not sure how to kindly say that there is a difference between writers using misogyny as a plot device and writers themselves actually being misogynists
what i’m saying is that the “shiv roy is a victim of misogyny” takes coming from distraught users on here are funny. because it’s like yeah. that’s the point. you are not serious people
“Like yeah that’s the point” doesn’t bar it from critique or dislike. Impact over intention babes.
you CANNOT just say shit like ‘impact over intention babes’ to absolve yourself of being unable to watch media literately lmfao.
you’re not the victim of a hate crime bc you hated it a lot, okay? you’re michael scott.
See, the idea that I have to “absolve” myself from not wanting to watch a show is leaps and bounds just wrong. I am allowed to put down boundaries however I please for myself. If you have trouble with that, go to therapy.
You want people to have the exact same tolerance for media as you? For what?
Like, the reactionary point of view that the writers of your fav blorbos are free of critique because “the point is misogyny” is a way to absolve yourself from I’ll feelings about bigotry.
You’re projecting.
And just to make a full point: stories are historically a way of communicating morals and impressing ideas. “The intention is misogyny” is a talking point in this context, but so is: and the misogyny is gross and can make the show not worth watching. And in the world we live in, still filled with gender crimes, is there not a better way to communicate whatever it is you are trying to communicate. And discounting that idea with “the point is misogyny” instead of allowing both facts to create a more whole point of view is fucked up.
Yes the show can deftly display misogyny in a way that makes poignant commentary but dismissing people’s hurt feelings because you don’t want to acknowledge and sit with them is your own problem, not theirs. Both points of view are salient to the conversation.
lol sorry I guess it’s defending Shiv’s writing day here for me:
I didn’t say you were absolving yourself of not watching a show–I said you were absolving yourself of having to try to understand a show. Next time you want to avoid the illiteracy allegations try reading a little further along the sentence.
If you want to put down a boundary and go back to Steven Universe or whatever, all power to you. You can have whatever tolerance for media you want, but ‘impact over intention’ is a fundamentally bullshit way to interpret and assign worth to media.
When you say that impact is more important than intention, you say that aggressively stupid show-watchers with more outrage than sense can see a bad thing happen and go 'why would the writers support this?’ in the same way a baby watching a magic trick might wonder why the fuck daddy would dare to steal their nose. Put simply, you allow people to misunderstand the premise and then equate their misunderstanding with a failure of the art to do its 'job’, inasmuch as art has a job.
