Does feminism exist in Equestria?
It's a matriarchy ran by immortals, so probably not.
>>25544394
Why would any sort of rights movement exist in a society as equal as Equestria's?
>>25544394
nah
>>25544394
>>25544413
>>25544419
>>25544544
Considering we have MRA'S here, I find it unlikely there would be no feminists in Equestria.
Also because feminists are everywhere, and when they have no equality problems to solve, they just make some up.
![WGtVTli[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/BqRO0Ez.jpg "WGtVTli[1].jpg")
>>25544394
Since there are no Jews in Equestria, no.
>>25544903
No, they just do that with friendship problems. Didn't you watch lesson 0?
>>25544394
Well OFCOURSE this would be the first thread I see. On /mlp/. The cartoon horse board.
>>25544903
>when they have no equality problems to solve, they just make some up.
That's the MRAs, m8.
>>25544394
>feminism
>matriarchy
Probably not. Anyway, feminism is a characteristic in highly industrialized human societies. It may be that some form of it exists, but I would say it has essentially no traction outside of cities in Equestria, and is pretty fringe even when in them, considering matriarchy and all.
>>25544999
Nah, not really. Don't get me wrong, it's silly to think that men are an oppressed group, but men in particular tend to get royally fucked over in family courts, which is an issue I think needs to be amended.
My biggest concern is the fact that men have no right to opt out of pregnancy. If you accidentally knock some girl up, and she decides she wants to be a mother, you are legally obligated to become a father by paying child support.
That shit's scary, man. I'm no Casanova, but if I were, I'd be terrified of that particular hazard.
The male birth control pill can't come soon enough.
They have Stallions' Rights Whinnyvists
>>25544903
>>25544999
>>25544999
>Male infant circumcision
>Selective service
>Male suicide rates
>Male workplace deaths
>Men being the majority of victims of all violence
>Men falling behind in education
>Forced envelopment still not legally considered rape
>The Duluth model of domestic abuse
>No equality problems
Great bait friend, made me reply.
>>25544999
nice b8
I almost thought you were serious for a second there
>>25545081
Feminists consistently noisily protest and send death threats to anyone who attempts to made a male birth control pill.
>>25545270
I know, it's fucked up. I just want to add, every woman I've discussed the male pill with have been very much in favor of it. The male pill is something I strongly believe both sexes want.
You have to understand, feminism was never a pro-woman movement, it was always an anti-European movement. The end goal was always to turn men away from women, thus causing a demographic collapse of native Europeans, and this is currently what's happening. The male birth control pill would incentivize men to shack up with women again, and feminists can't have that.
Fact: Women report being less happy than they were before their "liberation".
>>25545344
>You have to understand, feminism was never a pro-woman movement, it was always an anti-European movement. The end goal was always to turn men away from women, thus causing a demographic collapse of native Europeans, and this is currently what's happening.
What exactly did giving women the right to vote and the right to work have to do with causing a demographic collapse?
>Fact: Women report being less happy than they were before their "liberation".
How about a source for some of these "facts?"
>>25544394
>Does feminism exist in Equestria?
>An ideal society created by a feminist
>A society where females not only outnumber males but rule over them
Yeah, I think it does. It is also my ideal society.
>>25545161
women are a disease
>>25545412
Shits' fucked, but women aren't a disease. A noisy minority is being cunts, and for some reason we've been listening to them for 40 years. The feminist bullshit is melting around them, and they've been rabidly grasping at whatever they can. It will probably be at least mostly dissolved within your life time.
>>25545376
>What exactly did giving women the right to vote and the right to work have to do with causing a demographic collapse?
It ruined traditional gender roles and split up the family. When women are pushed into the workplace, it's common sense that they won't have time to raise children. The sexual liberation was particularly destructive, as women who engage in promiscuous behavior report leading much less happier lives and much higher instability in marriage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=um3EmS9DKsI
In the early days of female suffrage, certain women actually predicted that the right to vote would eventually split up the family and hurt them in the long run. Turns out, they were completely right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JYcUUPpF_2M
>How about a source for some of these "facts?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXeszLlTX5E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFzqWeJiBXQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPETpCVrH9Y
Now, I don't oppose a woman's right to work, but I think it's incredibly harmful to promote this idea that the best way for a woman to lead a fulfilled life is to put her career first. Women are not men, and their reproductive organs have a very finite expiration date. Having both a successful career and a picture-perfect family is next to impossible.
