The Mysterious Mr. Enter / Jonathan Rozanski's "Growing Around" - IndieGoGo Campaign Failed, John going off the deep end, "Turning Red" is ignorant about 9/11 (later retracted)

[KillThemCrackasBabies]

Sorry for the late reply, but what exactly do you mean by that?

It’s a special kind of passion that only a sperg can have. While non-autists will tire of routine, autists despise change and prefer to remain comfortable in the mundane.

This, autistics (particularly children) like to have a routine of familiar activities to keep them from sperging out.

Why is Routine so Important to People with ASD?

www.appliedbehavioranalysisedu.org

https://www.autism.org.uk/about/behaviour/obsessions-repetitive-routines.aspx

If he's been at this for so long that's become a comfortable, familiar part of his daily life, he's probably still doing it just to be doing it, as opposed to feeling obligated.

 

[Corsola]

He'd argue that Lord of the Flies would not apply because that was a bunch of kids that survived an airplane crash arguing over pigs heads and sea shells, whereas with GA it's been the way of the world because kids could beat in the heads of dinosaurs in some incredibly dumb and simplistic way where Enter apparently assumes humans lived alongside the fucking dinosaurs, who also all only had long thin necks.

Yeah, let's see a neanderthal kid beat in a fucking T REX head with a rock. That'll go well.

Didnt he say that kids became dominant because they could crawl through holes to get away from dinosaurs or something? Like the prehistoric world was set up like a fucking Metroidvania with convenient shortcuts and morph ball passages wherever you need them.

 

[tamago]

Spoiler: Side Note

Hate that mod. Cerra.

When I went on Enter's server a few months ago for the lulz, he banned me for persisting on asking questions. You ask too many questions about Daddy Enter and criticize the mod, he'll ban you for wrongthink.

He's also a degenerate that cosplays Growimg Around characters. Fuck that guy.

Does he cosplay the female ones?

 

[Duncan Hills Coffee]

Does he cosplay the female ones?

Given how much crossdressing is in GA, he probably has.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Didnt he say that kids became dominant because they could crawl through holes to get away from dinosaurs or something? Like the prehistoric world was set up like a fucking Metroidvania with convenient shortcuts and morph ball passages wherever you need them.

The kids crawled into holes...so that when the dinosaurs stuck their heads in, the kids beat the dinosaurs to death with rocks.

This is legitimately the in-universe excuse for why its a kid-first society.

 

[Doctor of Autism]

The kids crawled into holes...so that when the dinosaurs stuck their heads in, the kids beat the dinosaurs to death with rocks.

This is legitimately the in-universe excuse for why its a kid-first society.

There are multiple holes with that shit:


1. Why would values from the fucking Jurassic era still hold up to the modern day?

2. How the fuck would literal children kill dinosaurs with rocks? Unless they had convoluted traps with boulders (which is highly unlikely), they wouldn't even deal with them.

3. Why would the kids who killed the dinosaurs with rocks give children more rights than them especially as they get older?

4. Why would there even be fully evolved humans in the same age as the dinosaurs?

Of course most of these points can be waived off as just a cartoon but it's only an issue given how seriously Enter takes Growing Around and how he wants it to be viewed in the same vein as Bojack Horseman.

 

[The Pink Panther]

Does he cosplay the female ones?

I think he did. IIRC, that's what he mainly crossdressed as.

 

[Mr Roboto]

Spoiler: Side Note

Hate that mod. Cerra.
He's also a degenerate that cosplays Growimg Around characters. Fuck that guy.

I want to see photos just for the autism, but I know it will be horrifying

He'd argue that Lord of the Flies would not apply because that was a bunch of kids that survived an airplane crash arguing over pigs heads and sea shells, whereas with GA it's been the way of the world because kids could beat in the heads of dinosaurs in some incredibly dumb and simplistic way where Enter apparently assumes humans lived alongside the fucking dinosaurs, who also all only had long thin necks.

I think he has mentioned LOTF before in one of his journal entries and I think he was critical of it. Growing Around will just be LOTF but done right

 

[CoconutCat]

He'll either label it "made for kids" and accept the lack of comments or ad revenue (This cartoon was "not made to be profitable," after all,) or his stubborn ass will take the risk, say "not made for kids" and challenge the FTC to deliver on their "shooting fish in a barrel" claim. To my knowledge, no channel has ever been fined or taken down by the FTC directly, so Enter might just try to call their bluff.

Looks like we have an answer:

Of course, if Enter actually did his research, he'd know content that's "for kids, but not exclusively" still counts as kids' content: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9684541

Mixed audience content, on the other hand, is considered a type of Made for Kids content. This is content that targets children as one of its audiences, even if it's not the main or primary audience, and that qualifies as child-directed after balancing the factors described above.

If you're going to act all superior and make snarky remarks towards your fans, you should at least know what the fuck you're talking about.

