|
Post by Saint Ambrosef on Mar 27, 2021 0:15:15 GMT -5
when the community complains whenever a character dies but then gripes that not enough characters die
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2021 10:53:37 GMT -5
I'm honestly having trouble thinking of something more broadly throughout the community cause while I've definitely seen what everyone has said somewhere here and there, I feel like most times those cases have been mainly in a certain handful of people or even just a few individuals. I guess I'm struggling to find something that the majority of the warriors community is hypocritical of, cause whataboutism is a rabbit hole that never ends in any situation and we can be here all year. We can look at pretty much every opinion of the series and point out how someone doesn't seem to take notice- or approves or disapproves- of something else comparatively. Don't get me wrong, not saying this thread is bad at all I actually find it a really interesting topic, just explaining my thoughts.
I suppose one thing the community as a whole can tend to be pretty hypocritical of broadly- and not necessarily specifically- is the Warrior code and "what is right". Or objective morality. Whatever you wanna call it. And that includes me cause I've probably done this too. I find it so odd sometimes when everyone flips back and forth between judging characters on our own real world morals and then not judging them due to clan culture/life and/or the warrior code. How we'll trash someone for yelling at someone but turn a blind eye when they rip each other to shreds in a border skirmish. How we'll not like how a character handles a situation while also condoning the extremely intolerant and xenophobic nature of the system. It's just weird how, in a sense, so much of the community wants so many things to be made right or handled differently while also supporting and acknowledging a fundamental culture, system, laws, and rules, that can be at many times really hostile, even downright cruel at times. Some people have a tendency to do this more than others, and there's definitely a wide range of beliefs on what people would like to see change in the clans- and I've definitely seen an increase in people who want the clans to change how they are/work. But overall the vast majority of the community still engages in what seems like an endless "one step forward, two steps back" morality debate where we are constantly trying to judge a character's actions under the current difficult situations of an often cruel clan life.
It's not necessarily a bad thing I just find it interesting. I mean as a reader we are inclined to accept the fantasy world that we have, and I've definitely done that a lot. In a sense it's the clan system- even in it's cruelty and unfairness at times- that makes it interesting. But as a result the community finds itself in an overarching cycle of unintended hypocrisy as we try to pick and choose which aspects of this series are ok while also finding excitement in reading dramatic and scary plotlines.
|
|
Asexual
Medicine Cat of the Valley
Vale
Writing essays on what should be simple questions since 2019!
|
Post by Vale on Mar 27, 2021 15:30:38 GMT -5
Considering how big the fandom is every thing seems to be hypocritical as there are supporters of both sides of any view, it's hard to get a grasp these days what is actually what the fandom thinks in general vs a vocal minority. This thread isn't about that though so I'll share moments I thought were a bit hypocritical from my time around various parts of the fandom.
Mate choices in general seem to bring out a lot of the hypocrisy in the fandom imo. A lot of the time it feels like we like the cats making choices for themselves, but sometimes get mad that the character made the "wrong" choice when they choose to take a mate. I think some of this comes from how some people want characters who don't end up in a relationship during or after their story which I agree with and think is a fair critique overall since I could count on one hand cats who didn't have a relationship at the end of their narrative. Sometimes this is just because shipping gets too intense, but admittedly the Warriors fandom doesn't seem that bad with shipping barring the obvious Squirrelflight, Ashfur, and Brambleclaw debates we had when that was the current series.
Others have already mentioned it but hypocrisy around characters with mental health issues does annoy me a little. I do think we've gotten better it recently though and it's up to people's interpretations but... yeah, I don't think it's right to ask for good representation of mental health issues, get it, and then find the character annoying or bad for having it. This also goes for characters that are neurodiverse or have disabilities. Critique and simply disliking a character overall is fine of course but if in one hand we're asking for more characters who are neurodiverse/have a disability/mental illness yet also saying Moth Flight is annoying for having ADHD then I think it's pretty obviously hypocritical. As awareness grows though I think this is lessening, with people better articulating why they don't like a character or their representation without simply saying "don't like her because her ADHD is annoying". (For the record I like her, she was just the cat who came to mind first.)
Character death is for me one of the biggest ones. People want cats to die but there feels like a lot of complaints when they do, especially when a death is off-screen or a few cats die in one event. I can understand this as this is something I'm hypocritical about if I'm being honest as it's impossible to give all cats super meaningful deaths or know if one background cat is favoured by a person or a small group of the fandom and as such will be sad if they die. I don't mind being saddened by a death personally so I try not to complain as I would rather they kept killing off characters to keep the whole "survival is rough" thing going which I think a lot agree with.
|
|