rpanonmod ([personal profile] rpanonmod) wrote in [community profile] rpanons2013-10-12 06:19 pm

Pokémon

Rundown: [community profile] rpanons is an anonymous community for role-play related topics. This place serves as a forum for game discussions, canon discussions, RP solicitations (ATP, game ads, open memes), and advice. The occasional off topic comment is inevitable, but please keep heated social and political topics to their respective communities. Posting them here will only get them frozen. Subsequent threads made to bypass a freeze will then be deleted.

Rules:

Do not post pornographic or shocking images.
Do not share private entries, plurks, chat logs, etc.
Do not use this community as your social/political/hatespeech soapbox.
Do not be redundant. One page does not need three or more threads on one topic/theme.
Do not treat this comm like your personal Plurk or Twitter. Off-topic happens, but it should be open for discussion and not just a play-by-play of your life. No one cares.


CONCERNS | RESOURCES


Navigate:

LATEST PAGE | GAME DISCUSSIONS | CANON DISCUSSIONS | HTML/GRAPHIC HELP

ATP/ENABLE ME | GAME ADVERTISEMENTS | PB SUGGESTIONS | USERNAME SUGGESTIONS

GAME IDEAS | CHARACTER ADVICE | RP WITH ME

da

(Anonymous) 2013-10-18 07:02 pm (UTC)(link)
you're also a brainless idiot if you sit there and pretend the series isn't rife with rape imagery and the only reason anyone would have an issue with it is because "ew fanservice", which is what pretty much every single opposing voice on this topic is characterized as. and it happens any time this thing is brought up with any work of fiction it's featured in. people skeeved by rape imagery are written off as "prudes" and morons.

and let's be real, the whole "gross otaku" comment applies pretty broadly along anime fans that willfully enjoy rape imagery. you can like the show and not be one, and object to the show's basic pandering to male rape fantasies, but you're lying to yourself if you think the majority audience of the show doesn't fall under that category.

Re: da

(Anonymous) 2013-10-19 03:36 am (UTC)(link)
i said not this shit again

we ran it into the ground last post

(also wow, I never said the rape imagery was okay, i understand why people have a problem with it and i'm not going to watch the show because of it, but lumping everybody who does tolerate it in with the neckbeards is hella judgemental. what, do you think they want to rape someone in real life because they have a kink for it in fiction?)

Re: da

(Anonymous) 2013-10-19 05:21 am (UTC)(link)
you can like the show and not be one, and object to the show's basic pandering to male rape fantasies, but you're lying to yourself if you think the majority audience of the show doesn't fall under that category.

way to not read.

and sorry, but people are going to keep calling it a neckbeard show and fans are just going to have to deal with that. that's what happens when you like a shitty show. if you're not a neckbeard, then you have nothing to worry about anyways, so why get your knickers in a twist over people calling the sky blue.

dda

(Anonymous) 2013-10-19 06:04 am (UTC)(link)
we have twilight rpers who both enjoy the work, mock the writing, and acknowledge the problems in the portrayed relationships. can't we use the same principle in judging fans of this?

Re: dda

(Anonymous) 2013-10-19 07:08 am (UTC)(link)
the majority of Twilight's fandom are vapid idiots. that doesn't mean EVERYONE who partakes in Twilight fandom is a vapid idiot, and saying that Twilight is vapid idiot fiction made for vapid idiot fans does not actually imply all people who partake in it are.

Kill la Kill is a show made by male otaku for male otaku and yall the gross shit that comes with that. It's just how things are. This truth shouldn't be taken as a personal insult, but here we are again having this same stupid argument.

Well, I'm not. I'm leaving the discussion at this. If over-defensive children want to fight for however many odd comments over how unfair it is to call a duck a duck, I'm not going to be wasting my time with it, personally, again. Have fun.

Re: dda

(Anonymous) 2013-10-19 01:40 pm (UTC)(link)
quack