fanartist.
It is for kids and it also does suck, so both points are valid.
>>81175998
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lSCS6FOTF0Y432eVG-OEL_FV9M9U0VQjqBSOx6w8QCs/edit?pref=2&pli=1&pageId=100779675585199996004
>>81175711
>>81175800
Some girl on tumblr drew a SU character slightly (i.e. not noticeable unless you're a landwhale and thus get triggered by such things) less fat than the actual canon art. So she got bullied by Tumblr for a while, to the point where some people started doxxing her and harrassing her IRL until she attempted suicide.
Then some random person on Tumblr reported some of the people involved to the police, which lead to this, as well as some 25 year old basement dweller going on an insane tirade about how he got arrested because of it and his parents had to bail him out of jail.
>>81175998
check the archives, it used to be posted here a lot.
>>81175521
>Having a dozen non-sequential episodes or something would confuse kids.
That explains why nobody, of any age, likes Uncle Retard.
I hate more the idea that self-claimed adults can't appreciate musical action scenes.
>>81176036
Even when I was 17 I knew not to do this shit. Why do people think its a good idea to harass others over a cartoon?
>>81176128
Are there actually any that are good? The one in jailbreak was pretty bad.
>>81176036
Jesus Christ tumblr. Over a fucking cartoon character being drawn a little differently? I know they're crazy, but goddamn.
>>81176036
Anyone have the art that made tumblr shit itself?
>>81176146
they're otherkin
they have a legitimate mental illness
>>81176036
aah that whole tirade of events. Yeah it never made sense complaining about the body type of a character who can shape-shift. But I'm glad to hear people got what they deserved. Is the artist okay now?
>>81176235
I'd like to add that she made this in 2013, which means that there were only a handful of episodes and we didn't actually see Rose's full body yet.
>>81176092
eh give it a read anyway.
Even if you find it disagreeable, it has some points you might take interest in.
>Watching a musical show
>Complains about a musical
>"I hate when people say it's just a kids show!"
Well.
That's because it is.
Ian isn't saying it's okay that it's bad because it's a kid's show. He's just saying the critique is looking at it as if SU is a completely different genre from what he's complaining about. It'd be as if he was watching a western and said, "Fuck, these people are on horses way too much, where the fuck are all the sports cars?" or watching a film about Jesus and complaining about the religious undertones.
>>81175395
depends on the judgements
critique like "this is poorly animated/drawn, this doesn't mesh with the writing established, etc" makes sense
critique like "this comedy kids show isn't as dark as I want" isn't
>>81176314
Already did, when it was posted here in the past.Bet you anything that Ian found it here as well
>>81176332
Just because its a musical, doesn't mean every number in the show gets a pass. Some of them in this show are garbage.
>>81175616
This is kind of very personal and not scared by most people. Its obvious that the writters were aiming t other thing, it its ok to not like it.
>>81176368
Okay but that has nothing to do with what I was saying. Unless you're implying Stronger Than You was one of those numbers which I hope you aren't.
>>81176368
The critique was that it was not serious enough or something.
>>81175395
I always find the "It's for kids" shit funny because people usually think about kids 6 and under when they say that shit but children 7 to 12 who watch cartoons do notice stupid shit or the weirdest inconsistencies in a cartoon show.
Especially if they see a cartoon that's better written and has good animation and then they watch another one that's shittier, they'll notice.
Still I have to agree with ian, a critique on SU is good but 20 pages just screams "dude, move on"
>>81176146
People who think they are morally superior to everyone who can't interact with others IRL and are stuck on their comp 24/7 tend to be bonkers.
I come from the era of shit 90's internet and the dramas were there in forums but I am glad it wasn't this bad when I was a kid.
Avatar and SU aim for different audiences you fucking retard.
It's like getting mad that Blues Clues wasn't more mature.
>>81176399
It is. Stronger than You is only held together by Estelle. The song composition and the lyrics are fuckawful. Which is funny because the song directly after it in the next episode does a better job of being catchy and fits better with the tone of the scene.
>>81176313
Well she is pretty thin in there in comparison to what has been seen of her.
Her arms are super skinny.
But regardless sending death threats off anonymous about a teen's art is stupid
>>81176479
Oh sorry, Avatar is for all ages while SU is for tumblrteens. My mistake.
>>81176505
You're clearly in the minority. Most people think full disclosure is shit except for the ringtone.
>>81175395
I mean "it's just a kids show" doesn't excuse it being poorly made, but writing a 20 page critique about the tone of a scene in a chidlren's cartoon not being serious enough is kinda out there.
>>81176505
>It is. Stronger than You is only held together by Estelle. The song composition and the lyrics are fuckawful.
Oh well then.
I can see me and my good friend, Superior Taste, aren't invited to this particular tea party.
>>81176548
SU is for the 9-11 age range I think is what was said by Ian.
While Avatar was for teens.
>>81176560
Because most people care about Jailbreak because of muh lesbians. That was the jumping off point for half the fanbase by now. The song however is shit and I'm still waiting for Garnet to get a good song for herself.
>>81176314
I skimmed it, he has a point about the drama it seems forced and super emotional sometimes although I do like the messages behind them sometimes.
Ian isn't even saying "its just a kids show". Hes pretty much saying, "maybe this show isnt for you.
Kids shows are limited in design by the way.
Notice how in Weirdmageddon where the world seemed to be ending, everything was kept mild and comical for the most part.
Avatar is clearly the exception.
>>81176598
>SU is for the 9-11 age range I think is what was said by Ian.
What I remember Ian and most of the crewniverse saying is that SU is for "everyone", including members of ISIS, but not including that one murderer who accidentally gave himself away because he forgot he had a mic on while he was in the bathroom.
>>81176035
That's some serious autism.
>>81175616
I thought the fight looked pretty damn solid, but that's subjective.
The fight still had tension. The struggle against a force that hated her very existence was still there and still expressed clearly. It just wasn't the kind of tension the guy writing the critique was looking for. It was only partially about Garnet's direct conflict with Jasper. It was about the resolution of Garnet being broken apart as well as a validation of her existence. The song conveyed how truly powerful and "in-step" Garnet is: Singing and mocking her opponent in a cocksure tone while matching her every step of the way. It was both an act of defiance and a celebration of herself. It was pretty poignant. Not only that, but it was poignant a way that a more generic knock-down drag-out shounen/superhero/summer blockbuster style fight wouldn't have been.
