Jump to content

Ginger Mint

RP Certified
  • Posts

    2,671
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    43

Everything posted by Ginger Mint

  1. hi hi One person going to eat at a certain restaurant isn't going to make others fail, usually multiple restaurants can succeed simultaneously. The only time a restaurant failing is going to be the terrible is if the people running the restaurant foolishly took the risk when they couldn't bear the loss. Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I shouldn't have given the show the benefit of the doubt. Rather than, "It's good to help strangers, and missing out is ok because you can still enjoy it," Maybe the message really is that "its ok to disregard the feelings of strangers, whether they are little children in some far off city, or whether they are the feelings of someone who doesn't like to be held captive in enclosed spaces, because you'll be rewarded for it." Since that seems to be the lesson people are learning from this episode, I believe I'll have to downgrade my rating of the episode from an amusing, "so bad, its good," to a disappointing "So bad, its horrible." And since that thought makes me sad, I think perhaps I've gotten too emotionally invested in a television show. I'm gonna go walk it off. Ciao.
  2. hi hi Exactly Rosewind, that is why in the context of the episode, Rainbow Dash is doing something wrong. If reality did factor into it, then we could just assume that the disappointment is actually harmless. When taken for what it is, Rainbow Dash is suggesting that it is a good thing to hurt strangers. Then at the end of the episode, we learn that helping a stranger is a good thing. (And Harshwhinny demonstrates that missing out isn't so bad.) However, for about half the episode, the question of "will helping a stranger be bad?" doesn't get asked, which led me to be confused about what was going on.
  3. hi hi See, here's where there is some conflation happening. There's Rainbow Dash's point of view, and then there's reality. In reality, losing out on something trivial like that doesn't hurt anyone, but for the sake of argument, the issue was Rainbow Dash's point of view in the context of the episode. In my experience, the only people who get emotionally traumatized by entertainment are people who have pre-existing emotional issues or who develop an unhealthy obsession. When a soap opera star gets attacked in public because of something their character did in the show, the actor is not the cause of the problem, it is the attacker who has issues. (I am going to refrain from taking the bait and debating world hunger and poverty, because it will quickly become not appropriate for this forum, not because I don't have an answer.)
  4. hi hi 1. I could enjoy an episode about walking down the street if they gave me a reason to think walking down the street was important. 2. If a prestigious set of games involves a regular competition where one side must suffer emotional trauma in order to continue the prestigious set of games' existence, it would be an immoral prestigious set of games. (I can think of some examples of real world organizations that do this, and of course, they invariably believe that their side is more deserving.)
  5. hi hi Some rare exceptions aside, nobody wants to lose. Nobody wants to get stopped by a train either, but most people just accept it as necessary and get over it. It is the people who can't accept it that have issues, especially when they do dangerous things to try to get around it. 1: Rainbow Dash believes the Crystal Empire deserves to win more. This is debatable, but ultimately moot. That reason is never mentioned or addressed ever again in the episode. Nobody mentions it to the games inspector or the not-inspector, and none of the Crystal Ponies show any signs of having issues. 2: If Rainbow Dash was deeply affected by Cloudsdale losing the games in her youth. By choosing to deeply affect someone else, she is doing something that is morally wrong. By her own measure, she is willingly hurting ponies. I cannot abide that. When people are willingly hurting others, I am compelled to hope that they fail. If an institution is willingly hurting its members, that institution needs to be changed.