Feminism hurts women in the long run more than men, but it hurts western civilization as a whole the most.
>>25545462
you're right, anon, i shouldnt have said that. i didnt mean it. there are just so many ways men can be screwed over, and feminists have the audacity to say that theyre the victims. shits really frustrating, you know?
>>25544413
>>25545035
>>25545400
But Equestria is clearly not a matriarchy, nor is it a patriarchy. The show has repeatedly shown us that both genders are equal, and we've seen that neither are advantaged over the other are dominant, nor have we seen any discrimination in that regard. At most the show focuses more screentime on female characters, but it's never portrayed them as superior or dominant, that's just delusional to suggest that. You could refer to the top levels of their government as matriarchal in a sort of way, since the current alicorns are female and thus the heads of state are presently female, but not their society which is clearly gender-egalitarian.
Also, outnumbering them? No. Crowds of ponies in the show, which is what people base that little headcanon off, are completely unreliable for determining anything, especially with all the clones. I'm pretty sure the gender ratio is even, and we just don't see it. I won't be buying it, but if you really insist on headcanoning that imbalanced gender ratio nonsense regardless though, despite how silly it is, keep in mind that the ponies are primarily monogamous.
>>25545099
dubs confirm
Stallions' Rights Whinnyists in Equestria
>>25545247
>that pic
>>25545528
>It ruined traditional gender roles and split up the family.
Why are either of those things important?
>When women are pushed into the workplace, it's common sense that they won't have time to raise children.
And why should women be the only ones to raise children?
>The sexual liberation was particularly destructive, as women who engage in promiscuous behavior report leading much less happier lives and much higher instability in marriage.
So what? Is that not their choice? Why are you so adamant on dictating how people should choose how they want to live their life, whatever that may be, when such choices have no effect on you?
>Now, I don't oppose a woman's right to work, but I think it's incredibly harmful to promote this idea that the best way for a woman to lead a fulfilled life is to put her career first. Women are not men, and their reproductive organs have a very finite expiration date.
Wow, so the only thing that's important about women is their ability to reproduce? Not the fact that they are human beings?
>Feminism hurts women in the long run more than men, but it hurts western civilization as a whole the most.
And why is "Western Civilization" important? Can you even define what that is? Or is it just "whatever parts of my culture that I like?"
>Clickbait Youtube videos as sources
Pathetic. Two of them are talking about how feminism doesn't represent men, and two of them are completely unsourced besides the video itself. Why should I believe anything you're saying is true if nothing you produce is credible?
>>25545859
>What are gender roles and having an in tact family important
Because not knowing where you belong is shitty, and having a fractured family is also shitty. It makes people grow up to be criminals.
>And why should women be the only ones to raise children?
No one said they did. The problem is that SOMEONE has to raise the children, and as it stands a man who isn't employed is unmarryable while a women who is employed won't be raising the kids. It leads to children being raised by childcare centers or the state, which are both shitty for the child.
>So what? Is that not their choice?
That's not the point. It's being advertised as being the best and most liberating thing you can do as a women, when in reality it only destroys your life. It's like someone telling you crack is amazing but then not telling you about all of the drawbacks. If this was truly a better way to live life, and it really was liberating, we wouldn't be seeing women complaining about how it's making their lives worse.
>Wow, so the only thing that's important about women is their ability to reproduce?
No one said that. He only said that women are different than men, so it doesn't make sense for them to act the same. Women have different constraints and they need to be aware of the consequences of their decisions.
>And why is "Western Civilization" important? Can you even define what that is? Or is it just "whatever parts of my culture that I like?"
Western civilization is the set of cultural beliefs, social norms, ethical values, traditional customs, and political systems developed originally in Europe and spread to the US and then to most of the rest of the world. Western civilization has lead to the dominance of the US and European powers over the rest of the world. They very clearly did something better than everyone else.
