There is no such thing as "socially damaging works of fiction"

[Paper Machete]

This stuff works by association and exposure. If something is presented as neutral or positive across many different works regardless of context or what that work is about then you will begin to internalize it as normal. (This is basically how product placement is meant to work as well.) It's not a question of which specific piece is damaging but what has been repeated across many works that may have a degenerative effect.

Stories are de facto meant to be manipulative. So as always, you are not immune to propaganda.

 

[Fount of BadSpeak]

This is an interesting topic. I think that there are damaging works of fiction, not because the fiction "makes" people act badly, but rather that the fictional stories inspire people to indulge in their worst excesses, though they obviously had the urge to act like that before consuming the fiction. The damaging aspect comes from people utilizing a piece of fiction as an excuse to act like subhumans, rather than the fictional media somehow magically corrupting someone into acting a certain way. Meaning, the school shooter who played Call of Duty was always a murderous lunatic, and was going to kill people anyways. The troon who watches anime was always a freak, and would have been a sexual predator regardless of whether they consumed anime. The furry was always an animal fucker, regardless of whether he would have had access to Disney or not.

Take metal versus rap, for an example. Metal oftentimes has awful themes, from war, to murder, to insanity, to cannablism, and more, but overwhelmingly the creators and the audience for this music does not indulge in these activities, as it is agreed upon that it is edgy for emotional catharsis, not to inspire action. Meanwhile, rap has awful themes, revolving around promiscuity, drug use, murder, robbery, and more, and it is very common for the creators and the audience to indulge in these behaviors, as they very much want to indulge in these behaviors. Metalheads are usually pleasant people to be around, and their concerts are surprisingly friendly, all things considered, whereas rap fans are awful, and their concerts are awful, in no small part because the audience uses the fictional music as a pretext to indulge in degenerate behaviors.

Where this becomes more murky is when pieces of fiction are crafted specifically to try to inspire people to act in a certain way, or support a certain cause, such as the tv show A Handmaid's Tale, or the Netflix special Adolescence. The former is oftentimes cited as a prophetic story about how women are one lost election from being turned into rape slaves for evil YT men, and the latter is cited as "proof" of how dangerous young white men are. This is despite the former story resulting in women being breeding servants because humanity is going extinct, and the latter being "inspired" by a story of a nigger nogging and murdering a white girl. Or, to take it further, you can look at the many pieces of fiction that are historical fiction, but present themselves as historically accurate to try to trick people into thinking that every white nation and white person was actually secretly brown all along. See: Vikings, Cleopatra, Kingdom Come Deliverance 2, Queen Charlotte a Bridgerton Story, etc. Many people now legitimately believe that white people were actually browns, white nations don't exist, and use that as justification for white replacement, in no small part because fiction has relentlessly presented white history as not being white.

I also do not think most people actually believe that fiction and reality are inherently separate, as many people turn into church moms once the topic of porn of any variety comes up, and they firmly do not think fiction is just fiction in those cases. The reality is that people want to encourage fiction they like, and discourage fiction they dislike, and they will use whatever justifications necessary to push that. Basically, my fiction is based, redpilled, and awesome, whereas your fiction is degenerate, subhuman, and possibly even treasonous.

 

[skykiii]

I don't know how to even argue with this.

Here's an idea:

"Well, I checked the stats, and it turns out crime rates went up after the first rap song!"

"Well, that convinces me!"

Instead I'm hearing (not just from you) a lot of platitudes about how "fiction affects people so obviously, it can be damaging!"

That ain't convincing enough when--as I've mentioned--a lot of times these points are brought up to advocate the media in question being censored or destroyed.

What part of "if you're gonna clamour for something's destruction, you should prove it needs to be destroyed first?" is hard to understand?

@Basic Blond Boy

You clearly put a lot of thought into this and it deserves a longer response. For now though, what I can manage is this:

For a lot of your post, I feel like there's an issue of misdirected blame. You mention creators on social media, for example.

Now... personally, I do see social media and the rise of the internet as being a problem. And you could say that these people being popular authors is what got them an audience, sure. But the real problem there is people being way more connected than we need to be.

