Can "bad message" be objective criticism? (I suggest reading the whole thing before answering)

Apolygon2 said:
I have always been and am of the belief that nothing is off limits in fiction. I hate the notion that some shows get called problematic for reasons like "weird or morally questionable fanservice", "talking about certain topics" and basically anything that shows get... I hate this word, but "cancelled" for.

redo of healer doesn't suck because the morally questionable at best mc rapes the villain, it sucks because it's a shit show with poor writing. and that is something that I genuinely hate how is not more excepted as the right way to look at fictional stories, even though subconsciously people do show way less reaction to shows that are great and involve those things.

but.... 

there is an exception for me that people have called me a hypocrite for, and I don't think that's fair.

that exception, is when a show or piece of media, is promoting; not showing, not "glorifying", not implying, but straight up promoting a problematic message.

I don't care if the mc is a piece of shit rapist, in show were that aspect is used for edgy fanservice, but if it tries to go out of it's way to say "that's a good thing and you should think it's right" now it's a problem.

so why? why is it that I think that's a negative aspect despite believing that nothing is off limits in fiction?


well, I for one consider an impactful, positive and possibly life changing message or advice, to be something that adds to fiction and makes it better. and I think most people can agree with that.

death parade is better because it teaches you to value your life. bojack horseman is better because of it's countless genuinely life changing advice. mob psycho is better for it's message of self improvement and anti-main character syndrome.

so the way I see it, a harmful, unhelpful, or undeserved message, isn't just a sign of bad morals, it's also harmful to the piece.

like recently, I was watching an anime, which is possibly the worst anime outside of "so bad it's good" things that I have seen called "My life as Inukai-san's Dog" and it's a pretty shitty ecchi with a weird, certainly illegal in real life gimmick of, you guessed it, the main character having turned into a dog who the main girl REALLY LIKES. 

and if you were thinking that, no she has no idea the dog is a human, she just likes to groom the dog or get groomed by the dog, or just generally be a degenerate about it.

and the show was pretty garbage, but what pushed me to give it a high 1 instead of a 2/10, was the fact that it has started trying to say "no, it's ok to be weird, (aka want to fuck your dog) and you should expect people for who they are!)

and that is just an objectively terrible message. even ignoring the extremely questionable morality of it, it's illegal in most places. and I'm sitting here thinking, this genuinely made it worse. there is nothing good that can come out of that message.


so what do you think, am I a hypocrite?

or does my way of thinking make sense?

Catalano said:
another "ecchi is bad" thread, thanks for letting us know, you're so smart, a round of applause for you, man
how can I be like you and watch anime that promotes good stuff? please tell me

dertasso said:
You dont need a blog post to say that if you dont agree with a message, you should be allowed to criticize it. You are, because thats how life works.

Apolygon2 said:
and that is just an objectively terrible message.

Say-My-Name said:
No. I didn't even bother reading your text post, because nothing will change this view of mine.

Apolygon2 said:
read it, It's not what you think it is.

this thread is coming from someone who thinks "nothing should be off limits in fiction"

epidemia78 said:
I haven't seen the dog anime nor do I plan to but isn't it just an excuse to get extremely low-angle perspectives of hot anime girls? Does it really try to promote the idea that having sex with dogs is good? I find that hard to believe.

WatchTillTandava said:
I indeed read your post fully through and I indeed do consider it hypocritical, though unsurprisingly so. A lot of people tend to hold a belief and even pride themselves on it and incorporate it into their core identity while all the while harboring one or several notable built-in exceptions to it. A bit like the "I support free speech, BUT" and "I'm all for free speech, BUT" crowd. Where I see the actual core problem with your reasoning and central disagreement jumped out in the following line:

 There are no objectively terrible messages in the first place. There are, as always, people holding subjective views and opinions and falsely assuming they constitute the one or very few exceptions and that their subjective views in this one super special rare exceptional instance are actually objective because they feel strongly about them unlike other views and other people's holding of other views. And equally egregious and kind of going hand in hand with that, they wrongly assume the subjective views to be universal in application and universally held or should/must be. That's the issue.    

epidemia78 said:
I haven't seen the dog anime nor do I plan to but isn't it just an excuse to get extremely low-angle perspectives of hot anime girls? Does it really try to normalize having sex with dogs? I find that hard to believe.

Say-My-Name said:
I did. Still haven't changed my mind. About 70 years ago, you'd be criticized for saying it's ok to be gay. Now, you'd be criticized for saying the opposite. What's considered "objectively bad" keeps changing. I can gurantee you, insulting a furry would be considered rude in 20 years. Enjoy it while you can.

Apolygon2 said:
I don't care if the mc is a piece of shit rapist, in show were that aspect is used for edgy fanservice, but if it tries to go out of it's way to say "that's a good thing and you should think it's right" now it's a problem.