Plus, the real dramatic climax of the episode was what happened immediately afterwards.
>>81176598
>While Avatar was for teens.
? Avatar aired right next to spongebob. The demo is obviously for the same age group.
>>81176598
Nickelodeon is and has always been a kids network. Avatar was for kids. It's a kids show on a kids network, as most cartoons are. Even Cartoon Network's PG cartoons are for kids.
>>81176617
So the song is shit cause you say so and everyone else who likes it are shit, ok then ma'am.
>>81176673
Yeah, overrated song and episode.
>>81176665
Even kids shows can have different target audiences.
>>81175395
People usually use it when people are taking it way too fucking seriously ad in this case Ian is 100% right.
He isnt using it as an excuse for poor quality and most creators dont. But fandoms are tiptop cancer and hyper analyze every scrap of content like retards for a show that isnt going to explain technical shit. There was a thread discussing how the fucking hand ship from homeworld works. Its ridiculous how seriously people on this board and in fandoms in general take shows when they are aimed at an entirely different audience
Just so you guys know, the critique in question was written way back when reformed aired. A lot of the flaws he points out in his resume arent even relevant anymore.
>>81176638
Yeah, but there's some meaning to having a certain age range.
That age range is their expected audience and who they're designing the show to please the most.
Pleasing the adults is not as important to them.
>>81176725
Why are you complaining about autistic things on a site made for autists bro :^)
>>81176036
...is what people like to say to make their bullying, bigotry and death threats look good by comparison.
What actually happened is that someone drew fanart of Rose which was thinner and closer to a "standard" sexy female body than the character actually is, and people criticized that for complicated reasons involving nonstandard beauty and the like. For unrelated reasons, mostly about non-internet matters, the artist was very depressed and troubled.
The War on Justice, being their usual psychotically evil selves, likes to rewrite this into "she killed herself because of cyberbullying" because it fits their political narrative. No, that narrative isn't "cyberbullying is bad"; in fact, the people who parade it around would aggressively laugh off the concept of bullying in any other context. No, the point they want to prove is either "liking this show makes you a subhuman Nazi who is guilty by association of word-murder" or "having this social justice viewpoint makes you a subhuman Nazi wurderer"; which they took the opportunity to illustrate by sending a flurry of bullying, death threats, and other harassment at anyone who's on the wrong side of their politics.
A sane person would notice that the thing they're using this incident to justify is the exact thing they love to do themselves. But if they were sane, they wouldn't be the War on Justice.
>>81175395
Did you write the critique? Is that why you're here?
>>81176799
>a site made for autists
This isnt reddit /trash/ or /b/
>>81175395
>current year meme
>thinking "It's 2016" has anything to do with anything
Cartoons were more universally accepted for all ages A LONG TIME AGO. 2016 has nothing to do with shit you dumb fucking moron.
SU is a children's show. It's not complex. It's goofy. It's got "randumb" humor, the protagonist is a fat annoying child.
A child's show has to be looked at differently when it's given to all the tropes of babies shows.
>>81176778
>That age range is their expected audience and who they're designing the show to please the most.
>Pleasing the adults is not as important to them.
It really is telling how little you know about the entertainment business. Studios always find ways to maximize their audiences. Unless it's a niche network like Discovery Kids, it's in the network's interest that the show attracts as many people as it can.
>>81176839
Prove to me /co/ isn't for autists
>>81176694
>Being unable understand or even cope with the fact that some people might enjoy things that you do not enjoy
Yup. Pure autism.
Maybe when SU is done Becky'll make a mature cartoon for mature viewers such as yourself OP.
>>81176946
Ironic because you're illustrating it more than me.
>>81176825
I'm trying to understand what you're attempting to say here. However, your English grammar is so awful, I'm not able to get a fucking thing.
>>81176598
It's funny but I have yet to meet a kid who likes SU, most of the kids in the after school program that I work in don't seem terribly interested in it when I bring it up or tell me they don't watch it.
The girl that help me out with the kids on the other hand are big fans, but they are in their 20's and hardly kids.There are however two 10 and 11 year old boys that are bronies in my group, but they don't like showing their power levels that much
>>81177038
>but they don't like showing their power levels that much
More like they don't want to get their asses kicked.
>>81177078
Yep I figured that much.
>>81176702
Nevermind that Avatar was corny as fuck more often than not, or that for all his training over the entire series, Aang just defeated Ozai with a last-minute plot device and a double asspull.
But that's fine, because it's a kids' show.
>>81176036
What kind of loser its still discussing cartoons and caring so much at the age of 25!
>4chan
oh-uh
>>81177027
There's nothing unclear about it, but I'll simplify it.
The incident, which is actually a distorted fabrication, is treated as an atrocity because someone was cyber-bullied over politics. The people exploiting it would normally dismiss cyberbullying as something that isn't even a thing, but now it's suddenly convenient for them to acknowledge that words can hurt people.
Now that they've acknowledge this, instead of accepting the harmful nature of cyberbullying, they choose to engage in even more of it than they already did, using the political issues of the incident as an excuse. This ignores the fact that the political issues had nothing to do with any of the actual problems they have with it, nor did the incident establish anything wrong with the viewpoint they're attacking.
To further shorten it, the War on Justice is demonizing their political enemies in a certain way in order to justify doing the same evil deeds they try to associate with others. This isn't surprising, since it's what they always do.
>>81175395
That pic doesn't look like he's saying "It's for kids so it can be bad."
It looks more like "This isn't the tone we were going for in the first place."
>>81176971
Sauce?
>>81177311
>There's nothing unclear about it
Your grammar is horrendous.
>War on Justice
What the hell is this supposed to mean?
>The incident, which is actually a distorted fabrication, is treated as an atrocity because someone was cyber-bullied over politics.
What incident? Which and whose politics?
>it's what they always do.
Who is "they"?
You're referring to a number of abstractions ("the incident", "the problems", "the political issues", "the viewpoint", "their political enemies") without any points of reference.
