Taking a stand vs. being an asshole · 5:56am Aug 19th, 2013
My last post makes me sound like an asshole, doesn't it?
Here's the more-complete story:
I submitted an article to Cracked. An editor responded & pointed out that there were 3 similar articles recently submitted. One of them had been moved forward in the queue, meaning it would be considered before mine. 3 editors commented on 2 of those previous articles that they didn't think MLP could support an article.
All 4 submitted articles were hung up on the Cracked requirement for verification: They wanted a link for each statement in the article to some proof of its truth. Cracked doesn't trust links to Wikis, so they asked for links to video clips to verify each statement. Most of these statements were plot summaries, so most links would have had to be a video of an entire episode (some to multiple episodes), and the editors wouldn't have watched them. Nobody had yet offered any solution for this impasse.
I wanted to see what else Cracked has written on My Little Pony, and how they got around this problem, so I googled, and immediately found these gems:
4 Insane Pieces of 'My Little Pony' Fan Art (By Grown Men)
The children's cartoon My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic inexplicably has a legion of obsessively weird adult male fans who proudly refer to themselves as "bronies," because the Internet has made it much easier for people to confuse "individuality" with "being a sociopath."
Why 'My Little Pony' Is About to Get Even Creepier
Picture the three key groups of MLP fans: little girls, "bronies" (i.e., adult male aficionados of the show), and furries. Now, picture all of those people intermixing in the same dark movie theater. It's tantamount to tossing kids into a haunted house full of loud, self-important 20-somethings and terrifying sexual fetishists.
5 Awesome Vigilantes Who Solved Crimes Better Than the Cops
#1. Teenage Hacker Gets Pedophile Judge Arrested
Willman discovered that Judge Ronald Kline didn't just have a massive collection of child porn on both his home and courthouse PCs, but also kept a written diary of his plans to seduce young boys. Along with a huge stash of My Little Pony fan fiction, we're guessing.
I could've pushed forward with the article, but that would be like a Jew writing for Goebbels. I'd be ashamed to be associated with them after seeing what they've written. I could've just let the article die quietly, but I felt like I had to say something. So I left a message with the above quotes, said that demanding checking of each individual fact was not journalistic integrity if they chose carefully-selected small true facts to tell a big lie. Then I explained that I was a brony & didn't want to work for people who wanted to hurt me & my friends.
Is that taking a stand, or being an asshole? I feel in my gut like I was just being an asshole. But maybe that's why people don't speak out more when they should--not because they're cowards, but because they're afraid of being an asshole.
Dude.
It's a cartoon pony fandom.
All right, a chance to post this.
This video also explains most of the problems that this site has.
I think you've hit the nail on the head with that one BH. I know it' s certainly been true of me before.
And no, I'd say taking the time to clearly state your position while providing supporting documentation means you're not being an asshole here.
Taking a stand.
To be fair, the articles that Cracked proclaims "poke fun of bronies" (or at least so the authors said in the comments back when I read Cracked), were universally mean-spirited and unfunny, just pointing and laughing at us. John Cheese is also pretty infamous for being disgusted in us, and when I left he, Jacopo, and David Wong all seemed to be the big guys in control, so it's no wonder Cracked wouldn't want to run an MLP article.
That would be taking a stand. Not even the slightest bit ambiguous.
Those articles and the material they selected to back them demonstrate plainly that they're just another media outlet making bank on sensationalized, misconstrued misinformation and/or outright lies.
Politely dropping their own bags of shit on their step and calling them on it is hardly being an asshole. It's nearly a public service.
(Granted, though, I come down hard on these sorts of issues of personal ethics and various groups' lack thereof.)
As I said in your last blog,
Fuck Cracked. They're like SomethingAwful, with the two exceptions, (1) SomethingAwful was funny 10 years ago (Corin Tucker's Stalker is the only occasionally amusing contributor remaining), (2) SomethingAwful's user base are at least capable of gathering $10 together at the same time.
EDIT:
SomethingAwful's coverage of bronies Also this
Is it offensive? I guess, could be. But, you know what it demonstrates? A bare, basic minimum of comprehension as regards the subject matter is what it demonstrates. Admittedly, they never responded to my hate mail wrt to Yelling at Cats "What Went Wrong" (a silly piece of drama that would have been timely for the Brony Barn article), but eh.
