Poi wrote:was there any mention of Azula in all this??
tinyartist18 wrote:sympathy =/= support.
tinyartist18 wrote:And I don't think that we know enough about them to make any particular determination, which is why I said that as of right now, I do sympathize with their cause. I feel (the word I used) for them because, frankly, there is a favor for bending in that world. Who wouldn't be annoyed/want justice?
tinyartist18 wrote:And of course they are going to be villainous. I don't expect to support them. But because they're now called "Equalists" and not "anti-benders" it does evoke at least some sympathy for them.
tinyartist18 wrote:They may end up being Machiavellian - I'm sure some of them will be - or terrible or terrorist etc etc etc. And obviously, I don't think that killing the Avatar, or anyone for that matter, is the best course of action, nor the right one. But that doesn't mean that their justification isn't quite admirable.
tinyartist18 wrote:And I feel for most people, regardless of their actions. I have felt pain for serial killers, and I don't expect it to change for a fictional group, especially when their actions seem a bit less concrete (they haven't quite done anything yet). Also, we have been told (I believe. I may be wrong) that Ty Lee's techniques have been spread around the world. Maybe they'll use that. I won't judge them either way until 2012, but like I said, I feel for their cause. I don't intend to hate them just yet.
tinyartist18 wrote:I wasn't referring to the Equalists when I said this. Rather, I was interested more with the information that two people from different nations can have children, and the children receive a bending element of only one of the nations. And neither does there have to be a mutant gene. In fact, I would doubt that it would be a mutant gene, considering a significant portion of that world bends. It may have - if it was genetic - started as a mutant gene, but I don't think it would any longer be considered such. This, of course, does not discount any argument for spirituality, it just provides further factors with which we can analyze the situation.
Pleh wrote: Actually, it sort of DOES. Why do you think we have "sympathy" cards in walmart? The entire idea of sympathy connotates that your emotions and worldview support the other person's position. Even if you are not in a position to help that person, expressing sympathy is a form of support. Of course there are degrees of support, so I'm not saying that I think you would fully support the Equalists, but you get the idea.
Pleh wrote: This assumes that a system or world in which some people have talents, skills, and abilities not available to everyone is an unfair or unjust system. Since in the real world, such skills and talents are indeed imbalanced, I don't see why people think they should be. So I think the answer to your question is, I wouldn't. I would be happy as a non-bender in a world with benders. I might wish I was a bender at times, but I certainly wouldn't feel like the world owed me equality.
Pleh wrote: See, that's what I completely disagree with. I find their justification abhorrent like a murderer who hides a body and pretends to be innocent. Not to mention that I'm betting Omanavonavonmelonlord has a more sinister design than simply bringing "equality."
Pleh wrote: Nor do I intend to say that you shouldn't sympathize with them. Bryke might be able to turn this whole thing on it's head and make the Equalists into terrible victims only taking the only option available to them. If that's the case, they'll certainly deserve pity and sympathy. Sympathy for evil people isn't wrong (in fact, I believe that very concept is the core of Compassion which Jesus tried to teach people to have), though sympathy with evil intentions (as opposed to evil people) may be an indication that you yourself are evil.
Pleh wrote:I think that it was obvious from the start that they would only gain the ability to bend a single element, but maybe that was just me. The whole "Steambending" with Zutara kids never made sense to me. Neither did "dual bending." In my mind, if Dual Benders were the way that worked, then shouldn't we have already seen some in the show?
I'm not sure what else you might have thought would happen, but what we see in Mako and Bolin seemed like the intuitive solution to me.
tinyartist18 wrote:I pretty strongly disagree. One is an emotion, the other is action. Yes, my emotions and my worldview do support their position, but I do not support their actions. I don't want this to become a political debate, but it's similar to me sympathizing with the debt ceiling nonsense - I get where they are coming from, but I don't think they are doing the right thing.
tinyartist18 wrote:Alright, let's bring the spirituality/genetics debate up again. Non-benders are nearly second-class citizens (we haven't seen slaves, or a huge patriarchal basis in the whole of society, so it's safe to assume that worldwide, there is a tendency to favor benders). Let's say there is a "bending" gene. There is also a "gene" for melanin production, which makes black people black (amoung other things, but it is a safe generalization to say that it is genetic). Is it right to favor whites over blacks? That's not discrimination, no, but that's a bias towards one group over another, based solely on their genetic construct. Similarly, if it's spiritual, which it well may be, then that's like favoring one religion over all others. This has happened in many societies, as Christianity has been the most popular religion for the majority of recent history. However, many societies make an effort not to favor Christians over other groups. Some do, but is that right either way? It has nothing to do with talent, I don't think. Yes, a talented bender may be valued above a non-talented bender, but both would be valued above a non-bender.
tinyartist18 wrote:Well, I guess that depends on how you interpret a longing for equality.
tinyartist18 wrote:I interpret it as just, which is why I do sympathize with their reasons. If they pulled a Martin Luther King Jr.-esque peace protest approach, I'd probably paint myself their colors and start cheering them on entirely. But as of right now, it is implied that they will use violence, which I do not condone as the right way to get something cultural or political. There are *so many* real-world parallels in the search for equality that frankly, I can't help but sympathize with their reasons. And the striving for justice is not Socialist or Communist, that implies that they would form a proletariat and rise up against the upper classes to reform the economic system such that everyone receives an equal piece of the economic pie until government is no longer needed and the world will become a finely-tuned clock with all economic and governmental systems securely in place. Rather, I see it as closer to Democracy, or to Republic, where all people are equal in the eyes of the law, and in the culture.
