This weekend, The Hunger Games came out: the first in probably about seven films based on the popular trilogy of books. It can't be understated how popular these books and movies are; the movie's opening weekend was massively attended, and the books have been the talk of book nerds for years. And it's kind of unsettling when you realize that all this rapturous attention is getting directed at children dying in arenas.
"Oh look, the children are dying! Let's clap and bray!"
Does anyone else see a problem with that? Isn't that like a question on those tests they give to psychopaths? "How many children have to be killed in an arena before your erection wanes?" What if an entire civilization failed that test? What if that's our civilization? Although I take no pleasure in being the last bastion of morality in the world, as Cracked's only licensed killjoy ...
"Everyone stop having fun immediately! You! Having premarital sex! Knock it off, you guys!"
... someone has to explain why we should not be enjoying these films and books so much. So please, I beg of you, read the information below and pass it on to your friends and intelligent pets. Hopefully you'll find a way to use this advice in your daily lives -- your smug, self-superior, tongue-clucking lives.
5Children Have a Right to Life
Let's get this one out of the way first, because it is, to my eye, kind of the obvious issue here. The same way that dogs and mailmen have an innate right to life, children, too, have the right to not be killed for the amusement of the book-reading public.
Because no one ever talks to them, few people know how bloodthirsty librarians are, a trait at least partly attributable to frustration that no one ever talks to them.
An excellent example of this is how, when a child is killed in a non-arena context, we all gasp and say "That's awful!" That is the correct reaction, and if you've done that, please feel good about yourself for a moment. But consider how the inclusion of an arena affects the equation: not at all.
In fact, if the children were deliberately placed inside of the arena (instead of stumbling in there because of some poorly placed signage), that actually makes this worse. Because we are now talking about not only premeditated child enarenament (a rarely used term to describe a violation of a child's right to not be in an arena), but if that arena in fact kills the child -- which seems to be the arena feature that is getting everyone's rocks off -- then we're talking about murder.
You guys know why murder is bad, right? Should I have started there? Sigh ... You know something, screw it. I've got other reasons. Let's move on to ...
4It Discriminates Against People Who Don't Have Arenas
OK. Let's say that hypothetically we have some children, and maybe their right to life isn't so great. Maybe the children are wicked or something. But that still doesn't mean it's acceptable to put those children into an arena we have lying around, because poor people don't have arenas and won't have that option open to them.
Obviously, there are limits to this kind of argument. Inequality is always going to be present at some level in our society, and in general we have no problem denying poor people, say, their yachting rights. But we don't deny them voting rights, either. And by that measure, the right to dispose of wicked children has to fall closer to the voting end of the spectrum as a fundamental, inalienable right. Allowing the wealthy to dispose of children in arenas ...
... and denying that same privilege to poor people is grossly unfair. Furthermore, the population balance between rich wicked children and poor wicked children will tip, and the poor wicked children will eventually overrun us all and eat our flesh.
Wait. Is that right? That's how Oliver Twist ended, right? Oliver ate all those people's flesh? Yeah, that sounds right.