Inactive Andrew Dobson / Tom Preston / CattyN - STOP DOING SEXIST CRAP

Checkered Spotlight said:
What's he going to do if LGBTIA+ viewers feel really offended by him coddling characters because of their identity? What then?
Click to expand...

Probably continue to do what he's done so far and basically ignore the perpetually offended. There's no point pandering to a bunch of crying bitches who are just going to complain no matter what.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Karen Riley and Koby_Fish
Checkered Spotlight said:
If you're not going to let your characters go through ANYTHING BAD EVER, you're not going to let your characters grow. He doesn't mean to, but it kind of comes off as really condescending, like he thinks people of those identities can't take a character dying without being triggered or some shit.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the activist crowd not only doesn't understand this basic fact and also overwhelmingly they don't understand basic writing/storytelling and how it works, they think that characters going through bad things is proof that the writers hate the characters and want to use them as a proxy to punish whatever the character represents, because that's exactly what they would do to characters, only instead of the characters being minorities or women, they'd focus Bad Things™ happening to Straight White Cis Males. In other words, they're projecting again.

It's like they're the mirror image of the Moral Majority's objections to violence and sex in media, which was brilliantly parodied in the Simpsons episode where Marge goes on a campaign to make Itchy and Scratchy non-violent.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: IAmNotDavid, Karen Riley, CWCissey and 9 others
Koby_Fish said:
The problem is that the activist crowd not only doesn't understand this basic fact and also overwhelmingly they don't understand basic writing/storytelling and how it works, they think that characters going through bad things is proof that the writers hate the characters and want to use them as a proxy to punish whatever the character represents, because that's exactly what they would do to characters, only instead of the characters being minorities or women, they'd focus Bad Things™ happening to Straight White Cis Males. In other words, they're projecting again.
Click to expand...

You know, that really explains why they whine so much about women and minorities dying on Supernatural, but basically masturbate themselves sore over the main characters' suffering.
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: Koby_Fish and Uncanny Valley
Koby_Fish said:
The problem is that the activist crowd not only doesn't understand this basic fact and also overwhelmingly they don't understand basic writing/storytelling and how it works, they think that characters going through bad things is proof that the writers hate the characters and want to use them as a proxy to punish whatever the character represents, because that's exactly what they would do to characters, only instead of the characters being minorities or women, they'd focus Bad Things™ happening to Straight White Cis Males. In other words, they're projecting again.

It's like they're the mirror image of the Moral Majority's objections to violence and sex in media, which was brilliantly parodied in the Simpsons episode where Marge goes on a campaign to make Itchy and Scratchy non-violent.
Click to expand...
Wasn't that the episode where Marge realized she couldn't censor one form of art and praise another because of hypocrisy? Back on topic, I agree that they don't understand basic storytelling, as there's no success without hardship. The writers don't hate the characters, they want to see them overcome whatever impedes them.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Karen Riley, CWCissey and Koby_Fish
He's STILL arguing about censorship vs localization with that one guy that's been calling out his bullshit.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Koby_Fish
Koby_Fish said:
The problem is that the activist crowd not only doesn't understand this basic fact and also overwhelmingly they don't understand basic writing/storytelling and how it works, they think that characters going through bad things is proof that the writers hate the characters and want to use them as a proxy to punish whatever the character represents, because that's exactly what they would do to characters, only instead of the characters being minorities or women, they'd focus Bad Things™ happening to Straight White Cis Males. In other words, they're projecting again.

It's like they're the mirror image of the Moral Majority's objections to violence and sex in media, which was brilliantly parodied in the Simpsons episode where Marge goes on a campaign to make Itchy and Scratchy non-violent.
Click to expand...
It would explain their terrible grammar. And their lack of literacy.

Honestly, I get the feeling they never read jack shit in their life. And Dobson moreso as he's probably the worst offender (seeing as he wants to tell a story and all).
 
  • Winner
  • Agree
Reactions: IAmNotDavid, Count groudon and Koby_Fish
CrimsonKnight said:
Wasn't that the episode where Marge realized she couldn't censor one form of art and praise another because of hypocrisy? Back on topic, I agree that they don't understand basic storytelling, as there's no success without hardship. The writers don't hate the characters, they want to see them overcome whatever impedes them.
Click to expand...
Yes, exactly right! After her "success" in getting violence removed from Itchy and Scratchy, she was asked by the Moral "won't someone PLEASE think of the CHILDREN?!" Majority to call for the censorship of [The statue of ] David's Doodle. So then at the end of an interview following the David fig leaf debacle, Marge conceded, "One person can make a difference, but most of the time, they probably shouldn't."