I grew up in the eighties and nineties, and back then we never got to hear what the people who wrote our books or made our cartoons thought (unless they were Michael Crichton, whose books are literally unsubtle essays disguised as stories). Indeed, case in point: I watched Ren and Stimpy as a kid, so did a lot of people I knew... how many of us knew what kind of a shit-hole John K was behind the scenes?

Going to the logic I've been espousing, I find it useful to find a point where things changed. Did more shootings happen after Doom released? Yes, but not immediately, and for a long time they were rare. So if we're going with the modern belief that they happen daily now* then I would say social media and political polarization had more to do with it than Doom ever did.

*This is before you get into that the stats on school shootings are cooked by people with an ideological axe to grind, who do things like "counting an accidental discharge at a police academy as a school shooting" to inflate the numbers.

As for rap music... you yourself called it a "conspiracy theory."

@Fount of BadSpeak You posted JUST as I was gonna hit "reply" so I'm gonna have to get to you later, once offline business is done.

 

[Basic Blond Boy]

@skykiii I think part of the miscommunication here is that you are saying most of KF wants these things banned, when the boards you are speaking of are mostly just looking at trends. The threads are more structured as observations of people letting media influence them, rather then hard bans.

Now... personally, I do see social media and the rise of the internet as being a problem. And you could say that these people being popular authors is what got them an audience, sure. But the real problem there is people being way more connected than we need to be.

My point in that section was that we now have the under-the-hood look of entertainment, which heavily changes the dynamics of how people see the medium.

I used Nickelodeon as it is a pretty just example. If you were a parent, and you just got word that this show your child is watching was written by a pedophile, would you not be cautious of what is in the material or how it may impact your child? I think most reasonable people would look into or go back and see if there were little hints they missed, maybe even be a little horrified as to how something so blatant completely bypassed the radar, if not normalized it to them.

Reminder, above was a series made for children that most didn’t see anything wrong with or know about till recently.

As for the Steven example, if you tell people the message of your story is “xyz,” then don’t be surprised when the takeaway is disgust for “xyz.” Maybe in the 80s and 90s something like Steven would pass under the radar, but in current year, with creators actively posting their weird philosophies and politics using franchises they write, it is no longer the case. You cannot post like below and expect it to not totally change people’s perceptions of a work.

Doesn’t matter if Absolute Batman is non political, the character is now associated with I.C.E. Agents getting killed because Daniel here is using his work to promote this idea.

Going to the logic I've been espousing, I find it useful to find a point where things changed.

This is a near impossible thing to prove in any numerical sense. Fiction is not real like a group, and its effects are not fully understood. However the ideals it and its creators hold are real, and it is smart to at least hold some skepticism over what you are consuming. In terms of this thread and the others, what we can look at is general trends in people and how said trends may have origins in works.

For your furry example, Lola Bunny has been held up by furries forever as the awakening. If there was a theoretical ground zero, it was Space Jam just going off of general watch and places like /co/, Tumblr, DeviantArt, etc.. There is no full way to prove how media impacts individuals, but you can get an idea based on how people act around it.

If you want my opinion on why there is a rise in media dependence and what timeframe, I would argue a soft launch in the 00s, a pick up of traction in the early 10s, before full blown clown world in 2016 and beyond.

The 00s are characterized by Bush, which was where a lot of fiction like The Daily Show and South Park were starting to overstep boundaries in what is comedy vs fact/lecture - matched with terms such as South Park Republican coming into existence in 01. 08 propelled things further as economically devastated Millenials would cling to their childhoods as a coping mechanism over the lack of upwards mobility. This was followed by Obama being the president with the most ties to Hollywood, beginning to heavily mix celeb culture with politics.

Early 2010s was the rise of geek culture. Arguably Disney propelled it after purchasing Star Wars and Marvel, killing the Comic Book Guy image. With no shame for geekdom, it was allowed to expand to the point it is now.

2016 and beyond is all the above + further societal damage kicking in. Dems are now heavily tied in with Hollywood and consistently use them for the party. Now de-stigmatized franchises have been repurposed for promoting nu-Dem ideology starting with GhostBusters (2016). People in general are much more segmented and broken, leading to further dependence on IPs - accelerated post-Covid. Economics is has also gotten worse the past 5 years, adding more dependence on escapism.

