Quote Originally Posted by Turtledeluxe View Post
This is why I made the statement about people not being open minded, because it did not come across to me as though the "critical camp" of the timeline element in EW had any interest in entertaining other possibilities, but were more interested in pushing "Venat is genocidal" for shock value.
For what's it worth, this illustrates the point I was trying to make several pages back about the problems with using "genocide" in this context. Because it *is* such a powerful word that is infinitely more complex than its bare-bones dictionary definition would suggest, and with so much to unpack behind the general use and IRL application of the term, at absolute best it is highly simplistic to apply it to Venat's situation on the basis of "she wiped out an entire race", and at first impression it genuinely does sound like a statement made to cause a stir than it is to make a point. People who already struggle to conceive of the notion that Venat Did Bad here are quickly going to be alienated and assume it's a troll attempt, trying to equate something laden with the history and typical intent that genocide has to this particular situation and character, to the extent that it'll like as not be a permanent point of contention with both sides refusing to move past the issue of its usage.

If your main point is that Venat committed genocide, well, then I suppose it's not really a problem and that's your argument to make. If your point is highlighting the hypocrisy in the story and the flaws in its portrayal of Venat, that's when I suggest you're perhaps shooting yourself in the foot before you've even begun. That's the best way I can hope to explain it, anyway. Perhaps I've misunderstood that intention with some people here from the beginning.

I'd go through the past few pages to see where the discussion has gone since, but I think I'd need a bottle of gin for that and unfortunately I don't actually drink.