![[Doremi].Ojamajo.Doremi.Dokkaan!.04.[B193813D].avi_snapshot_05.21_[2015.07.13_12.21.54].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/PrrgBR9.jpg "[Doremi].Ojamajo.Doremi.Dokkaan!.04.[B193813D].avi_snapshot_05.21_[2015.07.13_12.21.54].jpg")
The worst part is when it's said by general shitlickers who obsess over said kids show and the female characters within in
They are the last ones who get to go 'don't think so deep about a kid's show you fucking loser'
>>81175395
It's the same things with animated movies. Most defend Zootopia as "a kids movie" when any flaw is point out, but it is otherwise hailed as incredibly "deep" and "mature" when the same people are praising it.
>>81177311
What's it like to have severe autism? I am doing a study and I need some first-hand notes.
>>81175395
>Why do people still jump to say this in the current year?
Because it's true.
>>81176649
Not that writing a 20 page critique of the show is all that bad, but defending the show against that critique is definitely worse.
>>81176036
>some 25 year old basement dweller going on an insane tirade about how he got arrested because of it and his parents had to bail him out of jail
>>81177486
Apparently, despite obsessively clinging to controversial incidents when they're convenient, all knowledge of them vanishes the instant they cease to be useful.
This shouldn't be a surprise, since the WoJ wasn't aware of what actually happened even when they were pretending to acknowledge it. It stands to reason that they'd act baffled and clueless when called out on their vilely hateful hypocrisy.
>>81175395
Some people believe children deserve garbage
Other times it's simply that the show's demographic isn't the ones you market sex, blood, and booze to.
Rescue Bots isn't like Cyber Six because it's a kid's show
>>81177311
>>81176825
>its okay to send death threats to a girl who drew a picture they didnt like
This is seriously something tumblrites will defend? Jesus christ I hate all the spouting of tumblr boogeyman on this site but go the fuck back to tumblr if you think that drawing a picture is somehow oppressing you or against your "war on justice" crap
>>81177327
stop being reasonable, we're having an argument
>>81177670
You didn't answer anything I asked.
Again, what in the name of fuck are you talking about? Who are the people involved? What is this "war on justice" that you keep referring to? Your posts are all a miasma of incomprehensible bullshit.
>>81177500
I second this.
Seriously, when a show has mature themes and tones and all that jazz, I'll treat the show as a mature show, despite whatever the supposed target audience of the show is.
Being a children's show doesn't make your show fault-proof.
>>81177685
Tumblr is the real internet hate machine. Not us, 4+4chan, or any other website. They're insane
>>81177685
And you, despite being aware of the incident in question, literally can't process the flaws in your hateful hypocrisy even when they're directly stated.
Here, let me dumb it down for you even more. The fact that cyberbullying is bad and harmful is not an excuse to engage in it.
>its okay to send death threats to a girl who drew a picture they didnt like
No, that's YOUR entire argument. You and the people marching in lockstep alongside you aren't taking a single step against bullying, or against threats, or against harassment. You're marching against POLITICAL OPINIONS THAT YOU HATE while using guilt by association as an excuse. You're doing this because you care more about silencing social justice opinions than about human life.
>>81177792
>You didn't answer anything I asked.
Your questions are all in direct response to their answers.
>>81177889
No, they fucking aren't. All you do is speak in riddles. How can I have any idea of what you're saying if you don't even have the common sense of naming either of the sides you're arguing for/against?
And what is that "war on justice" of yours?
>>81177846
These girls and boys and poly gender queer attack helicopter kin harrassed a girl until she attempted suicide. They doxxed her for creating fanart they didnt agree with and could have ignored. Honestly you are right and I don't give one shit about cyber bullying because its retarded in the extreme and easily avoided by turning off the fucking computer. But doxxing someone and interfering with them irl and sending death threats is illegal. Whatever penalties these cunts faced they deserved.
Now fuck off back to tumblr to blog about how you courageously fought bravely against cis scum on 4chan. And just know that you caused one of the few people who didnt think that badly about tumblr to change his opinion
>>81178069
>>81177972
>>81177889
>>81177846
>>81177809
>>81177792
>>81177685
>>81177670
>>81177486
>>81177311
>>81177027
>>81176825
Will you guys shut the fuck up?
>>81176235
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/zamii070-harassment-controversy
>>81178069
Anon isn't excusing the cyberbullying he's just annoyed by how anons on /co/ talk about it because they aren't saying "cyberbullying is bad" but are actually just using it as an excuse to shitpost about how much they dislike Steven Universe.
>>81177846
>The fact that cyberbullying is bad and harmful is not an excuse to engage in it.
>The fact that wanting a stranger to kill herself is bad and harmful is not an excuse to engage in it.
So with all those shitty WoJ crap you've been spouting aside, are you saying that she deserved it?
I mean, I really haven't done anything to prevent it, but if I could, I would've. Even if she was the biggest trainwreck I've met, I don't want anyone to kill themselves.
Sure, like you've said, some people would use this case to badmouth SU fans unfairly, but that doesn't make you better than those people, don't it? Especially when you insist she had it coming.She didn't. >>>/pol/
>>81176825
>War on Justice
Is this what tumblr is calling people who don't agree with them now?
Holy shit, everything is so fucking dramatic
Everyone's got to have a hill to fucking die on nowadays.
>>81176036
This is the drawing in question, right?
>>81178069
>And just know that you caused one of the few people who didnt think that badly about tumblr to change his opinion
I highly doubt that. If you're insane enough to support cyberbullying just because someone said that hypocrisy is bad, you're probably insane enough to be part of the War on Justice to begin with. The babble you started your post with only further cements it.
>>81178258
This is what happens when you literally have zero struggles in your life.
Seriously we might as well as call /co/ and /lgbt/ just tiny 4chan tumblr.
>>81177573
How is defending a show I enjoy with a couple paragraphs worse than writing 20 pages on why I don't like said show?
That's pretty damn silly to say.
>>81176990
>n-no you!
lol
>>81178317
I don't remember the last time /co/ harassed a teenage girl into suicide over a character not being drawn T-H-I-C-K enough in fanart.