  6. hi hi There is no reason for Rainbow Dash to remain apathetic in either situation. In fact, if intense disappointment that causes long lasting resentment that lowers someone's quality of life is a possibility, then risk avoidance ought to propel her to even greater lengths to make sure that the competition is safe for both sides rather than perpetuate the cycle. The reason why people can normally get away with sports rivalries is because they are safe. In the NFL there has recently been a couple of important controversies, concussions and bounties. The game is getting increasingly physical as people push the limits further, and now concussions are becoming a serious and regular problem for players. Head injury can cause damage that lasts long after their career is over. As this concern grows, the motivation to make changes to the game itself will also grow, just like what happened in NCAA football. Decades ago, before modern protective gear was around, college football reached a point where serious injuries stopped being a fluke and started becoming par for the course, and the sport came close to being banned. An ultimatum was delivered, 'either people stop dying on the football field, or the game is over permanently.' Similarly with bounties, we expect that one team is going to want to win, and in doing so make the other team lose. However, intentionally trying to injure players and paying players who cause injuries is greatly frowned upon. The rules of the game are written to ensure that it remains as safe as possible for the participants. (See also: Soccer/football fans, riots.) The golden rule is often cited as one of the fundamental cornerstones of morality. Treat others as you would expect to be treated, and conversely, don't treat others in ways that you would not want to be treated. If you want to do your best, hope that your opponent does the same. If you want to sleepwalk through the competition and luck out, hope that your opponent tries the same thing. If you don't want your team to be hurt, don't try to hurt theirs. If you don't want to lose, thats fine as long as you can accept that your opponent also does not want to lose, and you could handle being put in their shoes. Being a sore loser is one of the primary qualities of poor sportsmanship, if not the first one on the list. Not wanting to lose can be a powerful, visceral emotion that can propel people to try harder, but it can actually be detrimental to winning if not balanced by positive motivators. Strong anxiety and worry can prevent people from getting in the zone, relaxing, playing loose and being in confident control. "Getting psyched out, panicking, falling apart," are just a few phrases to describe what happens when fear distracts an athlete from the moment. What qualifies as loss can differ, depending on the individual. If I spend $20 on the Season 1 DVD, I'll miss that $20, but it will have been worth it. For someone who doesn't even like FiM, they probably wouldn't think its worth it. Similarly, waking up in the morning and going to class or work can be painful, but it is typically worth it, even if it is felt it on a regular basis. Does Rainbow Dash think its a serious problem? I couldn't say, the episode wasn't clear on that. However, I have a hard time seeing the disappointment of not being chosen to host the Equestria Games being a life damaging pain. It seems far more likely that it was just idle banter, on the level of trash talk or boasting. (Which again, leaves me rooting for the other guy, as is my tradition.)
  7. Nevar, the clouds will rise again!
  8. hi hi The definition of legitimate pain that I am using is "pain that is damaging." If its not damaging, then its not a big deal. Pain can potentially be a sign of positive growth, "No pain, no gain," or so the saying goes. Trying to protect children from hurt, pain and unhappiness may sound like a good idea to start with, but the reality of it is that kids need to learn through doing, and that necessarily means making mistakes and discovering ways to deal with that. (A very recent study published in the Journal of Child and Family Studies shows that students who reported having over-protective parents also had significantly higher levels of depression and lower levels of satisfaction with life.)
  9. hi hi In general, I find that self destructive habits are a bad thing. If someone gets so invested in a game that losing damages their life, then in my opinion, they are in desperate need of some perspective on life. It is wrong to become so invested that your life suffers from a loss in a system where loss is necessary. Sometimes growing can be painful. Destruction is often painful. Growth is still good, and destruction is still bad. Sometimes which is which is up for debate, sometimes it is very clear cut. I've been a photojournalist for a few years now. I've seen dozens of photos of crying athletes come across my desk. We print them, we put them up for sale, we get angry phone calls and letters, "how dare you?" they ask. Then, a few months later, the photo starts selling like hotcakes and we get letters from the players saying things like, "This is the best photo," and "I don't want to forget this moment." Its like clockwork. At first, I thought it was kind of strange that Dash was the only one to react during the flashback in Cloudsdale, but now I'm thinking that it may have been a subtle hint that Rainbow Dash was taking things too far from the start.
  10. hi hi I have the feeling that we have already covered this ground before. Everyone is different. If the reward does not outweigh the risk for you personally, then don't play the game. Compared to random Joe, fifty grand is nothing to a big casino. Don't bet the farm on a sucker deal with a couple of con artists. If you do and you lose, then you made a bad decision.
  11. hi hi Typically, sports teams do not involve legitimate hurt. The disappointment of losing a game is no big deal, unless you're talking about Roman gladiators or Mayan ballplayers or something, its nothing. You brush yourself off, you get back up, and you are better for the experience.
  12. From the album: Ginger Mint's Thingamajigs

    Cloudsdale rules, the Crystal Empire drools.
