Dark Qiviut

I would be happy, perhaps they would replace her with a character with a real personality. 

Fluttershy's personality's as real as Rarity's, Dash's, or Apple Bloom's. Despite being a victim of flanderization, she has grown as a character, and many moments and episodes during the series — all of Hurricane Fluttershy, telling Dash the blunt and honest truth in Tanks — showed off why she earned her popularity.

Pro tip:

 

Objectively means something that is based on pure facts. So you may want to avoid using it when talking about a fictional show and discussing a point that is a matter of opinion. In a fictional universe there are no concrete "facts" because it's not real. It is in his opinion she is useless, therefore there can be no "objectively" wrong or right.

Just because an opinion is expressed doesn't mean you won't be called out for providing false context. Opinions when addressing fiction can be illogical and wrong. Calling Fluttershy "useless" is an objectively wrong opinion. Why? Because she's everything except useless regardless of the writing quality. Even Trade Ya!, one of the worst thoroughly characterized episodes of the show, doesn't make her look useless.

Removing a splinter is hardly healing. That and there is always the possibility that someone else could have removed it and to top that off, its removal wasn't central to their advancement. They could have just as easily defeated the creature and carried onwards.

They weren't going to defeat the manticore unless they figured out the source of the problem. Her friends were fighting, but 'Shy saw something else despite not seeing the splinter. Defeating him the way they tried initially was completely unnecessary.

points #2-6, #9-10

The quality of the writing doesn't change one bit of my point. The point here is how despite it, Fluttershy isn't useless. I have plenty of problems with the flaws of Dragonshy, but none of them have anything to do with Fluttershy's "use." Stare Master has problems themselves, especially the Cutie Mark Crusaders' obnoxious shouting, but 'Shy is still responsible for everyone's safety. Without her confronting the cockatrice, who knows what will happen to Twilight or the CMCs.

Of all the Discorded characters, it makes perfect sense for Fluttershy to not fall for his tricks. He tried whatever he could to make Fluttershy fall for it, but she was written to be too "pure," for a lack of a better word, for his evil.

Adrenaline rush. Not to mention another example of the cliche of the shy girl having outbursts of extreme anger. Same joke rewrapped over and over in different packages.

Once more, still doesn't change my point. 'Shy had trouble flying fast while hauling the balloon. Twilight telling her she had to catch Dash to defeat Discord to give her the adrenaline doesn't invalidate her use.

And yet she still contributed a very small amount of wing power, thus further proving her uselessness. She is only able to help them by a small margin which just so happened to be the minimum of what they needed. She was not able to improve much at all despite all of her training, thus showing she also lacks aptitude for physical activity, yet another skill she fails to possess.

In other words, Fluttershy was useless because she barely contributed due to stage fright. That's like saying a person with autism is useless because he or she can't capture social cues or a blind man's useless because he can't see. Stage fright isn't a quirk. It affected both her ability to help out with the rest of the team and herself. But when the team needed her the most, she had to confront her phobia, and she was able to beat that phobia, at least for one night. Echoing the moral, your contribution matters no matter how big or small it is.

Such a discovery had little to do with Fluttershy herself, she just happened to be the one to see it. Nothing about Fluttershy being Fluttershy was central to that discovery, it could have happened to anyone.

She still discovered it. From how The Cutie Map was written, you can make an educated guess that nobody ever saw Starlight with her true Mark. Was it a coincidence? Yes. But she still discovered it. If 'Shy was truly useless, then she wouldn't out her as a fraud.

That being said killing off a fan favorite character would not inherently kill off the show. Many series have eliminated popular characters and had great success as it gets people talking about the show. Controversy sells, thus it would not inherently hurt the show. The only fans that would be lost are the ones who can't handle the fact that they don't control the show and thus the show and that the writers don't adhere to their will.

 

Many popular shows have killed off fan favorite characters and found it to be wildly successful moves.

There are two problems with this argument, as well.

1. Controversy does sell, but for how long? Will it sell well for the long term or short? In shows like Beast Wars, Dinobot was portrayed as a tough, philosophical, honorable, and tragic warrior. It makes sense for the writers there to kill him off at some point in the series, but the question was when. They gave clues early in season two thanks to the monologues and Shakespeare references. Code of Hero was an excellent payoff, and it enhanced his popularity.

    

   But why Fluttershy? What's the actual point in killing her off? You can't say it's because of a so-called "weak" personality or poor writing in many of her episodes; you only gyp the integrity of her character, the rest of the canon, and the fanbase itself. "Character development" or "controversy" don't work, either, for this show runs season by season. When the staff finishes scripting the season, they won't know if there will be a next of FIM. Season four had to be improvised from season three. Season five had to be improvised from season four. Chances are season six will be the same.

    

   Also, consider the series' optimistic backdrop. There are serious and dark episodes like Amending Fences and The Cutie Map, respectively, but FIM doesn't relent its symbol of hope. Killing off a character like Fluttershy will be a double entendre: kill the character and optimistic tone off, permanently.

    

   More importantly, for the reasons stated, it comes across as a rating's trap. In other words, they only pull this plot just to rack up viewership. DHX and Hasbro will only look desperate, which neither need because it's Discovery Family's flagship franchise. You can kill off an entire show this way.

    

   In conclusion, killing off a character like Fluttershy exploits her and the overall theme. It'll be suicide for FIM.

2. The fandom doesn't own the show, and the fandom knows this. Hasbro, DHX, and IDW are entitled to what direction they might want to take, as long as it makes sense for both the optimistic roots of the franchise and Hasbro's bottom line. But they're not entitled to not have their decisions called out and questioned. Analysis is fun, but fandoms aren't hiveminds, and bronies aren't sheep. The brony fandom is no exception. If there's really terrible writing, like Rainbow Falls in the show and The Good, The Bad, and The Ponies in the IDW comics, they're not afraid to break down what went wrong piece by piece.

The original EQG dolls are abominable, sexist ripoffs of Monster High, whose builds are much sturdier.

But these knockoffs?

They're much worse.

Without a doubt, Spike. Yes, he had great secondary roles, but in almost every episode where he's the central character, it's about finding his place in Equestria. But the way they're executed sucks in every episode but one: Secret of My Excess. Currently, there's only one other good Spike episode: Inspiration Manifestation.

Second is Fluttershy. Dragonshy, Green Isn't Your Color, and Hurricane Fluttershy are really good, but episodes like A Bird in the Hoof, Putting Your Hoof Down, and Bats! are among her worst. The former due to a slow pace, Philomena acting like a jerk, and a weak moral. The middle for the obvious. The latter for putting her completely in the right even though Applejack had much more solid reasons to remove the bats.

Flutteruseless

she's still the useless doormat she was in season 1

• Friendship Is Magic, Part 2: Tamed the manticore by pulling out the cursed splinter.
• The Ticket Master: Dusted the Golden Oak Library to woo Twilight into giving her the other Gala ticket.
• Dragonshy: Stood up to the dragon after her friends were assaulted.
• The Stare Master: Was able to tame Opal (off-screen) and then risked her life to save Twilight and the CMCs.
• Green Isn't Your Color: Agreed to model for Photo Finish and then admitted to Rarity personally that she wasn't a fan of it in the climax.
• A Bird in the Hoof: Took care of an ailing Philomena.
• The Return of Harmony: The only one who was forcibly controlled by Discord (Part 1); flew quickly to help Applejack tame a runaway Dash and save Rarity and Pinkie.
• Putting Your Hoof Down: Stood Up to Iron Will when she wasn't satisfied with his advice.
• Hurricane Fluttershy: Worked her tail off to improve from her first trial run and then stepped in, confronted her stage fright head on, and help ascend Ponyville's reservoir water to Cloudesdale.
• A Canterlot Wedding: Orchestrated the choir for the wedding.
• The Crystal Empire: Took part of the jousting match with Rainbow despite her massive stage fright.
• Keep Calm and Flutter On: Beat Discord in his own game.
• Rainbow Falls, Equestria Games: Prepared and took part of the aerial relay event.
• Bats!: Kept her ground when Applejack et al. wanted her to get rid of the vampire fruit bats in a method she greatly despised.
• Filli Vanilli: Even with her stage fright, she took part of the Ponytones by singing as "Big Mac" — Flutterguy — while backstage. When the Ponytones became the thing in Ponyville, she was the one who suggested them to participate in the events.
• The Cutie Map: Found out about Starlight Glimmer's fradulent stance and outed her next morning.
• Tanks for the Memories: Explained to Dash about hibernation and Tank's need to hibernate. When Dash was desperate to keep him awake, she told her the blunt truth: Dash was going to be petless during the winter months.
• Make New Friends, but Keep Discord: Made friends with Tree Hugger while she was away in Three's a Crowd (the first time she did that) and then confronted Discord when he threatened to "banish" TH.