>>25545859
>Why are either of those things important?
They're not important, if you're a feminist. However, if you care about western civilization, they're pretty important.
>And why should women be the only ones to raise children?
Do you not believe in sexual dimorphism?
>So what? Is that not their choice?
Yes, but that doesn't mean it's healthy behavior. The same way I believe obese people should exercise more and eat healthier, I also believe women should (should, not must) exercise some caution in terms of their sexual relations, for their own sake more than anyone else.
If I had a daughter, I would personally not be very happy if she fucked a new guy every week. Would you?
>Why are you so adamant on dictating how people should choose how they want to live their life, whatever that may be, when such choices have no effect on you?
But it does- It has a detrimental effect on the society which I inhabit. There is a very high correlation between single-parent households and criminality. If promiscuity correlates with broken families, it also follows that it could cause a more criminal society overall.
>Wow, so the only thing that's important about women is their ability to reproduce? Not the fact that they are human beings?
Now I think you're just trolling me. When did I ever insinuate that women are not human beings? Just because they're not the same as a men does not mean they are inferior. The keyword here is complimentary.
Let me flip the question: Do you think inherently feminine traits are inferior, and the only way for a woman to have value is for her to take on a masculine role?
>And why is "Western Civilization" important? Can you even define what that is? Or is it just "whatever parts of my culture that I like?"
Now I'm certain you're just trolling. The achievements of western civilization should not be something that you need to be reminded of. Hell, the only reason you're able to type this is because of the fruits of western civilization.
>>25545859
>>25545994
>Clickbait Youtube videos as sources
Let's have a look.
The first video lists sources in detail.
The second video doesn't exactly need citations because it's completely conjecture.
The third video names the study they're talking about, so it is actually sourced.
The fourth video doesn't even need sources because the videos are easy to look up. Again, he's pointing out hypocrisy rather than giving statistics or citing a study.
The fifth video is conjecture but is sourced anyways.
Here's some more videos if you're interested.
Sargon of Akkad's "Why Do People Hate Feminism?" series (ongoing)
https://youtu.be/ua8T4nSTCWA
https://youtu.be/IrfkoGCK0SE
https://youtu.be/T09Bx6xoHSQ
https://youtu.be/xaid4utCQGw
https://youtu.be/sVbNdYtA5ws
https://youtu.be/tJ4tXdY_du8
https://youtu.be/by0spgMrbl0
Karen Straughan
https://youtu.be/OSaT9utl4Ys
https://youtu.be/vp8tToFv-bA
https://youtu.be/PqEeCCuFFO8
https://youtu.be/a9XDb0nxSO4
https://youtu.be/5eqYEVYZgdo
Milo Yiannopoulos
https://youtu.be/VCaEO6ue_io
https://youtu.be/wiESisEL43c
https://youtu.be/d-N9daqANcw
Mike Buchanan
https://youtu.be/8eHLnb6kYnc
https://youtu.be/_PvEW56Vqy0
https://youtu.be/SVW4cQeTsd8
Random unsorted
https://youtu.be/GgU2LEPdpMc
https://youtu.be/dj8883DryKA
https://youtu.be/_JJfeu2IG0M
https://youtu.be/OSZzm36SnuY
https://youtu.be/OFSbFBo9LOw
https://youtu.be/OFpYj0E-yb4
https://youtu.be/1oqyrflOQFc
>>25546012
>the videos are
because the pages*
>>25545859
>Pathetic. Two of them are talking about how feminism doesn't represent men, and two of them are completely unsourced besides the video itself. Why should I believe anything you're saying is true if nothing you produce is credible?
All of those videos provide sources.
What are you even talking about at this point?
Feminism in Equestria would be like MRAs here. But while MRAs have some legitimate grievances, "Mares' Rights Activists" in Equestria genuinely would be looking for things to fight for.
What if femanon got to Equestria before you and spread her feminist ideals throughout Ponyville and suddenly all the mares were sjw?
>>25545590
>both genders are equal
It has shown that the majority of stallions are enrolled in the military. You have a very odd definition of equal.
>we've seen that neither are advantaged over the other are dominant,
I see what you mean and somewhat agree, but that's only among those who aren't in the military.