I don't like this show because it spells Stephen with a V
>>81178277
That image is adorable. How is that offensive?I find it more offensive when faggots turn characters into fucking ponies/anthros
>>81176146
Welcome to the Brave New World. This is the new norm for non-anonymous online interactions. Anyone who doesn't kowtow to the ever-increasingly-more-absurd PC culture gets their life destroyed.
I remember a story last year about a webcomic artist, I think the one who does Ava's Demon, getting online harassment, threats, and even having her website hacked and DDOSed because some tumblr special snowflake threw a shit fit over one character joking that another character was a virgin because "that kind of disgusting language is offensive to persons self-identifying as aesexual yadda yadda yadda".
IIRC the artist deleted all their shit off tumblr, ended up having to pay a couple thousand bucks for the server overage, and had to switch hosts.
>>81176825
>What actually happened is that someone drew fanart of Rose which was thinner and closer to a "standard" sexy female body than the character actually is, and people criticized that for complicated reasons involving nonstandard beauty and the like. For unrelated reasons, mostly about non-internet matters, the artist was very depressed and troubled.
That is complete bullshit, stop trying to rewrite the past you idiot.
>>81178386
In-show Rose is like this. The hambeasts at tumblr felt Triggered they were stealing their precious repressenteixun.
>>81178277
No that pic was made in RESPONSE to the outrage
>>81178163
>So with all those shitty WoJ crap you've been spouting aside, are you saying that she deserved it?
I'm saying that none of the people you try to bully into suicide for saying the wrong thing "deserved it", and your fabricated controversy does absolutely nothing to change that.
Nor does it do anything to dehumanize the people it's meant to dehumanize, because it is never, EVER used to show that cyberbullying is harmful, only as "proof" that people who have (insert opinion here) or acknowledge (insert fact here) are evil subhumans who should be cyberbullied into suicide.
>>81175509
Because the point of any media is to please a target audience. If someone from outside of a target demographic has an issue with the content, it becomes moot because it wasn't intended for them to begin with.
>>81177685
god, justice is one of the many words that sesspool of a blogging site ruined
>>81178500
And you're just going to assume this or other group is the Target Audience? Should anybody else request a written permit to watch the show?
>>81175984
1/10 almost got me to be mean to you.
Adults who try to look super deep into a kids show or want the writers to make the writers focus less on the intended audience and pander to them are faggots but using "it's a kids show" as a defense against actual criticism makes you look like a massive raging faggot
>>81178386
Because the actual Rose Quartz has a nonstandard body type but is still portrayed attractively. If one replaces her with a more conventionally attractive version, then it could be seen as confining standards of beauty to an overly specific framework.
Notice the complete lack of death threats in the above paragraph. Despite this clearly noticeable feature, some people will call me a subhuman monster just for typing it, because of guilt by association. This is the entire reason people are drumming up controversy over the incident: not to stop bullying, but to stamp out perspectives.
>>81178604
>If one replaces her with a more conventionally attractive version, then it could be seen as confining standards of beauty to an overly specific framework.
And?
>>81178604
Swing and a miss
https://imgur.com/a/USROb
>>81178556
>be a studio
>make decisions based purely on empirical data and careful rationale
>not have any idea who your show will be made for
this is literally what you sound like.
>>81178258
>Is this what tumblr is calling people who don't agree with them now?
It's what you are, and I'm sure you have fifty pages worth of insults and words you copied without understanding readly to explain why you're so superior for being undramatic unlike the insane subhuman monsters that your foaming-at-the-mouth "indifference" is directed at.
>>81178648
>https://imgur.com/a/USROb
Oh god this is so much worse than I thought it would be
>>81178683
this is really pathetic passive aggression negro
>>81178556
no one is stopping someone from watching a kids show.
just like no one is stopping anyone from playing an E rated videogame, because its rated E for everyone.
if you target a young demographic, that leaves breathing room for a wider audience with less backlash. a show doesnt have to be mature and serious to be enjoyable to adults.
thats the reason /co/ exist, doesn't it? because there are adults who enjoy cartoons: whether its adult swim or cartoon network.
>>81178648
>The actual issue I'm trying to cyberbully into oblivion isn't offensive enough to look bad on its own, so here's a bunch of excuses I prepared earlier!
>Now remember kiddies, whenever you see that opinion again, don't look at it and don't comprehend it. Just think of it as a death threat and hate it like I do!
>>81178683
This says quite the opposite
>>81178759
>thats the reason /co/ exist, doesn't it?
No. The reason is the previous moot wanted western stuff out of /a/, so he created this board.
>>81178604
>a nonstandard body type
ie. fat, thick, chubby.
>a more conventionally attractive
ie. skinny
>confining standards of beauty to an overly specific framework.
ie. skinnier
http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/politics/english/e_polit/
>When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as ‘keeping out of politics’. All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer.
>Never use a long word where a short one will do.
>Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
>>81178773
>prepared earlier
sorry but I can't take credit for that imgur album, it got posted here 5 months back :(
but it's cute seeing you squirm so much over such a topic, even though it's mainly in response to you discrediting the reason *why* they decided to target her int he first place.
>>81178834
He asked what the issue was, and I told him precisely what it was and why.
>>81178866
Honestly how many of these posts are yours
>>81178069
>>81177972
>>81177889
>>81177846
>>81177809
>>81177792
>>81177685
>>81177670
>>81177486
>>81177311
>>81177027
>>81176825
>>81177777
DEM QUINTS
I have to ask. Why do social justice types even come here?
From what I've seen there's plenty of content and discussion on tumblr with significantly less uses of the word nigger.
I'm really not sure what they get from here that they don't get from tumblr. I'm not trying to be all "tumblr get out reeee" it's just sometimes you look at someone's post and wonder why they're even bothering with this site.
>>81178862
>Oh no, he's got me completely trapped. I can't use the evils of cyberbullying to justify cyberbullying at all!
>I know, I'll act like I'm winning! That's sure to fool them!
