Why did we need to make Helena a brown lesbian?

[NoobSupreme]

Helena is claimed to be Australian. Australians are either White or Aboriginal. It does not make sense that she is brown. Were she be American or Mexican or perhaps even Asian it would make sense. But a brown Australian is a very rare thing and does not make sense in production.

 

in addition she is lesbian. While that alone is weird to make a point in a game primarily played by underage individuals, you bring politics into this in the form of her wife being a blue haired pale white chick. It is absolutely disrespectful that you use this show that could have been good to push a political agenda. 

 

Worst of all is the several references to scissoring that was made seconds into the series. Like what the hell. Why did we need this in here??? (Again the majority of the ark playerbase is underage! And let me tell you how much we should be educating all the 10 year olds on ark how scissoring works) plus kids are a lot more likely to be watching an animated series compared to children.

the basis of ark is natural selection. Lesbians cannot have children with another woman, so it makes no sense why Helena would be lesbian.

 

 

 

i watched under 5 minutes of this and was sorely disappointed. I hope you go out of business for this disgrace.

 

 

for admins: I am not putting down brown or lesbian people. I am simply pointing out the irrationality to including this in a series about Ark, which is a game based upon survival of the fittest primarily, which is a concept brought about by the theory of evolution which since lesbians cannot have children with each other they are not the fittest. And hense have no place in this series.

 

I love how they make her look trans when ark is all about seeing reality.

Edited March 22 by NoobSupreme

[NoobSupreme]

If this seems transphobic racists or homophobic it is not what I meant. The entire character of Helena is just out of place.

[CervantesMor]

I can understand your reasoning but let me point out something: yes, ARK is focused on "survival of the fittest" but not in the strict sense of human evolution, "the most suitable to evolve and complete the path, the one that will allow free the Earth from the Titans". 

Also if you have read all the Notes (Lore) you know that in reality in the ARK Helena is not "the most suitable" as her path did not save the earth but what was special in her brought her to evolve into "homodeus" (she failed to free the Earth from corruption) thus becoming a "guide" to us Bob (Survivors)... still looking for the "most suitable".

A final observation: this animated series is not the representation of our journey as a Survivor, but of the story prior to our arrival on the Island, the one we discover by finding its Notes: the Lore.

[NoobSupreme]

41 minutes ago, CervantesMor said:

I can understand your reasoning but let me point out something: yes, ARK is focused on "survival of the fittest" but not in the strict sense of human evolution, "the most suitable to evolve and complete the path, the one that will allow free the Earth from the Titans". 

Also if you have read all the Notes (Lore) you know that in reality in the ARK Helena is not "the most suitable" as her path did not save the earth but what was special in her brought her to evolve into "homodeus" (she failed to free the Earth from corruption) thus becoming a "guide" to us Bob (Survivors)... still looking for the "most suitable".

A final observation: this animated series is not the representation of our journey as a Survivor, but of the story prior to our arrival on the Island, the one we discover by finding its Notes: the Lore.

How does this tie into how Ark is not strong about enforcing the points of survival of the fittest. Yes Ark has other themes, but dragon was added as “unnatural selection”. Sotf mode in Ark. and the general theme of the game with mutations. It does not make sense that Helena who is the main character of all this is not naturally fit as she is lesbian, which is like a lesser version of being barren.

Edited March 22 by NoobSupreme

[Gam3Th3rapy]

3 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

Helena is claimed to be Australian. Australians are either White or Aboriginal. It does not make sense that she is brown. Were she be American or Mexican or perhaps even Asian it would make sense. But a brown Australian is a very rare thing and does not make sense in production.

 

in addition she is lesbian. While that alone is weird to make a point in a game primarily played by underage individuals, you bring politics into this in the form of her wife being a blue haired pale white chick. It is absolutely disrespectful that you use this show that could have been good to push a political agenda. 

 

Worst of all is the several references to scissoring that was made seconds into the series. Like what the hell. Why did we need this in here??? (Again the majority of the ark playerbase is underage! And let me tell you how much we should be educating all the 10 year olds on ark how scissoring works) plus kids are a lot more likely to be watching an animated series compared to children.

the basis of ark is natural selection. Lesbians cannot have children with another woman, so it makes no sense why Helena would be lesbian.

