Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Source
not provided yet
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
No description provided.
I take it you are new here, don’t necro a dead argument.
Edited
Your problem seems to be a lack of reading comprehension, he answered you already, you think that there is a clear point where everyone will agree that a fictional thing crosses a point where it’s too messed up, where saying “it’s not real, get over yourself” isn’t a defendable position.
This is wrong because it assumes that everyone has the same set of morals, that everyone even agrees that something that isn’t real can go “too far”.
It isn’t sick or morally wrong to derive entertainment from the suffering of something that doesn’t exist, mainly because you’re not actually causing a living being that suffering. You can say that’s messed up but we don’t have to agree with you.
I don’t have to answer an argument that isn’t even an argument about my point
No, he missed my point, someone can see something as messed up and still like it but he’s acting like people will see it as messed up and not like it or be okay with it.
Nobody’s missed your point. The problem is that your point makes no sense at all.
#71B2 pointed out some incredibly obvious problems with your argument. Please answer them, because I really want to understand how you can think that something that is not real can be objectively wrong.
You know what, this is stupid, you seem to have messed my point and just keep on with pushing you on point…
Okay, the first problem here is that you are arguing for an absolutism. You keep arguing that there is a point where everyone must agree that occurrences of fantasy are wrong, and that accepting this position somehow means you are in your right mind. This is highly comedic, considering this conversation is occurring in a place that is dedicated to MLP:FiM, where many of its members are considered abhorrent in general society for liking a show targeted at young girls. So how can we accept your position for which is right and wrong in fantasy, considering you have already passed the point many others have already set and thus you “clearly” are not in your right mind, since you have passed that point. 1
Second problem is pointed out when you say, “there are people that doesn’t care if something is real or not and will not hold back, that is what sets apart someone in there right mind for someone that is not”. Which is quite right, but from your wording I suspect that you mean that the people that don’t care if something is real or not is the the person in their right mind. If anything it’s the complete opposite. It likely means that person has difficulty separating fantasy and reality and that is a dangerous issue effecting that individual, but it is an issue of the individual, not of fantasy.
Third problem, “they can identity when something is messes up, it’s not a matter of if they are okay with it being fictional or not,” Actually, if people weren’t able to separate an acceptance of fictional murder from real murder, I’d imagine that we’d either have magnitudes higher murder rate, or sales for action movies and most video games would be non-existent.
Next Problem, “it’s a matter of if they have an understanding that something can go to far, not what they think if to far.” As I have stated before, the point for what is acceptable in fantasy is set by the individual. It is entirely understandable that some people can and do think things can go too far. That does not change the fact that it is still merely a fantasy and that not everyone is going to agree that it does go too far. Being accepting of fantasies past the point others have set, does not mean you are not in your right mind, it just means that you have different tastes or are just open to more things.
Problem #5, “You keep saying how not being real makes it okay no matter what”. Did you not read this? Did you completely miss the examples where I clearly stated group A likes something, group B hates it and that’s okay and then topped it all off with a group C that is cool with everything as long as it remains imaginary? Did I need to pedantically add a group D that hates every fantasy?
Problem #6, “but ignore that it take a person to understand it’s not real”. Again, if a person has difficulty separating fantasy and reality, that is a dangerous issue effecting that individual, but it is an issue of the individual, not of any fantasy.
Problem #7, “they have to identify there is a point where you can’t just say “it’s not real” and that just makes everything okay” To keep from repeating myself more, please consult responses to the first, third and fifth problems.
1 For the sake of the argument I’m assuming you are male
No, there is a point where even if it’s not real it’s messed up, there are people that doesn’t care if something is real or not and will not hold back, that is what sets apart someone in there right mind for someone that is not, they can identity when something is messes up, it’s not a matter of if they are okay with it being fictional or not, it’s a matter of if they have an understanding that something can go to far, not what they think if to far.
You keep saying how not being real makes it okay no matter what but ignore that it take a person to understand it’s not real and that’s the only reason it’s not a problem, they have to identify there is a point where you can’t just say “it’s not real” and that just makes everything okay and understand that telling someone “it’s not real” to justify it is not going to work.
No there isn’t, because that would assume that everyone holds the same ideals as everyone else. That is hardly the case. There are people that thoroughly detest futa, while others love it. Some people get off to graphic depictions of rape, where others find it wholly deplorable. Some people love to sit down and enjoy reading their graphic novel with people being violently ripped apart in explosions, guts hanging out everywhere, where others would be nauseated by the thought of it. Then there are people that find it all perfectly fine, because it’s not real.
That’s a problem, if a point doesn’t exists for them there is something wrong with them, doesn’t matter if it varies from person to person, there is still a point where it’s messed up no matter what.
And you don’t understand that where that point is varies from person to person, if it even exists at all for them.
No, you don’t understand, there is a point where SAYING “it’s fictional” doesn’t cover up how messed up something is, so you saying “Fictional anything is perfectly fine, as nothing is actually damaged” is bull, that fact it’s fictional doesn’t jest make it okay, there is a point where you have to admit it’s messed up even if fictional.
Yes, I’m sick because the fate of fictional things are inconsequential to me. Just like it didn’t bother me when the white house was blown up in “Independence Day”, when the loving couple died at the end of “Pompeii”, or any other fictional happenings to fictional things. People that cannot separate reality from fantasy and work themselves up over the fate of fictional things or the results of fictional actions tend to be the ones with the issues.
@Prof.NightJack
Actually, it’s because it’s fictional that it can be as messed up as it wants to be. That’s one of the joys of fantasy. It can go to any extreme. If it’s something you don’t care for, there is a filter system for that.
There is a point where saying “it’s fictional” doesn’t cover how messed up something is.
…You’re sick…
Why wouldn’t it be? Fictional anything is perfectly fine, as nothing is actually damaged.
So killing cute cartoon characters is okay?
…
I know it is not real. It, however, doesn’t excuse it for making me question the artist’s sanity.
||
You know that never happened, right? They’re fiction. They’re not real.
Edited because: Rule #7
Plus there’s this story that was published the 9 December, 2011 that predates Fluffle Puff and MixerMike’s “fluffy” pony images. It’s image 7407 on fluffybooru.
Even if there were fluffy pony stuff published after MixerMike made his stuff, it should be written off as pure coincidence and they have nothing to do with each other.
It started back when we still had ponibooru, so it’s likely lost unless it’s on a 4chan archive as that where it started, and even when the abuse started the ones of them being hurt by their own actions didn’t just end, in fact I’m sure it actually came after the abuse started.
So, what do you consider the first fluffy pony work, then? I’m pretty sure Mike was the only one drawing them in the three-day pre-abuse era.
Part one of it even prove it. >>24200