There are many reasons to dislike Fluttershy, but "useless" ain't one of them.

Also, Fluttershy's character during season five has been much better compared to years ago. The Cutie Map, Castle Sweet Castle, Tanks for the Memories, and Make New Friends show the audience how much she's grown; this time, they stick with it.

Rainbow Dash...ugh, overbearing, self centered little shit, who gets away with it, because she acts like her element in her deus ex machina episodes about her.

Rainbow Dash is kind of a jerk most of the time and I've never really been a big fan of her.

• Rainbow Dash is far from being a completely overbearing and self-centered character. In fact, she competes with Rarity as the most three-dimensional character of the entire show.

   

  Griffon the Brush-Off: When Gilda insulted the entire party and Dash's new friends, she called out Gilda for her terrible behavior, as she should. Dash cared for both of them, but Gilda didn't appreciate them, and Dash was having none of it.

   

  Sonic Rainboom: The first episode to introduce her self-confidence issues. Like Rarity, Dash is very afraid of failure. Because she's unable to perform the Sonic Rainboom since her childhood days, she worried she'll be a laughingstock, and who can blame her. When Rarity was falling, Dash wasted no time descending to help her and the Wonderbolts.

   

  Hurricane Fluttershy: Even though Rainbow Dash was tough and with high standards, she wasn't afraid to step back and encourage Fluttershy. Throughout, she treated her as just as valuable a pegasi as everyone else.

   

  Sleepless in Ponyville, Flight to the Finish: Stood by Scootaloo's side while still treating her as a self-respecting pony. FttF in particular.

   

  Testing Testing: She and Twilight exchanged very immature barbs at each other and were called out. Afterwards, they felt very guilty. But no matter the tactic, Dash couldn't fully get into learning the techniques, because they bore her and don't capture her attention. Her immaturity at the beginning is believable because of who she is and how the writers kept her accountable. But she was also very worried that she wouldn't qualify for the reserves, hence her sorrow and meltdown.

   

  These are just a few examples.

• Zhortac, you're not using the "Deus Ex Machina" correctly. A DEM stands for a moment not previously established suddenly barging in as a way to get out of a writing corner. Twilight suddenly turning everyone into breezies after not being involved for almost the entire episode is one such example. Rainbow Dash's loyalty has been established since Part 1 of the pilot, and her loyalty in those episodes are foreshadowed, so they're not DEMs.

Dozens of times, she showed loyalty to not just her friends, but the ability to care for them, too.

• FIM1: Bumped into Twilight and accidentally made her dirty. So she cleaned her up.
• FIM2: When the Shadowbolts gave her a choice to join and abandon her friends, Dash was quick in saying "no."
• Griffon the Brush Off: After Pinkie told Dash not to play the prank on 'Shy, Dash decided to relent, only to get hit with the ink joke. When Gilda personally insulted Pinkie Pie and the rest of her friends, she stood up to Gilda and told her if Gilda was only concerned about being cool, Gilda can go elsewhere. It was obvious that Dash was disappointed in Gilda and wasn't interested in abandoning her friends in Ponyville.
• Winter Wrap Up: Led the weather team and was furious when every important thing the weather team went wrong. Furthermore, she was trying to help lead and cooperate with the others when the others were being way too slow, delaying the weather team itself.
• Fall Weather Friends: After she and Applejack feuded and behaved really terribly, they felt really guilty, but they both decided to go out and set things right by going back to knock all the dead leaves down.
• Sonic Rainboom: Without a shadow of a doubt, one of Dash's shining performances. Even when Dash was telling 'Shy to yell, she stuck by her side. The Cutie Mark Chronicles backs this up by protecting Fluttershy when she was relentlessly bullied. When Rarity and the Wonderbolts were falling for their deaths, she performed the Sonic Rainboom to save them.
• Party of One: Dash decided to check back at Pinkie and ask her to come to Sweet Apple Acres. When Pinkie — in her depressed rage — refused, Dash dragged Pinkie to SAA as a last resort. Without Dash's interference, Pinkie would still be Pinkamena.
• Return of Harmony, Part 2: After Twilight turned her back to normal, Dash frantically asked her friends what happened to the Elements and if Discord was already defeated.
• Lesson Zero: When AJ needed to build a new barn, Dash needed to destroy the old one first.
• Mare Do Well: Her friends were major jerks, and they literally tried to emotionally hurt her. But she still stuck by them when any friend in real life would've dumped them.
• The Last Roundup: Interrogating Applejack for not returning, thereby showing her concern for her friend.
• Hurricane Fluttershy: After realizing Fluttershy's severe stage fright, Dash relaxed her firm, leader-esque, sergeant-like personality and gave her plenty of encouragement. After Fluttershy ran off in tears, she was worried about her. During the final act, she stopped caring about the record and was more focused on actually completing the win-or-nothing act, and she led the cheer for Fluttershy when she courageously flew into the tornado and helped get the reservoir to fly into Cloudesdale.
• The Crystal Empire, Part 2: Whether Fluttershy liked it or not, Dash had to keep the Crystal Ponies distracted enough to not collapse into fear and give them a good time. Her action was in character because it was justified.
• Sleepless in Ponyville & Wonderbolts Academy: Each the peak of her three-dimensional characterization. There are essays breaking down her wonderful balance of character during these two, especially WA.
• Magical Mystery Cure: Helping Rarity clear out the weather when she had no idea what to do.
• Flight to the Finish: Trained the CMCs while still keeping her cool. As Scootaloo doubted herself, Dash said one of the most important lines in the whole show:

  Rainbow Dash: But that was me! You're you! And it just doesn't matter if you can fly or not. Your routine was amazing 'cause it represented exactly what makes Ponyville special. You do still know what that is, right?

  Another reason why her words of encouragement were so important is how cleverly it reaffirms the continuity from Sleepless in Ponyville without distracting the viewer.

   

  Throughout FttF, she helped train the CMCs to win the Ponyville flag-carrying contest and dropped her guard when Scootaloo didn't board. If Dash truly wasn't a role model, then she wouldn't have cared for Scoots's well-being so much. But Dash took her word from SiP and backed it up!

• Rainbow Falls: Stuck by her team even though they weren't the best fliers.
• Equestria Games: Wasn't focused so much on winning. Instead, she encouraged her competition to do the best they can. Although her aerial relay team didn't win, she wasn't so upset about it. This alone is a testament to her growth as a character.
• The Cutie Map: She and her friends were stuck in Starlight's brainwashing cell, but she remained firm in her own morals and stayed by her friends' side throughout.
• The Lost Treasure of Griffonstone: Decided to put her past conflict with Gilda behind her, and their relationship started fresh.

Throughout the series, she has a really insecure side and doesn't like to show it because she doesn't want to be seen as weak. This makes her extremely three-dimensional as a character by taking her archetype and weaving in something new and real. So many people can relate to a character like her: out and proud, yet reserved and nervous on the inside. Sonic Rainboom, Wonderbolts Academy, and Testing Testing are brilliant examples featuring her vulnerability, and all of them do it without being forced.