 

 

 

i watched under 5 minutes of this and was sorely disappointed. I hope you go out of business for this disgrace.

 

 

for admins: I am not putting down brown or lesbian people. I am simply pointing out the irrationality to including this in a series about Ark, which is a game based upon survival of the fittest primarily, which is a concept brought about by the theory of evolution which since lesbians cannot have children with each other they are not the fittest. And hense have no place in this series.

 

I love how they make her look trans when ark is all about seeing reality.

I have to disagree with you on almost everything. I am totally enjoying the series. I'm not lesbian however I don't have a problem with it. Also the brown is in my opinion also not an issue. As for your comment "a game primarily played by underage individuals" --  I personally have played ark since ase almost from the start and I don't know "any" children that play. I haven't even come into contact with any, outside of large discords for trading.

So to say (a game primarily played by underage individuals) as you did.. I must say I don't agree. perhaps if you had the

numbers to back that up. Bust still nope. I am enjoying and I will continue to do so.

If you aren't enjoying it then turn off your device and go breathe.

Also as a side note. even put into a situation for survival our sexuality and procreation aren't the only things to determine it. If you wish to promote breeder mentality have fun with that.

And finally - for you to say you aren't putting down brown people and or lesbians. you really need to reevaluate that comment. Because you certainly are. Have a nice day.  

 

PS-- I just re-read your last comment.. she looks trans?? absolutely does not. you are reaching so far with that.. you may dislocate something. 

Edited March 22 by Gam3Th3rapy
edit for clarity and additional comment

[St1ckyBandit]

"WHITE AUSTRALIA HAS A BLACK HISTORY"

The protest scene in the 2nd episode was cringe af.

The first 2 episodes establish 2 things, Man bad woman gud and White bad, black gud.

Add ark to the list of franchises that pander to the woke ideology. 

[NoobSupreme]

5 hours ago, Gam3Th3rapy said:

I have to disagree with you on almost everything. I am totally enjoying the series. I'm not lesbian however I don't have a problem with it. Also the brown is in my opinion also not an issue. As for your comment "a game primarily played by underage individuals" --  I personally have played ark since ase almost from the start and I don't know "any" children that play. I haven't even come into contact with any, outside of large discords for trading.

So to say (a game primarily played by underage individuals) as you did.. I must say I don't agree. perhaps if you had the

numbers to back that up. Bust still nope. I am enjoying and I will continue to do so.

If you aren't enjoying it then turn off your device and go breathe.

Also as a side note. even put into a situation for survival our sexuality and procreation aren't the only things to determine it. If you wish to promote breeder mentality have fun with that.

And finally - for you to say you aren't putting down brown people and or lesbians. you really need to reevaluate that comment. Because you certainly are. Have a nice day.  

 

PS-- I just re-read your last comment.. she looks trans?? absolutely does not. you are reaching so far with that.. you may dislocate something. 

Short blue hair = trans kid.

 

im sorry I offended your sense of lesbian black supremacy. 

[NoobSupreme]

1 hour ago, St1ckyBandit said:

"WHITE AUSTRALIA HAS A BLACK HISTORY"

The protest scene in the 2nd episode was cringe af.

The first 2 episodes establish 2 things, Man bad woman gud and White bad, black gud.

Add ark to the list of franchises that pander to the woke ideology. 

Protesting is stupid. I think America needs a law that if you are blocking traffic by standing in the street protesting or riding a bicycle in the street people should not get in trouble for hitting you. I mean it’s like standing in front of a bunch of people at a shooting range. What do you expect?

 

 

[CervantesMor]

10 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

How does this tie into how Ark is not strong about enforcing the points of survival of the fittest. Yes Ark has other themes, but dragon was added as “unnatural selection”. Sotf mode in Ark. and the general theme of the game with mutations. It does not make sense that Helena who is the main character of all this is not naturally fit as she is lesbian, which is like a lesser version of being barren.

I imagine you didn't understand what I wanted to point out; reread what I wrote carefully.