 

[umseriously]

From a Christian perspective, you're right. Jesus literally states that what goes into a heart cannot corrupt it. Only what comes out of it. But you won't see anyone here or elsewhere bring up that position. The west views it as corruption contrary to what the Bible says. Very interesting that.

 

[Smoltine Kiminal]

As for rap music... you yourself called it a "conspiracy theory."

something being a theory does not mean it is not true
gravity is a theory too, relativity is a theory, ...
this thread itself proposes a theory

glorifying behaviour will cause children to grow up with a favorable view of certain behaviour
this stuff is extremely basic, children learn about the world by their perception of it, and media can warp perception
read through this thread and you will find many false preconceptions that where caused by viewing media
https://kiwifarms.st/threads/silly-things-you-used-to-believe-as-a-child.182/
the only reason you cant understand this is the meds you are on
they suppress weaker interconnections of your synapses, decreasing your capacity for critical thought

what goes into a heart cannot corrupt it. Only what comes out of it.

that just means that i can watch media/propaganda created with evil intent without falling to evil
it doesnt mean noone falls to it
it means "just following orders" is not a valid reason to do evil
it means humans have agency, and are responsible for what they do, no matter what
>bob loved the heroics and brotherhood fighting evil terrorists in american war movie 2341
>bob joins up with the army, deploys to the middle east
>bob is ordered to raid houses of civilians who might or might not be terrorists
>bob is a good guy, he doesnt shoot any of them, unlike his comrades
>bob develops ptsd
bobs heart is still uncorrupted, even if hes traumatized

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

Here's an idea:

"Well, I checked the stats, and it turns out crime rates went up after the first rap song!"

"Well, that convinces me!"

Instead I'm hearing (not just from you) a lot of platitudes about how "fiction affects people so obviously, it can be damaging!"

That ain't convincing enough when--as I've mentioned--a lot of times these points are brought up to advocate the media in question being censored or destroyed.

What part of "if you're gonna clamour for something's destruction, you should prove it needs to be destroyed first?" is hard to understand?

We're a bunch of autists talking shit, we ain't going to ban or destroy anything.

Anyways if you want a good of societal harm coming from a single piece of work, looks up "Into the Wild" and the dumbasses who died following it.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

 

[skykiii]

Anyways if you want a good of societal harm coming from a single piece of work, looks up "Into the Wild" and the dumbasses who died following it.

So a bunch of terminally dumb people Darwin Awarded themselves.... what's the "societal harm" again?

(Actually, joking aside.... this is another side to the "harmful media" question: Maybe it should be okay if media does indeed filter out idiots from society)

@SSj_Ness (Yiffed) example is interesting because....

Let me ask: what happens when something has the exact opposite of its intended effect?

Like imagine tomorrow, an alien race puts out a movie about how they would be so much better at ruling us and we should just let us colonize them. Harmful message, of course... but now imagine that the human race's reaction is "okay, they just admitted they want to rule us, time to arm up and build a fleet of Vic Vipers!"

Was it harmful or was it not?

 

[Fek]

HBO's Band of Brothers and Black Hawk Down in 2001 have ruined generations of men into thinking the that joining the Army into foreverwars would be a good idea.

It's cyclical, too. "Stripes" did the same thing for Army recruitment back in the..80s, I think it was? And that movie is just a comedy.

 

[Smoltine Kiminal]

an alien race puts out a movie about how they would be so much better at ruling us and we should just let us colonize them.

the "aliens" are calling themselves jews

but now imagine that the human race's reaction is "okay, they just admitted they want to rule us, time to arm up and build a fleet of Vic Vipers!"

some humans have that reaction, but they are in the minority
others, like you, dont notice, and make this stupid thread instead

 

[Rekieta’s Broken Penis]

Statistically, the majority of the audience for any work of fiction turns out just fine. The ones who become some sort of weirdo are a minority, and likely already had something wrong with them.

The majority of people who play russian roulette survive. Obviously you cant point to a particular rap song which ruined black America but when you look at the totality of rap music and associated media, it’s clear that it has a deleterious effect on blacks. Even here in Australia, I see little black abbos and black Africans imitating this “gangster” criminal lifestyle because it’s glorified in media. The fact is that it’s a behaviour learned purely through media because the people in question have no connection to that culture otherwise. That’s clearly visible in the Ed Wunsler character on that show I forgot the name of.

