Politics in Media - The Good, the Bad, and the Preachy

Malty didn't ruin already a lot of lives and killed a fair amount of people thought?

The Karmic Rape is distateful by itself.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Feb 16th 2019 at 2:54:28 PM

And at the same time we have John C. Wright and Theodore "Beating up Women is super fun and brutality is awesome!" Beale, who write fascistic garbage and quackery and...why would you look at that, they ARE fascistic quacks and in the case of Toxie Voxie Theodore Beale, probably a serial killer.

The whole karmic rape thing is even more evidence the author is an incel - they literally post constantly about wishing karmic rape on "manipulative", "cruel" Stacies. And would you look at the traits Meldy was literally made to embody.

She is what an incel thinks all women are like.

Edited by NickTheSwing on Feb 16th 2019 at 11:59:19 AM

Also, the fact the protagonist literally buys a child sex slave should cut off ANY and all defenses of this literal trashpile of a work AND any support for its author.

You don't just write "buys a child sex slave" and be an okay human being.

Yeah thats straight out of some of the worst shit I have seen.

I dunno I like to believe that the work may not reflect on the creators own views but Shield Hero is one of those works that makes that really hard of a stance to take.

That is indeed straight up incel shit.

@ VeryVileVillian: If you think that fictional events must be morally justified to be used as catharsis, why would you base your judgement on whether they can be justified rather than if they actually are? Wouldn't a case-by-case system make a lot more sense?

What should or shouldn't be presented as morally justified in the first place is a different question altogether, and in this case I would largely agree with the consensus of the forum. If the author unironically depicts rape as a good thing and expects people to agree, that's pretty messed up.

As a note. I've noticed that many of them like to talk about how fictional literal enlightened dictators are "more liberal" than average modern liberals.

That says more about them than anything.

Sidenote but damn that it feels weird writing this when your family fanboys Velazco, the leftist peruvian dictator that is also one of our best goverments, because leftism.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Feb 17th 2019 at 11:35:21 AM

So to change gears a bit, something that I've been wanting to talk about for a while: does anyone else like today's entertainment industry has a habit of shaming religious beliefs?

I mean, it feels like every fictional believer recently is either fundamentalist idiot, and even when they're not their faith is so downplayed it might as well be nonexistent.

Maybe I'm being oversensitive, granted, but as a Catholic, I can't help being a bit bothered with how belief in a higher power seems to always carry such negative baggage.

Americans being americans. Is hard to show heroic religious chsrscters when the GOP exist.

Trust me. I'm as annoyed as you.

I really don't think that's nearly as popular as you seem to be suggesting, rather then there being no openly atheist or anti-theist narratives there are now some. I don't really see that as a problem, religious sentiment does not need special protection.

I feel the same way but I also understand a lot of people feel like they've been on the other side of that for awhile.

Free speech.

Is more thant active religioius participation and expresion are consider mark of highly conservative person with all the baggage it entail.

Spartan: that is irrelevant, we dont need open atheist to not regard expresion of religiousness as just folder for dumb people.

Edited by unknowing on Feb 17th 2019 at 1:06:13 PM

And there's still entire channels out there that openly cater to religious audiences. There aren't entire channels dedicated to atheists as far as I know.

And let's not forget that while atheism is slowly increasing in the USA, most of the USA is still openly religious.

Edited by M84 on Feb 18th 2019 at 1:09:51 AM

Again, it is irrelevant, the positive portray of atheist dosent mean every religious person being a fundamentalist, is not a sum-take situation.

Also, there's still a stigma against people who are openly atheist in the USA. Anti-atheist prejudice is common enough that at least one study has suggested that people trust rapists more than they do atheists.

They didn't say anything about fundamentalism, only that there doesn't seem to be many channels catering exclusively to atheists.

Edited by dragonfire5000 on Feb 17th 2019 at 9:19:38 AM

Most of the media I consume is set in worlds where it's not exactly relevant - though I will note that almost every fantasy series either tends to have "the gods help those who help themselves"-style views on the topic, or actual, literal gods, which is about as theist as it gets. Belief in current religions being what it is, I imagine it's a lot easier for shows just not to bring it up unless it's relevant to a plotline in the show, like in House or something. Especially if you have any queer characters or anything - then you're all but forced to address the elephant in the room about which particular brand of religious the character is, and crack open that particular can of worms.

No.

It is absolutely relevant, for two reasons.

Firstly as I said there's no evidence that such narratives are common, secondly yes if a narrative is saying that all religious people are morons then it's counterproductive and irrational but in my experience, some religious people will view any atheistic narrative as saying regardless if it actually is or isn't.