 

Dash weaves and leans on emotions. Sure, every main character does that, too. But Dash is arguably one of the most out about it. When you see her upset, you know it immediately, and people can understand how mentally crippling it can be to her.

 

The only way I can keep watching when she comes on screen is by pretending that this episode never happened.

That's like saying the only way you can watch the show when Twilight Sparkle or Fluttershy are on screen is by pretending their terrible actions never happened. What happened with Rainbow Dash in episodes like Tanks for the Memories happened. It's just as much a part of the canon, and that's not changing. What she did in the past might come back and play a role in future episodes, like Twilight in Amending Fences.

If you hate any of the mane six please do yourself and me a favor and stop watching the show and leave the fandom.

If you have real hatred for one of the mane six, I don't even consider you a fan.

Your logic behind this is objectively wrong, because it's dangerous. Just because a fan hates a main character doesn't mean they're not fans of the product. Valid reasons for hating a character, including a main one, exist. Observe them and see whether they make sense or not.

Hating Fluttershy because her character had constantly reset, devolved into a flanderized mess in between Luna Eclipsed and Twilight's Kingdom, and had two of her main episodes show her do terrible things are valid. This is a show about likeable characters and using these characters to help teach morals, so Fluttershy being shown to do reprehensible actions — verbally abusing her friends in Putting Your Hoof Down; assaulting Rainbow Dash and not following up her end of the deal in Dragon Quest; manipulating Discord in Keep Calm, Princess Twilight Sparkle, and Make Friends — and not suffering any reasonable consequences implies she can do even worse and get away with it. If any of these episodes were my first, and I saw that from her, I wouldn't want anything to do with her.

But hating Fluttershy because she's mostly useless is not a good reason because it's false.

The brony fandom doesn't belong to some form of club like your "No True Scottsman" fallacy implies. The brony fandom belongs to everyone. Telling others to stop watching the show/"leave the fandom" because they hate a character is completely elitist, and it makes you look no better than the people you claim to dislike.

I really hate Luna, mostly because of her fans.

If you're going to hate a character, hate him or her for his or her character quality only. To blame the fans no matter the scale is to take what happened in the show and shift it on the fanbase. Never scapegoat the fans.

I knew about the Easter Egg since Pinkie Apple Pie aired, but I don't recommend paying attention to rumors, especially ones on YouTube, since there's no actual proof of the animator's firing.

Instacoffee.

Fix'd.

BTW, @@Jeric, I heard Button's Mom is dumping you for Flash Sentry. XP

@@Lightwing, Cadance is worst princess.

Contrary to popular belief, Fluttershy is @Simon's WORST pony!

Yet they call themselves anti-bronies.

If they respect the fanbase, then still doesn't change how they're not. Those friends are using the wrong title.

I am going to go on a wager here and say you don't have kids.

Just because I don't have kids doesn't mean they shouldn't be called out for their complete irresponsibility for not watching their kids. Kids shouldn't be responsible for something their parents are able to avoid when going online.

Do you see the problem with blaming the parents?

There's no corner-cutting. Your comparisons are terrible.

• In a place like a school library, if the parent is not there, the school is completely responsible for monitoring what their kids see. This includes the teachers (if allowed in), librarians, and the heads of the school. One of the purposes of adults in the school is to not only teach children, but keep them safe, too. Keeping NSFW content out of kids' hands is one such example. There should be very strict parental controls on these computers so the porn and gore are as far away as possible.

   

  If a teacher accidentally gave them X-rated content instead of family-friendly homework, then that's the teacher's fault.

• No child should have an iPhone without strict parental controls. iPhones, iPads, and iPod Touches should only be given to kids if the parent is responsible for seeing the content and approving the page first. If the guardian slips up, and the kid sees R34, then it is the parent's fault. Why? Because the parent let his or her guard down and became reactive, not proactive.
• If they're at a friend's house, then the parent of the friend is responsible for monitoring what their kids see. The friend's parent should be like the kid's own vigilant parent: supervise all content online. (If the kid is younger than thirteen or fourteen, then the kids should be offline.) But if they go online and see naughty content, then the friend's parent's at fault.
• If the kids have Internet access on a game console, then the guardian who owns the console is responsible. If it's in his or her own parent's house, then the parent is responsible. If in a friend's house, it's the friend's parents. Like the computer, tablet, MP3 player, or smartphone, parental controls exist. Set it up and monitor every single webpage before giving access to their kids. (I don't know if it's possible today, but I wouldn't enable the Internet on a game console till they reach thirteen at least.)

In a place like the four-year-old girl's home, her parent is one-hundred-percent responsible for everything her child saw online*. All parental controls should be strict while allowing their children access online after getting parental approval for everything out there. If the parent can't be with the child, then the Internet and chat-related apps should be disabled (password-coded with a good password) until the parent returns.

On Skype, some brony posted R34 images in a group where kids saw it, including a young girl. They probably got traumatized knowing there are MLP fans who just shove NSFW pony art wherever they feel like it, without giving a single heck or thought about who sees it. Maybe that person didn't know there were kids in the group, but the brony was still incredibly irresponsible and it wasn't even a NSFW group.

*As a general example, this is one of those exceptions. The brony who posted the porn was completely irresponsible. If I was a parent and saw that, I would be incredibly upset at the person who did it and give him or her a long talk, assuming he wasn't a troll. But would I be upset at the bronies who like clop and the thought that bronies who like porn is fine? No. Even though this dude posted the porn, there are other clop artists who would be very upset over it, too. To paint cloppers with such a broad brush makes me no better (if not worse) than the clopper him or herself.

One question, though: Why were there kids (including a young girl) on Skype, anyway? Were there any settings to prevent anyone from joining without consent? Was it a chat group, video log, or a combo? Did anyone give the person permission to go into that group? How old was the dude, anyway?

You are assuming an awful lot. How do we know that the child was completely unsupervised or that safe search filters were not on?

• Recently, I let her go online for the 1st time to entertain herself for a while I was doing a little busy work around the house.

  The troll's words from her own note. She stated specifically in part one of the note that she left her daughter to "entertain herself" online — in other words, wander online alone — while she was housekeeping. Any responsible parent will never allow their kid — especially one this young — to ever explore the Internet without proactive permission. Computers aren't babysitters.

• Nobody knows what settings were on, because she never stated the specifications. We don't know if SafeSearch was actually on at the time she left her daughter alone. We don't know where she even found the adult images. Were they on Google? Bing? A website where adult content is filtered, but was able to bypass it for some reason?
• From the way her child acted, she was very familiar with what is appropriate or not. From the description within the note, the kid immediately knew what porn is. Children at such a young age won't even know the concept of pornography. Remember, the mom claimed this is her toddler's first time online altogether.

Her entire note is very sketchy. The fact that she communicated privately to a user with a history of vile brony-bashing makes it worse. Anyone with an ounce of common sense won't point the finger to bronies who posted their adult images or fanfiction and instead point at her for being a terrible parent. There's some speculation that her note is completely fabricated, this being one of them.

But let's just say it is true. Let's say her toddler found the porn via a search engine. Hypothetically, with safe search on. The mom actually left her daughter to wander around online while she housekept. And then later, she found out about the bronies and bronies who did like to talk about and post clop.

It's completely her mom's responsibility! Her situation is completely avoidable. If she was actually being a mom, then she wouldn't have allowed her daughter to go online until she came back. Yet, rather than accept responsibility, she spewed stereotypical and sexist bullshit about male bronies. Rather than treat people individually, she painted bronies under one large brush and called all of them misogynist. People like her are what we like to call SJWs: people who claim are fighting for justice, yet are no worse than the people she claims she's advocating against. This "mom" pinned the blame on everyone except herself and acted like a right-wing propagandist on Fox News! That's bad parenting.

