Most of them. Makes me think of Tolkien. He treated death differently, but it was almost always a man dying. I think we both probably understand the male sense of honor in sacrifice that Tolkien would invoke in those moments. It's just that society doesn't treat it that way anymore. Except under special narrative conditions (for instance when an "ally" character of fodder variety dies).
I really do think that if GRRM had placed ASOIF in, say, an African kingdom setting, showrunners adapting it in modern America would be squeamish about depicting "good guys" slaughtering civilians. In the same way that, if it were set in a ridiculous exclusively female society, they wouldn't slaughter those civilians.
If you ignore the racial element of the genocide propaganda narratives, the narratives in which the one kind of person is "fodder" and treated as less-than-human, you will only get part of the picture.
Because the point of promoting feminism is to destroy the host society. Means to an end. There's a reason complacent races like the Chinese are spared from the propaganda we suffer. We are fed propaganda to weaken us, Whites are not part of the global underclass scheme. Keeping with the Chinese as a counter-example, they are fed propaganda that promotes focus on family (to the EXTREME exclusion of their neighbors) and complacency (fear of government, reminders of surveillance, govt promoted narc campaigns, and on and on).
I can't be bothered to watch this show, or anything like it, but I'd be curious how many fodder deaths were male.
Most of them. Makes me think of Tolkien. He treated death differently, but it was almost always a man dying. I think we both probably understand the male sense of honor in sacrifice that Tolkien would invoke in those moments. It's just that society doesn't treat it that way anymore. Except under special narrative conditions (for instance when an "ally" character of fodder variety dies).
I really do think that if GRRM had placed ASOIF in, say, an African kingdom setting, showrunners adapting it in modern America would be squeamish about depicting "good guys" slaughtering civilians. In the same way that, if it were set in a ridiculous exclusively female society, they wouldn't slaughter those civilians.
If you ignore the racial element of the genocide propaganda narratives, the narratives in which the one kind of person is "fodder" and treated as less-than-human, you will only get part of the picture.
How can you say there's a racial element when white women have insane levels of value in leftist propaganda films?
Because the point of promoting feminism is to destroy the host society. Means to an end. There's a reason complacent races like the Chinese are spared from the propaganda we suffer. We are fed propaganda to weaken us, Whites are not part of the global underclass scheme. Keeping with the Chinese as a counter-example, they are fed propaganda that promotes focus on family (to the EXTREME exclusion of their neighbors) and complacency (fear of government, reminders of surveillance, govt promoted narc campaigns, and on and on).
Is it? I think it's to rebalance the hierarchy to put women at the top.
The Chinese are spared it because their views on women make mine look tame.