Apolygon2 said:
so what do you think, am I a hypocrite?

or does my way of thinking make sense?

epidemia78 said:
I haven't seen the dog anime nor do I plan to but isn't it just an excuse to get extremely low-angle perspectives of hot anime girls? Does it really try to normalize having sex with dogs? I find that hard to believe.

dertasso said:
Come on only normies care about that 'objective' shit youre saying. But that doesnt change anything. You can criticize it if you think its morally wrong in your opinion. Because its your opinion.

wizdom224 said:
You know I see a lot of posts asking about objective criticism and my answer to that is always that it doesn't exist.


I actually don't care much for what the author thinks. If I'm going to bother myself enough to think hard about a work (and I rarely do), I will likely care less about its message in relation to my personal set of values and more about its ability to be creative, insightful, and dive deep into the subject at hand. But even that's just subjective.


I think you have opinions and they are not mine.

Apolygon2 said:


well again. then wouldn't be unfair to praise shows with good or impactful messages but not do the opposite for the other way around?

morals are generally subjective.

but I don't think it's unfair to say promoting straight up illegal and life ruining things like "rape, selling drugs or murder" is bad thing.

I understand that the entire legal system and moral of humans is subjective. yet you can't call someone wrong for saying "rape" is objectively bad.

but I'll change objective to "generally expected" for the sake of being accurate.

if that generally expected bad thing is promoted, it is actively trying to result in that generally excepted thing happening. and that should be bad, the same way a show that gives life changing advice is good.

yes, in someone's mind the good advice can be life ruining, and the bad advice can be fantastic, but we still look at good advice as... well good.

so why is it unfair, to do the same, for a message, that is trying to result in a generally expected to be bad event?

dertasso said:
No because maybe the law is in fact shit

Apolygon2 said:


you're right, but I argue that at the very least illegal messages, are objectively harmful at the moment since they can land you in jail.

Apolygon2 said:
I did too, and it didn't at first.

but in episode 4, there is a whole feel good speech about the main girl being like, "is it bad that I'm weird" (talking about how she likes dogs) and the show being like "no it's ok, being weird or different is fine" which again, is a decent message, if you ignore the context that her weirdness is wanting to fuck the dog.

WatchTillTandava said:
My primary disagreement was really just with you characterizing it as "objective".

I would still tell the person saying "rape is objectively bad" that they're making what is, in my (inherently subjective, ha!) view a false statement every single time. Even if I'm not personally in favor of rape and still support legal penalties for it in most contexts.

But as to having a strong and fundamental ideological disagreement with the message one feels is being relayed by any given series, as long as you recognize the inherent subjectivity and bias of your own position, I actually don't think there's anything wrong with it at all and agree with the notion that it's hardly dissimilar to the opposite. I regularly have lowered my rating for an anime series if I just fundamentally disagree with and reject a view that I believe they're trying to put across for any given reason, in cases where it's relevant. For example, I definitely was rubbed the wrong way by and lowered the rating in my appraisal of Higehiro (a romance and drama series from 2021) due to the writing of the story, in my view, engaging in too much performative appeasement of and caving into the modern social media Puritanical lynch mob types.  

Say-My-Name said:
Meh. Fiction would be stripped of it's charm if it started to care about the real world all that much.

Apolygon2 said:


not really, out of every show that I have seen, this dog anime is the only example I can think of.

and I don't think many people would miss it. and that's if it didn't exist anyways, only without promoting the weird bestiality to the audience as a "good thing"

dertasso said:
Yeah, you can say it can be public agitation, but on the other side you can say a shitty law can cause even more harm.

Say-My-Name said:
It has it's audienece. Just cause you dont like it, doesn't mean it's better off not existing.

Apolygon2 said:


for me the reason a message is good, is because it can result in positive impact on the watcher.

and if I believe a message will leave an negative impact, not always, but generally, then it's a bad message that makes the show worse.

of course, there is always subjectivity in that. but I do think there is a difference between a subjective bad thing that 99.999% of the people agree on (ex, killing people for no reason is bad)

vs something that is 50/50.

to me the 50/50 doesn't make the show worse, even If I disagree with it. the thing that the vast majority of people agree to be negative, and the show is promoting it, makes it worse.

dertasso said:
No that means the law has to change. 

WatchTillTandava said:
I would contend that it depends on your perspective on life and the world as a whole. If you hold many views which have always been safely and comfortably in the majority on everything that counts and is consequential, then it's not surprising to have a mentality which favors defaulting to the majority held view as an indicator or sign of "rightness". If traditionally you've been in the minority on one notable or a number of views you hold the majority of your conscious life I'd argue you're more apt to be interested in and receptive to seeing alternative views on a wide range of subjects expressed in art and media, even if you don't necessarily agree with all of them individually. I fall into that camp so I'm always naturally more sympathetic to wanting to see the controversial view expressed, probed, and explored even if it's extremely inflammatory or one held by an extremely miniscule minority. I feel that way, again, regardless of what my own view on the issue and opinion expressed ends up being. I'm still glad the art (in this case, an anime series) exists as a vehicle for their expression.

camay1997 said:

This is why I don't care what other people think. Being hypocritical about something (ONE thing) isn't the worst thing a person can do. I'm pro abortion but anti killing babies under any other conditions. Does that make me a hypocrite? If yes, good for you. If no same response. But, to answer the question in the title, "Do you wish it to be?"

