Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Birdy ([info]skewed_tartan) wrote in [info]jurisimprudence,
@ 2006-05-02 19:39:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:Catty

The "Sympathy in Fiction" Edict.
Or its full name: "Sympathy for a belief system in fiction that parallels immoral behavior in real life does not in fact equal sympathy for said immoral behavior in real life." Or the acronym: "S.B.S.F.P.I.B.R.L.D.N.I.F.E.S.S.I.B.R.L.", or just "The Slytherin Apologists' Edict", from the group this behavior is most highly expressed in. After people who claim they agree with Mein Kampf in it's theory, but would never follow someone like Hitler because he had a stupid looking mustache on his face anyway.

Also see: [info]ataneill93, several times.



(Post a new comment)


(Anonymous)
2006-05-03 04:35 pm UTC (link)
Without a punishment, it looks like you're saying that's a good thing.

(Reply to this)(Thread)


[info]mindset
2006-05-03 06:01 pm UTC (link)
Laws of this type don't need punishment; they're like scientific laws, describing a situation. (See the original Godwin's.) Many of the Jurisimprudence laws have them, but they don't *need* them.

To the OP: I'd like to propose a corollary for this law. Namely, "Sympathy for an immoral fictional character does not in fact equal agreement with the character's immoral behavior or belief system." Which if more "Slytherin Apologists" actually stated (or believed), they're probably run into less wank...

(Reply to this)(Parent)


 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map