>>81176646
Here's your (You)
>>81178901
All me. :^)
>>81178834
wow orwell really captured the zeitgeist of contemporary society astonishingly
>>81178683
>people who dont want someone to fucking kill themselves over a drawing makes them part of "the war on justice"
>telling said person they deserve all the shit flung at them is fighting the "war" on "justice"
>suggesting content creators abiding by your own personal set of rules when creating content, there by violating the first god damn amendment is "justice".
if this is what you fucks are calling justice today then I SINCERELY hope NONE of you become members of the Judiciary branch.
you might as well be holding a hammer and sickle with a turnip in your mouth.
>>81177777
HOLY SHIT THE CHECK THE GET
>>81178489
But I've never bullied anyone into suicide, nor have I ever glorified because it's unmanly and stupid.
To me, it just seems like that you're just expressing your insecurities on to innocent people with your WoJ myth.
>>81178933
> I can't use the evils of cyberbullying to justify cyberbullying at all!
you keep insisting I'm justifying cyberbulling, when I'm just showing everyone exactly what it was that people were attacking her over, as I said before in the previous reply that you apparently did not read sadly
you can keep on offering these silly middle-school insults but you'll run out of greentexting soon enough if you keep it up my bruh
I admire your commitment to it though, it shows true resilience
You guys are so fucking dramatic chirst.
>>81178933
Just tab out of this debate. This isn't tumblr, so you aren't going to find anyone to side with you, and, on the internet, victory is determined by numbers and attrition.
>>81178968
I wonder what it must be like to hate yourself and your habits so badly, but at the same time be so unwilling to change, that you actually delude yourself into thinking it's not your fault and that you are perfectly normal.
>>81178967
Why did you get mad at someone calling autism , faggot
>>81175395
But... the criticism there is not even about quality, it's about tone.
>Avatar was a kids show yet treated it's audience with respect.
Not really.
>>81178866
>He asked
>and I told him
Here's a hint: >>81178834 and >>81178386 are the same person. As it is this post. What I'm saying is that I'm having none of your sophistry.
>>81178636
>If one replaces her with a more conventionally attractive version, then it could be seen as confining standards of beauty to an overly specific framework.
What Gilgamesh said, Tumblerina. AND? What's the problem with that? Can you give a sensible reason what makes images like this one so offensive?
>>81178926
SJWs have managed to infect two types of media: cartoons and video games. Anime, TV, films and books, for instance, have managed to hold them back with their sheer size, but cartoons and video games are small enough industries for tumblrites to be able enter them, start yelling and pretend they're some overwhelming majority. It's essentially them going for the low-hanging fruit.
>>81179060
Probably blissful after 100% reprogramming.
>>81175395
I still feel bad Ian is working on that shitstain of a show when we could have had RPG World.
>>81178933
Why are you so pathetic?
>>81179088
>Anime
Not really. Japan is free of that crap, thank goodness.
>>81179079
It looks cuter than they'll ever be probably.
>>81175523
>gets in trouble because of death threats
>i hope you die
Seems sensible.
>>81175395
>People complain about SU being too lighthearted and kiddish
>People complain about SU focusing too much on drama and 'feels'
You just can't win
>>81176036
>be a SUfag
>get arrested
>>81175523
Come oooonn, you didn't have to black the name out.
>>81179079
oh thats nice art
i sure hope its triggering >>81178604
>>81176825
>people criticized that for complicated reasons involving nonstandard beauty and the like.
That's not complicated, just contrieved.
>>81179009
>>people who dont want someone to fucking kill themselves over a drawing makes them part of "the war on justice"
Actually the opposite of that. People who DO want to drive other people off the face of the planet for expressing social justice viewpoints are the War on Justice. Because the social justice viewpoints are what they actually target, not the evil bullying that they falsely accuse them of while shamelessly using themselves.
>>telling said person they deserve all the shit flung at them is fighting the "war" on "justice"
Yes, telling someone that they're subhuman and deserve to die for having the wrong opinion could be metaphorically compared to waging war.
>>suggesting content creators abiding by your own personal set of rules when creating content, there by violating the first god damn amendment
The first amendment doesn't forbid people from disagreeing with others' expression, nor does it forbid people from thinking about how they express themselves or how their speech affects others. It's doubly hypocritical in this context because pretty much all the rage and hate in the War on Justice is directed at forms of speech; even their own strawmen tend to involve accusing others of being mean or expressing themselves in the wrong way. Unless the "goddamn" amendments are something different from the actual Constitutional amendments, they aren't doing you any favors.
>>81179174
>>People complain about SU being too lighthearted and kiddish
I've rarely seen people say this
>>81175523
searching for this image in google i ended up on know your meme:zamii070. i already was like wtf
after reading the comments i ended up looking for plebcomics, and what was done to her
reading her tumblr i ended up on an article about how clapping your hands triggers anxiety and why you should use your jazz hands instead
wtf is this why whats going on i dont even
>>81179129
Yeah, that's what I meant. Cartoons and video games, meanwhile, haven't been so lucky in recent times.
>>81179079
>>81178277
if that characters actually looked like this, i might watch this show
just like if the characters of stardew valley didn't have the same fatface tumblr style i might play that game
its a shame how badly landwhale amerilards have ruined modern media with this fat acceptance shit.
I wonder if the faggot posting the 'war on justice' shit has a tumblr that they regularly post their opinions
signs point likely to yes
There are two conversations going on this thread
For OP, I don't think Ian is saying "It's a kid's show, so adjust your expectation of the QUALITY of content". More like "It's a kid's show, so adjust your expectations on the TYPE content".
As for the other thing, I think that people should be able to draw fanart in anyway they please, and shouldn't have to worry about the "Societal consequences of it". That's just ridiculous, and an excuse for bullying. The crazy person ranting about the "War on Justice" in this thread is just having a laugh, I think.
>>81179271
that character is dead and not in the show anyway
>>81179079
>What I'm saying is that I'm having none of your sophistry.
If you're having none of the facts, then don't ask for them. The answer I gave you is precisely what the issue is; you replacing the words with your own version doesn't change that.
>What Gilgamesh said, Tumblerina. AND? What's the problem with that? Can you give a sensible reason what makes images like this one so offensive?
You've already been given one.
