i think it's a common fandom & critic habit to identify when a text is attempting to invoke a real-world parallel through x & then reduce the entire portrayal of x to that parallel -- when in the text there are deliberate convergences & divergences
it's not that i dislike what the boys was doing in invoking cops or white supremacy through its supes, that's in conversation w the foundations of the superhero genre... but your intent obviously wasn't confined to just this social commentary when you also compared people running
i'm not sure why fandoms tend to characterize "redemption arcs" in fiction as conservative. person recognizes their actions have caused harm & makes meaningful attempts towards ameliorating said harm... is this the fantasy driving the modern right. do we live in the same universe
sorry having experienced multiple iterations of "homelander won't be redeemed his conservative fanboys are so dumb😂" discourse... u guys can just say u don't want to see it. that's allowed. you don't have to fabricate a politically progressive rationale for it
& i do sympathize it's very easy to slip up during this kind of interview & misstate something or inadvertently forget to acknowledge something sensitive, & it's so hard to be so deliberate w your words for an extended length of time, & so on...
a psychologist's job is built around pt interviewing. if you want to lead a pt to a particular conclusion abt their behaviour it is done through gentle & open-ended prompting, not a sloppily worded, demeaning, leading question. this is an example of someone being bad at their job
This quoted post is unavailable.
people too readily use ADAPTATION as an excuse imo. obv there is nothing wrong with adjusting or even heavily altering source material. but why are you making those changes? are they interesting? do they serve a better story?