Talk:My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

[edit] Deletion

Well, I anticipated this. I figured I'd create an article about the show and its connection to skepticism and rationalism (especially that infuriating episode), and its often assholish fandom. But do with it what you want. ShadowUltra (talk) 05:19, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Personally I think it is a valid topic - we have articles on Furries so why not Bronies? Acei9 05:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
I don't see a particularly good reason for deletion. Picon small.pngAcer Blue 06:06, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Well, give it some clean-up and add a goat or two, and let's see who salutes... --AmazingTechnicolorCheeseWedge (talk) 06:19, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Furries have a whole lot longer history for one, though I don't really see the reason for parts of that article either. Vulpius (talk) 18:09, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
The only reason to keep Furries in my mind is because they often play into a lot of dualism or mind/body/spirit woo because some of the culture is based around avoiding reality and wishing for something 'better' in the same way that a lot of fluff neopagan woo is aimed at teenagers who do the same thing. Bronies? Nah. Some of the fans of the show are annoying, some are not. What are you going to do? ±Knightoftldrsig.pngKnightOfTL;DRfree guybrush threepwood! no new taxes! down with porcelain! 18:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Technically, this article isn't supposed to be about Bronies, it's supposed to be about the show itself and how some of the plotlines and criticisms play into topics discussed on this website. ShadowUltra (talk) 05:13, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
On WP the "other stuff exists" argument would be thrown out on its arse. Redchuck.gif ГенгисOur ignorance is God; what we know is science.Moderator 19:31, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
For what it's worth... Balaam (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
If we can have an article about Harry Potter and all the fundie dunces screaming "pagan feminist witchcraft inclusiveness conspiracy" about it, then we can have this. Some more cite notes (sourcing criticisms and responses thereof) and debunking crank ideas related to the show (I'm surprised nobody's really mentioned the bitching over "feminisation of America" and how the show doesn't encourage men to lift 300lbs and then go kill brown people) to make it a tad more on-mission (it's there, just a bit more focus) and it looks like it might be handy. I'm also just itching to show this page off to a couple of friends. I'll probably contribute because I can find some things but I stopped watching the show itself about two-thirds into the first season. Polite Timesplitter talk to me sugar, but best keep it on thedown-low 09:14, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
I do believe this is relevant to our mission, insofar as there is some (relatively small) degree of political controversy over this, especially among social conservatives prone to freaking out (see this hilariously misinformed article, which was highly rated on WIGO Clogs to boot). It could probably use some trimming though. Full disclosure: I am a Brony myself. (Don't worry, I won't be butthurt if it gets deleted.) Wehpudicabok (talk) 18:51, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
As a brony, I'm leaning towards deletion. Yes, there have been a couple of controversies, but this all seems like a case of molehill mountaineering. Rhodoferax (talk) 05:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be strong consensus to delete this. I'm gonna remove the deletion banner, pending someone shouting bloody murder at me. —Tom Morris (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] 0_o

That is all. SophieWilder 20:45, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

WHAT IS THIS SONG PEOPLE????


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chXCgIxJgEc

[edit] Suggestion

I say we should keep this, but expand it to coover the whole My Little Pony franchise. That way we can work in that Turmoil in the Toybox stuff from the eighties. Balaam (talk) 08:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Keep: If fundies complain about something as harmless as "My Little Pony" an article is on mission. Proxima Centauri (talk) 09:10, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

"I hate fundies and will nitpick them over everything, to the ends of the earth" is not an especially good reason to keep this article. Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 10:27, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
A list of Stupid Things Fundies Whine About would be good though. But not articles on every fucking one, otherwise we'll end up with articles about the Teletubbies and so on. SophieWilder 11:00, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
Don't mention the Teletubbies! It'll give Proxima ideas! Star of David.png Radioactive Misanthrope 11:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

[edit] "Feeling pinkie keen"

I feel that that section rather misses the point of rationalism, which is sadly quite common on the wiki -making fun of the ideas behind homeopathy is easy, but it is ultimately irrelevant. We practise evidence based medicine, and dismissing homeopathy because it conflicts with existing theories is no more scientific than accepting bloodletting - we reject it because *the evidence shows that it is not effective.*

The same applies to the episode: rejecting a hypothesis because it conflicts with your pre-existing theories (here, on precognition or whatever) is not scientific. If the evidence shows that the unexplained phenomenon is real then a scientists needs to re-evaluate existing theories. Of a guy was able to repeatably predict the lottery numbers in a controlled lab setting then it is unscientific to dismiss it because you think precognition is impossible; clearly, something you don't understand - although not necessarily supernatural - is going.