This is not the bronies' fault in any way, shape, or form. It's the mom's fault all the way. No exceptions!

In other words:

I'm sorry but your "strikes" are not valid.

Completely wrong. All three strikes stand.

Also, your entire post and reply to me does nothing except show you haven't read the note thoroughly or at all.

I find it interesting that the only people you're not blaming are the people who actually made the content. Who are at fault just as much as everyone else. How do we know that these artists didn't tag things properly?

Because, once more, there's no objectively good reason to blame the people who made the content for the reasons already stated. We don't know where the kid saw the content, how she found it, or if she even went online after all. She only said her daughter found the adult content while she wasn't looking, assuming the story isn't full of misandrist lies. Nothing more. From the notes themselves, she also didn't search her Internet history; if it's not on a privacy setting and with cookies on, she'd know where in a heartbeat. The mom's note is more holey than the Bible.

So let me get this right:

 

If some porn artists do not tag their content correctly, it's up to a search engine which has billions of article to filter on a daily basis to catch it and if it slips through the cracks it's their fault?

 

Yeah no.

Even if they don't tag it, it still is Google's fault. The brony who doesn't tag the adult content should tag it. If he doesn't, report it to hide it. But it doesn't absolve Google or any other search engine, either. Search engines like Google's are smart enough to know what's safe or work and not. But images can and will squeak through, whether they're tagged or not; this means the people who look through the image engine need to help out the sites and filter the content. If an image slips through, report it.

To be very blunt, even if you filter the content yourself, it doesn't mean the site itself is safe for work. DeviantArt isn't. Tumblr isn't. YouTube isn't. Fanfiction.net, Mediaminer.org aren't. Search engines aren't. Wikipedia isn't. You can filter NSFW content, but it doesn't mean they'll filter content appropriate for teens. YouTube, DeviantArt, and this forum only filter content inappropriate for people under eighteen. Kids should only go on specific websites that allow them to go on as long as parents have their formal, legal consent and final word for everything. Some family-friendly corporations make it clear that parents need to give their kids permission to log on to their websites. To be specific, guardians must explore the site to see if the content is appropos; even if it's SFW, guardians have the final word.

I am absolutely using it correctly. You are blaming the mother. The mother's child was traumatized. She is a victim. You have your kid witness some messed up stuff and say it doesn't affect you.

Once more, you keep using it incorrectly, and you're wrong about this entirely. Her mom is not a victim. Only the child herself is. From how she writes, she's very familiar with Tumblr. This means she should be familiar with how not only the site works, but her parental controls, too. By not accepting responsibility for her own recklessness that wouldn't have happened had she wasn't being stupid and blaming the bronies (who clop) and painting a large brush on male bronies, she's shifting the blame. By shifting the blame, she not only scapegoats the entire brony fandom, but her own daughter, too! She's teaching her it's okay to:

• Blame other people once she gets older. What happens when the kid is responsible for doing something wrong once she's old enough to know right from wrong? Will she pass the blame onto them, or will she accept responsibility? Based on her mom's disgusting attitude, you can guess it'll be the former.
• Stereotype other fans. Stereotypes are a basis of bigotry. Racism, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, sexism, ableism, bigotry against fans and fandoms stem from this garbage. The second you stereotype, you're not any better than the fans you claim to be against. The second you think stereotyping is okay, you're no better than a white supremacist.
• Be sexist to not just men, but also other women. Yes, both misandry and misogyny. Sexism doesn't simply affect one gender. It affects everyone. If you're sexist against men, you affecting the quality of life for women. If you're sexist against women, you affect the quality of life for men. What about the minority sexes and genders? Sexism against the primary genders affects them, too. This idiot "mom" is saying sexism against men is okay, thereby teaching her sexism altogether is okay.

   

  Why?

   

  Because the brony fandom has plenty of R34.

   

  *whistle* Time out!

   

  What she forgets (and you ignore after I told you this last time) is how thousands of bronies who like clop or do clop are women. But to say their like for porn disregards women and children is BULLSHIT! Adult fan content of cartoons (appropriate for kids) have been around for almost a century, and this isn't the only fandom that does it. Secondly, she only targets (male) bronies for their porn. Why the hell didn't she paint other fandoms with such a broad brush, either? Or maybe she should've done like what any 'Net-savvy, intelligent, responsible parent would do and:

  • Examine the people who made the clop
  • Talk to them about it
  • Have them explain to her why they like making fanart whether it's family-friendly or not
  • Use the predicament her daughter had as a positive teaching experience for everyone.

Instead, she took the easy way out.

By the way, the troll also acted like these guys literally took control of the show and its impact away from little girls. She couldn't be any more factually wrong.

When did I say that? I said nothing of the sort.

You did. Re-read the segment:

When you defend all bronies, even the ones causing the problems it looks more like you just don't want to admit there ARE bad seeds in the brony fandom at all. Not that you want to eliminate negative stereotypes, you just don't want to admit that anyone in the brony fandom can do any wrong.

Just because I defend bronies doesn't mean I don't call other bronies out for their bad behavior. Observe my history here, I won't hesitate to call out crap that I see in the fandom. But what do I do that's different from some of the other people, including plenty of them in this thread?

• Just because a brony does stupid shit doesn't mean I don't like them nor do I believe he should go to hell. People who do something wrong can also be very good people. Address the problem and see if it can be changed for the better.
• Just because there are bad people in this fandom doesn't give me the right to stereotype the fandom as a whole. You have massive conventions, approximately ten million bronies worldwide, a very strong relationship between the fandom and staff, and a hell of a lot of charity work. Bad bronies exist, but it doesn't change the fact that there are hundreds of thousands more good people here. The second you use bad bronies as a reason to scapegoat for any reason (including vainly "ditching" the title), you're no better than the people you claim to despise.
• I actually understand why the reasons to dislike the fandom are objectively worse than all the porn and so-called "brony cringe" combined.

   

  Bronies who like porn. Bronies who clop. Bronies who celebrate their fandom via collections, brony clothing, avatars, sigs, talking about it. The bronies who have relationships with tulpas. The brony who fell in love with Twilight Sparkle. There's absolutely nothing wrong with any of it, and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. As long as it doesn't affect anyone's lives for the worse and the people themselves live happy and healthy lives, why the hell should I even think about giving a damn what they do?

And I made this plain and clear in my posts in this thread, and I'll do it again. Bronies who like porn aren't a problem. Bronies who like gore aren't a problem. Bronies who like vore aren't a problem. Bronies who admit to liking "cringe" content aren't a problem. The attitude of people who are boisterous about loving their shows can be a problem, but the people themselves can be just as fantastic as the ones who prefer to keep their passions to themselves. Depending on the rules of their sites and groups, they're completely entitled to discussing it whenever they see fit. Is that a problem? Hell, no! Anyone who thinks otherwise is helping perpetuate the "closet brony" problem. Discussion about it is healthy. Why? Because it bridges gaps and makes people feel comfortable about themselves.

If that "mother" bothered to research bronies correctly and take responsibility for her own poor parenting, then maybe she would've learned something. How maybe bronies who like porn are just like her mom, except the sexism.

You claim that I believe bronies can do no wrong. That's a strawman.

How about instead of blaming the mother and insisting it was everyone's faults but the bronies you advocate people keeping their porn tagged properly and in the correct place and advocate issuing an apology to this parent whom had their child exposed to something they should not have been exposed to.

Correction. Rather than you giving her ass a pass, call her out for stereotyping, misandry, shifting the blame, guilt-tripping the fandom as a bunch of misogynist pigs, and (along with the anti-brony herself) creating a pawn out of her daughter (if she has one)?

Kids shouldn't be online alone. The fact that she allegedly allowed her four-year-old to go online on her own is inconceivable. The fact that you (and by extension so many people on Tumblr) pin ZERO responsibility on her mother and are serious about it is alarming!

