Referrer URL if available:
November 30, Hunger Games Catching Fire: Badass Body Count sorry old man, I have a dress fitting to go to Number of people killed: For context, here is why THG is a sexist fairy tale.
It anticipates most of the criticisms. An insightful, even optimistic retort is that at least she's not killing, at least she's made the ethical choice to not kill anyone. But this insight is exactly what you are supposed to think, it is an illusion, and it is why my tally above is also a lie.
She kills one person, but she is responsible for all of their deaths. From the very beginning of the Game it was immediately true that everyone but one got killed.
It's not like they went in there thinking, "I'm not going to kill anyone because I am planning to escape this Game. Katniss's thinking is basically, "I'm not butcher, but I am going to try and survive.
|Saavedra, Angel de, duque de Rivas||Notes Acknowledgments The ideas for this book come from the theoretical and practical work I have been doing for the last ten years.|
|Diagnostic information:||Historical Background Feminist approaches to ethics, as well as debates about the gendered nature of morality, are not recent developments. If so, should we simply accept the fact that men and women have different moral virtues as well as different gender traits and proceed accordingly?|
This is a closed system. Whether she shoots them down herself or waits for the psychopath in the group to do it for her, it's the same. What's important is that this "choice" not to kill, and the personal feeling of morality it falsely gives you is how the system survives.
Because you feel good about your choice, "at least I'm a good person," you fight the system much less. You are less of a threat to the system because you are allowed to believe you're a good person and they're not.
You killed 15 people. Just because the system tells you, "the other tributes are your enemy," doesn't mean it's a factual statement, you have to answer the Thin Red Line question: There are Good Samaritan laws in place which protect you from liability if you give someone CPR in good faith but inadvertently crack a rib.
But this is nonsense. The person motivated to offer CPR NEVER thinks about a future lawsuit, he just acts; or, in the reverse, the person who is nervous about lawsuits was never going to help anyway, and thank goodness he can blame it on lawyers.
These laws have the perverse effect of allowing the us passive aggressive techonauts to observe events rather than intervene in events. There's going to be some who will respond with the obvious: Both arguments miss the point completely: It looks like Katniss is free to make personal decisions, but no matter what her free brain decides, everyone around her dies as planned, huh, that's odd.
The only "free" choice, the only way to beat the Game, is not to play. If you really wanted to be a moral agent in such a terrible environment, you'd have to convince the other tributes to all agree not to fight each other, knowing full well that the soldiers will therefore come-- that is the point of the maneuver, to expose the evil of the system instead of allowing them their deniability, "oh, we don't kill anyone, the kids kill each other!
It is the only anti-system choice short of revolution. The response that this maneuver puts the individual Districts in danger, too, is, unfortunately, part of the deal.
The genius of the system is that it never puts everyone at risk, it presents them with a lie: If the Districts themselves don't want blowback, "we don't want trouble", if they "want" to maintain the status quo, they have to send people to participate.
You don't send a Theseus, you send a Katniss, which they did, hence another round of Hunger Games. She'll look heroic, she'll perform badassly, and nothing will change, which it didn't, which is why even though she won the first movie there was a second movie. There's going to be some of you who will be confused, "are you saying Suzanne Collins planned this?
Collins wrote the story, yet she is not aware herself of what she wrote; she couldn't have written the story any other way than from a narcissistic perspective because that's all she knows living in this world; or, to reverse it, had she known, had she written a different kind of story with a different kind of hero, it would never have been published, let alone made into movies, we'd be on Twilight 7.
Everyone around her is extraordinarily heroic and self-sacrificing, they literally drag her bad ass to the finish line at the cost of their own lives, so that she can survive as a symbol, and the rest of you dummies think she is the hero.
Only a taught narcissistic psychology would SEE her as heroic when right in front of you and your eyeballs you can observe she is the least heroic of all. I'm not blaming you, this is the training we all got. The sleight of hand of such movies is that it presents an entirely different society full totalitarianism in the context of TODAY, in the context of narcissism as expected, as ok, so meaningless acts become exciting and meaningful acts are obscured.
Huh, Mags blew herself up with poisoned gas. Ah well, she was old. But in totalitarianism, there are no individual acts-- that's the whole point of the totalitarian structure, that's what it wants, what it wants you to become.The most objectionable part of straw manning is the claim that a specific person or group has a certain (poorly thought out) belief, without any solid evidence that this is the case.
The ethics of care (alternatively care ethics or EoC) is a normative ethical theory that holds that moral action centers on interpersonal relationships and care or benevolence as a virtue. EoC is one of a cluster of normative ethical theories that were developed by feminists in the second half of .
Project Gutenberg Australia a treasure-trove of literature treasure found hidden with no evidence of ownership. Moderation / Criticism / Exposition / Exposés David Aaronovitch. Catholics try, rather unconvincingly, to show how conferring sainthood is different in principle to the pagan apotheosis (the process that made Claudius, for instance, into a God), but the distinction doesn't quite wash.
. During Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures,” Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) argued that if Republicans want progress on both economic and national security, the party will need to take back the majority in the House of Representatives.
Project Gutenberg Australia a treasure-trove of literature treasure found hidden with no evidence of ownership. Feminist Ethics is an attempt to revise, reformulate, or rethink traditional ethics to the extent it depreciates or devalues women's moral experience. Among others, feminist philosopher Alison Jaggar faults traditional ethics for letting women down in five related ways. To Burghardt and Yolande The Lost and the Found The Forethought Herein lie buried many things which if read with patience may show the strange meaning of being black here at .
To Burghardt and Yolande The Lost and the Found The Forethought Herein lie buried many things which if read with patience may show the strange meaning of being black here at .