> At most the show focuses more screentime on female characters, but it's never portrayed them as superior or dominant,-
I can agree with this, but it doesn't change the number of male ponies vs. female ponies in total. Look at the classroom male to female ratios.
>You could refer to the top levels of their government as matriarchal in a sort of way,
I'm not too concerned about their top levels of government considering they're ruled over by a set of demigods.
>Also, outnumbering them? No. Crowds of ponies in the show, which is what people base that little headcanon off, are completely unreliable for determining anything, especially with all the clones.
I'm convinced that the lack of male characters was because of re-used body designs and lack of consideration, which is perfectly reasonable given the show's intended demographic, and this is reinforced with the newer seasons having more male characters in every day positions.
I'm still waiting to see female royal guard.mostly because unf
I guess what it boils down to is how conscription in Equestria works, because if its' 100% voluntary then I have no issues with how things worked out whatsoever. If conscription is mandatory, but only for males, it's hard to say that the two are actually equal.
>>25546138
>It has shown that the majority of stallions are enrolled in the military
Woah there buddy. The 'majority'? That would be absolutely batshit insane. Even if Equestria had a military the size of the US military, that would only be a relatively small portion of the population.
Besides, I see no reasons for mares to not be in the guard too. We have seen mares doing heavy duty work, so they ARE capable. We have seen a few female guards in the comics, but I think the only reason we don't see them in the show is because DHX hasn't created art assets for them, in the same way that all of the guards we see now look exactly the same. I see no reason whatsoever for the military there to be a single gender.
>Look at the classroom male to female ratios
Those are also pretty inconsistent, Anon. If you notice, we constantly see variations of groups of ponies in what should be the same class. There are a few that are always there, but there have been a bunch of fillies and colts that seem to come and go. Either way, I'm pretty sure that education is equal in Equestria, and both genders have been shown to be equally capable.
>I'm not too concerned about their top levels of government considering they're ruled over by a set of demigods.
Right. I don't think there's any discrimination with becoming an alicorn though. It has to do with merit and being a good, benevolent leader, genitals would have nothing to do with it. So, either a mare or stallion would logically be able to become an alicorn.
>I'm still waiting to see female royal guard.
As I said, there are a few in the official comics. I don't remember which issue sadly, but eh. I think they exist, but as you have seen in the show, DHX has put minimal effort into the guard ponies, and I think that extends to not even bothering to make female art assets for them.
fug comment too long 1/2
>>25546199
>I guess what it boils down to is how conscription in Equestria works
I'm pretty certain conscription wouldn't be a thing in Equestria. It's pretty horrible and I think the ponies would be opposed to dragging ponies away from their lives and forcing them to fight. Besides, for what purpose even? There doesn't seem to be any canon countries near Equestria that could threaten them militarily, the only thing is the changelings, but it's questionable if them invading is typical, and they should get more than enough volunteers for anything they need anyway. Volunteer army's aren't conscription, by the way.
The only situation I could see them conscripting is absolute necessity in an emergency, as in it becomes a necessary evil as otherwise Equestria would be lost. And I'm pretty sure that, in that kind of situation (which I don't expect them to ever have, mind you), they'd do it for both genders. Again, we've seen that mares are pretty capable of being strong too, so why not.
Anyway, yeah. The show focuses more on female characters. There are more female characters with screentime/talking roles. In later seasons, that has evened out a lot however, with a lot of new side characters.
I still firmly stand by the fact that the show has never portrayed one gender as superior or dominant. The target audience ensures that female characters are more prominent in the screentime they receive, but that doesn't imply anything, it simply means that's where the cartoons focus lies.
>>25546235
Though, in a hypothetical emergency, they'd get a lot of volunteers probably, soo...
Whatever. If there's nothing else to say, I'd like to be going now.
I think that what we see in the show isn't always representative of the truth of Equestria. Lack of male background ponies, for example, could easily be a product of the production of the cartoon. Remember, the cartoon we watch isn't what REALLY happens in Equestria, it's just a retelling of the stories that happen so that we can enjoy them. So things that are strictly technical, related to the production of the cartoon, should be taken with a grain of salt.