>>81178987
Read his essays. He can be frighteningly accurate sometimes. This one is my all time favorite quote from him:
>Nearly all western thought since the last war, certainly all “progressive” thought, has assumed tacitly that human beings desire nothing beyond ease, security and avoidance of pain. In such a view of life there is no room, for instance, for patriotism and the military virtues. The Socialist who finds his children playing with soldiers is usually upset, but he is never able to think of a substitute for the tin soldiers; tin pacifists somehow won’t do. Hitler, because in his own joyless mind he feels it with exceptional strength, knows that human beings don’t only want comfort, safety, short working-hours, hygiene, birth-control and, in general, common sense; they also, at least intermittently, want struggle and self-sacrifice, not to mention drums, flags and loyalty-parades. However they may be as economic theories, Fascism and Nazism are psychologically far sounder than any hedonistic conception of life. The same is probably true of Stalin’s militarised version of Socialism. All three of the great dictators have enhanced their power by imposing intolerable burdens on their peoples. Whereas Socialism, and even capitalism in a more grudging way, have said to people “I offer you a good time,” Hitler has said to them “I offer you struggle, danger and death,” and as a result a whole nation flings itself at his feet.
>>81179295
>The crazy person ranting about the "War on Justice" in this thread is just having a laugh, I think.
That is what I am hoping too.
>>81179295
>The crazy person ranting about the "War on Justice" in this thread is just having a laugh, I think.
Judging from their posts, I think not
No one person would get this adamantly upset over something that isn't near and dear to them
>>81179271
You can get mods for stardew, stupid.Even a furry one if you want.
>>81175395
didnt this same nigger once say "GO WATCH AVENGERS IF YOU WANT MALE GEMS" once?
>>81179240
>Because the social justice viewpoints are what they actually target
Exactly. Is what deserves to be targeted, out of them being illiberal, regressive, restrictive norms of morality.
>Yes, telling someone that they're subhuman and deserve to die for having the wrong opinion could be metaphorically compared to waging war.
An utterly overblown metaphor, in my opinion.
>>81179344
That was Matt you dumbfuck
Ian is the best, get your shit outta here
>>81179295
>As for the other thing, I think that people should be able to draw fanart in anyway they please, and shouldn't have to worry about the "Societal consequences of it".
So you're against criticism and thinking. Whatever. That doesn't make it any saner to use the evils of bullying as an excuse to bully people for criticism.
>>81179344
>getting your showrunners mixed up
why are /pol/shits the most retarded ones
>>81179380
people got on the manlet when he said "ITS A KIDS CARTOON YOU STUPID GOYIM" why should i give this guy a pass? because hes the father of your wifes son?
>>81179240
>The first amendment doesn't forbid people from disagreeing with others' expression
but it does forbid THREATENING SOMEONE TO KILL THEMSELVES or THREATENING TO DO SO THEMSELVES
see: Charlie Hebo
a french cartoonist murdered along with others working in the same magazine in their own studio for criticizing islam.
you are not defending justice, you are defending SILENCE so that your precious sensibilities are not questioned or criticized.
>>81179305
>the issue is the answer
...What?
>"X is a problem"
>how is that a problem
>"because the problem is X"
This is circular logic shrunken from a circle into a point. "X is bad because it's an X."
>>81179378
>Exactly. Is what deserves to be targeted, out of them being illiberal, regressive, restrictive norms of morality.
So you're saying outright that you support bullying because you hate your victims' viewpoints that much?
If so, then you shouldn't need to use this hypocritical guilt by association on it.
>>81179065
>someone thinking critically about a cartoon is considered autism.
Watching retards react to stuff is really funny sometimes.
>>81179097
Yeah, blissful until you get that heart attack after getting finished eating with your 3rd big mac for the day.
>>81179438
circular logic is the only kind of logic SJW cucks have to go on
>>81179454
no bad tactics, only bad targets
>>81179305
>If you're having none of the facts, then don't ask for them.
Once again, you speak in riddles that are utterly disconnected from any context.
>The answer I gave you is precisely what the issue is
No, it isn't.
>If one replaces her with a more conventionally attractive version, then it could be seen as confining standards of beauty to an overly specific framework.
How is that wrong in any way whatsoever? ANSWER THIS.
>You've already been given one.
Where?
>>81179425
judging from your reply, it's evident you have no clue what you're saying and haven't read the thread either. Ian is alright and even laughed at that white-washing meme thing /b/ did a while back with SU, Matt is a faggot who lies and gets angry at fans, case closed dummy
>cukmemes
is really that all you can muster? how embarrassing
>>81179423
>>81179432
>you are not defending justice, you are defending SILENCE so that your precious sensibilities are not questioned or criticized.
Actually that's you. You're attacking the concept of criticizing fanart in an unapproved way, in order to silence a viewpoint, and using an overblown media controversy as an irrational excuse.
Or maybe you personally aren't doing that, but that's what the War on Justice is doing.
>>81179469
And yet, I don't know how shoggoths like >>81178968 manage to live for longer than a few minutes despite being a tank-full of fat.
>>81179423
i came here so that i could freely kek to shitposts without getting lectured by landwhales kicking and screaming when they're hugboxes are threatened.
so much for that.
>>81179240
>Actually the opposite of that. People who DO want to drive other people off the face of the planet for expressing social justice viewpoints are the War on Justice. Because the social justice viewpoints are what they actually target, not the evil bullying that they falsely accuse them of while shamelessly using themselves.
Neither side of that entirely arbitrary border is really sane or devoid of shitty practices (includiing cyber-bullying), pretending otherwise spits in the face of facts.
And yes it's entirely arbitrary, you're all a bunch of self-righteous assholes who think ends justify the means, the only difference is what you consider to be just.
>Yes, telling someone that they're subhuman and deserve to die for having the wrong opinion could be metaphorically compared to waging war.
Not at all, but it's still something you shouldn't do.
>pretty much all the rage and hate in the War on Justice is directed at forms of speech; even their own strawmen tend to involve accusing others of being mean or expressing themselves in the wrong way.
Again something that is shared by both arbitrary sides of that conflict you find yourself into.
>>81175395
>Does anyone else hate the "Its just kids show bro!"
Only other autistic manchildren you faggot.
>>81179454
>So you're saying outright that you support bullying because you hate your victims' viewpoints that much?