So my point stands, religious narratives have been insulting and denigrating atheists for millennia. A few atheists ones doing the same does not make a problem.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Feb 17th 2019 at 12:20:29 PM

I'd say there are circles in the entertainment industry that have a tendency to mock religion. Most of the HBO-style serious drama for example often features quite scathing looks at religion and religious institutions. Game of Thrones, by some metrics the most popular show on earth, has a very self-evident dislike for religious belief, with one of the few preachers portrayed positively being a borderline atheist and most heroic characters talking scornfully about religious belief (Davos Seaworth, one of the most heroic characters of the show, being a prominent example). You have other examples of varying intensity, like The Young Pope and Westworld.

The more academic (and subsequently academia-inspired) circles of the entertainment don't tend to look too fondly on religion. When Martin Scorcese (one of the most prominent openly religious filmmakers who addresses his faith via his work) made his (quite brilliant) adaptation of the novel Silence, a film about the Shogunate's oppression of Christians in Edo Japan, there were a stunning number of commentators and reviewers that seemed to be Rooting for the Empire and agreeing with the general notion of "yes the shogunate was correct to commit genocide to wipe out the threat of Christianity".

Basically, as I said, general entertainment its still very much pro or neutral regarding religion, but academy-inspired works tend to have a much dimmer view.

And thus religious people interesed on that type of stuff tend to feel...uncomfortable.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Feb 17th 2019 at 1:25:08 PM

The Game of Thrones show in particular gets me red on the eyes: George Martin had a very nuanced, Warts and All view of the subject in his books with Davos in particular being one of the most moral religious characters in the whole story.

But otherwise, I feel very much like .

Honestly, this is exactly what I mean.

Negative perceptions of religions and religious institutions is not the same thing as saying all religious people are morons or evil.

There is a long history of religious institutions backing reactionary and bigoted causes, is it universal? No, but that doesn't say much. Equating criticism of religion and its institutions with insulting every religious person is not something that's going to make me especially sympathetic, especially considering how common it is.

Edited by Fourthspartan56 on Feb 17th 2019 at 1:30:41 PM

It's me or does most media, which portray religion negatively, tend to make all religions in to some sort of Inquisition Expy? Like Warren Ellis, Garth Ennis, Game of Thrones and ec. like to portray all religious people as scumbags, who will burn anyone who disagree with their "nonsense" (as they like to present) views.

Because there really not much else to use. A lot of religious backed crimes have a lot of more solid basis on secular stuff as racism or imperialism. Inquisition is just the most solid type that can.safely blamed on religion alone.

Edited by KazuyaProta on Feb 17th 2019 at 1:41:03 PM

@Spartan: I think you're being too narrow on your definition of what should offend religious people and what shouldn't. It seems like unless a work outright declares "Yes I think all religious people are stupid" you're not going to have any sympathy, even in cases like Game of Thrones where religion is universally portrayed as either a sign of unshackled fanaticism or naivete that needs to be grown out of.

To put it another way, if a religious film portrays every atheist as a complete idiot or a psychopath, it's righteously considered offensive towards atheists even if it doesn't outright say "you see, atheism is bad". Or even if it portrays atheists in a possibly halfway decent light whilst still behaving in a patronizing "atheism is a moronic belief, but nice people can believe in it!". So the same, for a lot of people, goes on the opposite path.

As I said, this isn't the prevalent trend in culture in any way, but there are obviously corners of the entertainment industry that don't look too kindly on religious belief. And I say this as a member of such a corner, being a academicist myself (I'm currently in the process of acquiring a Master's in Film Studies).

It's certainly not as pervasive as the opposite phenomena of pro-religious works bashing on Atheism, but I don't blame people for being miffled about it. More particularly because this (as a forum based on analyzing media) tends to skew slightly more to the academic side of things, so most people here will have more access to the academia-inspired work.

@Very Vile Villain: The usual trick seems to be harkening back to either the worst aspects of the Catholic Church or the world aspects of Islam, possibly both, depending on the work.

Edited by Gaon on Feb 17th 2019 at 10:48:02 AM

Mind you, I wish there was more LIBERAL religious programming but that may be my area.

One of the big things I hated about the Game of Thrones adaptation was the treatment of the Sparrows. In the books, it's a class based revolution where the nobility is charged with rape, pillage, murder, and torture during their conflict. They're The Fundamentalist and dangerous people but....it's a much more sympathetic depiction.

In the show it's all about....Loras being a homosexual.

I am genuinely confused by why they made that change.