Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scriver]

Remember that little discussion we had a while back about boycotting corrupt businesses, and how difficult a proposition that actually is?

Was just linked to a good example of that.  Here's a list of food companies owned by Monsanto.  Good luck.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Pssh, easy. The only thing I buy from that list is Lipton, and only for guests, as I don't drink tea myself. Provided that it's the tea-selling company we're talking about.

I would never buy any Uncle Ben's either, but that's because they dub their awful commercials. Companies that dub their commercials in Sweden get universally loathed. Strangely, only hair/shower/make-up companies seem to have caught on.

Too bad the list was fake, though. It ruined the whole awful supposed-to-be-joke I wanted to get going.
addit: Because, you know, I'm Swedish, and we have different companies here.

[Caz]

So this thread is just for arguing on every subject? I read the first post but I'm still not sure. 

[Ogdibus]

I never thought I'd post something relevant to this thread on this topic. I've been ranting a few other places, and I think it deserves some scrutiny from non-fans, as talking to them tends to devolve into talking about the fandom itself rather than the issue. Also do note that I'd be posting this here if something similar happened in anything else I was interested in.


The problem: Hasbro censored a handicapped pony in MLP:FiM. Unfortunate implications, ahoy.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

History: In the very first episode, one of the background ponies used to fill space had an animation error: crossed eyes. The fandom latched on to this character, developed a personality, family, etc, with a common theme being her struggles with being accepted due to her handicapped eyes and clumsy nature. Over a year later, this character (dubbed Derpy) ascended into the show proper, given a 2 minute scene and actually being named.

Then a week later the new episode she was in was taken down.

Then a month later, the episode was re released, with the name removed, crossed eyes "fixed," and a new voice.


Comparison video of the modified scene:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKIqF_SoI9s

Official PR response:

The 'My Little Pony Friendship is Magic' series has always been about acceptance and inclusion, and the series strives to convey that through the playful antics of a diverse cast of characters," Hasbro spokeswoman Nicole Angello told us over email. "Some viewers felt that aspects of the episode 'The Last Roundup' did not stay true to the core message of friendship which is the heart and soul of the series. Hasbro Studios decided to make slight audio alterations to this single episode.

Facts:
- Curiously the response says nothing about the eyes and name, which were changed as well.
- It's hard to deny Derpy has a handicap with her eyes, but it's more ambiguous as to whether she has a mental handicap as well or just clumsy. Either way, her handicap(s) were played down.
- The name (which was removed) could potentially be construed as offensive, given its origin, but it's ambiguous whether that's the reason they changed it or some sort of issue trademarking it (popular character they could make a lot of money off of)
- Negative response among internet fans was minimal, so if viewer response really motivated the change, it was from the target audience's parents.
- Notably, networks outside the US have censored parts of the show in the past. Canada's Treehouse network censored the word "loser" from one of the earlier episodes, for example. Issues distributing this episode to squeamish networks very well could have played a part.



Now why I think it's bullshit:

First off, I don't really care about the character. She's been a fandom favorite I've mostly ignored over the past 8 months. Also, I actually like the new scene better; it's funnier and the new voice doesn't sound so stupid (figuratively and literally).

The problem is their reasons for the change. By doing this, they're saying a handicapped individual is inappropriate to show on screen. Positive discrimination at best, outright bigotry against handicapped individuals at worst. I'm going to assume positive discrimination because it's most likely and far less, well, evil.

So we have a character in a slapstick situation. Other characters in the show have been in similar situations in the past. The only difference is the eyes and voice. By removing the handicap from the character, they're saying it's inappropriate to put a handicapped character where any other character would fit just fine. Tiptoeing around minorities like this is offensive to everyone involved; you're saying the minority is "special" and needs to be treated "different," rather than you know, treating them like a human being (or pony, in this case). Placing minorities on pedestals and treating them like they're fundamentally different is the opposite of "friendship and inclusion," which is what the PR response says was somehow violated in Derpy's original scene.

This is additionally grating to me, because the fundamental heart and soul of the show according to the original creator is thus: There is more than one way to be a girl. By changing Derpy's scene, they're explicitly stating that there's a "wrong" way too: her original portrayal. Tell me, if a 6 year old handicapped girl saw the original scene, do you think they'd interpret Derpy as making fun of them, or would they interpret her as a funny character to relate to? I think the latter. Now, the new scene isn't going to change much; the target audience won't take away any of the unfortunate implications I've been talking about. But if they ever hear the history behind this, they will.



