Avatar the Way of Water
- Thread starter Zoroe
- Start date
How can we evolve as a species if we are content with a common idea? 
Not to say that Avatar 2 is a bad film it's just not living up to its potential. It could have been amazing, but it was just .. "meh".
Not to say that Avatar 2 is a bad film it's just not living up to its potential. It could have been amazing, but it was just .. "meh".
That's is the perpetuation of a masculinist myth that fathers must be seen as protector, meaning that it also has problematic underlying consequences:
- It puts the father as the dominant figure in the family
- By giving the role of protector to the father it negates in most ways the potential for the father to be an emotionnal support for the family
- It repeats the cave man myth that men are providers and protectors while women are the emotional support systems of the family
In short, that situation puts the character in opposition to an healthy masculinity, a masculinity in which he would be able to understand that it is harmfull to see himself as the protector both for his children and for himself. This is the reason why instead of developping a fonctional family, Jack repeats the cycle of a common white hardcore conservative family (treating them like a squad instead of emotional peoples). And this paradigm is entering in complete conflict with the supposed progressive message of the story.
This fallacious version of healthy masculinity is therefore something that we must learn to reject. As only by understanding how to have an healthy masculinity and teach healthy masculinity to our children, will we be able to create fonctionning families and actual progressive ones.
- It puts the father as the dominant figure in the family
- By giving the role of protector to the father it negates in most ways the potential for the father to be an emotionnal support for the family
- It repeats the cave man myth that men are providers and protectors while women are the emotional support systems of the family
In short, that situation puts the character in opposition to an healthy masculinity, a masculinity in which he would be able to understand that it is harmfull to see himself as the protector both for his children and for himself. This is the reason why instead of developping a fonctional family, Jack repeats the cycle of a common white hardcore conservative family (treating them like a squad instead of emotional peoples). And this paradigm is entering in complete conflict with the supposed progressive message of the story.
This fallacious version of healthy masculinity is therefore something that we must learn to reject. As only by understanding how to have an healthy masculinity and teach healthy masculinity to our children, will we be able to create fonctionning families and actual progressive ones.
Last edited:
What? Where in the movie that it state that a father being a protector does or doesn't include emotional support? Seems you're the one limiting stuff like definition of protecting or what it encompasses. Where does it state that a father can't support his family emotionally since his role is a protector? Or where does it state that a movie should be progressive and functional to your own definition while disregarding others' definition and vision of how a "functional" and "progressive" family really is? You're trying to enforce your own gender-oriented ideals as healthy to others while just reviewing a movie?
It's not something that is said, it's something that is SHOWN. And not only in Avatar but in real life also. The myth of the protecting father as real sociological consequences for the development of healthy fatherhood relationships.
I wish things were that simple.
You can protect your family as a father, the problem comes when this moral is forged as a accomplishing standard values. Then it becomes toxic because it negates (in a lot of cases) the possibility for the father to be able to see himself as much as an emotional agent as the other, negating therefore the possibility for the father to create strong emotionnal relationships with his children.
Nowhere. But Avatar is promoted as a progressive movie. Therefore we must question the value within it.
There are multiple way to create a fonctional and progressive family. The one shown in avatar is not an example of that. Period.
This has nothing to do with gender, but I'm sence that you are feeling threatenned by what I'm saying here. Maybe with a confusionnist political agenda behind that so let me tell you something.
Movies and Medias in general (One Piece included) are not only entertainment, they are also also great undirect educationnal support. All stories provides a vision on life and therefore specific values. So... in a world where the patriarchy is the norm, conservative and harmfull values promoted as beneficial and progressive MUST be questionned.
I wish things were that simple.
You can protect your family as a father, the problem comes when this moral is forged as a accomplishing standard values. Then it becomes toxic because it negates (in a lot of cases) the possibility for the father to be able to see himself as much as an emotional agent as the other, negating therefore the possibility for the father to create strong emotionnal relationships with his children.
Nowhere. But Avatar is promoted as a progressive movie. Therefore we must question the value within it.
There are multiple way to create a fonctional and progressive family. The one shown in avatar is not an example of that. Period.
This has nothing to do with gender, but I'm sence that you are feeling threatenned by what I'm saying here. Maybe with a confusionnist political agenda behind that so let me tell you something.
Movies and Medias in general (One Piece included) are not only entertainment, they are also also great undirect educationnal support. All stories provides a vision on life and therefore specific values. So... in a world where the patriarchy is the norm, conservative and harmfull values promoted as beneficial and progressive MUST be questionned.
Last edited:
You are saying about father and mother but it's not gender-oriented? So what, family-role-oriented? Conservative "and" harmful value? So being conservative is harmful now? You're sensing i'm being threatened? Lol you are the one being threatened by a blue guy saying that a father must protect his family, and proceed to say Avatar is promoted as a "progressive" movie, and a father's protection negates his role to build an emotional relationship with his family members, while no one especially in the movie define and limit that except yourself.
Like I said, it's not about gender, it's about a vision of masculinity.
Yup. Always has been.
You should learn how to read what is shown to you. You know.. the passive messages.
And this, is not what I said. I won't come back to that, read again.
It doesn't mean that Avatar 2 is a bad movie, it just means that well.. it has some problems.