What a way to twist my words. You clearly said "social justice viewpoints". VIEWPOINTS. Not people, but ideas. Ideas deserve to (nay, MUST) be attacked and defended. Regardless of how wrong it might be to you, that's a basic tenant for civilized society.
Don't try to turn that into make me say that I defend personal attacks of any kind.
>hypocritical guilt by association on it.
Eh?
>>81179497
>How is that wrong in any way whatsoever? ANSWER THIS.
The quesiton of whether art should be criticized or we should pretend it exists in a vacuum isn't the main issue. The point is that the viewpoint itself isn't a death threat, but the WoJ wants to bully it into oblivion as it if was. They don't want to stop actual bullying.
God I hate threads like these
You have your radical-tumblr , radical-/pol/ posters, and then a mess of people in between who haplessly reply to both because /co/ is so goddamn easy to bait
>People saying that they're just as victimised if not more than the person getting bullied
We've achieved the next level.
We are at last transcendent.
>>81179060
>hate yourself and your habits so badly, but at the same time be so unwilling to change, that you actually delude yourself into thinking it's not your fault and that you are perfectly normal.
Literally me.
>>81179691
Literally who?
>>81179691
Insomnia is a cruel bitch man
>>81179542
>criticizing fanart
>telling people to KILL THEMSELVES
>the same thing
ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS
here is a constructive criticism: "hey, i like what you did with the coloring in this piece, but it's off model."
calling people cis scum and that they should die for "fat shaming" you is NOT CRITICISM
thats being an unrepenting asshole
>>81179578
>And yes it's entirely arbitrary, you're all a bunch of self-righteous assholes who think ends justify the means, the only difference is what you consider to be just.
Alternatively, I could be a person who's calling out a group psychotic hypocrites on their psychotic hypocrisy. This doesn't automatically make me part of the vividly specific category you're trying to lump me into.
>>81179542
give me your tumblr anon
>>81179659
That's what makes them great, though.
Pointless drama makes my naughty bits tingle, though, so maybe it's just personal preference.
>>81179650
>The quesiton of whether art should be criticized or we should pretend it exists in a vacuum isn't the main issue.
Wrong. That IS the main issue we're arguing.
>The point is that the viewpoint itself isn't a death threat, but the WoJ wants to bully it into oblivion as it if was. They don't want to stop actual bullying.
You keep going back to "bullying" as it is somehow the core issue at stake. Take the hint: it's not. Bullying is a collateral effect that, as you have probably figured out (I hope), gets practiced by the radical voices in either side. Stop going on a tangent.
Nobody here has made any sort of death threat. And, being this an Anonymous image board, is an utterly pointless practice. Unless, of course, you have a pathetically thin skin.
>>81176399
>Stronger Than You
I just searched this to give it a listen again and instead of the actual song as the first result it's some Undertale shit.
>>81179831
don't worry i got you senpai
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8G18BXuZ6eU
>>81179731
>ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS
Are you? You're the ones trying to equate the two. Obviously expressing a certain viewpoint and bullying someone into suicide aren't even remotely the same thing, even if they actually did happen together at some point in time, but people viciously and self-righteously attack the former as if it were the latter, while engaging in the latter themselves.
What you're accusing me of is the opposite of what I'm doing.
>>81179240
>The first amendment doesn't forbid people from disagreeing with others' expression, nor does it forbid people from thinking about how they express themselves or how their speech affects others. It's doubly hypocritical in this context because pretty much all the rage and hate in the War on Justice is directed at forms of speech; even their own strawmen tend to involve accusing others of being mean or expressing themselves in the wrong way.
The SJW movement is literally strong-arming content creators into creating content by their own set of rules. They do this via loud discourse over the internet, using that as leverage to get into positions of influence, and then enforcing those rules by bullying or firing anyone that doesn't follow these rules. It's not a de jure violation of the first amendment, but it sure is a de facto violation.
>>81179831
lets not bring undertale in to this, it's already a shit show with the tumblrina not knowing their fucking place
>>81179423
I'm the guy who posted >>81175523
I just thought it was funny that people were getting arrested over a cartoon, so I just posted that and moved on. I wasn't really expecting any replies, and I didn't think it would explode like this.
You have my sincerest apologies.
>>81179814
>You keep going back to "bullying" as it is somehow the core issue at stake.
It is and always has been. It's both the favored strawman and favored tactic of people who want to silence the viewpoint they hate, and that is the issue at hand. The validity of the viewpoint itself is an entirely distinct issue, that some people would rather equate to bullying and death threats than actually discuss.
>>81179861
>Are you? You're the ones trying to equate the two. Obviously expressing a certain viewpoint and bullying someone into suicide aren't even remotely the same thing, even if they actually did happen together at some point in time, but people viciously and self-righteously attack the former as if it were the latter, while engaging in the latter themselves.
But they were literally the same thing, since those that expressed those viewpoints also bullied someone into suicide you sophist.
>>81179857
this is the cringiest thing in the fucking universe
>>81179857
Is there just a remake of this song with every conceivable thing?
>>81179755
>Alternatively, I could be a person who's calling out a group psychotic hypocrites on their psychotic hypocrisy.
I really doubt you could be that, you don't seem to be too good at noticing hypocrisy. Because you know, a hypocrite calling other hypocrites is a bit hypocritical.
Your whole argument is that people should be able to express themselves without being bullied. I think we all agree on that, be it fanart or criticism thereof. Problem here is that you're defending people who bully others for expressing themselves "wrongly" through fanart, simply because those bullies have been then bullied themselves.
The fact that they were bullied doesn't make their previous bullying legitimate, two wrongs don't make a right. Nobody here is arguing that cyber-bullies should be harrassed.
>This doesn't automatically make me part of the vividly specific category you're trying to lump me into.
What? There's nothing arbitrary here, you lumped yourself into the ennemies of "the War on Justice". You put yourself in a stupidly specific yet ill-defined category that literally nobody ITT identifies with or against, I didn't do that, you did.
>>81179979
>But they were literally the same thing, since those that expressed those viewpoints also bullied someone into suicide you sophist.
Even if that were actually what happened, it wouldn't make them the same thing. Attacking someone with a political motive doesn't make the political motive an attack in and of itself. It's entirely possible for someone to express the viewpoint in a completely different context, which is not guilty by association of being an "attack".