 

[DickMain]

There are multiple holes with that shit:


1. Why would values from the fucking Jurassic era still hold up to the modern day?

2. How the fuck would literal children kill dinosaurs with rocks? Unless they had convoluted traps with boulders (which is highly unlikely), they wouldn't even deal with them.

3. Why would the kids who killed the dinosaurs with rocks give children more rights than them especially as they get older?

4. Why would there even be fully evolved humans in the same age as the dinosaurs?

Of course most of these points can be waived off as just a cartoon but it's only an issue given how seriously Enter takes Growing Around and how he wants it to be viewed in the same vein as Bojack Horseman.

But what happens when kid gets big?

Also, there were smaller dinosaurs. And lots of other, smaller, not-dinosaur things that could kill just as easy. But dinosaurs.

 

[Optimus Prime]

There are multiple holes with that shit:


1. Why would values from the fucking Jurassic era still hold up to the modern day?

2. How the fuck would literal children kill dinosaurs with rocks? Unless they had convoluted traps with boulders (which is highly unlikely), they wouldn't even deal with them.

3. Why would the kids who killed the dinosaurs with rocks give children more rights than them especially as they get older?

4. Why would there even be fully evolved humans in the same age as the dinosaurs?

Of course most of these points can be waived off as just a cartoon but it's only an issue given how seriously Enter takes Growing Around and how he wants it to be viewed in the same vein as Bojack Horseman.

The whole stupid concept itself actually does present some insight to how Enter answers uncomfortable questions, because obviously the real answer is 'he didn't think about how this society was set up'.

Primarily, I'm almost certain he went with this answer because the first thing that came to mind about what kids have that actually an advantage over an adult (since we were all pretty clueless, needy little shits as children) is kids can fit into small spaces.

Secondly, he wanted to back date this hard so that it was always this way in the world of GA, so he went all the way to the beginning of man's existence on the face of the Earth.

But what could children do in small spaces? Maybe they crawl in there and prove their dominance by killing big things. What are big things back then that in numerous cartoons (remember who we're talking about here) seemingly existed alongside cavemen? DINOSAURS.

Thus, kids beating dinosaurs to death in small holes was the answer.

I think he has mentioned LOTF before in one of his journal entries and I think he was critical of it. Growing Around will just be LOTF but done right

If Piggy had only worn a dress, then he wouldn't have been beaten to death!

(Arrested Development narrator: Actually, it is more likely that Piggy would have died even sooner if he had in fact been a crossdresser).

 

[Icarus B. Nezzer]

Looks like we have an answer:
View attachment 1470150

Of course, if Enter actually did his research, he'd know content that's "for kids, but not exclusively" still counts as kids' content: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9684541

If you're going to act all superior and make snarky remarks towards your fans, you should at least know what the fuck you're talking about.

"Not just for kids"
You got it backwards, Mr. E. The "for all audiences" defense only works when you have an adult-oriented show that some children can enjoy; not the other way around. If you had gone into this show with a "Simpsons" approach, aimed for a high "PG" rating on primetime, then maybe it could work (Hell, it could even excuse some of the darker shit in your show because, if kids are disturbed, they're not the target anyway,) but no. You made your "compete with Nick and CN" bed, and now you have to sleep in it.

 

[Petronella]

John's thinking doesn't even go that deep. He's a brony, My Little Pony had adult fans, therefore whatever work he makes has to be "for all audiences."

 

[LiquidKid]

There are multiple holes with that shit:


1. Why would values from the fucking Jurassic era still hold up to the modern day?

2. How the fuck would literal children kill dinosaurs with rocks? Unless they had convoluted traps with boulders (which is highly unlikely), they wouldn't even deal with them.

3. Why would the kids who killed the dinosaurs with rocks give children more rights than them especially as they get older?

4. Why would there even be fully evolved humans in the same age as the dinosaurs?

Of course most of these points can be waived off as just a cartoon but it's only an issue given how seriously Enter takes Growing Around and how he wants it to be viewed in the same vein as Bojack Horseman.

The whole stupid concept itself actually does present some insight to how Enter answers uncomfortable questions, because obviously the real answer is 'he didn't think about how this society was set up'.

Primarily, I'm almost certain he went with this answer because the first thing that came to mind about what kids have that actually an advantage over an adult (since we were all pretty clueless, needy little shits as children) is kids can fit into small spaces.

Secondly, he wanted to back date this hard so that it was always this way in the world of GA, so he went all the way to the beginning of man's existence on the face of the Earth.

But what could children do in small spaces? Maybe they crawl in there and prove their dominance by killing big things. What are big things back then that in numerous cartoons (remember who we're talking about here) seemingly existed alongside cavemen? DINOSAURS.

Thus, kids beating dinosaurs to death in small holes was the answer.



If Piggy had only worn a dress, then he wouldn't have been beaten to death!

(Arrested Development narrator: Actually, it is more likely that Piggy would have died even sooner if he had in fact been a crossdresser).

