Porygon Was Innocent: An epileptic perspective on the infamous Pokémon episode

> I have seen many fans, in the face of being told the reason for these changes, say that it doesn’t matter because they aren’t personally epileptic. This is, as you might understand, incredibly personally frustrating, and yes, very ableist. In saying this, these fans claim that disabled people do not have a right to feel safe when watching their favorite series, and that their wellbeing doesn’t matter in comparison to a few brighter shots of teenagers using their magic powers to punch each other.

I don't get it. Why is it bad wanting to see the unsafe version for yourself?

> Over 2500 fans signed a change.org petition asking Crunchyroll to take down this edited, safe, version of the series and instead upload an unedited version that was true to the original vision—even if it had the potential to cause seizures.

That's not how I read the petition in question. People are asking to get access to the original that they know exist. I can't find a paragraph that demands deletion of the edited safe version.

>> As fans, we implore Crunchyroll to try to acquire an uncut version of the simulcast as we are paying good money each month for the services they provide.

This is a giant liability issue for any company.

If you want the raw version, I'm sure it's out there...

Reading from the petition:

> This petition may be pointless and may not affect the outcome of this season, but if not that, hopefully it can affect Crunchyrolls future simulcasts from suffering the same fate as Jujutsu Kaisen is right now.

I'm not a CR customer, have they ever offered multiple versions of their synchronized on air series （simulcast)?

I'd assume it would only be a single chosen version, with perhaps an alternative days or months after airing, but from an effort and financial perspective I wouldn't expect it.

At no point does the petition ask for separate versions (it argues the dimmed version make them nauseous), it's a commenter that surfaces the option, so I see TFA's point standing.

> As fans, we implore Crunchyroll to try to acquire an uncut version of the simulcast as we are paying good money each month for the services they provide.

Seems like they want Crunchyroll to offer it, I wasn't able to spot a mention of taking the safe one down; it's an uncharitable or invalid characterization on the part of the author imo

> Crunchyroll usually gets an unaltered version for series such as Demon Slayer. But for unknown reasons, most likely due just pure lack of initiative from Crunchyroll's side, Jujutsu Kaisen isn't as lucky.

I'm not sure if it's actually simulcast but they apparently offer the preferred (to the petitioners) version of some shows. I guess that would be simulcast taking all regions into account but not sure within a single region.

I read it as CR usually only getting the unedited version, with no alternatives.

The whole vibe of the petition was dismissive of the issues and only argued for getting the flashing version, so I understand author's view. E.g.

> These things are supposed to help prevent seizures, [...] the ghosting is almost making the visual stimuli worse as people have attested to feeling nauseous and dizzy from the obscene amounts of frame blending.

Emphasis mine.

I don't know how bad the blurring was in motion, but I read the petitioner's argument as "this version is worse in every way for reasons that are only hypothetical". I really don't see much room for a generous interpretation.

The generous interpretation that it makes them nauseous instead of giving them an epileptic attack.

I’m nearly certain for 90% of people the problem is entirely psychosomatic.

I'm skeptical unless the company has promised its shows to be safe for epileptics. Is this because it's for kids?

Anyone have a source for this?

Looks like this is it? (Seizure warning) :

https://youtu.be/7gOlodTlpwk (Seizure warning!)

It's about a minute of rapid red-to-blue cycles. It's fairly intense.

Oh wow, that is intense. Intense to the point that while watching it, I had to ask myself: "wait, am I 100% sure I'm not epileptic?"

> I don't get it. Why is it bad wanting to see the unsafe version for yourself?

Because, as shown in Japan and called out in TFA, even those without a history of seizures can have them. These can be bad enough, even in those with no history of seizures, to warrant a visit to the ER.

If they just want to see the unedited version, it feels lazy to demand that CrunchyRoll track down and host the episode when (in the time it takes to read the petition) you can just do some Googling and find it. Right now anyone who wants to see it can track it down (and the Streisand Effect will ensure that remains the case) but it isn’t so easy to find that someone would stumble across it by accident. Why change that status quo?

This kind of feels like a troll petition, especially with that weird invocation of “we are paying good money each month for the services they provide”. People often tack that sentence on to something when it’s clear that what they’re asking for isn’t self-evidently necessary.

> unless the company has promised its shows to be safe for epileptics

Many jurisdictions have regulations requiring this. It’s also not a tough criteria to fulfill. Most of the things you need to avoid are pretty obvious, and the less obvious things can be caught by automated tools. The blowback for creating or hosting epilepsy-triggering content is pretty intense. It’s not something most companies want to play around with.