The only one of the duo who deserves an apology is her daughter. Sorry that (if it happened) she accidentally looked online when her mom was busy housekeeping and that she's being raised by someone with a backwards parenting mentality. Her mom, though, doesn't deserve one apology whatsoever. She didn't earn it when she left her daughter alone during a completely avoidable predicament. She lost all sympathy when she scapegoated them for her own doing.

Seriously, all of this for a four-part Tumblr note that was nothing but pure troll-bait.

You want to know why people have a negative opinion of bronies? Because when stuff like this happens, bronies like you defend it and turn around and blame everyone but other bronies for the problem.

Wrong. The real reason is because people like the troll desired to stir the anti-bronydom pot that plagues Tumblr and paint everyone under a large brush. This troll and anti-brony herself enforced a stereotype on a website where bronies are still very vulnerable. But rather than conducting their own research and treating bronies individually, so many suck up to this bait, and bronies become a major laughingstock when there are no good reasons for it in the first place.

You claim my attitude's a problem? The pot's calling the kettle black. The only attitude you should have a problem with is your own.

So if anyone points out the bad people in well anything that is bad to you?!

You want people to ignore those people..

Re-read what I wrote in my posts in this thread, because you pulled the very same strawman I called out earlier. What I said is just because there are bad people in fandom doesn't give you the right to paint a whole fandom under a broad brush. You don't ignore the bad, but you shouldn't ignore the good, either. Just because bad people exist in this fandom doesn't mean the whole fandom will tank like the Philadelphia 76ers.

....I'm done I'm done with this entire fandom

One of the bigger problems I'm seeing is how way too many people treat the concept of "fandom" as some kind of clique or cult. That's false. A fandom is merely a whole collection of fans. Replace "fandom" with "fanbase," and you get the same definition. You say you're "done" with the brony fandom, yet you're still in the fandom for one reason only: you like the product just like nearly all of us here. You help expand the brony fandom just by being a brony. If you're a Sonic fan like myself, then you're in the Sonic fandom. Even if you don't participate in the fandom actively, you're in the fandom passively because you still follow FIM in some way or another. Unless you're not a fan of the product, it's impossible for you to disassociate from a fanbase when you're already in a fanbase.

People like you is why I stopped calling myself a brony

You and the people who brohoofed your post are wrong on this entirely. Just like Tommy Oliver chose to change his review format in response to stupid criticism and then burn bridges, you chose to "ditch" the title in hopes to vainly disassociate yourself from the fanbase and scapegoated other people like myself. Nobody in this fandom forced you to give it up. Your reasoning is a lot like why many feminist separatists abandon the "feminist" title as a result of misandrists adopting the term. This terrible mindset makes you perpetuate the stereotypes you try to avoid more accurately than them by claiming "I'm not one of them." Fans come in all shapes, sizes, cultures, and attitude. Never scapegoat fans for any reason.

You're a fan of FIM, aren't you? If so, that makes you a brony. "FIM fan" and "brony" are interchangeable, synonymous terms. The only way to truly give up the title is to stop being a fan of the product.

Try to talk about one bad brony and they'll think your talking about them and attack and send you death threats.

If this happened to you, then I'm sorry you had to endure this. I don't care who it is or what reason it is. Personal attacks and death threats are among the lowest form of humanity. Nobody should tolerate this under any circumstances. I've seen others get personally attacked on this site and off, and they always make me angry. Once a few years ago, someone on here admitted in his status to sending another user a death threat; fortunately, he got kicked off not long later. I was personally attacked on this forum myself, and the most vile part about it is how sometimes a lot of people actually brohoofed the flame. (I wish the people who brohoofed the abusive content receive the same "abusive behavior" warning as the people who sent them; the people who enable the attacks are no better than the enabler.)

However, you're handling your terrible experience irresponsibly. You're entitled to not like certain people in the fandom, and I don't blame you for it, but you're not entitled to paint a fandom under a broad brush. The second you do that, you're stereotyping. Stereotypes are a basis of prejudice. This causes other people in other fandoms to feel guilty of simply liking something even though they did nothing wrong. Stereotyping fans doesn't stay confined within the fandom or online. Like what I wrote before, they bleed into society, and you create terrible misconceptions that result in inadvertent evil. By stereotyping, you're exploiting your terrible experiences rather than using it to help you grow as a person. Anytime you stereotype a fandom, you imply that you can't bother to express an opinion without bigotry.

Because bronies themselves aren't hating, bashing or stereotyping each other....

Don't get sarcastic with me. Bronies who stereotype other bronies are no better, either. This attitude should be called out, too.

The show would be better off without her. She holds back the entire group. A few shining moments of usefulness do not make up for how worthless she is as one of the element bearers.

You're objectively wrong.

1. Healed the manticore by pulling out the splinter.
2. Cleaned up the Golden Oak Library to receive Twi's second ticket.
3. After her friends were assaulted, Fluttershy scolded the dragon to the point of submission and convinced him to relocate.
4. She chose to babysit the Cutie Mark Crusaders and risked her life to save them and Twilight Sparkle.
5. Because she saw a sick bird, she brought him to her cottage to take care of him until he felt better.
6. Countertrolled Discord; only she wasn't coerced.
7. Corralled Rainbow Dash as she flew away from the ReMane Five, saving Pinkie and Rarity in the process.
8. Punched her stage fright in the face and helped pull the rest of Ponyville's reservoir water to Cloudesdale.
9. Became Discord's first friend.
10. Contributed to the Equestria Games.
11. Saw Starlight's disguised cutie mark and outed her.

And there's plenty more that I didn't mention yet.

Besides, like what @@Banul already said, this ain't about who's more useful than another. This is a show about friendship, and Fluttershy's just as much a friend as the rest of the ReMane Five. Combined with her being one of the most popular characters in the fandom, killing her off will be suicide for the show.

Without a doubt!

To be blunt, Batman & Robin completely sucks, specifically the oversexualized costume design, lame puns, and nonsensical script.

But I still love it. Of the four pre-2000s live-action Batman movies in this canon, this is still my most favorite.

It is better to call a female member of the fandom a Pegasister, as females are not suited to the 'Bro' part of Brony.

That's a shallow way of viewing the "brony" title. For one, "bro" isn't merely confined to male friends anymore. Depending on where you live, you have patches of people, including girls, refer to their friends regardless of gender as "bros" to reflect their tight bond. A person doesn't have to be a boy to be a "bro." Also, a lot of girls really dislike the term "pegasister" because you're putting the female gender — the demographic expected to like FIM — on an island separated from the rest of the fandom whereas "brony" has a gender-neutral, feminist backdrop.

Good. Toys should never be split based on gender!

Pegasister. Brony sounds a little too masculine 

Just because a name like "brony" sounds masculine doesn't mean it's male-oriented or vice-versa. "Masculinity" and "femininity" are gender-neutral social constructs and should be treated as such.

@@StudioUAC, You're not understanding the content rating's purpose. Shows with a content rating indicates what's appropriate for the base demographic. "TV-Y" is, by far, the strictest content rating for American TV, for it must be appropriate for very young kids at least. It doesn't mean it's simply for kids or a "kids' show." Nor does it mean FIM is a "kids' show" and not an all-ages/family show.

It just bugs me that people want to spoil the core concept of the whole thing by having all of the characters pairing off with each other.

Shipping doesn't spoil the friendship concept at all. As a shipper myself, I ship because it's a lot of fun to work with. You have the more popular ships followed by the crack-ships. Shipping in fanart and fanfic lets you go crazy, have fun, and walk away not regretting it (much ). That doesn't translate into disrespecting the core of the show.

It's such a silly thing since its only reasoning is the damn last names.

No. Doctor/Derpy gained popularity for two reasons:

1. In Hearts & Hooves Day, there was one shot of them standing next to each other or talking to one another. You can't see all the detail because they looked like thumbnails, but they're there. That caused plenty of what ifs, similar to Lyra/Bon and how much they were near each other in random shots.
2. Doctor Whooves and Assistant. This fan project began in 2011, and it caused the ship to take off. H&HD gave DoctorDerpy canon fodder, which we saw in Slice of Life.