Helena is not the hero who saved the land of the Titans but is "waiting" for the one who will be ready to do it, the animated series does not tell "our ARK of survivors" but the story described in the Lore, the sexuality of a person does not it determines the ability to adapt him/her-self to a new and different way, it does not even determine the quality of the person himself, it does not determine the possibility of being able to defeat the Titans and their corruption... which is the purpose of ARK: saving the Earth (not evolve mankind).

Try rereading my previous message taking this into account and without thinking of any prejudices.

[CervantesMor]

2 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

Short blue hair = trans kid.

[[don't take this as mockery, I just want to make a joke for a laugh :)]]

So Vegeta married a Trans (Bulma)? Ah no it's the son who is Trun(k)s

[NoobSupreme]

1 hour ago, CervantesMor said:

I imagine you didn't understand what I wanted to point out; reread what I wrote carefully.

Helena is not the hero who saved the land of the Titans but is "waiting" for the one who will be ready to do it, the animated series does not tell "our ARK of survivors" but the story described in the Lore, the sexuality of a person does not it determines the ability to adapt him/her-self to a new and different way, it does not even determine the quality of the person himself, it does not determine the possibility of being able to defeat the Titans and their corruption... which is the purpose of ARK: saving the Earth (not evolve mankind).

Try rereading my previous message taking this into account and without thinking of any prejudices.

Evolving needs reproduction. It does not fit that the main character is effectively sterile. In addition I suggest you reread my comment I don’t know how you look at a game that is themed around evolution and make the main character an unfit individual for evolution. No matter how strong of an individual Helena is, she cannot have children unless it is with a man.

[Pipinghot]

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

Helena is claimed to be Australian. Australians are either White or Aboriginal. It does not make sense that she is brown. Were she be American or Mexican or perhaps even Asian it would make sense. But a brown Australian is a very rare thing and does not make sense in production.

All this shows is that you don't know squat about Australia.

Australia, like the U.S., has immigrants from a wide variety of locaations, people from all over S.E. Asia and the western pacific have been emigrating to Australia for decades. Looking at someone's skin color in a society that has long standing immigration and deciding they "don't make sense" only means that you have a very limited imagination and prefer to see cliche, obvious character selection.

Beyond this, there is an element that should be super-obvious. Australia also has inter-marriage which has been going on for generations. Even if you never look beyond the shores of the island there are plenty of Australians of mixed brown/white ancestry.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

in addition she is lesbian. While that alone is weird to make a point in a game primarily played by underage individuals, you bring politics into this in the form of her wife being a blue haired pale white chick. It is absolutely disrespectful that you use this show that could have been good to push a political agenda.

It's not anyone "making a point", you're projecting your ideology on other people. You're working from the assumption that when someone else does so they're doing it to make a point. Authors choose characters for a wide variety of reasons, but by far the most common reason is that an author thinks the character will be interesting.

If she was straight and white you wouldn't be suggesting that anyone was trying to make a point, and yet you assume that making her brown and lesbian is somehow making a point, which is pretty silly thinking.

Likewise, her wife being a "blue haired pale white chick" has no more meaning than this is the character's background. Brown people live their lives differently than you do, lesbians live their lives differently than you do, blue haired white chicks live their lives differently than you do, and so on. None of that mean that the authors are trying to bring politics into their story, that's just you projecting your values and preferences on to other people.

The only thing "absolutely disrespectful" is that you mis-interpret the show to push your political and social agenda while trying to pretend that you're not.

Sometimes the hero of a story is Luke Skywalker, a standard white boy from the country, sometimes the hero of the story is an intellectually superior dwarf from a noble family, sometimes the hero of the story is a brown lesbian with a white wife. If you stop making your terrible assumption that only certain people are allowed to be the hero of a story then you will find yourself enjoying stories on their own merits rather than being offended by false narratives that you've falsely constructed in your head.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

Worst of all is the several references to scissoring that was made seconds into the series.

Nonsense, this is you projecting again. The only reference they made was that the two of them are adults who have an adult relationship - just like every other show and story about adults does.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

(Again the majority of the ark playerbase is underage!

No, it's absolutely not. The significant majority of the ARK player base are of age, you can drop your hand-wringing "for the children" arguments, that's nothing more than a lie you're telling yourself to justify your hand-wringing.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

And let me tell you how much we should be educating all the 10 year olds on ark how scissoring works) plus kids are a lot more likely to be watching an animated series compared to children.