I don’t get why people want CrunchyRoll to host this content so bad. It feels like people demanding to be able to set off firecrackers on a wheelchair ramp. Sure it probably won’t hurt anyone most of the time, but why do people want this one specific thing so badly when they can get it somewhere else?

It's not necessary, but it is nice to have. IMO demanding the original version would be inappropriate, but you can ask for it.

Yeah, but if I know that and still want to try it?

If you host (and charge for access to) content that causes a seizure and don't have warnings & stuff then there's a good argument to be made that your negligence caused any seizures that may arise.

Especially if there's a perfectly good non-seizure causing version right there.

Promising that content won't cause seizures is one thing, knowing that it already has is another.

Agree. The whole world doesn't need to give up alcohol/peanuts/gluten just because some people are allergic. It should be enough to put to a warning for them so they can safely avoid those things. Similarly, a warning on a version had has potentially problematic strobing seems like enough? I've certainly seen that warning on several things recently.\\

I noticed this issue in Kaiju 8. It was so bad I thought my TV was broke. It was clear the scene was supposed to be brighter and flashy but it was at like 50% brightness. I had incorrectly guessed at first that it was the TV not liking some extra bright scene.

Turns out it was this. It did arguably ruin the scene. An analogy would be if someone walked up to the TV and turned down the volume by 50% for an action scene.

You can simply "just do some Googling and find it" for literally everything on CrunchyRoll. That's called piracy though, and there are various reasons why people buy a crunchyroll subscription instead of doing that.

Seems quite a reasonable request to me.

No one is stopping you from tracking it down and watching it; the request is merely that it not be the version aired on TV, nor the default on streaming media like Crunchyroll. That seems like a pretty reasonable middle ground to me - if you can only host one version, host the safe version. If you want to host multiple versions, feel free to add the unsafe cut as an alternative.

>I don't get it. Why is it bad wanting to see the unsafe version for yourself?

Half the point of the article is that the seizures frequently occur in people who had no history of seizures, i.e. who were "not epileptic". Thus, saying "I don't care, I'm not epileptic" is pure nonsense.

> Why is it bad wanting to see the unsafe version for yourself?

No one has said it is bad to want that.

Being free to want that doesn't mean you are entitled to have someone fulfill your desire for you.

It is not middle ground if it requires breaking the law...

"Not enough money? No one is stopping you from defrauding someone or robbing a bank"

Edit: I meant piracy

I think you might be responding to the wrong thread? My comment had nothing to do with illegal behavior

I think the allergy analogy people are deploying in these comments is misleading. It’s more like you’re asking for a car without seatbelts because you’ve never been in an accident. These visual patterns are dangerous even for people with no history, according to the article, and the consequences of a seizure can be severe. The author suffered a fractured spine! This is not a reasonable thing to have in the environment; it’s good that we’ve established protections.

It's more like asking for mandatory seatbelts in a world where most people are completely immune to any kind of car crash and will not get so much as a scratch from any kind of collision.

Well, how do you "track something down" when it isn't provided through official channels?

Yeah. The Simpsons bit is funny https://youtu.be/3Eox1ogr3SE

Seems like the people who signed the petition feel like it's worse for them. Vibes are an interpretation, and I disagree about your interpretation, but you can only quote the words, not the words transposed based on what vibe you get, otherwise you run the risk of prejudice and slander.

I read it as "We'd like CR to seek an altered version, because we're not getting what we're laying for". The author said they asked to have the original taken down, followed by calling it ableist.

Is the latter really more correct, or is that what's seen through a cynical lens?

Unaltered version*

I cancelled my c roll sub because they don't have anything on there. None of the older classic anime, only the newer ones which I'm not really interested in.

Every time I look up an older one (2000s) to watch it, they don't have it. So no wonder people pirate it all.

Three’s a lot of stuff on Archive.org that isn’t exactly legal to distribute (and I’m not sure if they have some kind of exception because they are nonprofit or publishers just don’t care to send DMCA notices). I’m glad such a place exists, though.

For sure, and given that the creators of this have refused to release or license it, it’s doubtful that any legal method of viewing it exists or ever will. Yet it has captured people’s curiosity, and that gives some merit to archival, abandoned as it is.

At least the Internet Archive is bereft of advertising and malware that scourges most piracy sites.