That’s not really gatekeeping. Maybe gatekeeping a fully emotionally developed adult? But that’s a bit of a stretch too. You can’t just throw around buzzwords and expect it to mean anything. And you definitely can’t be expected to be taken seriously.
Maybe if you put down the YA and read something age appropriate you’d get a better feel for adult interactions.
No. Gatekeeping was the polite way to say that you have no fucking right to stop someone from doing what they enjoy, as long as they aren’t harming someone else. I personally don’t read YA novels, but I will protect that right for everyone else.
The correct term, rather than gatekeeper, would be fascist. You can fuck right off if you’re going to try controlling what media a person consumes. If you truly think what you’re saying, you are a morally bankrupt human.
With all that stretching and leaping you must be limber as fuck.
I would never stop anyone from doing anything that didn’t harm someone else. But I will judge the fuck out of them. Disney adults, children’s book readers, broneys, etc. are children’s minds in adults bodies. If it’s because of a disability, good for them, they should enjoy life in whichever way suits them. If not, it’s pathetic and they should seek help with their personal growth.
Yes, and? Shame is useful. When I feel ashamed of something it leads to reflection and hopefully personal growth. Fear those incapable of shame.
Shaming isn’t necessarily bad. Shame fascists, abusers, bigots, the ultra wealthy, etc. I would guess that you agree with doing that. We just disagree if adults refusing to grow is shame worthy.
Not my intention. I used those extreme examples to make the point that shaming is not necessarily bad. Obviously, an adult that has a child’s mind, not due to a disability but because they refuse to grow, is more of a grey area where people can disagree if shaming is warranted. I find it pathetic and repellant, some others apparently disagree. Some of those may be well adjusted adults, but some of them may benefit from looking in the mirror I’m holding up
Reading YA novels does not mean they have a “child’s mind”. Rest and relaxation are also things to value, people cannot be “on” 100% of the time and having unchallenging fiction as a way to unwind is a better use of time than social media. (Speaking of holding up mirrors…)
I can understand shaming people for supporting JK Rowling, but shaming people for reading at or below their reading level just feels like pointless bullying. For what reason? What’s the goal of doing that?
I’ve read Heidegger, but my favorite books that I enjoy going back to reread for fun are at a 5th grade reading level. Do you feel the same way about adults who enjoy cartoons? Is partaking in easy/unchallenging comforts immature in your mind? If so, why? If not, where does this perspective come from?
It’s not about reading level. If someone has a low reading level due to disability, they should enjoy what they can, and if it’s not disability just reading anything will eventually fix that. It’s about the content. If someone is capable of understanding adult content and chooses to surround themselves with childish themes they are pathetic man/woman/person-babies.
It’s not about easy or unchallenging. I’m not sitting here only reading great literature or things filled with purple prose using sat vocab words. Around 70% of what I read is sci-fi/fantasy and I read A LOT, so my quality bar has to drop pretty low to keep me occupied in between the really good stuff. Again, it’s about adult vs. childish themes.
I’m sorry, but I feel like you’re being a little disingenuous here. I don’t think you need me to write an essay differentiating between various types of media. I think you know exactly what I mean when I mention people that refuse to grow up and continue to consume childish media well into adulthood.
No, I didn’t know what you meant, and I think all the hate you’re getting suggests you’re doing a poor job of communicating effectively and it’s not a me-problem.
I’m not trying to be disingenuous, but I do see that I’ve conflated reading level with target audience, but my initial argument still stands if we swap that out. When I said I enjoy reading books at a 5th grade reading level, I meant books whose target audience is middle schoolers.
Consuming “childish” media ≠ refusing to grow up. I think that’s a very important distinction to make, and your comments in this thread seem to be conflating the two. At the same time though, what’s wrong with “refusing to grow up”? Why is it so important to you that others be mature?
i’d like to know this as well but i doubt there can be a definite answer. sometimes you can tell an obvious difference between ‘for children’ and ‘suitable for children’ but it’s not always clear.
personally i’d say e.g. paw patrol, my little pony, harry potter are for children and e.g. the witches, watership down, lord of the rings are suitable for children. but there must be a big grey area rather than a clear divide
Even if we can accurately identify something as being for children, that something would likely have been produced by very passionate adults, and approved by other adults for publication. Do these adults get a pass from being shamed for their interest in children’s content?
You don’t think any of the adults that create said books are fans of their own and each others works? Surely they aren’t all working in an industry in which they loathe all of the work they are doing or think it is all so beneath them.
I’m mostly responding to the idea that it is shameful to enjoy reading books that are far beneath the level one should be able to read at. Would the same apply to the adults that write children’s books?
no, of course not as long as it’s a genuine effort and not a cynical cash grab (there has been something of a backlash against celebrities knocking out children’s books). so it’s not the producers but the fans of it that come in for criticism. one complicating factor is that in older media children were not taken for idiots. the examples i used as suitable for children (except maybe lord of the rings when perhaps i should have said the hobbit? i’m not familiar) were written specifically for children but who could honestly look down on an adult for enjoying them. whereas if you’re hurtling into middle age and still really into dora the explorer or similar that’s obviously weird. but e.g. twilight? i still think you should have grown out of that but it’s in the grey area
Ew, that’s not true either. Lemmy is NOT the place for gatekeeping assholes. Take that bullshit to X.
That’s not really gatekeeping. Maybe gatekeeping a fully emotionally developed adult? But that’s a bit of a stretch too. You can’t just throw around buzzwords and expect it to mean anything. And you definitely can’t be expected to be taken seriously.
Maybe if you put down the YA and read something age appropriate you’d get a better feel for adult interactions.
No. Gatekeeping was the polite way to say that you have no fucking right to stop someone from doing what they enjoy, as long as they aren’t harming someone else. I personally don’t read YA novels, but I will protect that right for everyone else.
The correct term, rather than gatekeeper, would be fascist. You can fuck right off if you’re going to try controlling what media a person consumes. If you truly think what you’re saying, you are a morally bankrupt human.
Is it gatekeeping to say that functioning adults who don’t need them anymore shouldn’t wear diapers?
With all that stretching and leaping you must be limber as fuck.
I would never stop anyone from doing anything that didn’t harm someone else. But I will judge the fuck out of them. Disney adults, children’s book readers, broneys, etc. are children’s minds in adults bodies. If it’s because of a disability, good for them, they should enjoy life in whichever way suits them. If not, it’s pathetic and they should seek help with their personal growth.
I won’t stop them, I will just socially shame them with an intent to stop them.
You have all the tact of a conversion therapy camp. I have nothing more to say to a closed-minded person like you.
Yes, and? Shame is useful. When I feel ashamed of something it leads to reflection and hopefully personal growth. Fear those incapable of shame.
Shaming isn’t necessarily bad. Shame fascists, abusers, bigots, the ultra wealthy, etc. I would guess that you agree with doing that. We just disagree if adults refusing to grow is shame worthy.
You are equating adults reading YA novels to “fascists, abusers, bigots, the ultra wealthy, etc.”
It’s time to admit your argument may have gone off the rails at some point.
Not my intention. I used those extreme examples to make the point that shaming is not necessarily bad. Obviously, an adult that has a child’s mind, not due to a disability but because they refuse to grow, is more of a grey area where people can disagree if shaming is warranted. I find it pathetic and repellant, some others apparently disagree. Some of those may be well adjusted adults, but some of them may benefit from looking in the mirror I’m holding up
Reading YA novels does not mean they have a “child’s mind”. Rest and relaxation are also things to value, people cannot be “on” 100% of the time and having unchallenging fiction as a way to unwind is a better use of time than social media. (Speaking of holding up mirrors…)
I can understand shaming people for supporting JK Rowling, but shaming people for reading at or below their reading level just feels like pointless bullying. For what reason? What’s the goal of doing that?
I’ve read Heidegger, but my favorite books that I enjoy going back to reread for fun are at a 5th grade reading level. Do you feel the same way about adults who enjoy cartoons? Is partaking in easy/unchallenging comforts immature in your mind? If so, why? If not, where does this perspective come from?
It’s not about reading level. If someone has a low reading level due to disability, they should enjoy what they can, and if it’s not disability just reading anything will eventually fix that. It’s about the content. If someone is capable of understanding adult content and chooses to surround themselves with childish themes they are pathetic man/woman/person-babies.
It’s not about easy or unchallenging. I’m not sitting here only reading great literature or things filled with purple prose using sat vocab words. Around 70% of what I read is sci-fi/fantasy and I read A LOT, so my quality bar has to drop pretty low to keep me occupied in between the really good stuff. Again, it’s about adult vs. childish themes.
I’m sorry, but I feel like you’re being a little disingenuous here. I don’t think you need me to write an essay differentiating between various types of media. I think you know exactly what I mean when I mention people that refuse to grow up and continue to consume childish media well into adulthood.
No, I didn’t know what you meant, and I think all the hate you’re getting suggests you’re doing a poor job of communicating effectively and it’s not a me-problem.
I’m not trying to be disingenuous, but I do see that I’ve conflated reading level with target audience, but my initial argument still stands if we swap that out. When I said I enjoy reading books at a 5th grade reading level, I meant books whose target audience is middle schoolers.
Consuming “childish” media ≠ refusing to grow up. I think that’s a very important distinction to make, and your comments in this thread seem to be conflating the two. At the same time though, what’s wrong with “refusing to grow up”? Why is it so important to you that others be mature?
How does one accurately identify something as being specifically for children and children only?
i’d like to know this as well but i doubt there can be a definite answer. sometimes you can tell an obvious difference between ‘for children’ and ‘suitable for children’ but it’s not always clear.
personally i’d say e.g. paw patrol, my little pony, harry potter are for children and e.g. the witches, watership down, lord of the rings are suitable for children. but there must be a big grey area rather than a clear divide
Even if we can accurately identify something as being for children, that something would likely have been produced by very passionate adults, and approved by other adults for publication. Do these adults get a pass from being shamed for their interest in children’s content?
Lol what? They are publishing and marketing said books to children
How is that the same as adults unironically enjoying children’s literature?
You don’t think any of the adults that create said books are fans of their own and each others works? Surely they aren’t all working in an industry in which they loathe all of the work they are doing or think it is all so beneath them.
I’m mostly responding to the idea that it is shameful to enjoy reading books that are far beneath the level one should be able to read at. Would the same apply to the adults that write children’s books?
no, of course not as long as it’s a genuine effort and not a cynical cash grab (there has been something of a backlash against celebrities knocking out children’s books). so it’s not the producers but the fans of it that come in for criticism. one complicating factor is that in older media children were not taken for idiots. the examples i used as suitable for children (except maybe lord of the rings when perhaps i should have said the hobbit? i’m not familiar) were written specifically for children but who could honestly look down on an adult for enjoying them. whereas if you’re hurtling into middle age and still really into dora the explorer or similar that’s obviously weird. but e.g. twilight? i still think you should have grown out of that but it’s in the grey area