Amusingly at the end of the show, when Marge and Homer are at the museum looking at the statue of David, Marge wonders how the kids will see this and appreciate it, and Homer laughs and informs her that the schools force them to go and see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Karen Riley, CWCissey, CrimsonKnight and 1 other person
Jewelsmakerguy said:
It would explain their terrible grammar. And their lack of literacy.

Honestly, I get the feeling they never read jack shit in their life. And Dobson moreso as he's probably the worst offender (seeing as he wants to tell a story and all).
Click to expand...

The problem is that modern sociologists (and others in the "social justice" community) are hung-up on something called "representation". Back in the 60s and 70s, the complaint was over "tokenism", that is, the insertion of a black character for no other reason than to have them there, and that this was somehow more racist than not having a black character at all. Now they have expanded that complaint to complaining about any casting that puts various "oppressed" minorities in ANY sort of bad light, regardless of whether the story is fictional or based on a real occurrence. It's the same reason that various feminists and SJWs got buttmad about the rape in Game of Thrones. They tried to make out that this was an attack on women in general, when in fact it was to show how rotten the perpetrator was.

Minority children particularly were taught or advised for decades to look up to various role models, as a sort of "see what you can accomplish" paragon of virtue, in order to encourage them to overcome obstacles to their success. Now that's turned completely on its head, as they go about criticizing what they see as negative depictions, stereotypes, and forming their self-esteem based on how a character being portrayed by an actor is treated in the contrived fictional setting as if it were reality. This presupposes that people only identify with a particular group that they also happen to belong to, and that they cannot learn from or identify with characters that don't match in whole or in part to their particular characteristics. I find this concept ridiculous particularly in this Age of Otherkin, where various humans claim to identify with cats, horses, dogs, or Fuck You I'm A Dragon. One thing is for sure, however, there have always been and will always continue to be people who can't tell fantasy from reality.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: IAmNotDavid, Karen Riley, UglyOldJafar and 2 others
NoStinkingBadges said:
How badly has that whole "representation before storytelling" thing really infected society? How badly should we be worried about this?
Click to expand...

Be wary but don't jump the gun. Most of the people who think representation should come before storytelling just shout about on social media. Like I've said several times, they don't actually read, play, or watch anything besides a couple cartoons that already unabashedly pander to them.

They also don't actually say " representation before narrative". Whenever a character they like because they're gay/bi/tranny/whatever suffers, SJWs blame malevolent targeting of marginalized people. They don't go around saying "I hate good storytelling". They're just skeptical when people tell them just because a gay character dies doesn't mean the writer hates gay people.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: IAmNotDavid, RepQuest, Koby_Fish and 1 other person
It makes no sense. It really doesn't. It makes works like The Larymie Project and Rent, stories about the hardships and terrors LGBT people face, somehow homophobic because gay people suffer. It makes works like Ruined and, fuckin' hell, The Vagina Monologues, sexist and racist because black people and women suffer. The motherfuckin' Vagina Monologues, a play so goddamn feminist that MRAs on college campuses boycott that shit, is now a sexist work because people who live abnormal lives are no longer allowed to suffer in any way, shape or form.

At least I'll let this content me; the rational majority of storytellers and consumers don't think this way, and will bite back and bite back hard when people insist that they make their LGBTQ+ characters propoganda pieces with no meaningful character value beyond the fact that they exist.

On topic: none of this discussion matters because Dobson is never making any kind of longstanding fiction ever again.
 
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: RepQuest, Karen Riley, Koby_Fish and 4 others
Skysora said:

Of course.
Click to expand...

Fucking hell. Dobson is like comic!Ronnie, but in real life and without the traces of self-awareness. Or the tendency to apologize. Or the innate sweet-naturedness.

... Dobson actually makes the comic version of Ronnie look good. Think about that... he doesn't make the real-life version of Ronnie look good, because real-life Ronnie is actually a decently well-adjusted person as it is (albeit still with a tendency to feel sorry for himself). He makes the comic version of Ronnie, who has been deliberately played up as the most pathetic person in the world, look like he's got his shit together in comparison.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RepQuest, Karen Riley, Koby_Fish and 1 other person
NoStinkingBadges said:
asexual erasure is real

EDIT: So, on topic, what was Dobson's childhood like? Do we have any details on his parents/immediate family? What kind of environment foistered him into the entitled little cocknugget he is today?
Click to expand...

He is actually pretty secretive about his childhood,family, "friends", etc. Gotta give him that.
 
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: RepQuest, Karen Riley, Too Many Crooks and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back