As an aside, are you a fan of animated depictions of children? Is that what this whole thread is really about?

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

@SSj_Ness (Yiffed) example is interesting because....

Let me ask: what happens when something has the exact opposite of its intended effect?

Like imagine tomorrow, an alien race puts out a movie about how they would be so much better at ruling us and we should just let us colonize them. Harmful message, of course... but now imagine that the human race's reaction is "okay, they just admitted they want to rule us, time to arm up and build a fleet of Vic Vipers!"

Was it harmful or was it not?

The intent was harmful, whether or not the intended harm occurred.

Anyway, do you not concede that socially damaging works of fiction exist, like my example? Liberal propaganda, especially targeted towards kids, is absolutely harmful.

 

[ChefKiss]

The Quran is a counterexample

The point where a work of fiction becomes harmful is when you tell people it's a real and true thing that really happened.
Stuff like netflix Adolescence changing details to play into a real world narrative is dangerous

 

[Super Mario Brothers]

Fifty Shades of Gray is something that's very dated by now but it's basically the one fiction that normalized BDSM. Maybe I can stretch it to include Twilight but Twilight mostly influenced the werewolf/vampire fucking genres that take over Wattpad, and also FSOG, but I don't think Twilight itself started the normalized abuse trend like FSOG did.

Maybe you can say yaoi influenced pooning but clearly it doesn't in Japan, and trooning/pooning seemed to be mostly a result of Tumblr. Do fictional characters with zippertits count as fiction?

I thought of answering with 1984 as a joke but it was banned in the USSR, so they clearly thought it would have enough influence there.

Maybe you can stretch farther and say Tiktok, where most of the videos are fictional. (Basically playacting.)

 

[Nicholas Gur]

I thought of answering with 1984 as a joke but it was banned in the USSR, so they clearly thought it would have enough influence there

Using fiction as a trojan horse to expose people to differing philosophy is absolutely a form of propaganda and can be socially damaging to a population. Look at how accepting americans are of interbreeding and abnormal sexualities because they spent their entire lives exposed to media depicting positive examples of mixed race families and sexual degenerates in their movies/tv.

 

[ArnoldPalmer]

What about The Diary of Anne Frank?

 

[Male Idiot]

It's not that a work will immediately turn you into a degenerate, but it can start a trend that can have horrific consequences in the long run, and it's not limited to individual freaks.

Take for example rap music that glorifies being a gangster and how it annihilated black culture. Or films that glorify Hollywood that made capable people burn themselves out there.

Chris-chan isn't even the bottom 10% of Sonic fandom.

I was about to tag you, this thread feels like it was made for you.

I'd argue that entire generations of Germans reading "The Cloud" in schools made the general anti-nuclear sentiment a lot worse.

That and Harry Potter. Disney Adults.

These works cause delayed development and retardation when children are exposed to it.

Rap made niggers even more dumber and more violent.

Now I agree that there is no bad media, just bad media and reader combos.

I read Harry Potter once, I did not become a Redditor.

I saw Space Jam, and I did not become a furry.

I played Doom and I never fedposted a public space.

What I feel that this is a fundamental parenting/development problem, not a media problem.

Age ratings and a good upbringing means that you can enjoy heavy metal without suddenly grabbing an axe and trying to paddle to Bongistan with intent to loot it. Not that I would find Pajeet's London cow dung chest a worthy tribute to Odin anyway...

The problem isn't fiction but retards believing it is real, empowering retarded stramers with it, when instead they shouldn't be taking, heh, literature literally as reality.

 

[skykiii]

The point where a work of fiction becomes harmful is when you tell people it's a real and true thing that really happened.
Stuff like netflix Adolescence changing details to play into a real world narrative is dangerous

This. Exactly. Thank you.

As an aside, are you a fan of animated depictions of children? Is that what this whole thread is really about?

.... Eh?

I can't read your mind, dude, and I'm guessing you have some context I'm not privvy to. Without that I can't understand why "animated depictions of children" would be the real subject of a topic about damaging media. Was there some Charlie Brown controversy I'm not aware of?

 

[Yamaha YM2612]

You should read the Quran and see if you still think this