I'll bump this one up, because one area where unfortunate implications really bothers me the most comes from badly written morals.

One of them I'll talk about comes from this Micro-Series comic.

For comic-readers, you might remember the wording of the moral.

 

And that's how I learned that you should never let your fear of being criticized stop you from expressing yourself through art!

 

Especially if you have terrific friends to help you do it!

 

Even though I suspect they do not understand the artistic impulse that drives me.

 

Which makes them even more terrific!

To explain what the moral is really trying to say, Fluttershy was trying to explain through the moral that you shouldn't let badly worded criticism stop you from loving your passions.

But there are three VERY big problems.

1. The wording is absolutely terrible. Rather than say really bogus criticism is bad, the moral states that all criticism is bad albeit only focusing on the negative type. Other types of criticism exists, including constructive criticism ("concrit," for short); the very next issue, constructive criticism resulted in Pinkie Pie coming up with the idea of starting a clown school.
2. The moral stems from snooty comments from Praiser Pan. The critic featured is a straw man, a character designed to be proven wrong only. Notice how all of his negative criticisms have absolutely no merit. They're just as crappy as destructive criticism and online flames disguised as criticisms.
3. The criticism angle is extremely contrived. In order to get the moral across, there was bad negative criticism. What about constructive criticism? By featuring just one type of critique, it's telling the audience only one type of criticism exists, and there's no purpose for criticism. There are multiple angles of criticism to explore. Secondly, the criticism angle pops up out of nowhere. It doesn't appear until Praiser Pan shows up. A moral such as "don't hide your passions" works much better because Part 1 was about her having a secret passion and being afraid to admit it.

Yes, the comics have more of the older audience in mind, while the show balances between kids and adults. One big problem: children read the comics, too. As worded, it's a terrible lesson to teach children. Not all criticism is good. We all know that. But to paint criticism under a broad brush teaches kids that they should be praised only. Never insult children.

I'm a male, and I use "brony" because "brony" is the gender- and age-neutral term for fans of FIM. I hate the term "pegasister," because it unnecessarily segregates the fandom based on gender by relying on the sexist "'brony' = 'male fan'" lie.

Are you sure about that? I know a few self proclaimed anti-bronies that do not do that. So right now you're stereotyping.

Wrong here. Someone who doesn't like FIM, yet respects the fandom, is a non-brony. Anti-bronies are people who hate, bash, or stereotype the fandom. If those so-called "anti-bronies" don't do any of the stuff, then they're non-bronies. Anti-bronies rely on hate, non-bronies don't.

I disagree. I would be pretty mad at a group of people who make porn of a children's cartoon that my kid was exposed to. I think it's very well justified.

To say it's justified to hate bronies based on R34 is to say other fans should be hated for porn. People have made adult art of cartoons appropriate for kids dating back to the early 20th century. This isn't new, and it makes no sense for people to make a fuss about clop when they don't for others. Like I said, there's nothing inherently bad or gross about people who draw or write porn, whether it's bronies, furries, Sonic fans, anime fans, or whatever. Don't be mad at them for liking porn. Be mad at your search engines for not filtering it.

(Of course, people spamming porn just to troll is a different story, like what happened on here by users who wanted to get themselves banned a few years ago; that is not cool!)

Victim blaming? Blame the parents?

Kids don't get, won't be, and shouldn't be blamed for their parents' irresponsibility for filtering content. Kids are kids and don't know any better. Any responsible parent should always monitor the sites before their kids visit. Kids, especially young minors, should only go to websites with very strict, corporate moderation where it's consistently safe for work. Post Cereal and 4Kids were two such examples. Google and Bing aren't. Just because I don't have kids doesn't mean I can't call out for their guardians' ineptitude.

That is not true at all. Her mom clearly thought it would be safe for her kid to be looking up MLP stuff considering the show is for kids. However that isn't what she found. You're blaming the victim again.

You're objectively wrong here. The mom left her four-year-old daughter to wander around the Internet alone. You never leave your kids to explore the Internet, especially a toddler, alone. That's strike one against her. Her daughter found naughty FIM content without her mother by her side. The Internet is not a safe place to be in general. Strike two. But rather than taking responsibility for her own irresponsibility, she scapegoated the bronies as a bunch of porn-loving freaks and supported a Tumblr group known to bash them. Strike three, sit in the dugout.

"Victim-blaming"? You're not using it correctly. If I were to blame the victim, I would be blaming the child. The kid was four! She's nowhere close to being at fault. Like I wrote before:

The mom scapegoated the bronies when the fault is purely on the mom.

The mom is the only one responsible for the mess her child got in, period. What were the mom's search-engine settings? Was safe search on? Was it off? Did the kid tinker with it? How did the kid locate it? What was the content that the child even found, anyway? How does she define porn, anyway? Was it something related to Cupcakes? Maybe something saucy (which may or may not ever get filtered by Google or YouTube because it's very borderline)? Were the characters in a same-sex relationship (which won't be filtered lest it's NSFW)? The mom's content is weak and vague. There are way too many open ends for anyone to honestly believe the bronies are at fault here.

More importantly, it's very bad parenting to believe that because the professional content is appropriate for kids, they shouldn't assume something adult about these products is out there. Always apply a worst-case scenario.

So the art that is not tagged properly is no one's fault? And the art that escapes is google's fault?

I would say "yes." Even if the art isn't properly tagged in places like Tumblr, Google is capable of understanding what content is safe for work or not. Even if the art is tagged properly, it can still slip through the cracks like rainwater. If something slips by, flag the image to the search-engine website to have it filtered. SafeSearch Wrap Up was designed to filter content that slipped by for a reason.

Victim blaming.

To paraphrase a YT meme, you keep using it, but you're not using it correctly.

So none of the blame falls upon the people pumping out this porn faster than Sonic can crap out turbo turds?

Absolutely it's not their fault. You can't blame a fandom for something that:

1. It's out of their control.
2. The mom would've been able to avoid if she was damn responsible.
3. Was pure hearsay.

Kids are curious creatures. If you try to make them avoid it, they will try to find the content that their guardians are doing their best to shield. You're not always going to shield every bit of R34, and you can't control everything everyone else does. But parents can take control of their own situation, one of them being the supervisor of their kid's account and exploring the areas they wish to go to thoroughly before letting them on. If they find R34, report the content. If the kid see it and is bothered by it, talk about it, let them know that just because older fans post adult content doesn't mean they're problematic nor do they show no respect for the franchise. Kids aren't stupid.

When you defend all bronies, even the ones causing the problems it looks more like you just don't want to admit there ARE bad seeds in the brony fandom at all. Not that you want to eliminate negative stereotypes, you just don't want to admit that anyone in the brony fandom can do any wrong.

Your whole rebuttal died the very second you posted your transparent strawman. There are bad bronies, and they should be called out for their bad behavior. The problem here is you claim that kids seeing adult content is a good reason to hate bronies, the fandom itself, and paint a broad brush. It's not. You can dislike how some bronies behave, but it's ridiculous to use their behavior as a reason to bash or stereotype a fandom. Bronies who like adult content aren't gross, unappreciative of the show, or demented. There's nothing with the content or the bronies who love it, post it, or talk about it (as long as it's in the appropriate areas of the website). Also, a lot of bronies who like and post adult content are women; you can argue there as many women bronies who love FIM R34 as men. The bronies who love R34 are just as much a brony as those who don't. Anyone who thinks it's okay to call bronies who like "gross" content a problem or think kids seeing "gross" content makes bronies a problem is lying.

Isn't the fandom doing the same to anti-bronies?

There's a very big difference. To be an anti-brony is to hate, bash, or stereotype bronies. That kind of attitude is not okay and shouldn't be tolerated at all.