However, we can see signs of Equestria not being equal. There seems to be an expectation of males to pay the females, which we can see in how Rarity manipulates the males. The highest rulers of Equestria are also all female, which is a mark of matriarchy.
I believe there are grounds for a gender equality movement, but it probably isn't feminism, seeing as females aren't oppressed in any way in Equestria.
>>25546199
>Woah there buddy. The 'majority'?
Yea, that was quite the audacious claim. I didn't think about it in those terms.
>Besides, I see no reasons for mares to not be in the guard too.
It's not that they can't, it's that they're not. Outside of the wonder bolts, we have yet to see any female military ponies.
>We have seen a few female guards in the comics,
>Comics
:^)
>we constantly see variations of groups of ponies in what should be the same class.
In the CMC QTmk. episode we did see a pretty even split in the classroom, so I guess you have a point.
> I don't think there's any discrimination with becoming an alicorn though.
There's only four alicorns, two of which are sisters, and one of which was a direct pupil of an already alicorn. The sample size is far too small and they effect one another too greatly. A better representation of leadership would be directly below them, which we don't see. This isn't exactly Game of Thrones after all.
>As I said, there are a few in the official comics. I don't remember which issue sadly, but eh.
I'll just take your word for it. It's not a ludicrous claim to make.
>The only situation I could see them conscripting is absolute necessity in an emergency,
It seems like in a state of emergency, the princesses take things into their own handshooveswhich makes a large standing military fairly pointless outside of power politics and ornamentation.
>I still firmly stand by the fact that the show has never portrayed one gender as superior or dominant. The target audience ensures that female characters are more prominent in the screentime they receive, but that doesn't imply anything, it simply means that's where the cartoons focus lies.
I can agree with this now. I didn't seem to have much ground to stand on to begin with anyways, and my own inspection seems to have revealed problems in my assertions. Thanks for putting things into a different perspective and making me consider new ideas, Anon.
>>25546262
>However, we can see signs of Equestria not being equal.
Not really. I'm sure you've already read my other posts above, so I'll hold off on repeating myself.
>which we can see in how Rarity manipulates the males
It doesn't need to be a societal expectation for that to work. It's just Rarity taking advantage of the fact that she's attractive and the stallions are heterosexual. Questionable behavior perhaps, but nothing to do with gender-roles.
>The highest rulers of Equestria are also all female
The current alicorns are female, which means you could technically refer to their government as matriarchal, but that doesn't mean discrimination. Alicornhood is merit-based, so no reason to believe gender is relevant to who can become on.
Beyond the handful of princesses/princes and a few others however, we don't see much of Equestria's government.
>seeing as females aren't oppressed in any way in Equestria.
Neither are males. There's nothing in the show to point towards discrimination, and both genders have been shown to be equally capable.
>>25544394
By human definitions
Yes, theres feminism in Equestria
But its natural feminism, because theres more females than males in Equestria, majority rules always
Equestrian society is too perfect to be measured in human terms
>>25546262
>There seems to be an expectation of males to pay the females, which we can see in how Rarity manipulates the males. The highest rulers of Equestria are also all female, which is a mark of matriarchy.
Rarity is just that sexy. She probably does it to mares too, just offscreen.
The system isn't set up to be ruled by female leaders, it simply has female leaders in control through happenstance. Calling it a matriarchy has a few implications that simply aren't there.
>>25546274
>It's not that they can't, it's that they're not. Outside of the wonder bolts, we have yet to see any female military ponies.
Well, if you agree they can, then I think it's pretty reasonable to assume it's another thing to attribute to poor production values in things that aren't front and center. Again, I just see no reason for them not to be there. You can make the argument that there may be more stallions on average, but you'd think there'd be plenty of mares there too if they're capable.
Anyway, whatever. I'm going to go read now. Thanks for your time, I guess, even if I really should take a break from arguing with people about this stuff.
>>25546302
Equestria isn't perfect, they just live in a land of plenty so everyone is generally well off. They have a standing military, and there has been conflict in the past. There's some very obvious questionable shit going on, but the show doesn't focus on those things.