This must be your first day on the internet, children have access to all of the porn on the planet, not one of them are being exposed to the concept of lesbians for the first time in their lives by the ARK cartoon.

And again, your insistence on "scissoring" nothing more than you trying to use dog-whistle buzzword to pretend that this was some sort of excessive display of sexuality, which was absolutely not the case. If you see two women walking into a bedroom, closing the door and the first thing that comes to your mind is "SCISSORING OMGZ!" then all you're doing is exposing your own peculiarities (and probably your own sexual fantasies as well). There are thousands of example of shows showing adults walking into a room and closing the door behind them, there's nothing strange, excessive or bizarre about it happening on this show.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

plus kids are a lot more likely to be watching an animated series compared to children.

That's up to their parents to decide, not you. If you don't want your kids to watch this show then don't let them, but I guarantee you that millions of parents around the world don't care one tiny bit about the very tame, very non-explicit relationship shown between those two characters. Standard network TV has lot's of more explicit sexuality than was shown in ARK, and all of the big streaming services have much more material that kids watch that is more sexually explicit than Ark.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

the basis of ark is natural selection. Lesbians cannot have children with another woman, so it makes no sense why Helena would be lesbian.

And there it is, there's the true agenda driving your socio-political diatribe that you're trying to pretend isn't one.

Here's a puzzle for you, natural selection and evolution are both entirely real, and yet every species (of mammal) has homosexual relationships. If the existence of homosexuality is forbidden or prevented by natural selection, why does it keep occurring? The answer is simple (even though you're not going to want to admit it),  it's because homosexual relationships benefit the species as a whole. Individuals who are homosexual don't pass on their own genes directly, but they do indirectly help to pass on the genes of their family group, which still benefits the species.

If you're going to try to use natural selection as the basis of your (political) argument, than you need to make sure that you understand how it works. You're pretending that natural selection supports your (political) position, but it doesn't, natural selection and evolution demonstrate why your thinking is wrong.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

i watched under 5 minutes of this and was sorely disappointed. I hope you go out of business for this disgrace.

Translation: You are, in your own words, "transphobic racists or homophobic" but you want to pretend that you're not.

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

I am simply pointing out the irrationality to including this in a series about Ark

No, you're pointing out your own irrationality.

There's no law that says you have to like gay or trans people, your feelings are your feelings. But if you're going to attempt to use arguments like natural selection to justify those feelings then you're going to need to come up with arguments that can withstand the scrutiny of logic, and yours don't. Everything you've said here has been your arguing from the position of your own collections of irrationalities.

[Pipinghot]

16 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

If this seems transphobic racists or homophobic it is not what I meant.

Yes it is, at least be honest with yourself about it.

[Pipinghot]

7 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

Protesting is stupid.

And yet that's what you're doing in this thread.

What you really mean is that you don't like it when people protest that you don't agree with. You don't think protesting is stupid, you only think it's "stupid" when other people do it.

7 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

I think America needs a law that if you are blocking traffic by standing in the street protesting or riding a bicycle in the street people should not get in trouble for hitting you.

Oh, so you're a closet psychopath, well that explains a lot.

7 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

I mean it’s like standing in front of a bunch of people at a shooting range.

It's nothing at all like that, this is some of your dumbest logic yet.

7 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

What do you expect?

In both cases, the street or the shooting range, I expect people who are controlling their deadly instruments (whether they're cars or guns) to hold themselves accountable for operating their devices responsibly and with proper restraint.

I've been on plenty of shooting ranges and not once has anyone ever argued that it's ok to shoot people who are standing down range, regardless of whether it's accidental or intentional. Anyone who said something stupid like that would get kicked out the moment they flapped their stupid lips. Here's a pro-tip: if you're at a shooting range and you shoot someone, it's your fault no matter what they were doing. As the operator of a car or a gun it's your responsibility to ensure that no one gets injured by your device.

[NoobSupreme]

12 minutes ago, Pipinghot said:

All this shows is that you don't know squat about Australia.