tinyartist18 wrote:What we've seen, and what has been an apt study is that the military organizations actually reflect the culture of the world, and participate as a catalyst to reform the way that people see others. When blacks were allowed into the military in the Civil War, that was almost immediately prior to the emancipation of slavery and the following support that it received from the Northern States; when the military was desegregationalized, that was almost immediately prior to blacks gaining equal rights. This has actually grown in interest recently because DADT was abolished. In recent A:TLA history, the only military that we have seen to actually utilize properly their nonbenders in a fairly equal situation was the water tribe, but they had their own patriarchal issues. In the FN, the nonbenders were almost always the spear-wielders, the redshirts of the army. I don't think I've seen many EK army members who are non-bending, and we know that the AN and the Dai Li were both entirely bending. Because of the parallels in the world, I don't think that I can see this any other way.
tinyartist18 wrote:Another parallel: Do you sympathize with the Egyptian protesters? Do you condone their actions of violence?
tinyartist18 wrote:But that's the thing. I take it as a huge evidence for genetics. I'll make that post in the genetics board later, but short story: there are codominant genes, where not only one gene is "dominant." As I said in my long-ago post (I believe), let's assume that bending is dominant (or recessive, not that it matters much, because there are also corecessive genes). The way genetics works is that a person can receive *one* of the genes, and since the parents would carry those genes (bender or not), then it's certainly plausible and very likely the case. My interest is to find out what their parents were, bending or non-bending, because that would make it more interesting.
Pleh-I suppose my only point here is that one may *choose* to sympathize with another person or not. Many people feel that they are not in control of their emotions, but I am not among them. How you feel is very much a choice just as any external actions you take are. It's true that emotions are more instinctive and reactive than many of our other choices and actions, but the ability to control your emotions and your worldview is the more general case of Inner Strength that Iroh was talking about (he was speaking more specifically to the emotion of despair, but it can be applied to many other emotions too).[/quote]
I'm sure it could certainly be a misunderstanding, maybe reconciled by the word "empathize" instead of "sympathize," for communication's sake. Although.. I did choose to empathize with the Equalists. It was an innate feeling that I sat down and worked my way through fairly logically. It's not out of random emotion that I think the cause is admirable.
[quote="Pleh wrote:Ah, you are talking about social favoritism and discrimination. In that case, it's true that all people should be treated equally with exception only in regards to responsibility they have taken upon themselves (such as being a police officer or doctor). However, I don't remember seeing any SOCIAL discrimination against non-benders in Avatar. The closest I can think of is either the gAang making fun of Sokka (which they would have done based on their relationship with him regardless of even if their bending status had been inverted) and the fact that all of the Fire Nation Nobility were the best of the best firebenders (though that has more to do with tradition than a dislike of nonbenders, so it gets a little more complicated). Furthermore, the EK didn't require their King to be a bender, so I'd hardly consider there to be any widespread problem.
Pleh]It also depends on what KIND of equality. Absolute equality can only be accomplished with perfect clones which never do anything different from anyone else. Since that's not possible, then the only thing mankind all shares equally is death.[/quote]
Does that mean that we should stop aiming for it? I can't ever be a perfect person, but I can try. There will never be a perfect government, but humankind sure has tried. There will never, ever be perfect equality - but I think that we can still try. I think that Equalists have every right and reason to try for it - their methods are another matter, but their reasoning seems sound to me.
[quote="Pleh wrote: To be honest, this result could even imply a hybrid theory to be the truth, that either spirituality causes genetics or vice versa. The truth is that both theories could have predicted this result, making neither preferable.
Earth001 wrote:So I am wondering. Does anyone know any similarities between Haven City (Jak and Daxter) to United Republic?
tinyartist18 wrote:I don't talk about discrimination, but rather about favoritism, which is almost just as bad. It goes beyond reverence, into blatant bias. The EK king was a figurehead, who seemed to be fairly distant to all but nobles, so while it is a good point, it seems irrelevant to the masses. I speak not of nonbenders being harassed or beaten, or denied privileges (although that may have happened in the years following Aang, I quite doubt it) but instead of the social bias. It may be because I've been interested in these social mechanisms for a while (I suggest reading Black Like Me, which describes outright discrimination, followed by White Like Me - although I haven't gotten too far, it is thusfar quite astute regarding these issues).
Even if none of that is true, society does change, especially in seventy years. Aang was a great avatar, absolutely. But why fight for something if there's no problem? If Avon/Navon/Melon Lord was able to inspire a group of people to fight for this, I would assume that there is a pattern of bender-favoritism.
tinyartist18 wrote:There has been recent research detailing that the actions of ancestors can alter the DNA of the offspring. I'm not sure how applicable that is to the individual, especially since we've seen that benders are benders from the time that they were born, but it's worth looking into. I'd like, if you would indulge me, for you to detail again what you mean by spirituality, because that certainly could affect it.
Tera253 wrote:in other news... apparently that Aang statue was seen in the distance the entire time.
Take a close look at This Image if you don't believe me.
WE HAD EVIDENCE ALL ALONG!!! D=
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest