• BrikoX@vlemmy.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Their titles are shit, but the context is that it wouldn’t been needed before.

    • SomeoneElse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      the context is that it wouldn’t been needed before.

      Before like in the past? Of course it wasn’t needed in the past. Times change, what is considered offensive evolves. It’s a good thing to have a little side note saying “Just so you’re aware this author isn’t a racist/sexist/homophobic/transphobe. The terms used in book were not considered offensive at the time of publishing and no disrespect or insult was intended”. Including notes like that are pretty important so that we can enjoy older media in the way it was intended and not make important works taboo because they don’t conform with today’s standards.

      I’m in my 30s and there’s already a lot of words I used in childhood that are considered offensive now. And I’d put money on the likelihood that some words I use now won’t be considered appropriate within my lifetime. That’s not censorship, it’s progress.

    • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, because times change, of course it wasn’t needed before. When Huck Finn was new it didn’t have that kind of reminder either. It does now due to different attitudes toward slavery. (Yes, even though it’s partially satirical.)

      If anything, a reminder that things were created in a different time, and should be viewed through that lens, should be given far more often, not less.