So, on balance the episode is about as much pro-science as anti-science --86.29.98.236 (talk) 16:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't agree. The reason the episode is so hated is not because it introduces something that appears to be impossible but because the "moral" of the episode (if I may use that term so loosely) is that we shouldn't question it, but take it on faith that it works. That's anti-rationalist. Wehpudicabok (talk) 06:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree that the section entirely misses the point, but so do you. In the episode, we see Twilight Sparkle investigating Pinkie Pie's "Pinkie sense" methodically. This study consists of testing very specific predictions, and getting the exact same result EVERY SINGLE TIME.
Any sensible, rational, scientifically minded person, would take to mean that the study concluded that Pinkie Pie's "Pinkie sense" is, in fact, real. After all, that's what the (very strong) evidence is telling us. The problem is, that Twilight Sparkle refuses to acknowledge that her scientific study proved the "Pinkie sense" right. She accepts it, due to a (very foolish) leap of faith. Not the blatant and obvious evidence. She rejects the results of scientific investigation, and embraces blind faith. Despite the fact that the results of scientific investigation proves the point, anyway. It's mindblowingly stupid.--213.113.49.27 (talk) 12:45, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

I expanded on Lauren Faust's statements about the episode, but my Wiki-fu is weak. I got the first hyperlink working fine, but adding footnotes are beyond me, so if someone could include this, I'd be much obliged: http://www.mylittleponynews.com/2011/02/feeling-pinky-keen-controversy.html

[edit] So...

We can have a section talking about the porn that was created because of it, and we can have a section talking about the 80's version of it, but we cannot have a section talking about how racists see it? Really? Now, isn't that interesting.--Token Conservative (talk) 19:15, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

If by "how racists see it" you mean some nothing wiki nobody pays attention to but us and a few others? Because i really dont see why "metapedia" saying it makes it worthy when theres plenty of far more notable and important groups we could probably find for it. --MikallakiM 19:36, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
If CP had said it was fully of faggotry, there would probably be an article called "CP's complaints with MLPFIM" and we all know it. And CP has a lower Alexa ranking than Metapedia, so if our stalking of CP is cool, we should probably be able to mention the neo-nazis who are, you know, worse than some neo-con morons.--Token Conservative (talk) 02:17, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
You... aren't going to get very far with me by saying "But do X with CP!".--MikallakiM 02:22, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
I know you joined because of CP and trolled there for awhile. I cann't imagine why pointing out the hypocrisy wouldn't work.--Token Conservative (talk) 02:26, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
that was 2 and a half years ago.--MikallakiM 02:38, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Again?

I thought there was a consensus that the political controversy over this show made it mission-relevant. Wehpudicabok [話] [変] 01:05, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Over a Barrel

I think it would be prudent to talk about conservative and libertarian bronies (yes, they exist) who see the show as a platform for their own belief systems. The most prominent example is the episode Over a Barrel in Season One, which they argue is a promotion of free trade and rational self-interest as the keeper of peace. ConfusedLiberal (talk) 20:26, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

[edit] What the...?

I was surprised to see this article here, and even more surprised that User:Ed Poor hadn't edited it. Godspeed (talk) 03:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Pornography

I think a bit of explanation is needed here. The 34th rule of the internet states 'If it exists, there will be porn of it'. That's the whole point of a RULE. People only point it out more for MLP because it looks weirder, and can be used to support their claim that bronies are evil pedos or whatever. This is not a rational way of behaviour (it's much more similar to cherry picking or quote mining. This is why I think that section should be deleted.--Thedoctor81 (talk) 19:09, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

[edit] My Little Pony Sums up religion

Could this be incorporated into the article somehow?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=MAwKTc2qCTg

--Thedoctor81 (talk) 19:16, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

[edit] Are you kidding me?

You neckbeards won't allow an Adventure Time article, or an article for any other cartoon for that matter, but you'll allow this goddamn horse show for children to be featured? How is this at all relevant to this wiki. Freaking bronies, being present in places where your not needed.— Unsigned, by: 66.87.114.79 / talk / contribs

Breaking up the scenery, breaking my mind168.91.255.100 (talk) 19:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Explain to us why Adventure Time is controversial? Zero (talk - contributions) 01:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Isn't this the same dude who wanted to create a neckbeard article? |₹Λ¥$€₦₦ Red rose 02.svg Maaaayyyybeeee you'll think of me when you are all alone 01:42, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
How about an "Avatar: the Last Airbender/Legend of Korra" article?Chair tater (talk) 08:00, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Illuminati

There's people complaining about Illuminati symbolism in some episodes of this show.--TemplarJLS (talk) 11:50, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

[edit] Alicorn

It's mentioned that Twilight Sparkle is an alicorn being sent to Ponyville, but at the time she was sent to ponyville she was just a unicorn. That sentence needs some work.

[edit] "As science minded as possible, given that she can cast magic spells with her horn"

Well, technically... Since magic is entirely possible in the MLP-verse, magic IS science there. If gravitite, a substance that blocks gravity, existed, it would be scientific too.

[edit] Chalk it up to Cultism?

New season. New weirdness. The show usually deals with pretty abstract or fantasy concepts. But the season opener this time... is a about a cult. I shit you not. It has everything. Weird isolated village. Creepy not-so-happy happy villagers. Leader who is power mad and above the teachings of their 'philosophy'. (A hypocrite, in other words) Rituals. (Staff of Sameness... Which is also bullshit btw) Forced indoctrination. (The main characters are made useless and then forced into a small room for 1 1/2 to 2 1/2 days with 1984-ish propaganda blasting through loud speakers.) A focus on sameness. A fervent belief in changing others for their own good. Some will say it's Communism (due to the whole 'equal' thing) but the roots of this thing are much more aligned to Cultism instead. — Unsigned, by: 73.174.16.193 / talk / contribs 05:27, 7 April 2015

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support