So then, what do you think? Original scene being a degrading stereotype, or just a handicapped character that happens to also be in a slapstick comedy situation? Would there be a better way to do that scene while keeping both the comedy and handicap? Should we tiptoe around minorities (handicapped people especially) in media, or should we treat them like anyone else? Are there character types that are "not allowed" for minorities but fine for others?

Also of course this isn't just about ponies; please do not bring up the pony fandom or their reaction(s). This is about treatment of minorities in media, and thus extends well beyond this one little scene. Feel free to bring up examples you think relevant from anywhere else.

This sort of thing bugs me a lot too.  It's effectively trading an active form of persecution for passive one.  It's really tough to deal with, too.  Many people disagree on how to deal with things like this, but it's too taboo for conversation, so the difficulties are never resolved.  It just get's ignored while the problem worsens.

This is particularly hard on people who live with such issues.  They might get a few government services if they are lucky, but it won't make up for the damage caused by being shunned by society, or being encouraged to shun loved ones.

So you think it is better for handicapped people to be negatively portrayed by the media than not at all? Because make no mistake, this was a negative portrayal. I mean for gods sake, the character literally had the most stereotypical, offensive voice that someone making fun of the handicapped would use, and was called fucking Derpy

Oops...  I didn't mean to agree with the way that the character was portrayed.  To be honest, I don't know if a negative portrayal is better or worse than none.  From my perspective as a member of more than one negatively portrayed minority, the direct effect on me varies, depending on the character.  When I consider how it affects the way that others perceive me, the effects get more difficult to evaluate.  I do prefer to fight an enemy that I know, to an enemy that I don't know, though.  The level of hostilty resulting from the portrayal is very relevant to whether it makes things better or worse, as well as the capacity for the party being negatively portrayed to fight back. 

In this particular case, putting some care into the portrayal of the character would have saved everyone a lot of grief.  It doesn't seem that any harm was intended, but it is the absence of accurate portrayals of such characters that leads to a stereotype default.  Silence won't change an existing stereotype, but correcting mistakes can.

[justinlee999]

So this thread is just for arguing on every subject? I read the first post but I'm still not sure. 

It's about progressives raging about stuff against progressivism.

[G-Flex]

Because, you know, I'm Swedish, and we have different companies here.

You can't always assume something like this. Granted, I can't assume either way myself, but: The brands on a package are often related to companies you wouldn't guess they're related to. Many large corporations own a slew of brand names, and a lot of those are likely regionally specific, and sometimes it's hard to notice that they belong to a larger corporation to begin with.

[penguinofhonor]

The problem: Hasbro censored a handicapped pony in MLP:FiM. Unfortunate implications, ahoy.

Hey, kaiyjuu! Read up on this.

The one point I feel is important is that Rainbow Dash calls her Derpy originally, but that might not be apparent to non-brony viewers. They might think she's calling her "derpy" as an insult. Which would significantly worsen the scene and definitely make it appear to be about ridiculing a mentally handicapped person. I wouldn't approve of that on the show.

Tell me, if a 6 year old handicapped girl saw the original scene, do you think they'd interpret Derpy as making fun of them, or would they interpret her as a funny character to relate to?

People keep saying stuff like this. I don't like this at all. In the dozens of times I've seen this brought up, I've only seen one person actually mention someone they know with a disability, and that kid had an eye problem.

I don't like people going "Well, [marginalized group] would totally like this depiction of them" especially when the depiction has some problematic characteristics. It just sounds like they're using the marginalized people to defend a character they like personally, and don't actually care what the marginalized people think.

[G-Flex]

They might think she's calling her "derpy" as an insult. Which would significantly worsen the scene and definitely make it appear to be about ridiculing a mentally handicapped person. I wouldn't approve of that on the show.

Let's break down some facts here. If "derpy" would be an insult, then it's still insulting for it to be her name. I don't know what's so hard about the fact that explicitly naming a character an insulting word is, in fact, insulting, and in pretty much exactly the same way.

"She's not calling her an insulting word, she's just calling her by her name, which is also the insulting word by design" is hardly a defense.

People keep saying stuff like this. I don't like this at all. In the dozens of times I've seen this brought up, I've only seen one person actually mention someone they know with a disability, and that kid had an eye problem.

I don't like people going "Well, [marginalized group] would totally like this depiction of them" especially when the depiction has some problematic characteristics. It just sounds like they're using the marginalized people to defend a character they like personally, and don't actually care what the marginalized people think.

