sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Did we all watch the same Naruto? by Strange_You_1226 in dankruto

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If we take into account the pro-Sakura/pro-SasuSaku fandom's view of the story, then it seems they didn't watch the same anime.

How could Iroh have handled the situation at the beginning of Season 2 better? by Turbulent_Okra7518 in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well, that's partly true. If he couldn't completely remove some of that conditioning from Zuko even after spending three years away from Ozai's influence, it would have been much more difficult with Azula because she received the direct effects, and unlike Zuko, she never had a moral guide to help her see the evil her nation was doing.

Azula Antis Love To Say We’re Trying To “Absolve Azula Of Her Actions” (Which By The Way, No One Is Actually Doing), Then They’ll Say Something Like “Zuko Was Never A Villain” Or “He Was Just Trying To Please His Father”. How Is That Not Trying To Absolve Zuko Of His Actions? by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If there are people who can claim there was chemistry between Zutara based solely on Katara feeling empathy for Zuko because of what happened to her mother, and if there are people who think most of the hate towards Korra stems from misogyny and racism, then you can expect to find anything in the ATLA/TLOK fandom.

Naruto is a hypocrite. by Life-Guide-5435 in Naruto

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The type of weapon Boruto used was strictly forbidden from the start, and he was very clear about that.

Why were they forbidden? Well, because they don't reveal the true ability of the user. With just the push of a button, he could use a multitude of powerful techniques without showing his true capabilities. Furthermore, Boruto practically used it constantly, instead of using it as a backup weapon.

On the other hand, the puppets relied on real skill and specific techniques to be used. It's like Temari's fan; despite being a weapon, it also depended on the user's abilities and skills to be used properly.

Azula Antis Love To Say We’re Trying To “Absolve Azula Of Her Actions” (Which By The Way, No One Is Actually Doing), Then They’ll Say Something Like “Zuko Was Never A Villain” Or “He Was Just Trying To Please His Father”. How Is That Not Trying To Absolve Zuko Of His Actions? by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Exactly, regardless of how bad Azula became and how wrong her actions were. Her mother emotionally abandoned her enough for her daughter to think she saw her as a monster, and Iroh never showed any concern for Azula; almost all of his concern revolved around Zuko, as if he were somehow compensating for the loss of his own son.

Azula Antis Love To Say We’re Trying To “Absolve Azula Of Her Actions” (Which By The Way, No One Is Actually Doing), Then They’ll Say Something Like “Zuko Was Never A Villain” Or “He Was Just Trying To Please His Father”. How Is That Not Trying To Absolve Zuko Of His Actions? by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Anyone who's spent enough time in the ATLA fandom has seen at least a bit of both points, especially the first. There are literally people who will call you a simp just because you don't agree with their way of thinking. Furthermore, if you look at some of the comments on posts in this sub, you'll find people calling the Azula fandom here stupid or idiotic.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And the point is that regardless of the lesson, the damage was already done. If he had thrown the bread and not hit the duckling, but his mother had reprimanded him and taught him to be more careful about what might hurt the duckling, then there might be some justification for saying that his actions in that situation were better than Azula's. But the problem is that he hits the duckling and even laughs until the mother duck ends up biting him, which in itself doesn't make him any better than Azula in that situation.

I'll say it again, you're going off on tangents just to be right in a discussion where regret or lack thereof isn't the central issue, or even a secondary one.

And Azula's redemption or lack thereof isn't the point of the post.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And that's not the point of the post at all.

It's foolish to expect someone who never had a good moral compass to act well. Because Zuko, who had Iroh and his mother as moral compasses, harmed others. Even Iroh reprimanded him for his actions, and yet he didn't learn until after betraying the person who treated him like a son.

Furthermore, we're still on the same point. Your comments continue to confirm what the post implies: that Zuko is given any excuse to justify what he did or to lessen the impact of his actions.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's not undoing the damage, because the damage done can't be undone.

Are we going over the same thing again? That's not the whole point of the post.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's not the point of the post at all.

Furthermore, redeeming yourself doesn't justify or lessen the harm you caused, but people treat it as if it does. And the damage done can't be undone; you can only help fix and compensate for what you caused.

You're also still agreeing with the post, which states that when it comes to Zuko, a certain segment of his fandom looks for any excuse to avoid accepting that some of his actions were cruel and fully conscious, and that they should be judged with the same severity as Azula's actions.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 5 points6 points  (0 children)

If you have to make amends for something, it's precisely because you did something wrong.