Just like Marvel Media with the status Co
Just like Star Wars Media with Politics
Just like most pop culture medias with masculinity
Just like most of the entertainment industry with the representation of Women.
Etc.
I won't say that Indiana Jones is Trash because Indy is a low key abuser, but we must notice those issues to correct them for the sake of the future generations.
Yup. Always has been.
You should learn how to read what is shown to you. You know.. the passive messages.
And this, is not what I said. I won't come back to that, read again.
It doesn't mean that Avatar 2 is a bad movie, it just means that well.. it has some problems.
Just like Marvel Media with the status Co
Just like Star Wars Media with Politics
Just like most pop culture medias with masculinity
Just like most of the entertainment industry with the representation of Women.
Etc.
I won't say that Indiana Jones is Trash because Indy is a low key abuser, but we must notice those issues to correct them for the sake of the future generations.
Way to go, trying to force your views to others since you're being threatened by "harmful" conservative views. You should try having a family one day and not protecting them as a parent, since you should stick to your principle that a father or mother protecting their children negates a parents' role of emotional support.
- Yes, conservatism is pretty much always harmfull, might it be systematically , sociologically or mentally.
- Cavemen myth are also harmfull as they perpetuates false assumptions of masculinity and gender role. Prehistoric people (I should not say cavemen) were intelligent, and societies were a LOT more equal in term of gender role that we think. There fore why it's dangerous to say that its all but natural for us to be protector of the families as fathers.
- And yes, seing ourself only as protectors and a leader in a family instance negates in a lot of ways our potential to be an emotionnal support.
Therefore what is shown in Avatar is quite toxic and must be questionned. But I understand that it's not an easy topic to comprehend.
- Cavemen myth are also harmfull as they perpetuates false assumptions of masculinity and gender role. Prehistoric people (I should not say cavemen) were intelligent, and societies were a LOT more equal in term of gender role that we think. There fore why it's dangerous to say that its all but natural for us to be protector of the families as fathers.
- And yes, seing ourself only as protectors and a leader in a family instance negates in a lot of ways our potential to be an emotionnal support.
Therefore what is shown in Avatar is quite toxic and must be questionned. But I understand that it's not an easy topic to comprehend.
Not what I meant lmao.
What I said is basically that there exist myths revolving around the vision of prehistoria. (better that way lol)
Those myth can be harmfull as they are mostly existentiallist "men are providers, women caretakers" when in fact the reality was not that simple.
In short, sexes and genders don't determine the role you should play in society.
What I said is basically that there exist myths revolving around the vision of prehistoria. (better that way lol)
Those myth can be harmfull as they are mostly existentiallist "men are providers, women caretakers" when in fact the reality was not that simple.
In short, sexes and genders don't determine the role you should play in society.
Blud going at "progressive family is healthy, conservation is harmful, protecting negates emotion" spree while discussing CGI smurfs movie with king-of-cringe villain 
Post automatically merged:
This is a fallacious way to look at relationship. If your father rejects you because you are gay in a white evangilical and bigot family, yes of course, in his point of view, he is doing this for the sake of the family name. It doesn't mean that this is fair.
Justifying a bad behavior for the reason that it is done for the sake "of someone" or "something" is just fallacious and toxic logic.
I wouldn't mind if that story was talking about a white conservative family. But here we are talking about a man whose eyes were opened to an entirely new people with new and more progressive ways that he had.
The characterization of Jake and his relationship to his family is therefore not only toxic, it's also narratively incoherent with what the end of the first movie represents.
But everything lies in the details, so I can understand why you didn't felt that way when you watch the movie. And that's also why having that kind of debate is important, because those kind of depicted values are often so insidious and non volontary that it is easy to miss them.. problem is, wether you miss them or not, you will learn from them.
That why I now always have a video of the Pop Culture detectective in my signature. That kind of analysis is VERY important if we want to avoid creating people like Andrew Tate unintentionnaly.
Go check one of his video. You will first feel annoyed by them.. but you will step by step understand the point.
My breaking point was this video:
I loved that serie because it was like a little cocoon for me.. so when I first saw this, I was like "no, men.. what you are saying is bullshit".. then I watched most of his video, because I senced that there was actually something that was threatening me in some way in them and I wanted to understand what was so repulsive (and also because I always have in mind that I can evolve on a subject). This long process (with other content) made me realize that I had a strange relationship with masculinity, I had a lot of preconsception and fallacious ideas of what being a men should be.. so I started to change.. Then I came back to this exact video.. and it click, I had completely change my point of view on the subject. TBT was cool, but it has indeed a lot of issues concenring its relationship to masculinity, just like Avatar 2.
But the only reason I didn't see that the first time was simple: I came with the Idea that there was no problem.
So by actually questionning the possibility that there was and coming back to the video, I allowed myself to see those problem.
That's what I propose you guys to do either here or on the left space in the general chat section.
Don't be so sure about Avatar 2. Right now, the majority of the population is under a bias we call "the halo effect" because it's almost the perfection esthetically, it should also be quite good in other domain. The fact is: It's not. Far from it. And the relationship to fatherhood is not the only problem.
https://www.looper.com/1143825/avat...n-uncomfortable-message-for-the-age-of-covid/