On this thing called "rape culture"

.

Maq wrote:

.

fwiw, I thought that was an interesting point of view.

Very self doubty at the moment and wasn't sure this was the place. Let me summarise:

My 4yo has gotten into playing Pokémon Go with me so I showed him the cartoon. I immediately felt uncomfortable with the underlying premise of achieving docility/obedience through violence. Pokémon trainers see a Pokémon they want, beat it into submission, and imprison them. After which they become friendly and obedient.

I felt this was a terrible way to illustrate to a young child how to forge a relationship with someone. We teach consent and cooperation in our house - no touching without explicit consent etc - and cheering on Ash and friends was sending mixed messages.

While I don't necessarily agree with your perspective as far as the rape culture aspect goes I do respect it. Even leaving out rape culture the idea of beating a creature into submission to make friends is problematic AF. And probably best to hold off on exposing your kids to that until you can have a frank discussion about it.

MrDeVil909 wrote:

While I don't necessarily agree with your perspective as far as the rape culture aspect goes I do respect it. Even leaving out rape culture the idea of beating a creature into submission to make friends is problematic AF. And probably best to hold off on exposing your kids to that until you can have a frank discussion about it.

Kinda why I deleted it. More an abusive relationship thing I guess although all these things intersect. I was thinking about it in terms of raising my sons to fully respect consent. Plus there's an underlying implication that once someone stops struggling against you and complies they will be happy which I found dodgy as hell.

Honestly, I think Pokemon has more to say about our relationships with animals than between humans. Pokemon are never presented as alt-form humans, or equals. They are presented as wish-fulfillment pets at best, and dangerous vermin at worst. These are not stories that are focused on human enslavement or oppression, at least not in the human-Pokemon relationships.

Robear wrote:

Honestly, I think Pokemon has more to say about our relationships with animals than between humans. Pokemon are never presented as alt-form humans, or equals. They are presented as wish-fulfillment pets at best, and dangerous vermin at worst. These are not stories that are focused on human enslavement or oppression, at least not in the human-Pokemon relationships.

There's at least some problematic elements (like the Pokemon Nursing School from Jessie's backstory) that go past human-like intelligence and go straight to occupational employment. The cross section of animal / human capacity is pretty hard to ignore in comparisons to similar arguments for human enslavement in the past.

I won't deny that the animal relationship aspect is a far bigger theme of the show/world, but there are definitely presentations of human-like capacities in Pokemon throughout. Hell, Meowth is a main character in the show and walks, talks, and interacts like a human the entire time.

In the context of teaching your kids "you can't just take without permission (and expect everything will be peachy)" then I think some pokemon scepticism seems well founded.

I totally take the point that it's also an attitude you want to avoid teaching your male children if you have any kind of eye on combating rape culture. Even if pokemon are purely animals you don't want to be teaching your kids that they are just entitled to take whatever is in front of them. A generalised sense of male entitlement surely underpins rape culture to some (large) extent?

A generalised sense of male entitlement surely underpins rape culture to some (large) extent?

Surely

Yeah that's where I was going with this. There's few consequences in the show for violating the autonomy of another creature. That runs counter to the lessons I'm trying to teach.

Jolly Bill wrote:

I won't deny that the animal relationship aspect is a far bigger theme of the show/world, but there are definitely presentations of human-like capacities in Pokemon throughout. Hell, Meowth is a main character in the show and walks, talks, and interacts like a human the entire time.

Yeah, I was mulling over this most of the day and Meowth specifically occurred to me. He's a fully sentient being who presumably at some stage had the sh*t beaten out of him to get him weak enough to force submission.

As I've thought about it I agree more with Maq's initial point.

Jolly Bill wrote:
A generalised sense of male entitlement surely underpins rape culture to some (large) extent?

Surely

Yep

I don't think a younger child is going to draw a distinction between pokemon, human, and animal. They're all "friends" and are portrayed as much in the show. The first time Stellan (4) saw a pokémon battle he asked "what are they doing". I said they're having a fight and that they like having play fights together. Then Ash captured said pokémon and it became "his". I had to explain that as well. I was not at all happy with that. It felt contrary to everything I'm trying to teach him about violence and consent. You don't make someone "yours" through violence.

MrDeVil909 wrote:
Jolly Bill wrote:

I won't deny that the animal relationship aspect is a far bigger theme of the show/world, but there are definitely presentations of human-like capacities in Pokemon throughout. Hell, Meowth is a main character in the show and walks, talks, and interacts like a human the entire time.

Yeah, I was mulling over this most of the day and Meowth specifically occurred to me. He's a fully sentient being who presumably at some stage had the sh*t beaten out of him to get him weak enough to force submission.

I was under the impression that Meowth was the Caesar the Ape of the pokeworld, waiting for the right moment to lead his oppressed brethren in violent revolution.

Never before has a more salient gif appeared on the internet:

https://i.imgur.com/2wQJOx8.gifv

Yeah, that's funny, uncomfortable and very apropos.

At least he didn't beat her up first.

DanB wrote:

Never before has a more salient gif appeared on the internet:

https://i.imgur.com/2wQJOx8.gifv

#retiredgif.