Or what people who work with them think.

[Max White]

People keep saying stuff like this. I don't like this at all. In the dozens of times I've seen this brought up, I've only seen one person actually mention someone they know with a disability, and that kid had an eye problem.

I don't like people going "Well, [marginalized group] would totally like this depiction of them" especially when the depiction has some problematic characteristics. It just sounds like they're using the marginalized people to defend a character they like personally, and don't actually care what the marginalized people think.

Well, I'm not mentally handicapped, so I can't tell you for sure what any one person who is would take the the stereotype of not being able to align their eyes, and I'm not everybody on earth with shit for eyes, so I can't speak for everybody, but I am blind in one eye, and it does tend to wander on it's own accord.

Do I take offence when people stereotype poor eyesight with having a mental disability. Na, not really.
So if anybody is worried that people with lazy eyes or what ever would take offence on their own behalf, I can tell you that not all of them would.

[Ogdibus]

The problem: Hasbro censored a handicapped pony in MLP:FiM. Unfortunate implications, ahoy.

Hey, kaiyjuu! Read up on this.

The one point I feel is important is that Rainbow Dash calls her Derpy originally, but that might not be apparent to non-brony viewers. They might think she's calling her "derpy" as an insult. Which would significantly worsen the scene and definitely make it appear to be about ridiculing a mentally handicapped person. I wouldn't approve of that on the show.

Tell me, if a 6 year old handicapped girl saw the original scene, do you think they'd interpret Derpy as making fun of them, or would they interpret her as a funny character to relate to?

People keep saying stuff like this. I don't like this at all. In the dozens of times I've seen this brought up, I've only seen one person actually mention someone they know with a disability, and that kid had an eye problem.

I don't like people going "Well, [marginalized group] would totally like this depiction of them" especially when the depiction has some problematic characteristics. It just sounds like they're using the marginalized people to defend a character they like personally, and don't actually care what the marginalized people think.

That was kind of a relief to read.

Sometimes people will identify with a negatively portrayed character.  In this case, I can see resentment developing for the other characters, based on their interactions, though this is speculation.  I haven't seen the content in question.

[Andir]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Are you sure that list is accurate? Kraft Foods, for example, is an independent publicly-traded corporation.

You're right.  That list is garbage.  From a few minutes of searching, it looks like it originates from abovetopsecret.com... and who knows where they got it from.

This looks like a better list of brands owned by Monsanto.

Not quite sure yet, but it looks like Monsanto and Kraft have been part of the same corporate entity in the past, but not for a long time, which might be partially responsible for the confusion.

Kraft's list of owned brands is actually more impressive, though it probably has less significance.  Monsanto has its hands in how most of the ingredients in our foods are grown.  Kraft is more involved in the actual processing and final sale of those foods.

The first list looks like any company/brand that uses HFCS for primary ingredients and maybe that's where they are coming from.  It may be Monsanto provided/contracted.  (But I guess you kind of mention that in your last paragraph)

[DJ]

So, should Him retroactively be deleted from Powerpuff Girls episodes because it's a negative portrayal of transsexual people?

[G-Flex]

So, should Him retroactively be deleted from Powerpuff Girls episodes because it's a negative portrayal of transsexual people?

Why is it that people who argue against things like this always have to throw in strange analogies instead of actually addressing the points mentioned?

To answer your question: I don't know. I don't know anything about Powerpuff Girls or about that character. It's a completely irrelevant question regarding an unrelated situation. I don't know how the two relate, whether they are analogous situations, or anything like that, and there's no point in complicating discussion by relating the "Derpy" situation to some other, different situation in another show. If you have an actual point to make, please make it instead of doing whatever it is you're doing.

[RedKing]

So, should Him retroactively be deleted from Powerpuff Girls episodes because it's a negative portrayal of transsexual people?

....I'd never thought of Him as transsexual. More of a andryogenous/hermaphroditic demon. Which admittedly, is a bit bold for a kids' cartoon.

[DJ]

Rewatching the cartoon now, Him is quite clearly transsexual. Also, an incarnation of pure evil. So yeah.

[G-Flex]

I recommend we not get distracted by talking about a completely different character from a completely different show with potentially different implications. It's not relevant, and it only complicates discussion in a way that isn't productive. That is, if the only reason it's being mentioned is as a rhetorical analogy to the "Derpy" situation. If people want to discuss it as a separate scenario, which it is, that's another thing entirely.