I personally love the negativity, what I can't stand from Cracked, and what no one should tolerate from Cracked, is the goddamned laziness.
Taking a stand, most definitely
1294688 Very good video.
Seeing as they have no ground to talk about assholeish behavior, you should definitely speak up.
That alone very solidly removes any possibility of you even approaching being an 'asshole' regarding this. You really have nothing to be worried about.
I didn't read anything insinuating that you are an asshole. Unless you completely bungled your message to the editors, it's pretty clear you're taking a stand.
Going to go with taking a stand. It might have been one thing if at least one article was written as a good-natured ribbing, but as all three articles are very mean-spirited, gotta say taking a stand.
Also, why is it that people seem to want to automatically equate "grown men watching a cartoon ostensibly for young girls" with pedophile, but not if they watch shows for young boys? I have gotten that reaction from close friends, who are usually reasonably intelligent. I asked WHY they come to that conclusion. The asked me isn't that just a natural assumption, I asked them to explain WHY that would be. They then shut up about it, and have not said anything like that since.
It is Cracked.com. They make fun of things, that is their business. If you get upset by them saying something negative about MLP, that's just silly. A jew writing for Gobbels, really?
They were cracks about the fandom. So what? They also constantly imply that priests lust after little boys, that muslims will blow up at the slightest provocation, ect. They are jokes.
So yes, you were an asshole.
Getting angry at Cracked is like getting angry at South Park or something else. Or hell, getting angry at MLP for its "negative portrayal of retarded people" in the form of Derpy.
I thought you could post links to YT vids with timethings? Or even just point it out so the editors could watch the pertinent bits?
Fun fact: one of the authors of the first article has a FIMFic account with stories published on it under his name. He also (purportedly) feels bad about the article.
Make of that what you will.
To them, you are being an asshole. A whiny, demanding, and overly entitled asshole.
(Puts on Cracked editor hat)
Its not cool to spit in the face of internet funniness and demand that we acknowledge positive aspects of a fandom centered around toys for little girls! This isn't obviously awesome like Star Wars. Sometimes we need more than a poop joke to keep our audience! You want to print an article on our site, to our audience that loves everything we do, and you demand we change something? No
(Takes off Cracked editor hat)
The opinions of people here speak for themselves. As for me, I think you wrote a funny article pointing out some of the... rather odd aspects of our fandom and, on doing some research to make a case to overturn their polite rejection, felt that you should demand fairness in addition. That's taking a stand.
You did your research and presented your case. That only makes you an asshole to people that aren't interested in the evidence. So you should feel like an asshole, and be proud of it.
If you're worried about feeling like an asshole, you're not an asshole.
It is a lil' tantamount to becoming cross at the Onion for slanting their coverage.
There's days I consider that some of the Cracked articles are pretty funny (or even striking, like the famous 6 Harsh Truths article) and there's days when I consider it just another blight on the internet welded to their list-o-snark format. I have unfollowed otherwise entrancing folks on twitter solely for excessive Cracked linking.
It's completely unfair to Cracked to expect them to be nice or fair to you, ever. Your job is to grin and bear it when the snark hose is directed at you. Their job is to pull off a pretense of intelligent contempt for the amusement of others, in good fun and hopefully in the tradition of MST3K where some ingenuity is displayed: otherwise, they're Something Awful with editors.
Also, from the links you posted: "Internet Hemmingway Kkat". So… without editors, then?
On articles they care about, they're capable of proofing them enough to spell 'Hemingway'. I'm not sure why I should get upset over a Cracked article that not even they care about.
I wonder if they are more or less capable of fixing obvious blunders than a typical MLP fanfiction author?
I read Cracked.
And yet I can't help but think, every day, this isn't aimed at me.
I mean, I know some of it isn't. I avoid the political stuff and the stuff about Canada because the first won't make sense and the later probably still won't.
But that said, they actively attack half the things I enjoy- and no, I'm not counting Star Wars and Star trek on that list, because they talk about the good and the bad. My Little Pony, Pokemon, fanfiction- all are hit with the same 'this is shit' stick.
... actually... it might be interesting to try and submit an article focusing on why the internet isn't such a bad place. Humm. Might try that some time.