>>81179861
except no one was simply "expressing a viewpoint".
they were at best harassing the artist, and were indeed telling them to kill themselves.
so im telling YOU that you are making them out to be the same thing. YOU are DEFENDING online harassment.
at worst, you can just say "its shit." that is objective, and therefore is a critisim. saying "this offends me" is not objective, but subjective and is no longer professional criticism. it's telling the artist to change THEIR own work that THEY made for THEMSELVES.
tldr (which im sure you didnt): basically this >>81179979
please either understand that what you sjw's did to the artist in your "super real fight" against the "super duper cereal war on justice" was a scumbag thing to do or else do what is pic related.
you are fucking outnumbered here
>>81180023
>Problem here is that you're defending people who bully others for expressing themselves "wrongly" through fanart, simply because those bullies have been then bullied themselves.
No, the problem is that you're pretending I'm doing that, which is just more guilt by association. I'm only calling out the hypocrites who use the bullying to excuse their own.
>>81180052
This is theoretically true but not really.
It's normal (even if it is not correct) to judge a movement by the behavior of its adherents.
Everyone does that
>>81179857
I've never seen this show, so forgive my ignorance, but why are they cats?
>>81175395
>Does anyone else hate the "Its just kids show bro!" argument
> argument
that's like a fact bro, get your shit together
>>81179814
>Take the hint: it's not. Bullying is a collateral effect that, as you have probably figured out (I hope), gets practiced by the radical voices in either side. Stop going on a tangent.
But that's the issue. There's nothing wrong with expressing strong discencing viewpoints, there's something wrong when you use bullying to silence opposing viewpoints.
Like there's nothing wrong with praying to whatever deity you like, but if it means you need human sacrifice, then it's an issue. The issue here is not that religions exist, it's that some people take it to unsavory extremes.
Whether it's used by both sides is irrelevant here, we aren't trying to assign blame to one side over the other.
Further proof SU is cancer.
>>81180085
I'm not who you're replying to, but I don't think you understand what he's trying to say.
Look at this thread.
Obviously what those people who harassed that girl did was very despicable, and they deserve to get fucked however they get fucked.
But for some reason a lot of people are just posting about how much they hate fat people which has nothing to do with this.
Were the people that bullied the girl fat? Possibly, even probably, but lots of fat people would never do anything like that.
Same goes for people who support body positivity or whatever. Even if some of them engaged in this bad thing does not mean all of them are shitty
>>81180120
This
>>81180052
do you have any evidence that there was even ONE person who did not jump down the artist's throat?
or better yet, are you gonna try to deny that zamii was never bullied and it was all a ploy by the illuminati? because if so then you sound exactly like /pol/ with that "the holocaust didnt happen" bullshit trying to make your shitty movement a tiny bit redeemable.
>>81179979
>calling others sophists when using sophistic logic in the same sentence
You can't be helped, can you?
>>81180160
Just give them a board. It's annoying.
>>81180199
Get an e-celeb board first.
>>81180085
>except no one was simply "expressing a viewpoint".
Nobody? Ever? At any time in the future?
That's not the case. It's entirely possible for someone to "simply express a viewpoint" without being a bully, even if it somewhat resembles that of an imaginary bully.
For example, someone could say "this art could support harmful body image issues" without attacking the artist, and if someone called them a bully because of guilt by association, that would be incorrect.
>>81179928
>It is and always has been.
No, it isn't. Only a minority of people in this discussion care about that, as they acknowledge that it is a problem practiced by BOTH sides (a known fact you consistently deny with sophistic arguments). As you can see in the collection posted on >>81178648, you can see that it is NOT a strawman.
>The validity of the viewpoint itself is an entirely distinct issue, that some people would rather equate to bullying and death threats than actually discuss.
Enough with your tangent. Why are you so obsessed with that thing, rather than debate your points of view in the open?
Also, enough with your "guilt by association" thing as well. You sound like a broken record.
>>81175395
>Why do people still jump to say this in the current year?
The same reason people look at you funny when you go to the beach to rave and rant about all the goddamn sand.
>>81178926
I wouldn't call myself a 'social justice type' but I'm quite liberal.
Basically, I like the discussion, and I'm an adult so I'm not bothered by differing perspectives.
I don't come here to have my opinions validated and my ego stroked.
Plus tumblr just sucks format-wise, I hate it
>>81180187
>do you have any evidence that there was even ONE person who did not jump down the artist's throat?
Did you miswrite that question? Because it sounds like you're admitting you jumped down the artist's throat since I can't prove you didn't.
>>81180102
>This is theoretically true but not really.
No, it's really true. A strawman doesn't taint an otherwise valid idea by association.
>It's normal (even if it is not correct) to judge a movement by the behavior of its adherents.
That's why people are pushing the controversy so hard.
>>81180246
>Plus tumblr just sucks format-wise, I hate it
Eh, I use it to post my fanart. I just try to stay the fuck away from the SJW crap.
>>81180099
>use the bullying to excuse their own.
But that's what you're fucking doing. You're the one defending bullies here, nobody else is.
Literally nobody, LITERALLY NOBODY ITT is arguing that it's okay to bully someone because they're bullies themselves.
You just accuse people of having secondary motivations for disagreeing with you (i.e. they are bullies themselves) because you think it makes your argument stronger. That's just low level bulverism.
>>81179861
I don't care about anything you're spraying, but if you're a femanon, tits or gtfo.
If you're male... stop being such a cuck.
>>81177500
Same argument can be made about BvS
>>81180187
>do you have any evidence that there was even ONE person who did not jump down the artist's throat?
One person, period? In all of existence? I'd say that's statistically likely.
And hypothetically, if the happened to share an opinion with one of the people who DID bully the artist, then their opinion would deserve to be judged on its own merits, not by the actions of others who held it (or something vaguely like it).
>>81177500
People are pointing out flaws in it? I really need to expand my circles. I never see anything but constant praise and talk about how perfect it is, and it's really put me off from seeing it for some reason.
>>81180181
>But for some reason a lot of people are just posting about how much they hate fat people
Really? It's like 3 posts in a 250+ posts thread.