Females don't outnumber males >>25546138
>>25546199
>>25546235
Majority doesn't always rule. Look at modern US for example. There's a minority group of obnoxious shits who have massive influence because people are sick of hearing from them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFvVOg0Y6eA
>>25545859
>only questions
Bait, you cant just argue a person without providing solutions
>>25546297
>>25546309
You may be right, I may have jumped ahead of myself. Possibly influenced by my impressions of the cartoon in general. However, I do believe there are some relevant scenes related to the Grand Galloping Gala. I can't remember exactly what happened, but I think Rarity clearly expects to be treated better because she's female.
We don't actually know that alicornhood isn't gendered. The alicorns are referred to as princesses, which is a gendered term, and what little we have seen of princes, at least ponies refered to as such, are not alicorns. The "king" did not have wings either. We always see the ruling class of Equestria refered to as princesses, not royality or alicorns or whatever. This may point to alicornhood being exclusively female, although it would be a weak sign. It could also be explained by a poor translation from reality to cartoon, or just that the ponies aren't used to being ruled by anyone but princesses.
>>25546334
It's not totally perfect, and it's not as though there is never any conflict whatsoever or that all of the ponies are perfect or something, but it's still a pretty damn nice and benevolent place. It's not just because it's a "land of plenty", it's also their values and stuff like that. Friendship and love and other nice things are highly valued there, and some of those things are even a physical force of magic in their world.
Does anyone ever stop to wonder that maybe the reason things like traditional roles are unpopular and things like sexual liberation are popular is because people weren't happy before?
>>25546359
Is there any actual evidence that alicornhood is gendered outside of the current alicorns? It seems like no one outside of Twilight and Cadence have become alicorns in at least 1000 years.
>The "king" did not have wings either.
And Queen Chrysalis wasn't even an actual pony. He probably instated himself as "king" outside of standard Equestrian operation. Dictator would have been a better fitting title for him, but he may have chose king for himself.
>>25546353
You don't "argue" with someone who doesn't give counterpoints. You're only offering answers if they're asking questions. No one has said you're wrong, so you don't have to prove that you're right, and thus no disagreement is even technically taking place. They're just being a cunt with the tone of their questions.
>>25546408
There is no actual evidence, but the possibility is there. There is no actual evidence either way.
>>25546403
There is not much sexism perhaps, but there are strong signs to racism, with how "mule" is constantly used as a casual insult against ponies. Or at very least, a strong stigma against race mixing. The language is also quite pony-centric. I believe that Equestria traditionally has been a racist society, but in recent years there has been more awareness of that, but we can still see traces of the old system in the form of the insults of the mules.
But I may be mixing up Equestria and the show again.
>>25546334
>Equestria isn't perfect, they just live in a land of plenty so everyone is generally well off.
By human standards, it would be pretty perfect, now, considering ponies are less inteligent than human, they have less necessities
>They have a standing military, and there has been conflict in the past.
Rarely seen, we cant determinate time gap between major conflicts, but it took 1000 years for NMM to return
> There's some very obvious questionable shit going on, but the show doesn't focus on those things.
Not canon
>Females don't outnumber males
Thats being discussed by another couple of guys in this thread, not gonna spam with it
>>25546359
>but I think Rarity clearly expects to be treated better because she's female.
In her words "a lady". I think it had more to do with her being refined and all that, and less with her being female specifically. I don't think that attitude is exclusively female or anything, we've seen ponies like Blueblood in the very same episode who probably wanted 'chivalry' too.
>and what little we have seen of princes, at least ponies refered to as such, are not alicorns
Not all princesses and princes are alicorns. We've seen that alicornhood isn't inherited, it's earned through... being an exceptional and benevolent leader, etc. Pretty vague honestly, but eh.
Shining Armor isn't an alicorn because he got his title through marrying, or is in other words a prince-consort, and Blueblood presumably inherited his title, which doesn't automatically come with a silver platter of wings either. Popular opinion for Blueblood seems to be that he is descended from Princess Platinum.
Either way, alicornhood is merit based and such, so it must be gender-neutral. To suggest otherwise would be to paint the princesses in... less than competent light, given that excluding a competent individual based on their gender would be extremely silly and highly offensive. The alicorns we have are benevolent, wise, etc, I'm pretty sure they'd care more about whether or not the pony can be a good alicorn than their gender.