From the sounds of it, you made a well-crafted argument and never took it too far, and certainly didn't make it personal. Seems legit to me.
The internet will be the internet, it's not worth your time trying to enlighten intolerant pricks that have already made up their minds. My Little Pony is worth standing up for especially if they are posting slam pieces like this, the real question is does it make a difference?
I like Cracked, but am unsurprised and unhurt when they make fun of any particular subgroup I'm a member of. Most humor is at someone's expense, and it's the circle of life, as it were, when it's my turn. I also don't feel that you were being particularly assholish... assholey... that you were acting like an asshole. The bit about "I don't want to work with you because you hurt me and my friends!" sounds a little schoolyard-comebacky to me, but it's a good honest sentiment all the same.
That first article was interesting to me on a secondary level, because item #3 links to the Pony Fiction Archive, which meant I could actually see how many people clicked through to read about Onion Ring Pony and Hot Dog Pony. (To date, 2,477 did.)
It was interesting to me on a third level because someone tracked down the discussion thread for the article on the Cracked forum and sent it to me, and I was very nearly in the article. When I posted SleeplessBrony's Romance Reports to the Vault, I also posted an exhortation to not write the story off simply because it was clop. Well, Romance Reports was almost one of the items in that Cracked article, and me including it in the Vault along with my explanation for why I felt it deserved to be included was to have been cited as further evidence of the madness of bronies. I still can't help but feel that I dodged a bullet there. (Edit: Found the discussion thread!)
If you really want to get pissed off at them, look into the discussion on their forums that was had when the "4 Insane Pieces" article was being developed. It wasn't poking harmless fun, they were looking for stuff to make the fandom look as bad as possible with the specific purpose of hurting it.
I wouldn't have anything to do with those people if you paid me to.
You showed vastly more respect to them than they did to you. I'd say you're as much in the right as anyone can be in an Internet argument.
No matter what you do, there will always be haters.
Might as well do what you feel is right and make a stand.
First, if you state an opinion politely and in the correct place, you're never an asshole. People are allowed to disagree.
Second, I find this interesting. Some not-small number of the Cracked readership are probably bronies, yet they're incapable of posting anything offering a positive side to the fandom. On the other hand, you have the A.V. Club with their elite hipster commenters, who gave very nice and suspiciously informed reviews of both Equestria Girls and The Royal Wedding. Sure there's some hate in the comments, but I think this speaks to the difference in maturity between Cracked and the A.V. Club, probably because the A.V. Club does have a staff of writers who seem to be on the older side, and they seem to be more interested in courting mature, intelligent discussion and humor most of the time.
(ETA: I also might still be proud a year later that one of the editors of the A.V. Club liked on of my comments on the Royal Wedding review. He admitted that he likes MLP and romantic comedies and should be replaced with someone more awesome, and I suggested Rainbow Dash. Look, not much exciting happens in my life.)
As I said in my pm it feels less like taking a stand and more like a fit of pique. I find it odd you'd submit an article without looking at what they had done before. If not to make sure you agree with their views but to make sure to tailor your article to the audience.
I agree your taking a stand is all well and good but the impact is harmed by the fact it was only after they rejected you that you looked into their previous works.
Eh. Cracked's whole thing is digging up something somewhat obscure, then either poking fun at it or excessively praising it. I think most of the articles (at least by the big names) are usually funny enough to warrant reading, but they aren't really much of an institution. If they don't want to write about MLP or bronies in favourable, or even fair, tones, let them. It's not really worth either taking a stand on or being an asshole over, in my opinion.
In any case, no, not being an asshole. Being an asshole to someone online is so common, that to even warrant the term requires behavior a lot more egregious than a single pointed, if a little petty, comment.
(Also, reading over that first linked article, I like that in the title they specifically refer to men, without bothering to check that FO:E was written by a woman. Nice.)
Uh, no. Pretty sure the editors are assholes.
Even if you are too, you are like a fly's asshole. Sure shit comes out but it's easy to digest. We eat it all the time and never notice.
Cracked are like goatse. They are glorious in how disgustingly vulgar they are, but if you stare too long you stop enjoying yourself pretty quickly.
What is much more worrying, is the fact that these two actions are often (if not usually) confused nowadays.
I've seen it everywhere: voice your opinion not in favor of what the majority believes and you're immediately labelled as a stupid prick. 
