The main thing to look out for here is:
- Is this medium, obviously for older audiences, being put with media that's obviously for younger audiences (i.e. loads of hentai in the edutainment section)?
- Do critics/viewers/older people look down upon the medium for the sole reason of being animated or using cartoon tropes?
- Is it automatically rated something oriented for children just because it's animated?
- Is it automatically put under 'Comedy' or 'Family' media regardless of content?
- Does it lose out to awards or being taken seriously for award nominations because it's animated?
- Is it a teen/adult oriented movie that flops because it's not for kids?
- Do critics attack it for not being for children or family?
- Since people think that cartoons have to sell toys, is it attacked for not selling merchandise?
- Is it attacked because it's not funny or trying to be funny (because it's not a comedy)?
- If it's a book, manga, or comic, is it always placed in the children's section regardless of content?
- Are certain quality expectations set, such as cheesy voice overs or a lack of character substance, and are people surprised or put off when these expectations are vastly superseded?
- Is it not taken seriously at all?
- Is something trying too hard to not be a part of the Ghetto, such as emphasizing that it's not for kids?
- Do ask yourself "Why are cartoons generally geared towards children?" Psychology has the answer: Children are more susceptible to being drawn to the simple art and feel more connection with brightly colored drawings than they do real people and grittier colors. And because children respond to laughter and happiness over other emotions, cartoons were created squarely with comedy in mind. Adults tend to more realistic fare, even if animated, and most don't like being made to feel like children. Because of the dumbed down writing of the Dark Age, adults couldn't find any serious emotional depth to attach to. "But if they couldn't like it, who would? Children, of course!" Children are far less critical of finer things, and care much less about realism and depth. Children are generally excited by action, and Dark Age cartoons were mostly action with very little in the way of the mellower moments of live-action acting. This emphasis on action (action meaning "events occurring", not necessarily "fighting") further removed adults from the equation.
However, it should be noted that this does not mean that adults cannot appreciate or like cartoons, or take cartoons seriously like children since animation is simply another form of media (raping a woman in a live-action movie or raping a woman in an animated cartoon are both shocking- and not real
) By our very psychological hardwiring, cartoons were bound to have found a wider audience with children. However, thanks to the Age Ghetto, entertainment culture also led to a baseless psychological belief that not only is it weird for adults to like cartoons, adults shouldn't like cartoons because cartoons are for kids- the only reason why is because cartoons are 'not real.' (As aforestated, live action fare technically isn't 'real' either, but
there is more emotional attachment and recognition with real actors than drawings, especially since animation very rarely capture the nuances of real life acting due to budget constraints) Even if a growing number of adults watch cartoons, it's less to do with the content and more to do with downfall of the idea of cartoons being solely camp or crude edutainment. In fact, there's absolutely nothing stopping adults from liking cartoons outside of cultural norms. It is merely noted that adults prefer depth, which almost all cartoons for decades sorely lacked.
- Also because of bad dubbing of anime prior to the 'Animation Quality Revisionism' of the New Millenium, most English-dubbed anime featured horrendous voice work. As mentioned before, a major reason why many adults look at animation in disdain is because of the fact that, traditionally, animation has had a much lower standard for voice acting that, in live-action, would be seen as wholly unrealistic. Anime's long trend of extremely over-the-top dubbing led to many seeing it as having an almost schizoid quality= adult content, but "kiddy" voice acting, besides leading to purists disavowing dubs. But in recent years, especially thanks to said revisionism by artists and animators, dubs and voice work in animation in general has improved manyfold. And thanks to an exponentially rising quality of writing along with it, even average cartoons are gaining critical acclaim for their direction.
- A quick note: sometimes, people assume the "adult" in "adult animation" means lots of foul language, sexual content, and violence — but "adult" can also refer to content too complex for children to handle (as in "Would kids really understand this?"). Such content often ends up interpreted as either Parental Bonuses or Getting Crap Past the Radar. Further confounding this is that some things may be too complex for kids...but is presented in a way that actually wouldn't be out of place in something meant for kids, such as a movie about the oil industry's excessive greed and ignorance towards the environment, and the hero of the day being a talking superspy tow truck. Many shows featuring humanoids and anthropomorphic animals but are not directly meant for kids (usually due to portraying stereotypes, such as the 'fat cat Wall street executive' actually being a fat cat) sometimes suffer this.
Actually, most shows featuring humanoids and anthropomorphic animals but are definitely not meant for kids will suffer this without reasonable doubt. You use a talking animal, you are for kids, even if you have mindless sex orgies, gratuitous cursing, intense violence, and/or realistic tense situations. The Ghetto then kicks into full swing- you will immediately find a major resistance, even amongst some of those against the ghetto, of using Funny Animals
in such things simply because the ghetto is so built into them that the very concept of Funny Animals
or Petting Zoo People
in realistic situations is something that shouldn't be done.
This page in a way is really one of the most one-sided and bias pages to the site. If you are going to insist this page stands, it needs a counter-argument paragraph or give a page to the actual more wide spread idea. Most people that assert this are elitists looking for a face for their persecution complex. We as humans are always going to like or dislike things. Some of us are more snobby than others. Just because you think "adults prefer depth" or programs with children as the primary demographic "write down to their audience" doesn't give you the right to push it down the throats of everyone else. Plenty of people will look at pages like this and feel offended that it allows a minority to speak for a majority, and probably never help this place. Let's be fair here or just pull the plug all together on the subject.