Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Nice analysis @nevermore. I’ve also noticed that the tactics used by one person in particular are strongly reminiscent of those used in the real world against anyone who questions the status quo. Take feminism as an example. Feminists were, and still are, often branded as “angry” or “bitter”. These labels are used to dismiss them entirely, and also to trivialize and humiliate. Another tactic is to accuse them of being “anti-men”, to associate arguments for equality with “man-hate”. Again, this aggressive counter-attacking is intended to silence and hence, preserve the status quo.
[adrotate group="5"]I have no issue being seen as Anti-Hook. I’m talking about the forum. The forum isn’t like some official place of anti-hookness. The people who remain here just aren’t aboard that shit because everyone else left. In other words, don’t let our views become the face of the forum. They aren’t. The other CS fans and Hooks fans are just as welcome her as SwanQueen or DavyJones shippers.
Yes, but the forum reflects the views of its majority, whether officially or not, and will be perceived as such. I never said CS fans or any others shouldn’t be allowed here. I’m just taking issue with the comments that slap derogatory labels onto individuals with certain opinions, brand this forum as “hateful” and demand apologies from others.
I also question the need for “balance”, which several people have brought up. People are more than welcome to state their views on threads they find interesting, but there is no reason why any one topic should be discussed, or discussed in a way that is NOT one-sided. Sure, it would stimulate discussion if multiple POV’s were expressed. I just don’t like the insinuation that any relationship or any thread is entitled to anything. That’s my main point.
In my professional life I actually work in gender issues and addressing social norms around toxic masculinities. I manage research projects on combatting gender based violence, especially intimate partner violence. These are issues I care deeply about and I personally don’t interpret the CS relationship as a toxic relationship. Of course there are things you can find to be problematic, every ship on the show is problematic. I am not saying that the way you interpret their relationship is wrong, it’s just different from how I interpret it.
See, this sort of thing would be interesting to discuss for sure. I don’t mind that you and I have different opinions. I just don’t like the labels and name calling that’s been going on around here – started by others, not you. I’d enjoy discussing these things with you, but I’ll also stand behind my opinions and most importantly, I will not be silenced and I will not apologise for my viewpoints.
As for things being personal, you do have my empathy. I had things in this show that felt personal for sure, and I suspect others have too. You may feel let down by the forums and the CS negativity, but some of us feel betrayed by the show itself.
I just dont want this forum to be branded as hate ful or intentionally anti-Hook all because the majority of peopel still floating around here are not fond of him.
But if you really and truly believe that you have genuinely good reasons for not liking him, and by extension, CS (e.g. romanticizing toxic relationships, unhealthy attitudes towards women etc), then why would you NOT want to be seen as anti-Hook? People tend to slap the label “hateful” onto anything that is inconvenient for them – that doesn’t necessarily make it so. There’s a difference between pettiness and disliking something because it conflicts with your values. If it’s the latter, then why “play nice”, just so that the other side won’t be offended?
It’s because you usually have nothing good to say about the CS ship. Sure, you critique other ships, but many times you have good things to say about them as well. You almost never have anything good to say about the CS relationship.
This is because the show promotes the heck out of the relationship; we’re told repeatedly on the show that they’re the most romantic thing since Romeo and Juliet. So why repeat the rhetoric? It’s like with Snowing – they don’t get much fanfare because they don’t need it – the show does it all for them. The problems with Hook and Emma’s relationship are not acknowledged by the show, hence all the discussion.
And, since I see a lot of it in this particular SF thread, where you continue to praise the show’s earlier seasons and how it used to be good when Neal was with Emma and how now the show isn’t good anymore etc, it comes off like you just will never even consider liking CS’s relationship bc Hook just isn’t Neal.
Logical fallacy. You’re equating correlation with cause. The show was simply better written in the earlier seasons, and that’s just when Emma happened to be with Neal. Many people loved S1 the best, and we didn’t even know about Neal in S1.
To me, these characters can’t do anything right anymore in many of your eyes. Just something to chew on…
A subconscious bias is quite likely, but is just as likely to work both ways. You yourself admitted a few days ago that you were probably more forgiving of Emma and Hook’s actions as the Dark Ones than you were of Rumple. If you check out the CS thread, there is quite a bit of rhetoric in there at the very end which suggest a very strong pro-CS subconscious bias. We all have them, and the best we can do is construct thoughtful arguments to back up our positions.
Some people will believe anything they’re told. Maybe water fluoridation affects them quite profoundly? Thank goodness OUAT isn’t propaganda with a nefarious purpose, that’s all I can say.
It’s too late now, as the show’s almost over, but it would have been cool to channel all of these thoughts into an actual campaign. We could have composed letters with these exact same arguments and sent them to the network or producers. I’ve heard of this sort of thing being done, and actually making a difference. It would be a heck of a lot more effective than a twitter campaign. Nor would it take significantly more effort than composing these posts. I love the discussions on here, but they do tend to get a bit insular. All these pages and pages of insight and argument (expressed very eloquently for the most part), and the only people reading them are forum visitors. Anyway, I’ll see if I can find any links of such stories.
Blame the writers that they chose to have Killian and Robin’s grave very close to each other.
We do blame the writers. If you actually read this thread carefully, that’s what people are criticising. The WRITING of the characters which perpetuates what we consider harmful social stereotypes. If Hook and Emma were written in a healthy manner, we’d be on board. So perhaps instead of jumping on anyone who expresses any slight anti-CS sentiment, or branding people as “bitter”, try going back and actually trying to understand what people are arguing.
On a different note, I notice that @thedarkonedearie resurrected the CS thread, trying to stimulate some positive discussion. That was seven hours ago. But instead of having a constructive discussion on there about a ship that you love, you are choosing to frequent the “anti-CS” thread, engaging all of the “bitter” people in petty arguments. Why is that I wonder?
I’m hoping it’s because the von Trapp family falls through a portal from fictional 1938 Switzerland into Storybrooke – because, why not?
I think we all know that. @Slurpeez gave a much more detailed and thought out response on the psychological and biological mechanisms of empathy than I could, but the point is that, yes we can take a step back and recall that she’s a fictional character, but humans have been using fiction to hack their brain and emotions probably since we developed symbolic language, so I wouldn’t necessarily dismiss the legitimacy of people getting genuinely invested in the well being (or lack thereof) of a fictional character (this is, originally, sort of the meta-point of OUAT, no? That fictional characters feel just as real to us as living ones.)
True, although I think I kind of get what @hjbau is trying to say. But again, this begs the question: if people deeply care about Emma, if they see themselves in her, then why in heaven’s name do they think her current relationship is good for her? Is this seriously what they’d want for themselves? For people they care for? If Emma was their sister or friend, would they honest to goodness look at her and think she’s happy? As @Slurpeez said, I can’t help but watch OUAT and think, “No wonder society has problems with gender equity and healthy relationships!”
Well, it’s nice that all of us Once fans have something in common isn’t it? We’re bitter about CS, you’re obviously bitter about “Queen Queen shoving her face all over the place”. Let’s all be bitter together – just be nice to each other is all.
Although I have to say I love the B.I.T.T.E.R in here over the focus on CS. I mean this place is literally the only place online where anti CS fans are located(must be why it’s so dead compared to other places) but aside from that this has been something on the show for 5 seasons.
Dead or not, I still think this forum is awesome because of the quality and depth of the discussions we have here.
Yall should have just accepted it in S3, but instead here we are end of S6 and still can’t let it go. And so b.i.t.t.e.r
Well, I have tried meditating on it for many years now, but acceptance hasn’t arrived yet. What is one to do?