  13. Ginger Mint

    Ginger Mint's Thingamajigs

    There be ponies here!
  14. hi hi And when competition involves legitimate hurt, that mode of thinking is wrong.
  15. hi hi While the topic of conversation may have drifted over time, the objection is this: I posted a picture of a little filly in another town being shocked that the Crystal Empire got the Equestria Games. I was told that it was wrong. I countered that, if you are truly concerned about kids being upset, then it is sensible to consider all of them. If Rainbow Dash had been serious about her motivation of not wanting foals to feel upset, the standard answer would be, "Relax, its not a big deal." In the Running of the Leaves, the important part was that they made sure the leaves across Equestria came down, In professional sports, the important part is that the audience is entertained, and in the Equestria Games competition the important part is that a worthy and capable host gets selected. If we're not truly concerned about kids being upset, since it is just a game amongst fans, then I think it is fair to say that I am a Cloudsdale fan. Go Cloudsdale, crush the Crystal Empire! Woo! Cloudsdale fans are totally better than all those Crystal Empire losers, and I'll explain why. • Cloudsdale is in. the. clouds. I mean, seriously, that is way awesome. • They've built an entire city out of a single building material. What? no, crystals don't count. • While sun glasses are cool, you don't need to wear them to appreciate the architecture in Cloudsdale. • The stallions are more handsome, that's a fact. • The Cloudsdale flag has more hues than the Crystal Empire's vaunted "flag of many hues." • Have you ever heard of a pony from the Crystal Empire performing a Sonic Rainboom? • The average pony is over 2/3rds water. And where does that water come from? Cloudsdale. Aww, yeah. • Lightning bolts and Rainbows.
  16. hi hi I've seen lots of people freaking out, but I've never seen M.A. Larson before. Therefore, I am compelled to believe that M.A. Larson does not, in fact, exist. He doesn't even have a first name, just a pair of initials, and as we all know, initials are what secretive government agencies use. Like MI6 or the FBI.
  17. hi hi I'm a competitive person in areas that I know I can compete. When I know that I'm out of my league, I prefer to sit back and watch. Did you mean to say that "if the consequences of sports aren't bearable, then sports are entirely pointless?" (If the consequences of sports are bearable, then no problem.) If, in another time and space, the consequences of sports weren't bearable, then sports would be a detriment. However, in the real world, the consequences of losing are generally trivial, and the rewards are generally excellent. But it is up to the individual to decide whether participation is worth it, not everyone is the same. (There have historically been less savory types of competition, often times involving people who didn't have a choice in the matter or had nothing to lose, competitions that were definitely not just for fun, but there is a good reason why those kinds of competitions are generally frowned upon these days.) It is just fun to be emotionally invested in something for no particular reason, absolutely. Its fun. Right there is an example of a motivation. Its not hard, its understandable. If I asked someone walking down the street, "why are you walking down the street," and they said, "because its fun," that would be totally legit. As I said, actions are not the same thing as motivations. Rooting for a team because you enjoy doing so is perfectly reasonable. Rooting for a team because you hate to see them lose doesn't make sense, its easier to just close your eyes and not watch them play, mission accomplished 100% of the time. Its hard to imagine the latter case though, because nobody in their right mind does that. People like that just stay home and don't like sports, and thats fine too. (Nothing wrong with Fluttershy staying home if she wants.) I don't need an explanation for Dash's behavior, I already have two. • If Dash actually thinks that the suffering of little Crystal Ponies is a serious problem, which is a little bit odd but understandable for shortsighted people, then she is irresponsible for perpetuating a serious problem. • If Dash is just participating in your run of the mill fan favoritism, then I don't really care one way or another. She made such a good case for Cloudsdale earlier, I'm rooting for them and not the Crystal Empire, and besides, I can't pick sides when I don't know who the other side is. I went ahead and made a diagram to illustrate what I mean. Without a positive motivation, you get stuck in the "no," or "who cares," areas. Fun, as simple as it is, is a perfectly fine positive motivation. The Crystal Ponies, however, were already having fun, they were already sprucing up their town, they were already attracting tourists. By my measurement, they were already on top of things, even if they didn't get to host the games. The other issue, about Rainbow Dash impacting whether her team wins comes down to fairness. The inspection process is supposed to be unbiased, and it does not take a very large stretch of the imagination to think that going all out on lobbying the inspector is going to bias her judgement. For comparison's sake, I'm going to go over the dramatic question posed in Sonic Rainboom, to help illustrate the difference in my level of interest. Your mileage may vary. (This is why I shouldn't post when I wake up in the morning, because I end up spending