Faxtual_Ghoul said:
There is no such thing as Objectively Bad Message

It's all about how WELL WRITTEN AND EXECUTED those messages are

Apolygon2 said:


I think you're projecting.

when I say vast majority, I know for a fact that it's vast majority. and that fact is not like the "objective" I used. I do actually mean fact.


it has nothing to do with my surroundings, you would a hard time finding people who think stuff like "rape, murder, or abuse" aren't bad. 

of course there are still people who disagree. there are way too many of us to fully agree on anything. but it is undeniable that the vast majority agrees that those are bad. 

they aren't actually objective, but the fact that most people by far think they are bad is an objective statement about them.



which is why I said, the 50/50 stuff aren't a problem to me.

same with 60/40, or 70/30 actually.


I only consider messages that are blatantly considered bad by the very large majority, to be a valid criticism. 

it's the same way "I don't like it" and "the animation was a slide show" are both technically subjective, but one involves way less personal bias compared to the other.

WatchTillTandava said:
Maybe you misunderstood what I wrote? I wasn't disagreeing that certain views are held by a vast majority. Not once did I ever dispute that notion.

I'm saying that if you generally hold views in line with prevailing/majority opinion on any number of issues, then you're less likely to be sympathetic to seeing alternate views expressed and explored. And what you say in the following line is kind of my case in point:

"I only consider messages that are blatantly considered bad by the very large majority, to be a valid criticism." - Right. I'm saying that a lifetime of being in the very large majority in a number of ways drives that mentality. It makes a person inherently more susceptible to echo chambers and groupthink because their view on any given random issue is always or almost always the default one rather than the dissident one which is besieged. That means less willingness to hear out a minority-held opinion/belief, even in art and fictional works like TV series. That's why I said from the outset that I did consider the view generally hypocritical but it's an expected kind of hypocrisy from the sense of power, comfort, and complacency people get from being in the majority.

betaweeb said:
it seems people already tackled the fallacy of using objective here, so for the sake of of discussion i will read it as "valid criticism", feel free to take issue with that if that doesn't work for you.

i take issue with your post though, not because you said that everything should be allowed in fiction, which i agree with, or because you said it's valid to criticize an arguably bad message due to being detrimental to the work in question, which is agreeable enough, but my problem lies earlier, when you imply that criticism about morality that isn't contained in your exception of "promoting" a bad message is not legitimate. 

you explain how you don't like when people call shows problematic, but here's the thing, and this may be rooted in your fallacy of objectivity here, you not liking it matters very little regarding the question of validity and legitimacy, a criticism doesn't need to answer to your standards to be fair. everyone has their own standards for criticism and there is no obvious hierarchy between those in regards to validity. of course, most people would probably gravitate to criticism that is more articulate, interesting and that tackles more popular notions of 'good writing' or what not, but a criticism that focuses more on messaging, or for the sake of discussion, purely on sound mixing would be just as fair as anything that answers your standards, even if it'd be a lot more niche'.

just to summarize my point with an example, you said that redo healer doesn't suck because of questionable morals, but because of shitty writing, that is both false and incomplete. incomplete because it should be "in my opinion, it sucks because of writing that is poor, based on my subjective standards", granted, that is a bit tedious and you can say that is implied and then i would waver the "incomplete" issue, of course, though i would assume that is implied when talking to someone i trust to be reasonable, but there is reason to believe here that you may subscribe to non-existent objective rules to writing and in this case, it would not be implied and the issue remains.

it is still false though because of the earlier part, that simply rejects the notion that it can suck just due to someone's problem with the show's portrayal of rape or whatever, if someone evaluates a show's quality based on that, that is a perfectly sound reason to say that the show sucked for them, as i argued previousely, this hypothetical person does not need your, or my approval, for their critique to be valid, disagreeing with a criticism does not make it invalid.

dertasso said:
@Apolygon2
Well not thst specific example, but even 'break the law' can ne countered by saying there is no progress without revolutions.
So ultimately its about whats best for everyone which coincitentally is the very definition of morality.

dertasso said:
Yea because usually the law is morally correct. Think about it. Its always about the morality.

dertasso said:
So where do we not have the same opinion again? Its Saturday and im tired

dertasso said:
Goddammin just watch Code Geass, its basically about our dicussion. And pls delete out conversation. Can you do that as OP? I dont want to be reminded i was in this shit.

silent_knight98 said:
This whole 'bad message' thing reminded me of The Last Of Us Part 2 ending.

Apolygon2 said:
I mean true, no opinion relating to fiction is truly objective.

but I meant objective in a way that "good animation" or "good writing" is "objective"

those 2 are still subjective, but not in the same way "I don't like it" is subjective. idk what is the correct term for this, but most people say objective so I will do the same

Apolygon2 said:
by message I don't mean what the author says or thinks.

I mean something like a feel good scene of a character going "yeah, rape is actually great and makes the world a better place" as a thing you should learn.