#because they aren't supposed to matter like that outside of un-sets

[thatonebjp]

I tried to turn some cards from our card game into magic cards

[rametarin]

unpopular opinion: reading a prev post of yours; on paper, if the quote un quote 'noble' hero gets the girl in the end, is that really such a bad thing?

"the main hero fell in love with a woman along his entire, grueling journey to fight the darkness; CLEARLY a male power fantasy"

tis all about writing susie. should only be complaining if said romance is bad writing or they just together because their the main man and main woman of the cast.

Of course it's not a bad thing. It's a simple romantic fantasy that is practically universal, even at least once, among the vast majority of male and female humans- people. The idea of a heroic person rescuing someone and they're a wonderful mate. It's very primal and simple and has a lot of material for a romantic scenario. It's natural.

I don't find it to be a bad thing, a 'toxic' or problematic thing, anything. It's not me that had that stance or opinion. I was just pointing out previous talking points others have had, talking about that ridiculous radfem interpretation of that as misogynistic and demeaning to women/females. It's based on the idea that gendered femininity is passed down as nurture through culture, and stories like that are tantamount to propaganda and indoctrination to "teach" girls to be submissive, weak and Player #2s as humans, prizes to be won (that quote sound familiar to you at all? From any particular media?) or rewards for doing something for wealthy people or society.

Under that interpretation, such gems as, "there is no consentual sex under patriarchy; all women are just suffering various degrees of rape" are sifted to the surface. Under that awful set of lenses, there's no such thing as male/female romance in media, just indoctrination and lies foisted to deceive women and oppress them with a false picture of how the relationships of men and women, "should" work. That's the accusation they levy on basic assed normal mainstream society.

And they make no exception. The Hyborean rescued slave girl becoming fuckbait because that's just the flavor of the media and whom it's geared towards, is considered as objectified and oppressed as the Prince Charming falling in love with the princess and rescuing her from the exciting overwhelming opponent.

The radical feminists that hold this viewpoint, that culture is media is society, and that bad things and bad people occur because, "that society hasn't advanced enough to stop 'rubber stamping these actions with approval," genuinely see themselves as gatekeepers of culture and human interactions, and demand everybody judge and consider if something is bad or good based on their logic, which they take great pains to set up as the orthodoxy, science and irrefutable unless you're as degreed and accredited as the institutions they make for themselves.

Logically speaking, outside radfem hogwash, there's nothing wrong with "and then prince charming and the princess lived happily ever after" for cheap saccharine stories. They're as valid as real art. But they MAKE something wrong with it and really hold down on how it's supposed to be some sort of justification for arranged marriages and holding it responsible as a perpetrator of treating women as property. No matter how flippant or irrelevant. The idea that all bad fiction supports bad culture. Because they see individuals as mere components of a whole, and those whom aren't leaders, as followers, bound by whatever arbitrary logic and rules imposed on their minds unconsciously by their society.

I quite loathe this disgusting and empirically garbage idea.