Tweet ||
Archive
Kids are stupid. And for some reason, I feel like those fish would've died anyway from maltreatment, so who cares.
I'm pretty sure there's a few kids who won the Darwin Award for attempting to fly off the roof of their house or a nearby cliff, so you know, you can claim the same thing. It would still be valid and show some correlation between fiction affecting reality.
So, guess we ban superheroes that fly then. Gotta think of the kids.
Though from my experience, I'm sure they are, just in the way they claim problematic people supposedly do.
Morons like these think fiction affects reality in the sense of "monkey see, monkey do."
It does not work like that for everyone, and more accurately, the majority of any population with any level of sapience.
If a kid decides to jump off a cliff because Superman did it, then that fucker can meet Darwin to cash in his award.
Fiction mainly affects reality based on
how people interpret the works of art that fiction inhabits themselves.
Works of art are typically meant for us
to enjoy in some way, or make us critically think.
1987 isn't a dystopian smut; it's a fucking book that's meant for us to enjoy a dystopian world, and make us think about if that's the world we wish to live in.
Works of art
don't necessarily need to have a lesson or core value to be considered art; consider Looney Tunes, Tom and Jerry, and Pink Panther slapstick comedy and animation.
And like, a cool fight scene is just a cool fight scene, like Stick Flash animations back in the early days of the internet.
Doesn't mean any of those glorifies, normalizes, encourages, and so on, people doing violent things or stupid things, nor attempt to do any of that.
And also to mention, just because you didn't enjoy it, doesn't change the fact it remains harmless art.
And also, let's step back and now look at the ridiculous statement this BNHA fan is saying, even despite that.
Many others have pointed out in the comments a big issue with their statement.
Here's the deal; kids are idiots.
While
most kids are generally capable of differentiating reality from fiction before they're even fucking conscious,
some aren't able to do that, but that
doesn't mean everyone else isn't able to do that.
And if that dumbass has a disorder that makes him unable to differentiate fiction from reality, then that completely wrecks his weakass points.
But I digress.
Thing is, on the
topic of adult crap, in whatever way kids are affected by fiction is
irrelevant, because we're in the
adult world, dealing with
adults who are viewing this shit,
not kids, who aren't supposed to see it, nor engage in it in any way.
Arguing that "
kids'll enter anyway" also pretty much applies to fucking
nuclear power plants, factories, and warzones as well.
TL;DR: Don't assume that others can't tell the difference and aren't able to think and act beyond fiction, simply because you can't, and that every other single human being is obligated to spoil you.
Tweet ||
Archive
Victims of grooming do not become automatic experts on how grooming is done.
Trauma doesn't give people the knowledge and intrinsic details of what goes on the human mind, along with several abstract relations to how any bad act is committed;
it's fucking trauma.
Trauma isn't "knowledge," it's the experience of pain and suffering.
You don't go on a tirade against tables because you stubbed your foot on it.
You learn to not stub your toe on it again.
Trauma is
when that pain is intense enough to stick with you longer than it ever should need to or have to.
An oversimplification, but I digress.
"
Oh, so you're saying that victims of trauma shouldn't speak out because they don't know what it's like to be raped or have their life threatened by bullets?"
I'm saying of
all the things you know, I fucking doubt it includes being
an expert in ethics or morality, especially on the
topic of how fiction as a whole affects reality.
I'm well aware of how people like to shit on victims of anything, and I actively avoid it whenever I notice it.
This isn't one of those things.
I don't deny that anyone who has gone through any form of trauma knows how it occurred, what it's like to be in that situation, and so on.
I'm not a school teacher or principal who do that all the time for a living.
As an abstract statement, to say that "
victims are not experts"
is too vague, and is true and false in various situations and scenarios, contexts and cases.
Simply put,
on this specific topic, I not only
doubt they know how grooming works, but also the difference between reality and fiction, and the ability to derive upright morality, on the basis of several decades of research proving opposite to what they claim, actual conceptual understanding of the human psyche, and how you treat real people over fictional ones.
TL;DR: I highly doubt they're traumatized by grooming, but even if they were, they obviously don't know shit about how literally anything works.
And either way, they're only using their alleged trauma and pain as a pathos and ethos. Good for persuasion, but contributes to nothing beyond faulty beliefs which actually do harm.
Tweet ||
Their account is locked at the time of writing, so I can't archive it.
But there isn't much to say anyway. Just wanted to point out this person is an idiot.
Ever heard of people who are pro-life but have abortions and look down on others to have it anyway?
And I still haven't seen anyone throw anything other than bullshit that all lolicons, or at least a majority of them, are somehow also attracted to real kids.
Basically, these Antis are crusading against a projection.