Even if you are acting polite and well-mannered (because, let's face it, you can also take a stand and be a dick about it 
).
I do understand the whole democracy thing, but there's also the freedom of beliefs those "majorities" too often forget.
But I'm getting a little off-topic here. To me, you were taking a stand, especially since you politely (as you say) refused to work with them without throwing a "hissy fit".
I think, in general, every fandom that isn't fully supported by "the right-thinking people" is going to be cited as a cautionary tale, since there is surely going to be a few bad apples in it. Worried about clowns? John Wayne Gacy. Some mass murder somewhere or another? He played violent video games. Satanists? They played too much D&D.
I suppose in some regards the cautionary tale still serves a useful purpose. After all, people who smoke are more likely to get lung cancer than those who do not, and people who don't look both ways before crossing the street are probably more likely to get hit by a car than those who do. Brushing and flossing really does prevent tooth decay. On the other hand, a TV show won't turn you into a pedophile, and a video game won't turn you into a mass murderer. Anyone who says it does is
an idiotuninformed.Also, I've gotta say the "there's porn of it" argument lacks any sort of merit whatsoever. I can only assume that anyone who makes that argument has just logged on to the internet for the first time. For their edification, here's a complete list of what there isn't porn of on the internet:
1.
Rule 34 FTW.
--admiral biscuit
EDIT; Oh, and you're not an a$$hole for taking a stand. Do I think it will change anyone's mind? No, probably not. But that doesn't make it not worth doing.
I take great pride I being an asshole. Not only is it basically a job requirement but also who I am. If I have to be an asshole to be understood then so be it.
If want warm fuzzy watch MLP, you want to know where you stand with someone, talk to an asshole.
Sometimes assholery is called for.
I don't have much to add about the morality of this, but I'll talk a bit about optics and effectiveness. As you know, I'm an EqD prereader, so I've seen things like this from the other side.
Imagine you're an editor. You reject most of what gets submitted because that is your job. Sometimes submitters argue about your rejections. You're used to this, and you've started recognizing the patterns these arguments take. There's the "argument from popularity" guy with hundreds—nay, thousands—of loyal readers. There's the "quality is subjective" guy. There's the "this is what you should really be looking for" guy. You paid close attention to each of these arguments the first two or three times you encountered them, but after four or five, they started to blur together. You don't really bother to read them closely anymore; you know from experience that any of these guys would drop their process complaints like last year's iPhone the moment their own submission got accepted. [1] Anyway, you'd rather be reviewing new stuff than rehashing those debates.
Another pattern is the guy who's eager to get onto the site at first, but upon rejection, suddenly discovers that the site's very purpose is immoral. EqD gets one of these every two or three months; I'll bet Cracked gets a lot more. Now, I have the context to know that your objections go deeper than that, but the Cracked staff doesn't. They will pattern-match this to sour grapes, and given the information they have, they will be completely right to do so. 95% of people writing what you wrote would've done it because the rejection hurt them, not because they gained new information that led to an objection in good faith.
I don't have a solution to this. You lose the ability to have your process complaints taken seriously if they only show up after the rejection, and I don't know a reliable way to get it back.
[1] I'm familiar with exactly two counterexamples to this in the ponyfic community. You're one, and the other became an EqD prereader to change the system from within.
You are not an asshole with that response, not at all. If what is said on the pages 1294758 linked is true, then it seems that the editors are horrible people who would have butchered your article anyway to make it as vulgar as possible.
1296468>>1295240 My article wasn't rejected. Some editors expressed doubt about the topic, but others were still advising me to work on it.
1296558
I'm curious about how you reached that conclusion based on what I linked, since that seems to be the exact opposite of the one I've decided on.
1296780
Comment #4 on his blog post talking about it:
1296468 What secret immoralities of EqD have people uncovered?
1299867
Let's see... we're elitists who ignore what real people like and only cater to our own obscure literary tastes; we're conservatives who ignore groundbreaking work and only post safe, familiar content for the masses; we're grammar nazis who put technical accuracy before storytelling; and my personal favorite, that we're presumptuous censors for daring to act as gatekeepers at all. I vaguely recall accusations of nepotism as well, but I can't think of a specific example so maybe I'm making that one up.