Australia, like the U.S., has immigrants from a wide variety of locaations, people from all over S.E. Asia and the western pacific have been emigrating to Australia for decades. Looking at someone's skin color in a society that has long standing immigration and deciding they "don't make sense" only means that you have a very limited imagination and prefer to see cliche, obvious character selection.

Beyond this, there is an element that should be super-obvious. Australia also has inter-marriage which has been going on for generations. Even if you never look beyond the shores of the island there are plenty of Australians of mixed brown/white ancestry.

It's not anyone "making a point", you're projecting your ideology on other people. You're working from the assumption that when someone else does so they're doing it to make a point. Authors choose characters for a wide variety of reasons, but by far the most common reason is that an author thinks the character will be interesting.

If she was straight and white you wouldn't be suggesting that anyone was trying to make a point, and yet you assume that making her brown and lesbian is somehow making a point, which is pretty silly thinking.

Likewise, her wife being a "blue haired pale white chick" has no more meaning than this is the character's background. Brown people live their lives differently than you do, lesbians live their lives differently than you do, blue haired white chicks live their lives differently than you do, and so on. None of that mean that the authors are trying to bring politics into their story, that's just you projecting your values and preferences on to other people.

The only thing "absolutely disrespectful" is that you mis-interpret the show to push your political and social agenda while trying to pretend that you're not.

Sometimes the hero of a story is Luke Skywalker, a standard white boy from the country, sometimes the hero of the story is an intellectually superior dwarf from a noble family, sometimes the hero of the story is a brown lesbian with a white wife. If you stop making your terrible assumption that only certain people are allowed to be the hero of a story then you will find yourself enjoying stories on their own merits rather than being offended by false narratives that you've falsely constructed in your head.

Nonsense, this is you projecting again. The only reference they made was that the two of them are adults who have an adult relationship - just like every other show and story about adults does.

No, it's absolutely not. The significant majority of the ARK player base are of age, you can drop your hand-wringing "for the children" arguments, that's nothing more than a lie you're telling yourself to justify your hand-wringing.

This must be your first day on the internet, children have access to all of the porn on the planet, not one of them are being exposed to the concept of lesbians for the first time in their lives by the ARK cartoon.

And again, your insistence on "scissoring" nothing more than you trying to use dog-whistle buzzword to pretend that this was some sort of excessive display of sexuality, which was absolutely not the case. If you see two women walking into a bedroom, closing the door and the first thing that comes to your mind is "SCISSORING OMGZ!" then all you're doing is exposing your own peculiarities (and probably your own sexual fantasies as well). There are thousands of example of shows showing adults walking into a room and closing the door behind them, there's nothing strange, excessive or bizarre about it happening on this show.

That's up to their parents to decide, not you. If you don't want your kids to watch this show then don't let them, but I guarantee you that millions of parents around the world don't care one tiny bit about the very tame, very non-explicit relationship shown between those two characters. Standard network TV has lot's of more explicit sexuality than was shown in ARK, and all of the big streaming services have much more material that kids watch that is more sexually explicit than Ark.

And there it is, there's the true agenda driving your socio-political diatribe that you're trying to pretend isn't one.

Here's a puzzle for you, natural selection and evolution are both entirely real, and yet every species (of mammal) has homosexual relationships. If the existence of homosexuality is forbidden or prevented by natural selection, why does it keep occurring? The answer is simple (even though you're not going to want to admit it),  it's because homosexual relationships benefit the species as a whole. Individuals who are homosexual don't pass on their own genes directly, but they do indirectly help to pass on the genes of their family group, which still benefits the species.

If you're going to try to use natural selection as the basis of your (political) argument, than you need to make sure that you understand how it works. You're pretending that natural selection supports your (political) position, but it doesn't, natural selection and evolution demonstrate why your thinking is wrong.

Translation: You are, in your own words, "transphobic racists or homophobic" but you want to pretend that you're not.

No, you're pointing out your own irrationality.

There's no law that says you have to like gay or trans people, your feelings are your feelings. But if you're going to attempt to use arguments like natural selection to justify those feelings then you're going to need to come up with arguments that can withstand the scrutiny of logic, and yours don't. Everything you've said here has been your arguing from the position of your own collections of irrationalities.

iirc she said something about rocking her tonight

 

[Pipinghot]

3 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

Evolving needs reproduction. It does not fit that the main character is effectively sterile.