Maq wrote:

I don't think a younger child is going to draw a distinction between pokemon, human, and animal. They're all "friends" and are portrayed as much in the show. The first time Stellan (4) saw a pokémon battle he asked "what are they doing". I said they're having a fight and that they like having play fights together. Then Ash captured said pokémon and it became "his". I had to explain that as well. I was not at all happy with that. It felt contrary to everything I'm trying to teach him about violence and consent. You don't make someone "yours" through violence.

Yup, more DV than rape, but there is a lot of overlap between the two.

I would think a pokemon becomes "yours" is in the sense a pet dog or cat becomes "yours". It still has autonomy but you are taking on the responsibility of caring for it in exchange for its companionship and aid. Then again we don't exactly promote or encourage people to let or force their pets to fight each other..so it kinda falls apart there. Perhaps then instead it becomes an important conversation about the differences between the virtual and the real, the imagined and the acted, etc?

krev82 wrote:

I would think a pokemon becomes "yours" is in the sense a pet dog or cat becomes "yours". It still has autonomy but you are taking on the responsibility of caring for it in exchange for its companionship and aid. Then again we don't exactly promote or encourage people to let or force their pets to fight each other..so it kinda falls apart there. Perhaps then instead it becomes an important conversation about the differences between the virtual and the real, the imagined and the acted, etc?

A tough concept to explain to a four-year-old.

I think that traditions of fighting animals still survive in parts of Asia, don't they?

It's not exactly an unheard-of activity in the United States. Cockfighting even has its own lobbying effort.

Animal fighting has always been, to me, the pokeparrallel, but you've raised some interesting points on body autonomy, Maq.

Two Texas A&M football coaches suspended after ‘chalk talk’ for women turns sexist

In an attempt to appeal to female fans, the Texas A&M football program hosted a “Chalk Talk For Women” event Thursday. During a presentation, Aggies assistant coaches Jim Turner and Jeff Banks offered both coaching tips and a few alternate lyrics to the school fight song, titled “Aggie War Hymn,” that the women found so offensive the coaches wound up suspended for two weeks. Talk about not knowing your audience. The offending lyrics can be seen here:

-

We are Aggie women
We are filled with estrogen
Hullabaloo, canek, canek, and back again

Maroon & white are the colors we love
We are putting down our dish towels
And taking off our gloves

No more lysol or cascade
We want to score Touchdowns
And walk in the parade

We are Aggie women & this is our song
Come on…bring it on…no more thong
Hullabaloo..caneck..caneck..and so on

Beyond just the reworded song, though, were the previously mentioned coaching tips, which contained a variety of sexually suggestive material. Texas Longhorns beat writer Anwar Richardson of Rivals.com and OrangeBloods.com tweeted out images from a slideshow of the “instructional” material.
IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Coj19quUEAA2ffQ.jpg)
IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Coj2DmwUsAAL21k.jpg)
IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Coj2LMaUEAAECvw.jpg)
IMAGE(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Coj2Z6JVUAAYIpy.jpg)

I'm not sure how I see that these guys get off with just a two week suspension. You have two douche bags explicitly promoting rape culture at an event targeted at female fans, and I assume students. I mean, if it was just the song, I could see it. But when you have an entire Power Point dedicated to letting women know their "role" I think you have to eliminate that from the team altogether.

Worse, one of the coaches was hired after being fired from Miami as, "a central figure in the Miami Dolphins bullying scandal of 2012."

Turner was aware of the running "joke" that Player A was gay, and on at least one occasion, he participated in the taunting. Around Christmas 2012, Coach Turner gave the offensive linemen gift bags that included a variety of stocking stuffers. The gifts included inflatable female dolls for all of the offensive linemen except Player A, who received a male "blow-up" doll. [Jonathan] Martin and another player reported that they were surprised Coach Turner did this; Martin further said that he was offended that Turner had endorsed the humiliating treatment of Player A by participating in it. Incognito and others agreed that this incident with Coach Turner occurred. When interviewed, Turner was asked if he gave Player A a male blow-up doll. He replied, ‘I can’t remember.’

It's a pretty crappy message they are sending to the team and their fans, in my opinion. i don't know, maybe they are trying to recruit players that were considering Baylor.

Is there honestly anything redeeming about football?

It involves physical activity for the players.

Those images... just... Jesus tap-dancing Christ, what the hell is wrong with people? How did ANYONE create that and think it would be ok?

OG_slinger wrote:

Is there honestly anything redeeming about football?

Honestly? I know plenty of folks who had themselves turn around and made to fly right by their coaches (the potential to be off the team does that). That said, that could be taken up by any sport... the problem being, we're still primates who love bashing into and hurting other primates... or watching it.

That's just... Appalling. I honestly believes it classifies as hate speech, and they should just be perma-banned. Just revolting...

As for American football... Considering how many medical conditions stems from bashing one guy with another... I'm pretty sure the risks outweigh the benefits of the physical activity, LarryC.

I watch a lot of football, but it gets harder to defend everyday.

Eleima wrote:

As for American football... Considering how many medical conditions stems from bashing one guy with another... I'm pretty sure the risks outweigh the benefits of the physical activity, LarryC.

Yeah, there are plenty of sports that involve physical risk, but I haven't heard of anything with the level of long term brain injury that football has. Partly because the protective gear is so good at what it does that there is not need for circumspection by the players when it comes to taking an impact.