I've Come To The Conclusion That Antis Think About Pedophilia And Children Being Involved In Sex Way,

I've come to the conclusion that antis think about pedophilia and children being involved in sex way, way more than proshippers do.

Ok so...I've been thinking: is it true that there's an actual irredimable media?

IMO media is only truly bad when its specifically intended to cause harm or is just a blatant act of bigotry. Media is media. Media is supposed to tell a story, invoke thought, express things. Such things don't need redemption.

I mean I'll be blatantly honest and say after watching A Serbian Film I just... Didn't get it. If there was a message within it beyond the corrupt and horrific world of extreme pornography then it was lost on me. But assuming that was the message, the film did its job well. It told a story. The things shown in the film are the story. Contrary to my view, most people think its a horrific and damning piece of media that needs to be outlawed and everyone involved shot on sight.

Unless a piece of media was just a flagrant display of bigotry or something truly intended to be blatantly offensive with no ulterior goal, thinking of media as something that needs to be redeemed is just... Pointless, honestly.

JoJo Rabbit, for example. Many people were outraged that such a terrible era was turned into a slashy comedy, but those people also missed the very important messages conveyed in the movie. Does the film owe them redemption, or do they owe the film self-reflection?

You're allowed to feel sad, disappointed or lose some interest in a character because its no longer played by a specific actor or character.

(Obviously not talking about blatant racism here. Derail this and I'll scream.)

But I mean like. I see people shitting all over anyone who is losing interest in The Witcher because Henry Cavill is no longer Geralt, but at the same time actors will all have very unique ways of portraying the same character, and its perfectly fine to not feel the same way about how a different actor portrays or visualises the same character.

If you prefer the story and portrayal of Steve Rogers' Captain America over Sam Wilson's Captain America, that's fine! They're two completely different stories under the same mantle. You can absolutely respect the story and message of Sam Wilson's Captain America while still preferring the one Steve Rogers' Captain America told.

If you're in love with the way Henry Cavill depicts Geralt, you're not a bad person who holding onto that and choosing not to devalue Liam Hemsworth's interpretation by forcing yourself to consume media you no longer have a vested interest in.

Spider-Man is another prime example. While the core values and details of the Spider-Men stay the same, the specific stories and characters of each Spider-Man are supposed to be different. They're supposed to fit the narrative being told and the larger framework of the universe they are set in.

So many people hated on Tom Holland's Spider-Man because he wasn't the 'OG gutter rat broke bitch' but like. For one, we do actually see those aspects in the story still (Peter taking dumped items off the sidewalk, his small room, stressing about money and replacing things, ect) and for another, he's meant to be different because Spider-Man with The Avengers is different to Spider-Man alone.

Its meant to be a different depiction of the same character.

Its fine not to like one or to prefer the other but it doesn't make it bad media or a bad thing either way.

If your comfy feelings and nostalgia are still more important the rights of human beings to simply exist, buy fanmade merch. Buy merch secondhand off resale sites. Stop buying directly from the source, stop buying licensed material which directly lines her pockets.

Pirate the fucking movies instead of streaming them directly and racking up numbers that keep her shit in profit.

another reminder to stop buying/watching/reading anything JK Rowling associated

If buying anything related to Harry Potter can be harmful because the creator can use the money to support bad things, why is it still famous? Why people still like it?

Because people are selfish and don't like being told what to do or being told they're making a bad choice.

When it first started coming out that JK Rowling was a bigot, people immediately began to use their own comfort and happiness as a defense for her actions and supporting her.

"Well Harry Potter made my childhood happy so I don't care what she does!" was a prominent argument.

People still like it because they can't separate their enjoyment of it from the reality of what Harry Potter is and who JK Rowling is. Its still famous because in its prime it was a fucking massive franchise. It held a monopoly on the movie market. It boomed. You can't just erase that kind of fame, especially when people still cling to it.

I can tell people until they're blue in the face that the money they give JK Rowling by purchasing licensed Harry Potter merch or streaming Harry Potter on official platforms or attending Harry Potter world or any of the other 38474 ways she's milked that cow for money that they're directly allowing her to keep funding these anti-trans movements and giving her a platform to spread hate but I can't actually make people do anything.

People have to stop being selfish enough to recognise that the issues and bigotry JK Rowling is perpetrating are far more important than the cozy little feelings they get from Harry Potter. People have to make the choice between their own feelings and the literal rights of human beings to exist and receive medical care, jobs, legal rights, ect.

Characters do not have to be redeemable.

I'm so, so sick of people absolutely trashing media and characters because they never get reformed or redeemed or become 'good.'

That's the whole fucking point, sometimes. That that character is bad. Characters who are genuinely, down to the bone, rotten to the core bad are part of the narrative too. They're valid too.

You're meant to hate them. You're meant to think of them as awful, evil people, because they are.

Narrative and story and development you disagree with doesn't inherently mean its bad or wrong.

Characters who balance between good and evil and ultimately choose evil are not storytelling failures. They're a narrative and story in their own right. They had the choice. They chose evil. That's the story. That's the narrative.

Media is predictable enough as it is. Pigeon-holing it even further by dictating that characters can't simply be bad or become bad is not the solution.