politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Sigh. Way to guarantee all the young adults are going to read the Twilight of shitty vanilla fairy melodramas.
Reading is something for everyone and anyone to enjoy. while a piece of art could have technical flaws and shortcomings, if someone enjoys it GREAT. We all like liking things. Don't shame them for liking something just because it makes you feel more well read.
Its also OK to point out when a piece of literature is badly written and, subjectively, not very good. The person you responded to was shitting on the work, you inferred the shame on the reader. One should not feel that a criticism of a work (however well founded the criticism is) is an attack or attempt to shame someone just because they happen to like it.
There are plenty of works that are popular but written like shit. Its fine to like them, and its fine to point out how the writing style is bad. As another example, Ready player one is somehow a popular story even though the writing is terrible. I would never shame someone for reading it, but I'm also not going to pretend like its a good book or not full of lazy references to popular media properties.
Maas is over-saturated and sucking the oxygen out of the room for people writing better things in the same genre. l will* die on that molehill. Any day of the week. Twice on Saturdays.
And as a side note, I like trashy novels? But its disingenuous to throw Court of Mist and Fury up against Anna Karenina and say these are equal works. Like whatever you like—it's fun to read self indulgent stuff, but also remember it is good to challenge yourself a bit from time to time.
No one is comparing those things You just came out and shat on an author and her gaining new readers. People who may suddenly discover a genre they love. You can have a correct opinion but still be a pretentious twat.
But I shat on the Court of Whatever series because it is not well written, and then you implied I should be ashamed for shaming people because all reading was great and equal, and then I gave an example how I didn't believe that necessarily to be true. The whole point is they could be discovering a better book if Terry Pratchett would have put more smutty bits in Tiffany Aching.
I do think you should be ashamed for shaming people for what they like. I think enjoyment of art is all great and equal and no one should be feel bad for liking something they like
You can disagree that people should really only like work that is worthy, or artists that are worthy. That's your hill.
Repeatedly said the exact opposite my guy. But as an artist, bad artists that phone it in=not as worthy? Yeah. I like this hill. It is verdant and good. Making good shit is hard. It would nice to live in a world where that effort was valued. You seem very earnest. I wish you the best with your Twilight vanilla fairy melodramas.
I am earnest. I don't read them but I remember my youth having media I liked that makes me cringe now. It's insulting the audience for enjoying something that is unfair.
Be as critical of the art and artists as you want. It is really elitist and mean to insult someone for enjoying it. Which IS what your first post did.
No. The first post was regretful that these books would get a boom in interest from their prohibition albeit of the low quality of their content—granted said like an ass, but, welcome to the internet.
You keep conflating low quality with shame. In a way that's increasingly reading as bit autobiographic. Like whatever you like—liking a thing doesn't excuse it from criticism. Yeah, I'd prefer the zeitgeist steer kids into reading better crafted works and not to mass marketed soulless trash. Is this really a problematic stance? Calling me a pretentious twat and an elitist because I am critical of a book series that ...you apparently never read? (I got up until the point when sheltered girl is abducted from abusive English garden boy by dark and brooding but misunderstood wing guy.) Tons of fantastical young adult books are written fantastically. But so far not by Maas.
Hey, I like that fairy melodrama.
I also like terrible things. It doesn't make them less bad.
Have you by chance read Black Prism by Brent Weeks? I'd be curious to hear your thoughts.