In fact, likely their only exposure to the existence of such a fandom might be... When their child accidentally runs into the gross stuff that Bronies have failed to properly tag.

That's still a lousy reason to dislike bronies or the fandom. For one, children under the age of thirteen should not be allowed to go online unless it's a place where they allow kids to go to. And even then, parents should always supervise their kids and filter websites. I still remember when one idiot mom allowed her four-year-old daughter to roam online unsupervised, only to find R34. The mom scapegoated the bronies when the fault is purely on the mom. Secondly, there is art that's properly tagged (i.e., from Derpibooru), yet still escape into the non-explicit section. Rare, but it happens. That's nothing to do with bronies and more to do with Google. If you find them leaked onto the non-explicit section, report the image to Google to have it filtered.

Simply put, if you let your kid wander around online, and you're concerned about what kids see, that makes you, the parent, the problem, not the fans who churn "gross" imagery. The parent should find a solution, not scapegoat bronies for her own failure.

I've seen a lot of MLP stuff I never wanted to see, with safe-search on.

Finding NSFW/R34/whatever else MLP art is ridiculously easy. Too easy.

Equestria-Faily did something like that (and made a Tumblr post about brony porn myths, which I can't link here), and I just Googled various MLP content. To be blunt, it's a really big myth. I searched a few things on Google (Applejack, Twilight Sparkle, MLP, Sunset Shimmer). Only one image out of several hundred images were explicit. About three were borderline.

@, the fact that you have to use sarcasm to get your point across does nothing except make your opinion feel very insincere and enforce your critics'.

"Don't feed the troll" is advice and demeaning the troll not blaming the receiver it's treating him lower than you and no longer as equals.

Yup. When you say stuff like "don't feed the troll" you're treating the troll like a child. Telling people not to feed them like they are some kind of zoo animal. Thus empowering the victim while taking power away from the troll.

When I tell people don't feed trolls I am offering general advice, not blaming anyone. Ignoring trolls has proven the only feasible defense against them.

It's not victim blaming, it's giving practical advice.

That's the intention, but there's a big difference between intention and implication. When you hear insults outdoors, you may be able to ignore them; you can get them ejected or arrested for disorderly conduct (or hate speech in European countries if they spew slurs). Online, it's much more different. Insults spewed at you don't go away; when they're online, they're there forever.

When you tell the target "don't feed the troll," you're telling the victim that the victim is responsible for being trolled. That there's some level of etiquette in order to not be trolled. You're not silencing the troll. You're silencing yourself. To say, "don't feed the troll" is to tolerate the problem and blame the victim. Instead of giving power to the target, you're giving power to the aggressor. Trolls want an audience. Pretending the problem doesn't exist allows these assholes to spread their hate to other corners of the web.

Why did "don't feed the troll" work a long time ago? Because trolls were basically pests. They wanted to get a rise out of you. Ignoring it from all ends could work. You can't apply "don't feed the troll" universally today because trolling is much more vicious now. There's no limit to modern trolling; if there's a line not to cross, they'll cross it. You have cases of trolls harassing, stalking, threatening, swatting, and doxxing. All within the past five years alone. A lot of trolling today relies on making the target suffer to the point where the bullying is everywhere they go. Sometimes the cyberbullying gets so bad, they may attempt suicide just so they can get away from it.

Words can be hurtful, yes but they only have the power you give them.

Easier said than done. A lot of insults have inherent hate in them, such as ethnic slurs. You may not react to the troll personally, but that doesn't mean others will nor shouldn't there be any consequences for the person using the slur. Even if you don't react externally, it doesn't mean they won't hurt internally. Slurs attack people at the very core; they're made to hate. There should be absolutely zero tolerance for them.

Words can hurt and will hurt. Even worse, words can kill. The target is another human being with raw emotions like ourselves, and each limit is individual. Sometimes it takes just one vile comment to seal their fate. We've had bronies called a "retard," "autistic," or "faggot" by anti-bronies as a way to get a sick laugh. We've had trolls call for the SWAT team on other gamers, a troll tactic that can get the target and his/her family shot and killed. For example, look what happened with Megan Meier, a fourteen-year-old who committed suicide because a woman (under a troll account) told her on MySpace the world will be better off without her. Look what happened to a Canadian citizen from the Lizard Squad, who was arrested partially for swatting his targets. Look at all of Encyclopedia Dramatica's DeviantArt targets, nearly all of whom were harassed at some point or another. You can't ignore how powerful words can be because people get cyberbullied every single day.

Trolls don't care about anything beyond their own amusement. Once you understand that, you hold the key to defeating them: don't give it to them. They want to see you try and argue with them and defend yourself. That's their aim. The only winning move is not to play because at the end of the day no amount of lecturing is going to convince them to see your way. You'd be better off using that energy to educate people who have legitimate questions about the brony fandom.

This type of trolling only worked on the comedian trolls. All they want to do is waste your time. Trolls who are assholes don't give a damn what you do. They pick a target and want to make you fear for your own safety. Why? Because they either don't like you or want to fulfill their sick lust for making their victims suffer. This type of amusement can cost targets their lives. You can't apply "don't feed the troll" here: Asshole trolls don't care about that mantra. They'll do whatever it takes to break you down. These trolls are cyber terrorists; people are entitled to go online and not worry about their safety being compromised. One goal these cyber terrorists yearn for is to make them feel unsafe. That's not okay, and that's not something people should ignore and be silent about.

No reaction is not a reaction.

Silence from targets is a reaction because it's a behavior. The purpose of trolling is to control their target's behavior and the overall conversation. Silence is rewarding for a troll because it tells them that the target accepts the troll's presence. "Don't feed the troll" partially runs on the operant conditioning principle: reward or punishment depending on the behavior. It worked on little kids offline because the silence is deafening, especially from parents. But online, the environment is very different: We're not the trolls' parents, and many trolls aren't small kids. Plenty of trolls are adults and perhaps parents of kids. (Two of Fanfiction.net's most famous trolls were guardians of kids. One was a father of a newborn, the other an aunt; even though they don't visit the site anymore, both have massive cliques to this day.)

Sorry, but people who behave badly or engage in bad behavior a lot of the time do not do so simply because they are uneducated, they do so because they wish to engage in such behavior. Sure, realistically in a fair world, people should be telling those engaging in such behavior to stop, but we don't live in a fair world. It makes more sense to preach what is more feasible to happen versus what is less likely.

In other words, rather than call out the action of vandals who spraypainted hate symbols on park benches, merely get the community together and scrub it off. Ignore all the profane insults and obscene sharpie drawings and scratchiti on bathroom stalls and walls; paint it over instead.

Just because it's expected or tolerated doesn't mean it should be accepted. Trolling is a massive problem online and off. Sometimes, the trolling can drive their targets to suicide because they can't get away from it regardless of where they move to. (Amanda Todd's suicide is one of the most famous examples.) Trolling can't be accepted or tolerated, period. You may not speak to the troll personally, but it doesn't mean you should be passive about the problem. Blocking and reporting of trolls should be encouraged. If the trolling involves threats, out them like what former pitcher Curt Schilling did after Twitter trolls sent rape threats to his then-17-year-old daughter through him (and maybe report them to the police). But more needs to be done to solve this cyberbullying problem. Websites like Rotten Tomatoes disabled comments altogether because several critics received slurs and death threats. Others like The Huffington Post and ESPN force users to comment through Facebook to verify your identity and keep you accountable. But more needs to be done, yet there's no one-size-fit-all solution because the problem's so new.

1. Ironically, DQ, the more you get up in arms to defend bronies, it really just doesn't help the fandom at all.

 

2. It just makes it seem more and more like they need to be defended for something, and really why is it such a big deal?