my entire trek to work thinking about what I didn't have time to finish typing.) The context of Sonic Rainboom is whether or not Rainbow Dash will succeed or fail in the Best Young Flier Competition, but the Dramatic Question is: "Who am I?" She is learning about herself through competition and dealing with the realization that maybe she isn't as good as she thought she was. She already performed the sonic rainboom once before, and now no matter how hard she tries, she can't pull it off. Instead of improving, she appears to be getting worse. She wants to join the Wonderbolts, but how can she reach their level when she's not improving? All she needed to do was perform the sonic rainboom and prove to herself that she was a capable pony. She wanted to prove it. Winning the competition wasn't necessary, though it was a nice bonus, she didn't need to wait for the golden laurel to be placed on her head to look up at her work and exclaim, "Whoa... I did it, I did it!" and "Best day ever!" Even if she hadn't won the competition, it would have been positive. Perhaps someone can let me know if I missed something in Games Ponies Play, because as far as I could tell, there wasn't really any solid indication that things might go wrong until they found out that the inspector would be arriving early. Applejack stated that they had practiced the routine to perfection, the Crystal Empire looked crystalier then ever, Rarity had the mane thing under control.
  18. hi hi Rosewind, I actually did. It was somewhere in the middle of a wall of text on the previous page, though I don't blame anyone for not going through the entire thing. Reward seeking and pain avoidance are two distinctly separate things. They can occasionally produce similar results, but the motivation stems not only from a different logical reason, but from a different part of the brain as well. You can't lose a competition that you don't participate in. If you're just standing around, minding your own business, your chances of losing a competition are 0%. By competing at all, you are increasing your chances of losing, which is why if your motivation is "don't want to lose," seeking competition is irrational. Its a nothing reason. Like being asked, "why are you walking down the street," and answering, "because running is too fast." Rainbow Dash in Hurricane Fluttershy was the kind of pony who didn't care about the disappointment of losing. The kind of pony who said: "No. Of course not. Forget the record." The record was about seeking to better themselves. They didn't face humiliation for failing to be the best, they didn't even face humiliation for almost failing to meet par. The effort they spent was heroic, even without claiming the title, and even Fluttershy who did least of all got recognition for her effort.
  19. hi hi Oh, come on. I even provided a TLDR... Lets try simple again, if thorough doesn't cut it. I am looking at multiple perspectives simultaneously. • Just because someone has a reason to do something, doesn't mean the thing they are doing is right, or the reason is a good one. "I want it," has never justified stealing, but is common and understandable. • Actions are not the same thing as motivations. • Rainbow Dash's motivation makes sense from the perspective of someone who could save a mare who is falling to her doom, but would rather sign autographs until the last second. • Rainbow Dash's motivation does not make sense from the perspective of another mare who might, for example, befriend Discord, chastise her friends for their prejudices, or lop off a part of her tail for a stranger. • Rainbow Dash's motivation does not make sense from the perspective of a protagonist, to whom I can relate and wish to succeed. • Because I didn't care whether or not Rainbow Dash succeeded, the question of whether or not they would be able to convince the games inspector did not create any suspense for me. • Characters don't have to be perfect, so having a flawed motivation is not necessarily a bad thing, in and of itself, and doesn't mean that the episode is necessarily bad. • Everyone in the group of friends basically agrees with each other, and the actual dramatic question of the episode doesn't get asked until over 10 minutes into the episode. • The question being: Will they impress the right pony? (With the added bonus of wondering if they will realize their obvious mistake.) • In the end, it turns out that the pony they ignored was the technically correct pony, but that impressing a pony who they didn't even know and were not invested in, was a good thing to do. • So it all works out in the end. Anything is possible, but if I'm going to be convinced that that I'm wrong, I'm going to need a better argument than: "Its normal." (I've also been told that its not normal for a grown man to watch a show about colourful little ponies.) On the side note of Super Bowl 40. Losing a competition due to irregularities by an authority figure is actually rather poignant to this episode. Do you suppose, if the Super Bowl had been decided by the team that gave the refs a better welcome, that people might have also been upset? Do you suppose that, if the refs had done their job and let the players determine the outcome, only intervening to hold them accountable for legitimate misconduct, that the game might have been enjoyable even to the fans who's team lost? (To be clear, there is nothing wrong with having referees, just as there is nothing wrong with having a welcoming committee. The problem arises when they alone decide the outcome of the competition.)
  20. hi hi There is absolutely no need to get personal about this. I'm honestly confounded, but since its my lunch break, I might as well try again. And if you don't believe that I have at least some experience when it comes to competition, then I present to you the length of my posts as solid evidence that I am at least familiar with it. (My folks may be big on marathons and triathlons, but I guess I'm more into debate.) I absolutely can understand why someone could have a personal bias towards one group or another. I've highlighted some examples of situations where that can be a good thing even. I'm also aware that there are times when people can have reasons to be biased that are unfair and unjust. Yes in-group bias is very common. Normal you might even say, but it is also one of the fundamental causes of a number of equally common problems, across all levels of seriousness in our increasingly interconnected global society. The notion that "everyone is doing it," may have some value as a heuristic in a pinch, but its not really valid as an argument. The analogy of someone finding a ring on the ground fails because of one thing: Opportunity cost. There is no real loss in this scenario, except perhaps the brief time investment that everyone took to state their cases. They are still capable of purchasing any number of other rings, because their capability hasn't diminished. A more apropos analogy, I think, would be another formulation of Carneades Plank, which I referenced earlier. Say you're driving in a caravan, a bunch of people in a few cars on an otherwise deserted road. One of the cars gets a flat tire. You don't have the tools to fix it, and there's just not enough room for everyone no matter how you squeeze. Someone is just going to be out of luck. By the time anyone can reach them, they'll have missed out on whatever event they were going to. Right then and there, you have no alternative, someone has to be left behind. However, the next time you are driving along in a caravan and a car gets a flat tire, the question becomes, "Why didn't you learn your lesson from the last time and prepare for this possibility?" Rainbow Dash has felt that disappointment before, so why has she not done anything about it? Could it be that it was not really a big deal? (Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.) I'm honestly surprised that nobody tried to call me out on the ethics of imprisonment for crimes, after such a hasty and resolute declaration like, "Alleviating hurt at someone else's expense is wrong, period." I did prepare for that though, so I'll just go ahead and pre-empt it. In the case of legal punishments, it is important to remember that the impetus for the intervention is started by those who break the law. Those who are, allegedly, harming others. This is important because it highlights the limitation of options that people face. People are forced to choose between further potential harm from the lawless on one side, and on the other side, the kind of vigilantism that inevitably devolves into tribal feuding if allowed to reach its endgame. The rule of law strives -though it does not always succeed, on account of mistakes or sabotage- to minimize harm to all parties, including the guilty. However airtight the legality may be though, it still does not excuse people from the responsibility of trying to prevent it in the first place. However, since extreme examples didn't work, (I was being rhetorical for the sake of clarity, not because I thought they shared the same moral gravity.) I'll try an example that is more basic. Lets say that little Timmy and little Jimmy are both fighting over a toy. You like one of the two, and don't have any opinion about the other. Their caretaker is approaching and is planning on resolving the fight, but you have an opportunity to distract the caretaker and make sure that the kid that you like gets the toy. Some might consider that meddling, but ask yourself which is better: making sure that one kid loses out, or making sure that whichever one kid who will inevitably lose at least has something? Conversely, imagine that the toy is something that Timmy and Jimmy can share, and that the only thing they are fighting about is which side of the room they want to play on. If your favored child is forced to get up and walk across the room, would you think it is normal to jump into the air, shouting "Nooo!" before collapsing to your knees in pain and frustration? Or would it seem reasonable to say "Well, its no big whoop sugar cube, at least you get to participate." (Which is what happened in the end, like I said. It all worked out in the end, and I enjoyed that about the episode. Yes, the hand-waving of the selection process was cheap and rushed, on account of the inspector doing the worst inspecting in the history of inspecting. ((Seriously, double tangent here, but would you accept a single data point from a total stranger concerning their tour of the facility when you were inspecting something actually important, like say an airplane? But thats ok, because nobody is perfect, and besides, everyone got to share the idiot ball this episode.)) It all worked for Rainbow Dash because, as I said, it fits her character to not care about these sorts of things. However, I do, so what was confusing to