One could argue that Starswirl almost became one, but in Celestia's words he "didn't understand friendship", which is crucial.
>>25546436
I think the 'mule' thing is a running joke by the writers more than anything that's meant to be considered serious worldbuilding. I do know that racism almost got the ponies asses frozen off in the past though, and they've had a looonnnnggg time since then to be exposed to other races and reflect on how racism is wrong, among other things, so I don't think racism would be a very big thing in Equestria.
>considering ponies are less inteligent than human
What on earth? The ponies in MLP are sapient and are clearly just as intelligent as we are. Real horses aren't sapient, but the equines in MLP clearly are, and they have an advanced civilization.
>>25546442
Nothing is perfect. Post scarcity and complete species wide peace is not even perfect, as demonstrated by a few stories, most popularly Star-Trek. Even a world with no conflict in which you would never have to worry about anything wouldn't be perfect because there would be no point in living in it.
It would be justifiable to say the ponies live in a better world than we do, which I would still have to disagree with. While Equestria is at the pinnacle of its existence, ours still has a lot of room to improve which may give it more potential in the long run. I mean shit, the laws of nature even act differently in their world than ours. They may not be capable of space travel at all because of it.
Lauren Faust is a fucking radfem.
The show is tainted no matter what.
>>25546519
You should judge things based on their own own merits. Attacking Faust instead of the show and then saying the show is bad because of its creator is textbook ad hominem.
>>25546553
>their own own merits.
their own merits*
>>25546489
>I think the 'mule' thing is a running joke by the writers more than anything that's meant to be considered serious worldbuilding.
You could say that about every little thing in the show though, and just assume that every instance of possible worldbuilding is meaningless.
Plus there's also other things, like Zecora, and how absurdly over-the-top black she is, and the central theme of her entire introductory episode being that ponies in general are racist.
The way they 'act out' on that racism is rather tempered, but the racism is clearly there and clearly modern. Frankly there are signs of continued segregation and slavery in Equestria too. It's really not as progressive as a place as people make it out to be, it's just a very happy and successful place.
>>25546620
>You could say that about every little thing in the show though, and just assume that every instance of possible worldbuilding is meaningless.
It would be questionable to use it for everything, but there are clearly instances where it's fair to use that, fairer than the alternatives even.
Anyway, the thing with Zecora was not that she was a zebra, it was that she was a mysterious, cloaked figure from the everfree forest. The ponies have clearly treated her fine since learning that she is not in fact out to harm them. The theme of Bridle Gossip was fear of the unknown, not racism.
Gilda is another example, and the ponies went way out of their way to be welcoming and friendly to her, even despite her sour attitude at the time.
>Frankly there are signs of continued segregation and slavery in Equestria too
Lol, no. Do you mean the cows? That isn't meant to be taken seriously, it's a minute detail in a children's cartoon that was at most plot convenience. Because if you think that slavery is a thing in Equestria, you're out of your mind. Basic freedoms are one of the simplest moral 'rights', and even if you don't think Equestria is as progressive as I do, you couldn't possibly argue that they're some backwards shithole with slavery and segregation. There's simply no evidence for that, and it would go against everything the show stands for.
Anyway, I do think Equestria's society is pretty damn equal. I strongly disagree with your assertion that there is racism in the show.
>>25546671
>Do you mean the cows?
Hey, you said it, not me.
Glad we're really in agreement on the issue.
It certainly didn't take you long to think of your own example.
>>25546671
And as far as pulling the 'joke' card, I think it's most appropriate when something just couldn't possibly make sense or goes against other things in the show. There are details like that popping up every now and then, which is inevitable in an episodic slice of life with loose continuity. We aren't watching an anime with strict worldbuilding and where every little detail might matter, we're watching a show about talking, sapient equines being targeted towards children. You simply must accept that not every detail has meaning or implications behind it. Which ones do and don't can sometimes be subjective, but the ones that don't can often stick out pretty sorely.
