Vent - Eastenders and Kidneys

Azari

goonarmy wrote: »

And dont complain about others countering the oringinal vent......

Countering the original vent is fine where you are just expressing a contrary opinion.

It's when people imply that the ventor should not hold that opinion that they cross a line.

I notice that whilst ther are a lot of posters who do cross that line by implying that because it's fiction the OP should not be concerned, none of those who find the lack of reality annoying have started telling posters how they should think.

The attempts to tell others what they should think all seem to come from one side.

JReacher1

Azari wrote: »

Countering the original vent is fine where you are just expressing a contrary opinion.

It's when people imply that the ventor should not hold that opinion that they cross a line.

I notice that whilst ther are a lot of posters who do cross that line by implying that because it's fiction the OP should not be concerned, none of those who find the lack of reality annoying have started telling posters how they should think.

The attempts to tell others what they should think all seem to come from one side.

No one is really arguing with the venter. They posted one vent.

The arguments between the two different sides have come from people who weren't the original venter eg myself, yourself, pollycat etc.

There has been no line crossed. Just because people don't agree with the original point does not mean they are out of order for saying so.


It's also not just one sided as both yourself and pollycat have stated that other posters are wrong for saying its fiction and attempted to belittle them.

It's an Internet forum where people have opposing views. There is no need for you to attempt to get the morale high ground.

Azari

JReacher1 wrote: »

There has been no line crossed. Just because people don't agree with the original point does not mean they are out of order for saying so.

Here are two quotes:

Money-Saving-King wrote: »

Most normal people who can manage to watch TV without the need for writing to Points of View if it even still exists?!

peachyprice wrote: »

People are watching Eastenders expecting it to be realistic?

The place where no-one owns a washing machine, the place where the local pub hasn't closed down, the place where people come back from the dead, the place where every family is constantly in crisis?

Really people, get a grip.

The highlighted sections are those that I think are wrong. An implication that people who think the lack of realism went too far are not 'normal' and need to get a grip.

It's also not just one sided as both yourself and pollycat have stated that other posters are wrong for saying its fiction and attempted to belittle them.

What I have said is not that it is wrong to say it's fiction.

I have said that it's wrong to say that because it's fiction you can never complain about lack of reality and there is something abnormal about you if you do.

As I said right at the beginning, it is a matter of balance. It would be absurd to watch Doctor Who and complain that it's unrealistic because time travel is impossible. It is not, however, unreasonable to object when what is supposed to be serious drama gets things badly wrong - although it's quite reasonable for people to point out possible reasons why the programme makers did as they did.

As usual on this forum, however, a plea for balance and tolerance goes unheeded and people continue to tell others to 'get a grip' if they don't happen to agree with them.

PILES

Azari wrote: »

Here are two quotes:





The highlighted sections are those that I think are wrong. An implication that people who think the lack of realism went too far are not 'normal' and need to get a grip.




What I have said is not that it is wrong to say it's fiction.

I have said that it's wrong to say that because it's fiction you can never complain about lack of reality and there is something abnormal about you if you do.

As I said right at the beginning, it is a matter of balance. It would be absurd to watch Doctor Who and complain that it's unrealistic because time travel is impossible. It is not, however, unreasonable to object when what is supposed to be serious drama gets things badly wrong - although it's quite reasonable for people to point out possible reasons why the programme makers did as they did.

As usual on this forum, however, a plea for balance and tolerance goes unheeded and people continue to tell others to 'get a grip' if they don't happen to agree with them.

Its Eastenders not serious drama or real life. Thats where the balance comes into it. If you think people should realistically rely on a soap opera to educate them about kidney donation then you do need to get a grip.

katiefinger

pimento wrote: »

My mum gave my dad one of her kidneys and one of the reasons it was all so protracted was that they both had to have conselling to make sure it wasn't being done for the wrong reasons or my mum wasn't under duress. They even had to prove who they were by sending a wedding photo in.

And this is by far the biggest flaw in the whole storyline. Regardless of whether he's the best possible match or not, Dexter would never be allowed to donate to a dad he hasn't seen for twenty years, who came back into his life shortly before 'urgently' needing a kidney.

I've been an avid 'fan' of EastEnders since it started when I was a child and despite despising this storyline and its inaccuracies, I shan't let it stop me watching it. I shall do lots of cringing and shouting at the telly when a kidney scene comes up though.

Yes, soaps are fictional but when they're concentrating on more serious issues (such as chronic kidney failure) they should at least attempt some form of realism. There is nothing entertaining about kidney failure, but to show it in a way which belittles it is frustrating for those of us who are personally affected by kidney failure and have to endure dialysis, fluid restrictions, fluid overload, a strictish renal diet, pain, exhaustion, too many sick days ... This was a chance to offer a generally kidney failure ignorant soap watcher a bit of an education on something which is starting to affect more and more people every year. Instead it's just a farce.

It's also belittling for those of us who have been living donors. Dexter's constant strop about needing to be a hero is ridiculous. You don't become a living donor because you want to be a hero; you do so because you don't want to see your loved one in any more pain or discomfort and you want them to exist without being hooked up to a machine for up to four hours, three times a week.

I do wish I lived in Albert Square; things happen so much quicker there. It must be bliss.