me was that the narrative didn't provide a counterpoint for more than 10 minutes. Usually those kinds of conflicts are worked in right away, like when Applejack said simply "Its all in good fun," in Fall Weather Friends. In the end, it all worked out. Rainbow Dash learned her lesson, and we once again get an example of how Polsky likes to write things into the subtext of the episode in order for them to make sense.) Empathy isn't just about understanding the down and out, its about understanding all sorts of different positions and making sense of them. One of my favorite quotes comes from T.S. Eliot, who was perhaps ahead of his time when it came to understanding the self through reflecting on the world around us. How can anyone say that they are the better, more worthy candidate if they do not understand their competition? It would be like saying you are the most capable basketball player, even though you've never played a basketball game before. You might be, its true, but until you prove it, you'll never really know for sure. If Rainbow Dash had said something like "Stalliongrad hosted the games last time, and if we fail, they're going to get them again. They don't need them twice in a row," something that explained why the competition would not feel as bad as the Crystal Ponies, then it might have made more sense. (This seems awfully tangential, but I would like to point out for the record that if we follow real life examples, the Olympic games are not all medals and roses for the cities that host them. There is no small number of people that will argue that the cost of hosting the Olympics outweighs the benefits, especially for the poor who pay the highest costs in taxes, loss of living space through gentrification, and who have the least to gain in terms of entertainment value and increased revenue. Competition has the potential to be bad or good, depending on the circumstances.) Have no fear Rosewind, I'm keenly aware of the value of the journey. As I said, there are a "zillion and one reasons to help." As I am about provide some excellent reasons why competition can be helpful, along with a few statistical tidbits. I honestly wish that they had emphasized the journey as part of the motivation, as doing so would have made the conflict more relatable to me. The statistics show us very clearly that the uncertainty about who's team will win is one of the biggest indicators of a sport's popularity. The chance of losing is critically important to the excitement of the event. If you know who is going to win before it starts, there is no reason to watch. The better the opponent, the more epic the match. Superbowl 40 tagged an estimated 90.7 million viewers. Regardless of who won, they watched it and were entertained. Statistics also show that people who participate in sports in school (especially girls) have on average statistically significantly higher levels of self confidence, self esteem, and general physical health. By necessity, the majority of teams will lose. There are 32 teams in the NFL, only one of them won the superbowl this year, and yet it continues to be highly profitable, prestigious and popular. (Don't even get me started on Cubs fans.) I am glad you agree with me on something, because that was never my argument, quite the opposite in fact. My argument was that because the selection process is fair, Rainbow Dash deriving motivation from the unjust suffering of others makes no sense. This is also something that I have not suggested. Not all sadness is a bad thing, there are things that can make it worthwhile. (Clear as day, I listed some examples.) Romantic Tearjerkers are wildly popular, for another example. Its a good thing that I never said I believed this, and in fact argued contrariwise. I said that if the motivation for helping one side against the other is to avoid loss and hurt, then it is at best poor sportsmanship and at worst dangerously insecure. Her actions were not inherently wrong at any point, but without a motivation, it is harder to be motivated to care one way or another.Its really easy to take for granted the ways that competition can be beneficial when we live in a society that has benefitted so much from competition. Its easy to ignore the ways a competition can be hurtful and destructive. Fall Weather Friends covers this brilliantly, but if you need an extreme example, then you can pick any number of tragedies brought about by modern warfare. In some competitions, everyone loses. Rewards are in the eye of the beholder, yes. Absolutely. I may not think that some particular circumstance is so bad, but the cause doesn't change much when a person is feeling legitimate anguish. As I said multiple times already, if you cannot accept losing, for whatever reason, then you should not be competing. Don't blow your life savings on a game of poker. Don't wager the mortgage to your house in blackjack. Don't take the chance if you are likely to suffer crushing defeat and you can't handle that. If you think it will be worth it in the end, win or lose, then go ahead and knock yourself out. Pushing yourself to be more worthy of victory can still be a good thing, even if you lose, you're better off where you started. TLDR: In a nutshell, as a situation gains seriousness, the actors involved also gain responsibility.