>>25546699
It's merely that you're not the first moron to argue that. I've argued with tons of people about varying kinds of stuff, and every time this is brought up, inevitably someone grasps for straws and pulls up the damned cows, so I saved you the effort. I'd suggest you keep your edgy, nonsensical headcanons to yourself, but that simply wouldn't be /mlp/, now would it?
>>25546519
One of the essential things of adulthood is the realization that mom isn't perfect.
>>25546719
But really though. Slavery? Not a chance that would exist in Equestria, the ponies wouldn't tolerate it and the alicorns wouldn't allow it. I'd sooner believe me if you told me that all of the characters were transgender otherkin, because that would legitimately be more believable than some edgy headcanon about slavery, and that's really saying something.
>>25546519
>Lauren Faust is a fucking radfem.
[citation needed]
>The show is tainted no matter what.
Show seems pretty fine to me. Could definitely have some improvements, but eh.
>>25546796
And I must stress that I think "muh transgender otherkin" being applied to all the characters is extremely ridiculous among other things, so hopefully nobody will interpret that as me agreeing with that either.
Anyway, I'll be going now. I've had enough of arguing about this stuff for one day, and we've already derailed this thread.
>>25546796
>[citation needed]
She's not very rad, but she does identify as a feminist.
I've never seen her do or say anything particularly egregious, perhaps except for how she chose to praise that scientist with the shirt for his apology, rather than calling out the initial backlash for feminists.
God, that thing was a fucking farce.
>>25546833
Because many feminists aren't extremists.
>>25546012
Sargon?
Karen Straughan?
Milo?
These people have no competence to speak with authority. They're just a bunch of bloggers shooting their mouths off.
>>25548441
I can safely say that Sargon puts in the work to make sure he isn't talking out of his ass, and he has no problem with correcting himself when he does speak incorrectly.
And Milo is a professional journalist working for Breitbart.
>>25546012
>all pseudointellectual vlogger-types
Read some actual academics and some actual feminist theory if you want to understand it. For you babby steps, start with some lectures online.
>>25548483
>Sargon
He's a complete pseud and focuses on stupid extremist people to pose himself as intelligent. He's the definition of reddit.
>Milo
He's an opportunist and an idiot.
>Breitbart
Really?
>>25544413
more like maretriarchy
>>25548558
FUCKING CARLOS
>>25548491
Do you care to actually prove anything they're saying wrong, or are you just going to be a massive faggot?
What the are "real" feminists saying?
Who are the "real" feminists?
What gives you the authority to say who is a feminist and who isn't?
>>25548509
Nice assertions bruh.
Attack what Sargon is saying instead of just attacking him. You haven't proven that he's wrong in anything that he's saying, and you haven't proven that he's a pseudo intellectual.
Milo is a journalist and a reporter, of course he's an opportunist. That doesn't make him stupid though. If you listen to anything he actually says in interviews, he's quite intelligent.
>>25546262
>Remember, the cartoon we watch isn't what REALLY happens in Equestria, it's just a retelling of the stories that happen so that we can enjoy them.
It's fiction you retard, technically speaking the official show isn't any more real than some random dude's fanfiction.
I'm just patiently awaiting the eventual breakdown of society, and as a result the dissolving of all this social justice and feminism nonsense.
>>25548491
>Read some actual academics and some actual feminist theory if you want to understand it. For you babby steps, start with some lectures online.
I always hear feminists say this, but they will never expound what these "real" feminists actually say. It's just another way of say "not my job to educate you".
I have never taken gender studies, but I have gone studied physics at university level, and I was mandated to take a philosophy 101 class. If someone were to ask me about the metaphysical musings of Immanuel Kant, I wouldn't just say "go read some books written about him", I would share the knowledge I possessed.
Don't ask me about Immanuel Kant though. It's been a long time since I studied philosophy.
>>25548996
>Milo
>journalist
>reporter
Top. Kek.
Milo is a shill, and Breitbart is a site for people who want propaganda that barely pretends to be news.
Are you really arguing over a children's show about magical ponies
>>25550315
>That meme
Remember to donate to Anita's Patreon!
>>25550618
Did you even read the thread?
Most of this doesn't even have anything to do with pone.