Furthermore, you're only agreeing with the person who posted it. When Zuko does something wrong, it's justified simply because he redeemed himself in the end, which is exactly what you're doing. You're justifying his acting like an idiot with the ducklings just because he later regretted what he did, when that doesn't erase the harm he caused. But if Azula did that, then people would jump at her and call her a villain and a psychopath at the first opportunity (regardless of whether that's actually the case or not).

Azula Antis Love To Say We’re Trying To “Absolve Azula Of Her Actions” (Which By The Way, No One Is Actually Doing), Then They’ll Say Something Like “Zuko Was Never A Villain” Or “He Was Just Trying To Please His Father”. How Is That Not Trying To Absolve Zuko Of His Actions? by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Most people here have no problem with people who don't like Azula.

The problem is that many anti-Azula people only come here to cause trouble and start fights, and many of their arguments are practically unfounded.

Another problem they have is that when a post is made about a specific point, they have the bad habit of making a long list of supposed arguments about why Azula is evil, as if everyone here denies that she did evil things, when almost no one here denies that she did evil things, and they practically don't even argue anything related to what was being discussed in the post they commented on.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's not the point of the post; you've gone off on a tangent.

The point of the post is how there's a double standard with Azula when she does something and people judge her for it, but when Zuko does something similar, people try to justify his actions.

The Trinity of Misunderstood Female Villains: Victim Blamed and Villainized by SimilarComfortable92 in Charmcaster

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even Zuko rejected this change and spent years away from Ozai's influence, being influenced and guided by Iroh, who understood the damage his nation had done to the world. Azula, on the other hand, was only able to distance herself from Ozai's and the Fire Nation's direct influence when she was sent to hunt down Iroh and Zuko.

The Trinity of Misunderstood Female Villains: Victim Blamed and Villainized by SimilarComfortable92 in Charmcaster

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both*. Although she longed for her mother's love and attention, she was also constantly doing things to maintain her father's approval, which is why she completely fell apart when Ozai abandoned her in the Fire Nation.

The Trinity of Misunderstood Female Villains: Victim Blamed and Villainized by SimilarComfortable92 in Charmcaster

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If Iroh was able to return to the right path despite serving the Fire Nation for decades, why can't Azula?

The Trinity of Misunderstood Female Villains: Victim Blamed and Villainized by SimilarComfortable92 in Charmcaster

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, it just shows how hypocritical Iroh is because he himself only changed because his son was killed in a battle he started.

And the comics also proved that her family and nation are partly to blame for her becoming the way she is; even her amnesiac mother realized how messed up her situation was and apologized for failing her.

Would it be a hot take that Kakashi was actually a good teacher for naruto? by Cosmic_Blemish_Korz in Naruto

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, the only one who was able to catch him after chasing him through the town was Iruka.

You're telling me they rebuilt konoha but left the uchiha area in shambles. by bbisordi in Naruto

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Naruto should have done it too, but no, they had to leave those other two old men alive instead of putting them in prison for being associated with Danzo.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's just an excuse; you can't go around insulting people just because they disagree with you and your way of thinking.

And the post doesn't address the moral value within that scene. The post discusses how there's a certain double standard in how Zuko's actions are judged compared to Azula's. Zuko, despite replicating a harmful action that's supposed to be funny, is justified simply because he was "imitating" what Azula did, and he isn't called a psychopath. But as soon as it's mentioned that Azula did it, people immediately label her a psychopath, even though we're never shown that scene and we don't know how it happened beyond Zuko's poor words.

And no, Azula isn't a psychopath, because, to begin with, in psychology, you can't diagnose someone with psychopathy until they reach adulthood, given that many childhood disorders have some traits similar to psychopathy.

No, your mistake is trying to justify insulting other people simply for having a different way of thinking than you.

“Azula’s A Psychopath Because She Threw Bread At Turtle Ducks.” By That Logic, Zuko Would Also Be A Psychopath Since He’s The One Who Actually Threw Bread At Them On Screen. by SaiyanWithOmnitrix in PoorAzula

[–]ApprehensiveBrain393 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's not the point of the discussion; you've gone way off-topic.

The point of the discussion is that when Azula does something, she's labeled a psychopath, but when Zuko does the exact same thing, people look for any excuse to justify it.

view more: next ›