Jeric

Curious. This would normally bother me, but I have a rather extensive history here when it comes to integrity. I'll have my reputation speak to my genuine nature. Legal control, yes. The question remains whether legal control effectively shields a minor child from their complete social environment. Let me make this clear. I seem dismissive, because I am being dismissive. I see a poorly considered opinion, and I sent it back hoping some additional consideration would be applied, giving the idea more ... body. It doesn't matter if I reached the same conclusion as another person, if the other's conclusion was poorly derived. If the resulting opinion was counter to mine, yet was full bodied, I would approve. I do this often here. I wasn't aware that this was a goal. Not mine certainly. Kids do. They also pay attention to far more that that. This, good sir, is a phenomenal plan. I have been looking for an appropriate stopping point ... might as well be now.

Do you see the two letter word that begins with s and ends with o? Found it yet? Good. Everything that precedes that word is an appropriate summation of one of my points. Everything that follows it is not. Well not everything. You see, most people on the internet assume that everything someone says that is perhaps contrary to another is somehow an argument. No, I haven't yet made an argument. Just pointed out factors that you and others overlooked as you crafted your narrative. This is how I work. Just spitting out an opinion disinterests me. Again, points I raised in this discussion are focused around nuance, complexity, the possibility that certain assumptions may not be concrete truths, and the illusion that we have control over how and when external complexity is introduced to children. I could further complicate this discussion by adding to it the likelihood of how suggestible you are when it comes to advertising. In the end, I'm simply saying that there are no absolutes, and nearly all positions on this subject amount to a house built on sand. Poorly constructed fabrications that are easily disassembled by reality.

I ended up singling FiM inspired songs for a Christmas charity, which in turn led to be being shipped by @Lightwing with Button's Mom, which wound up with my late wife getting voted to change her name to Button's Mom on here in a follow-up charity event ... so the ship became canon. I'm not even sure if that is the weirdest thing since joining this fandom.

That strip and following comment were in response to this: I don’t have children, so, you know, perspectives, but I would want to wait to expose and confront my kids on issues like this until I think they are old enough to think for themselves. the strip is titled, Illusion of Control. I really shouldn't need to go further than that, but ... I'll play reductionist. Parent - "I should be able to control when and how I have a conversation with my kids over things." Changes TV station that has animated gay characters." Reality - While on errands, child with mother sees two gay men holding hands. I hope that clears up the purpose of the strip's inclusion, as well as my referencing my own kids. The point remains valid. Parents have limited control, and that perception that they do have control is an illusion. I would like any gay undertones or symbolism to be subtle in FiM, as I prefer nuance in my storytelling. I don't need a show to hit me over the head with a message. Ironic ... as I applied that same thing in this thread ... but had to forgo nuance to draft a roadmap. Keep up next time.

There were nine trailers. Peter Rabbit was one of them. It elicited a groan from my daughter along with a lean over comment that "this looks horrible ... sucks". Some others were The Star, Wonder, Ferdinand, Coco, and Daddy's Home 2.

It's currently under fire for the replication crisis, publication crisis, and the general view that Social Psychology is not an accurate science. The first two are correctable. My inclusion of the study was not to say that its results should be taken as definitive, but to underscore our lack of understanding and that it is ... up in the air. In other words, nothing is definitive yet. How arousal is connected to orientation is not been established definitively. I have children. Well, teenagers. My only response to the argument you pose is to invoke this cultural beauty. I've seen looks from people with children when my daughter would hold hands with her girlfriend. I like to think that through the support of my teen, and her actions, has helped people face this this conversation. As parent, I have long been aware that one should never count on a fixed time table on when certain conversations need to occur. To suggest otherwise ignores a reality that most people do not understand -- the world does not revolve around them. Nor can they control their environment or social elements that their child will experience.

Perhaps it does. Though my use of modals should have intrigued anyone paying attention. Most logical deductions are made by looking at known elements and attempting to make sense of them, absent some material data. The unfortunate in this world tend to wait for confirmation, while the fortunate look for signs, evidence, and patterns .. and deduce. In situations where there is nothing risked, it's a fun game that can assist in sharpening ones inductive and deductive skill set. It's useful for when the stakes are decidedly higher. As I said, the plastics purchasing would be an important detail that I would love to have, but lack of material purchasing data is a limitation I fully disclosed.

Somewhere buried deep in this site is a thread similar to this one, in which I gave an answer of my greatest fear. Seeing as that fear actually came to pass a few years later ... I'll happily wimp out and say walking into a spider web.

She is bearing the elephant of loyalty. I believe the judges will allow it. However, here it's Fluttershy that's an elephant. And here Dash is an anteater. Wait. > Looks at first image I just realized that is a space elephant. I have nothing else to say. Fan art just broke me.

This was one I was waiting on. A few amusing things I took from this 1) She associates a pro LGBT message with the show in general ... because friendship? 2) In my experience, this is how a non fan actually responds when watching the show with an open mind. Hilarity ensues when they try to get names correct. 3) Twilight and Cadance get no cool hair because of the rule of averages. 4) recognized Tara Strong but didn't know for sure she was in this or what character she played. 5) Didn't like the animation when compared to Disney. This was a funny review. Like Andre she had a hard time disliking this.

That I completely agree with you on. Season 7 was light on musicality in general, and when I was trying to determine if I lived Season 7 better than Season 5, that was a hard to overlook issue. Season 7 gave me one amazing song, and two decent ones. The movie gave me five amazing songs ... minus that opening number. If Season 7 didn't follow at a rather seminal moment in my life, with a series of highly personal episodes, I would likely think otherwise.

Epic dragon attack and probably the best 'show don't tell' moment that Spike has had in a while. Actually thought of you when that moment during Canterlot came on the screen.

One thing that people keep missing is that film was constantly in progress through all stages of development. Meghan McCarthy specifically stated that she was able to, unlike the show, write new dialog and add new things at almost any time during development. Huge difference between a film and a show. Once an episode is locked ... it's basically done and usually can't be rewritten. Famous Derpy scene notwithstanding. This was not the case with the film. If she wanted to add a line about the dragons it would be trivial to do so. The truth is that they didn't do it because it would be a bad call. They didn't feel it was needed from a narrative reason. When you find yourself taking up screen time to explain why something isn't there, it's bad writing. Adding these characters becomes an opportunity cost. Something added ... something has to go. And I've seen enough people state that each of the new characters are they favs to suggest that the Lincoln Rule would apply heavily here. They flat out told JD that they didn't not want him in the film. It's a story decision and one that makes sense. The only additional dialog needed would not be touching on show characters not used, but creating a better narrative transition between the Seaquestria expulsion and the arrival of Skystar that also links Nova's arrival later. I hear that Nova had a cut song, so that likely explains where that missing story thread disappeared to. Other than actually craft based elements, and some technical complaints, every negative item I've seen from fans (and some positive ones) usually falls as a generic fandom (needs moar x) complaint. Valid I suppose ... but highly individualized. For example, if Discord was in this I would have groaned. One simply can't please everyone all of the time, you know?