I’m really disappointed man, I was earnestly hoping that there could be some intelligent dialogue between us. So I disagree with your viewpoint and you decide to automatically discount me as being unable to “get it” and not being worth your time? Is it because I’m not intelligent enough to comprehend your ideas that others seem so quick to grasp? That’s both rude and I hope inaccurate!
Or is it that in order to understand where you’re coming from, one has to have a background of experiences which I obviously lack. If this were the case, then you clearly have a form of life that is so utterly alien from my own that there can be no meaningful communication between us. Your ideas would literally be rendered incoherent in the public forum of thought that I come from because such a public forum is predicated on common understanding. Apparently one of us has a set of experiences that is so utterly alien to the rest of the human race that they must not even belong to the same species (Oh God…I think I just outed myself.) If it’s true that your viewpoint can only be understood by one who has a specific set of experiences, then you have no right to expect it to hold any weight in public because it’s literally incoherent to everyone else. I don’t think that’s the case however, and I hope you’ll change your mind on it as well.
I did read the article you linked me, and here’s my response:
Yes, you just need to get over it.
Schopenhaur once made the analogy that human interaction is like two porcupines trying to breed. The porcupines have nothing but good will towards each other, but it’s a simple brute fact of their biology that they’re going to poke each other now and again while they’re at it, and not in the good way. Likewise, when human beings interact in this big complex society of ours, there is bound to be some misunderstandings and hurt feelings.
Am I happy that some people looked at the Derpy scene and were legitimately offended by it? No, I think that’s really unfortunate that they were. They made a honest mistake and were reacting against what they perceived to be a social injustice. As I’ve exhaustively argued however, because Studio B and Hasbro had absolutely no intention to speak out against the mentally handicapped, interpretations of the Derpy scene as offensive are completely meaningless. There is no bad guy to be defeated here, no ignorant hate message to be dispelled. There’s just a grey pony with a funny voice that some people took to be retarded.
I dislike how Hasbro reacted because I feel it vindicated ignorance. You say in your article that leaving the Derpy scene up would have reinforced a hurtful stereotype. The exact opposite is true. By taking it down, Hasbro validated the soccer moms’ original thesis “Any depiction of clumsy, ditzy behavior is a slight against the mentally disabled and should be taken down” Suddenly it’s become a little less safe for cartoons anywhere to depict clumsy, ditzy behavior, which is kind of a staple of cartoons. The fight against discrimination wasn’t aided in the least by this, all it did was allow some people to go on thinking a perfectly innocent cartoon character was evil and piss off a few thousand bronies.
Is it a good thing that misunderstandings like the Derpy situation occur? Of course not. Is it a neccesary evil? Yes, because the only way to get rid of it is to get rid of human interaction all together. And you know, that’s exactly what’s happening in modern society and one of the things that is so wrong with it. People are so scared of misunderstanding that they’re beginning to stifle human interaction altogether. Everyone is always so careful when they say something, always sure to hedge their words in “I think”s, and “It’s my opinion”s. People are so terrified that, God forbid, something they say might accidentally offend someone else that they’re starting to stop talking altogether. That’s what the Derpy situation was, terror and censorship all for a simple misunderstanding.