  21. hi hi I don't know how many more volumes I can write to convey what I'm trying to say. Yes, its not trivial and frivolous for Dash, for some bizarre and in-explicable reason. Because, as you said, the Olympics selection is a real thing that happens in our world that is perfectly normal and rational, and nobody is so put out by losing that it is unbearable. In fact, the Equestria games selection makes even less of a difference than the Olympic games selection does. Anyone can just hop on a train and go to the Crystal Empire in like, a day. And its not like there is abject poverty that could be alleviated by a boost in tourism, even the continually cash starved farm pony can make the trip. You don't need to alleviate all hurt everywhere. Alleviating hurt at someone else's expense, however, is wrong. Period. It's not hard to imagine that missing out on the Equestria Games isn't going to hurt anyone, just like in real life with the Olympics, which is what makes Dash's motivation so bizarre.
  22. hi hi Well, I boiled it down as far as it can go. I guess the only other option is to ramble at length and make a much bigger deal about this than it rightfully deserves. Enjoy the ride. There may be some circumstances where turning different groups of people's hardships into a competition for "who has it worst," is a good idea, but this isn't one of them. Why should little colts and fillies today have to suffer because of something that happened before they were even born? The Crystal Ponies lost a thousand years, but so what? Everyone misses out on all sorts of things, both from the aeons when they're not alive, and all the things that happen when they are. (Even if they make a bunch of clones of themselves, they're still going to miss out on a well neigh infinite number of experiences.) This kind of shared hardship could be the common ground that brings them together, rather than keep them distinctly separate. If disappointment is truly a bad thing (in the context of Rainbow Dash's perspective and nobody else's) and is something that needs to be minimized for anyone, then ignoring the feelings of other ponies in other places that she does not know constitutes a dramatic lack of empathy. That makes sense for her, because she often is portrayed as callous and vain, but the same is probably not true for all of her friends, and it doesn't make for something I can relate to or be interested in. And I'm not just talking about Affective Empathy, you can close your eyes and not pay attention to other people in other places and just assume everything will be fine if you want to fool yourself. I'm talking mostly about Cognitive Empathy, about not treating people as individuals, but as labels. Labels like "Crystal Pony," or "other," which is not only degrading to the others who are not present, but to the ponies in the Crystal Empire as well, as it ignores who they actually are. There was a time in our world when slavery was considered a normal, appropriate part of civilization. The feelings of out-groups were not considered. The people in charge weren't emotionally invested in them, they didn't care, but this carelessness also degraded those who were privileged. And if you don't think that is a fair comparison, because its too serious, then perhaps you can understand why I am unable to take Dash's motivation seriously. In my opinion, she is making a big deal about something that is trivial and frivolous, while completely ignoring anything that makes competition positive. You can give someone something positive without hurting others. Thats fine, you can't be everywhere at once, and there's nothing wrong with preferring those who you share a connection. However, if someone is getting hurt, being pals with the guy who lucked out does not relieve you of the responsibility of trying to prevent the hurt in the first place.
  23. hi hi I'm not sure if having a chicken for a cutie mark really means anything. I mean, if One Bad Apple is any indication, Scootaloo is a thesaurus, not a chicken. On the other hoof though, they are both awesome, so that has to count for something. I suspect that the most obvious reason why she's probably not Scootaloo's mother is because either Twilight or one of her friends, especially Rarity or Applejack, who's little sisters are Scootaloo's friends, would have recognized her. Unless of course they were separated at birth or something, or Chickadee got lost in the jungle and then got amnesia and doesn't remember anyone from her past. And maybe thats why she has a fear of tall, imposing ceilings collapsing on her, because it was a hit to the head that knocked her out the last time.
  24. hi hi I don't know what you're talking about Dessa Dessa, Chickadee's colours are the best.
×
×
  • Create New...