The three biggest flaws are
1-any hole big enough for a dinosaur head to fit in would be big enough for an adult human to fit inside, especially since it would take multiple kids to kill each dinosaurs
2-how did the kids get out of the cave/hole after they trapped the entrance with a dead dinosaur
3-why would those kids arbitrarily give up power to other kids once they became adult age instead of just maintaining control until they died like most primitive civilizations

John's thinking doesn't even go that deep. He's a brony, My Little Pony had adult fans, therefore whatever work he makes has to be "for all audiences."

Ah yes, “there’s a ton of adult fans therefore it’s valid adult entertainment” the call of every autistic man-child in the brony community. At least most other cartoons aren’t made exclusively to sell toys to 4-8 year old little girls.

 

[Petronella]

The three biggest flaws are
1-any hole big enough for a dinosaur head to fit in would be big enough for an adult human to fit inside, especially since it would take multiple kids to kill each dinosaurs
2-how did the kids get out of the cave/hole after they trapped the entrance with a dead dinosaur
3-why would those kids arbitrarily give up power to other kids once they became adult age instead of just maintaining control until they died like most primitive civilizations


Ah yes, “there’s a ton of adult fans therefore it’s valid adult entertainment” the call of every autistic man-child in the brony community. At least most other cartoons aren’t made exclusively to sell toys to 4-8 year old little girls.

The brony thing is also probably why Growing Around has so many side characters. My Little Pony had tons and tons of side characters who became fan favorites so that's probably what he's trying to imitate.

 

[CoconutCat]

The brony thing is also probably why Growing Around has so many side characters. My Little Pony had tons and tons of side characters who became fan favorites so that's probably what he's trying to imitate.

The side character thing was actually Kyle/Nayolfa's idea. Nayolfa is basically what Enter would be if he was looking at GA from the outside: he's able to recognise how bad GA is, but his "suggestions" aren't much better.

 

[LiquidKid]

The brony thing is also probably why Growing Around has so many side characters. My Little Pony had tons and tons of side characters who became fan favorites so that's probably what he's trying to imitate.

Well yeah, it’s a show designed exclusively to sell toys. They needed all those characters to make toys out of them. Think of all the autobots that came on screen once and were never heard from again

The side character thing was actually Kyle/Nayolfa's idea. Nayolfa is basically what Enter would be if he was looking at GA from the outside: he's able to recognise how bad GA is, but his "suggestions" aren't much better.

I think the side character thing is mostly an attempt to be like the Simpsons, Family Guy, and all those other animated sitcoms that spent years developing rich casts of side characters that have all become just as complex as the main cast.
he just doesn’t know how to make write characters, so it fails on all fronts.

 

[Icarus B. Nezzer]

I think the side character thing is mostly an attempt to be like the Simpsons, Family Guy, and all those other animated sitcoms that spent years developing rich casts of side characters that have all become just as complex as the main cast.
he just doesn’t know how to make write characters, so it fails on all fronts.

What most amateur writers don't realize is that neither "The Simpsons" nor "Family Guy" intended to have such large casts of characters from day one. It just happened naturally across several years of episodes. Make one or two new characters to drive a specific story, make some more characters for quick visual gags, and after a while, you have an entire fictional backlot to mess around with. Compare to "Growing Around" where, in the first four episodes alone, Rocky Road has over half a dozen neighbors with established gimmicks, Lemonade Land has over half a dozen employees with established gimmicks, the school has at least a dozen students with established gimmicks, and the introductions are all too much too fast.

 

[The Last Stand]

What most amateur writers don't realize is that neither "The Simpsons" nor "Family Guy" intended to have such large casts of characters from day one. It just happened naturally across several years of episodes. Make one or two new characters to drive a specific story, make some more characters for quick visual gags, and after a while, you have an entire fictional backlot to mess around with. Compare to "Growing Around" where, in the first four episodes alone, Rocky Road has over half a dozen neighbors with established gimmicks, Lemonade Land has over half a dozen employees with established gimmicks, the school has at least a dozen students with established gimmicks, and the introductions are all too much too fast.

Also to add, the secondary characters could help flesh out the main characters' personality or motivations across. Introducing too many characters at once gives them less substance. Almost like they're Mary Sues or caricatures of existing stereotypes. Sometimes, less is more. Give your audience time to digest, don't force feed it to them at once.

 

[Optimus Prime]

What most amateur writers don't realize is that neither "The Simpsons" nor "Family Guy" intended to have such large casts of characters from day one. It just happened naturally across several years of episodes. Make one or two new characters to drive a specific story, make some more characters for quick visual gags, and after a while, you have an entire fictional backlot to mess around with. Compare to "Growing Around" where, in the first four episodes alone, Rocky Road has over half a dozen neighbors with established gimmicks, Lemonade Land has over half a dozen employees with established gimmicks, the school has at least a dozen students with established gimmicks, and the introductions are all too much too fast.

Makes me wonder if Enter is even aware that The Simpsons as a show in its entirety was actually Groening coming up with a show pitch minutes before having to give said pitch, because he decided he didn't want to hand Fox the rights to Life in Hell, his personal comic series.