1. You're wrong about this. When people spit out stereotypical vitriol, then you risk getting people who don't know about bronies actually buying the lies and bullshit coming from them. You have other bronies, documentaries, editorials, and positive news reports defending bronies because they're common punching bags online and off. A lot of the "criticism" aimed at bronies — shoving ponies, "grossness," the "neckbeard nerd" stereotype, sexist allegations against the idea that men can't enjoy the product — is a bunch of nonsense.
2. One of the basis of bigotry is generalizing/stereotyping. Often, online stereotypes bleed into everyday life. Not all that happens online remains confined there. A lot of fandoms and fans themselves are stereotyped and mocked just because they like a product. Bronies are one such example. I care because stereotyping and slurs are fucking disgusting.

Also, Dark Qiviut, It's not nice to put other people's opinions on blast like that.

When you post an opinion that's poor in quality, fallacious, or reliant on stereotypes, then you're not going to get a free pass, whether it's from me or somebody else. I called you out because the basis of your opinion about bronies having a victim complex was a strawman, and I don't let that slide.

Furries have the same problem as the bronies, both are seen as people who want to...'snuggle' animals.

 

Oh and many bronies are furries too and vica verse.

You're still trying to excuse the massive stereotype that I called you out earlier for. Many bronies are furries and vice-versa, but they're not the same. It's not okay to stereotype anyone in any fandom, period.

Not only do you have the "haters" who troll us, but what about the butthurt bronies?

The rest of your opinion (along with your OP) died the second you posted this line. Yes, people have a right to not like this show, and any brony who badly behaves to non-bronies should be called out. But you don't help your cause by using "butthurt," an ad hominem with sexist and homophobic implications.

@@Commissar Alexer, @@CookieK, @@Larkybird~, @@Lance Shield, I can definitely see why a lot of bronies get pissed off:

1. There's nothing factually bad or wrong about Rule 34. A lot complain about porn, gore, and vore plaguing and ruining the fandom or ruining FIM, and too many anti-bronies stereotype bronies as freaks. One problem: R34 has existed long before any of us were born, and a lot of women are into this stuff, too. But liking this stuff doesn't mean there's something wrong with them or don't like the family-friendly nature. People who like clop, gore, vore, shipping, or whatever are just as "normal" a brony as the bronies who aren't into this stuff.
   
   The people who like FIM porn, gore, and vore aren't ruining their love for the show. They're ruining their own love for the show.
2. People talk and spread the show around through conversation, references, art, and icons because they like the show. As long as they're following the rules, they have every right to talk about it. How does this show become popular? By word-of-mouth via social media. Not just Facebook, but Twitter and forums, too.
3. Too many people use bronies as a reason to not watch FIM or scapegoat them as a reason to no longer like it or be a brony separatist. There's no excuse to use them for your decision. If they're going to stop watching the show, never blame the fanbase for any reason. I chewed out Tommy Oliver for scapegoating the brony fandom a few months ago, and I'm not afraid to chew more out for this.
4. Far too many stereotype bronies as some kind of plague in society and generalize the entire fandom. A fandom is a group of fans, but each fan is individual. It's stupid for anyone to lump a small, loud group of bad fans into what is full of fantastic people. Call out the badly behaving fans, but the second you stereotype or generalize, you look worse than the bronies you don't like.
5. Other fandoms getting hate is not an excuse. It's not an excuse for anyone to generalize, stereotype, or bash other fandoms. Likewise, it's not okay for anti-bronies to bash bronies and the brony fandom.

Alexar, you're not establishing credibility by lumping furries (another marginalized fandom) with a completely different fandom and implying how it's okay for bronies to be stereotyped. Lance, you're not helping your own credibility by using the "bronies are oversensitive" stereotype as a strawman. Hell, none of you are validating your own opinions by stereotyping fans and, by virtue of your subtexts, giving the anti-bronies' stereotyping a pass. It's not okay under any circumstances.

Point blank, there are no good reasons for anti-bronies to bash bronies or the entire brony fandom.

@@cider float,

1. Many anti-bronies love to troll bronies. But you're wrong by calling it a good defense at any level. It may avoid wasting time, but trolls want any kind of reaction. Ignoring them is a reaction. What a troll doesn't want is conversation being stifled. Blocking a troll doesn't stifle reactions; it passes them onto someone else and spreads the problem. "Don't feed the troll" is part of the cyberbullying problem, because it immediately blames the victim for being trolled.
2. "Toughening up" is easier said than done. Not everyone can do it. To suggest victims of trolls to toughen up is to encourage the bully and blame the victim. It doesn't empower victims. If anything, it could isolate them more.

Like I said, trolls shouldn't be tolerated at any level. Anti-bronies that troll bronies shouldn't be tolerated at any level. But rather than blame the victim, empower the victim.

Me saying, use the tools provided by these websites to avoid these types of people shouldn't be considered victim blaming.

That's not where the point of victim-blaming. The  victim-blaming was this (in bold):

I did say it shouldn't bother you because people have so many tools to avoid these people.

The tools to block and report them should be there. The problem is you saying their insults shouldn't bother them. You can't dictate what should bother them or not. People are individual, and they will react to things very differently. Many will react to "autistic" as a slur demeaning the mentally handicap, and many will be bothered to the point of feeling psychologically hurt. Even if you block them, those words will be etched into their conscience.

Anti-bronies should be blocked (and reported if trolling or bullying), and I highly recommend it, too. Unfortunately, that's not enough to combat the trolling, including the fact that anti-bronies love to troll bronies.

It's not pushy Bronies that are the problem. It's gross Bronies that are the problem.

Grossness is where I draw the line. Grossness is where the general populace looks at the fandom and instead of seeing a group of grown men liking MLP for what it is, they see that they like it sexualized and violent... And let me tell you, that only works to confirm their culturally-imbued ideas that men shouldn't like things for girls.

There's nothing gross or problematic about bronies who like, draw, write, or animate fan content full of gore, vore, and porn whatsoever. Liking really gross fanwork doesn't mean they don't like or appreciate the fan-friendly nature of the show. You have plenty of male bronies who like clop and gore and are as much of a positive contributor in society as those who don't. Bronies who like porn, gore, and vore are no more or less a brony than those who don't. Any non-brony or anti-brony who believes otherwise is displaying sexist bigotry and are no worse than the bronies and SJWs who whine about FIM R34.

BTW, there are female bronies who like and work on clop/vore/gore as much an male bronies. So instead of them being sexist, antifeminist assholes like the right-wing propagandists on Fox News, perhaps they should stop stereotyping and educate themselves about the fandom and people themselves?

Being called a man-child and autistic for watching a children's show should not bother you at all.

Yes, cyber-bullying is a real thing and it can hurt, but most websites where people can communicate have provided tools to reduce the harm of cyber-bullying.

Block them.

YouTube, Facebook, instagram, twitter, etc. all have ways of dealing with people who bother you.

These measures were enacted to stop cyber-bullying. So who cares if haters watch the show or not?

Why does it matter why Anti-Bronies can't give the show/fandom a chance? Why is it worth creating a forum post about it? Is someone harassing you, calling you a man-child online? Just block them or don't respond.

You don't fully understand how hurtful these slurs are. By saying these cyberbullies shouldn't bother you, you're telling them it's your fault you're being bullied and that you should toughen up. That's victim-blaming, and it makes no sense. Some people are more sensitive to insults than others, and that's okay. It means they have the ability to empathize. But what's not okay is tolerating bigots who resort to these slurs. Blocking them works in a way because they're not attacking you to your face, but it doesn't eliminate the problem. Instead, the troll either will try to do something worse to get a reaction from you or go after somebody else. Like "Don't feed the troll," blocking only passes the problem onto someone else. But even if they do block them, the insult remains in the victim's brain, and the feeling of pain isn't going to go away that fast. A grave insult like "autist" as an ableist slur by an anti-brony to a depressed brony may be enough for him or her to attempt suicide. Blocking them is a surface solution, but the best way is to stop tolerating the trolling, whether it's anti-bronies trolling bronies or trolls attacking people altogether.