And yet evolution continues in spite of the number of leaders/conquerers/generals/victors who died without having children. History is packed full of people who were the hero of the story in their own lifetime and yet who did not pass on their genes.

Evolution absolutely does not required that the main character has to be fertile, because evolution does not all happen in a single lifetime. Evolution is a process that occurs in species, with no regard whatsoever for whether any specific individuals pass on their genes.

This argument is going to fail every time you try to use it. Evolution is for species, not individuals. Gay mammals and gay people have always existed, and yet the evolution of species continues to move forward regardless of what happens to specific individuals.

3 hours ago, NoobSupreme said:

No matter how strong of an individual Helena is, she cannot have children unless it is with a man.

Which doesn't matter in the slightest.

Breeding in Ark only happens with dinos, not survivors. There are no baby survivors, every character that has ever existed in ARK is effectively sterile.

[Pipinghot]

1 hour ago, NoobSupreme said:

iirc she said something about rocking her tonight

It's hilarious that you focus in on that one word, and your own specific interpretation of that word. Straight people say that to each other too, but even to you it should be obvious that when straight people say it they don't mean "scissoring", clearly your interpretation nothing more than a manifestation of what you like to imagine.

Feel free to put together a full, cogent, and logically consistent reply, no one cares about your silly and misguided sound bite.

Edited March 23 by Pipinghot

[NoobSupreme]

also i don

32 minutes ago, Pipinghot said:

And yet evolution continues in spite of the number of leaders/conquerers/generals/victors who died without having children. History is packed full of people who were the hero of the story in their own lifetime and yet who did not pass on their genes.

Evolution absolutely does not required that the main character has to be fertile, because evolution does not all happen in a single lifetime. Evolution is a process that occurs in species, with no regard whatsoever for whether any specific individuals pass on their genes.

This argument is going to fail every time you try to use it. Evolution is for species, not individuals. Gay mammals and gay people have always existed, and yet the evolution of species continues to move forward regardless of what happens to specific individuals.

Which doesn't matter in the slightest.

Breeding in Ark only happens with dinos, not survivors. There are no baby survivors, every character that has ever existed in ARK is effectively sterile.

not their genes

[NoobSupreme]

30 minutes ago, Pipinghot said:

It's hilarious that you focus in on that one word, and your own specific interpretation of that word. Straight people say that to each other too, but even to you it should be obvious that when straight people way it they don't mean "scissoring", clearly your interpretation nothing more than a manifestation of what you like to imagine.

Feel free to put together a full, cogent, and logically consistent reply, no one cares about your silly and misguided sound bite.

i just dont think we should be glorifying mental disorders in any way

[Pipinghot]

21 minutes ago, NoobSupreme said:

also i don

not their genes

Not their genes what? Use your words like a grownup.

[Pipinghot]

22 minutes ago, NoobSupreme said:

i just dont think we should be glorifying mental disorders in any way

Ahhh, so in addition to being a closet psychopath who thinks it's ok to run people over with cars or shoot them when you don't agree with them, you also deny the factual reality that homosexuality is not a mental disorder. Big surprise there, more science and facts that you don't understand.

[NoobSupreme]

"im angy because he tranfobe"

 

lol

[DeliaHaze20]

I will share an opinion I do find it weird how they made her lesbian out of the blue but the whole brown skin thing  I kind of just assumed she was super tanned you know since she's a paleontologist working in the sun all day. Also I guess it doesn't matter since the animated series isn't confirmed as canon or whatever.

Edited March 23 by DeliaHaze20

[DwainoFive]

I haven't watched the show so I won't assume anything there but I will make the assumption you don't even know where Australia is, let alone the population demographics. Supremely noob starting argument. The liquid drops hitting you in the face from the wind are not rain. LIl bro, you are alone here.

[Pipinghot]

1 hour ago, NoobSupreme said:

"im angy because he tranfobe"

 

lol

Translation: You can't come up with any legit arguments, so you pretend to ignore that all your arguments have been complete failures. Hey, whatever helps you sleep.