She-Ra and the Princesses of Power

[Darth Wedgius]

Ever start a thread that you think is going to be people discussing a show about magical Princesses and talking horses, and it just spirals out of all control in a completely different direction?

So about the My Little Pony Thanksgiving Special...

[phantom000]

Ever start a thread that you think is going to be people discussing a show about magical Princesses and talking horses, and it just spirals out of all control in a completely different direction?

So about the My Little Pony Thanksgiving Special...

Yeah, this thread is less then a month old and its already in the running for 'most active topic on the forum,' seriously there are threads that have been here for almost a year and have half as many replies...

So here is my pitiful attempt to get this back on track...

The thing about a remake is that you have to balance 'staying true' with 'new direction.' You can't just put a fresh coat of paint on the original, but if you change everything then why call it a remake to begin with?

She-Ra and MLP have an easier time of it because the original source material was rather high-concept; in that they did not have much of a direction. The characters are little more than archetypes and so you can do almost anything with them. Aside from the lore, He-man and She-ra are one of those cartoons that actually had some well thought out lore, there is nothing in the setting that can't be reworked.

That is what i had going into this series and now that i have finished the first two episodes, i kinda like it. I enjoy how they worked some of the details from the original into the new show, like when she kicks the punching bag. The characters seem well handled, adding depth to a lot of the original concepts. Bow is the cool headed soldier who always has a trick in his quiver, but he knows when he is in over his head, Glimmer is a competent fighter but has a lot to learn about combat and leadership, i loved the part where she turns to Adore and practically begs her to take the sword back, its a nice character moment but i wish they had set it up a little more when she spoke with her mother. Adora has that strong righteous streak in her, like she is supposed to, but it's tempered by the fact that she is, for the moment, out of her league and handling forces that she does not understand and therefore cannot entirely control.

Still, it's kind of annoying when people keep saying how 'this is war' yet they don't act like this is a war. Like when Angelica tells Glimmer she's grounded, I face palmed. You are telling me she lead troops into a combat situation, lost a battle against the horde, you recall her, all the way to the capitol and then you send her to her room? I would have preferred that she took Glimmer off active duty and sent her back for retraining. I guess it is kinda like nitpicking, but it annoys me when a character who is supposed to be in the military does not act like they are in the military. Like when they attack the village, if I was Adora i would have found who ever was in charge and ordered them to break off the attack and return to base, I mean she is supposed to be a Horde Captain, right?

[Karha of Honor]

Now we just need this for trans kids.

I mean, the show's creators wouldn't be looking forward exactly to the ungodly firestorm of butthurt it'll provoke, but that's nothing new and they've already pretty clearly shown they're not the type to back off on that account - so I'd be genuinely surprised if nobody's ever put their hand up in a writers meeting and said "So hey, idea, Flutterina is trans, what do you reckon?"

(That's not a spoiler, I haven't heard anything - I just added MOTUC Flutterina to my collection a couple weeks back so she's been on my mind.)

Netflix is nice filthy slut giving bj's to bith sides. it's hilarious if this is a front to distract from the Michael Bay mega movie they are working on or some other petentially unwoke stuff like that Jared Leto Yakuza movie was.

No, they aren't, because trans kids who are forced into the closet kill themselves before puberty. Kids are definitely treated as if they are straight, and plenty of wholesome kids cartoons are full of straight romances and straight narratives.

Some children won't sit in line with various social norms, for whatever reason, which can result in them being treated incredibly badly; society has a poor track record of that and other children can be particularly vicious. What I don't agree with is that there's any real identity of the sort you described at that age, straight, gay, trans, whatever. You're projecting adult viewpoints and senses on to children. Children are not small adults. I don't think there really is such a thing as a childhood romance for that matter, not in the way adults understand the word, although children will ape adult behaviour. Two boys might give each other a hug, and that wouldn't appear on TV - you'd get rabid lunatics screaming "gay children on TV! End of the world!" at that yet the children themselves wouldn't understand what the fuss was all about simply because it wouldn't really mean anything to them.

When they get a bit older - still children, say early teens, that starts to change, that's when curiosity about all sorts starts to appear and whilst you can probably get some idea of someone's eventual orientation at that stage it's not going to be all that much more reliable than just playing the odds. A boy might sneak on his mum's or sister's dresses when there's no-one around for example. Maybe it'll be something he stays with, maybe not. It's not a good idea to read too much in to it, although as above if other kids find out they'll probably make his life miserable about it (and so will some adults), and that's a problem.

What % of your type of trans activists is fine with madatory education?

Riedquat, nobody assumes that kids are too young to know they're straight or cisgender. Society actively pushes that on them, yet when somebody says "maybe this kid should be allowed to wear a dress instead of a suit if they don't feel comfortable in boy clothes", people act like it's a radical SJW feminist agenda being pushed on an innocent child instead of the child not being forced to be somebody they aren't.

Kids aren't straight or anything else. They're just children. Sure, there are social norms involved and some differ whether they're a boy or girl (there are also plenty of others which having nothing to do with that), although the very idea that one particular set of clothing is more comfortable for someone than another, other than the obvious aspects like "does it fit", is only possible by acknowledging and accepting them anyway. But the point I'm trying to make is that questions of gender identity are really meaningless before puberty.

No it's not, got punched and punched people way more before puberty than most girls did it.

[Riedquat]

Has your quoting gone a bit awry? I can't figure out how you're replying to my post there.

[Riedquat]

What I don't agree with is that there's any real identity of the sort you described at that age, straight, gay, trans, whatever.

Citation needed.

That cuts both ways.

[Worffan101]

What I don't agree with is that there's any real identity of the sort you described at that age, straight, gay, trans, whatever.

Citation needed.

That cuts both ways.

As far as current science knows, gender and sexuality are rooted in some combination of genes on the sex chromosomes. Sexual physical characteristics are caused by hormone release coded for in what I think is called the SRY gene and a couple other factors--there is such a thing as XY and XX gonadal dysgenesis, where you can get XX males and XY females, very rare but happens. It's currently thought, based on brain scans and some poorly-corroborated genetic analysis, that gender identity is rooted in nearby genes to some extent.

Gay and bi people are much more common, and given that there are numerous cases of homosexual animals recorded, and bonobos seem to be pansexual-normative, it's entirely possible that there's a "gay gene" or genes that's a perfectly normal part of human biology, but there really hasn't been anywhere near enough testing to make definitive statements on the matter other than "it appears that sexuality is genetic".

The problem comes in when a gay kid grows up in a heteronormative society and has no frame of reference for their budding emotions, esp. during puberty (which is hard enough already lol).

[RobbyB1982]

I just put that guy on ignore the moment I realized the sort of attitudes he was posting. Sure it won't stop him from posting it but at least I won't have to view it. I'm hoping that if everybody does that he'll go away, since he'll have nobody to debate.

There's an ignore option?

*investigates, adds transphobe that hates the show clearly not targetted at him he's in the thread discussing to "foe" list*

Much better!

[Karha of Honor]

Has your quoting gone a bit awry? I can't figure out how you're replying to my post there.

Talking to me?

[Riedquat]

Has your quoting gone a bit awry? I can't figure out how you're replying to my post there.

Talking to me?

Yes

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

What I don't agree with is that there's any real identity of the sort you described at that age, straight, gay, trans, whatever.

Citation needed.

That cuts both ways.

So? All I have hear is your vague assertion that kids AREN"T old enough to be straight or cisgender as well as gay, bi, or trans. I need a little more than your "well I don't think that way", especially because your vague opinion has to go up the lived experiences of flesh-and-blood queer people.