Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-31883133-20180114001435/@comment-25936766-20180114031233

KingFubuki92 wrote:

 1) An easy interpretation is that Hazel was just being an overprotective big brother, but notice the first part is him mentioning she was a child. So, did she actually know the risk? Ruby enrolled at Age 15, and she dreamed of making the world a better place...

 2) In addition, the child clause can lend credence to the idea she enrolled early like Ruby did....

 3) So what kind of mission could she have lost her life on? ...So what situation happened that allowed Gretchen to get hurt where neither her teammates, nor a huntsman could save her?

4) Why would Hazel hold Ozpin responsible? Well, I can think of two reasons. One, the situation is something Ozpin could have stopped on his own. Two, Ozpin was the one who recruited her, much like he did Ruby, and Hazel blames him for seeking her out.

5) The final hiccup. Ozpin says its a pain that can't be healed. Except we have seen characters that have had people close to them die and manage to push on.

6) After analyzing all this, something doesn't add up. The picture of the Puzzle is still missing some pieces. The main problem with your logic though....is, first of all, that you are butthurt towards Ozpin, for whatever reason. You despise him and paint him as a lying, manipulative demon. Basically, you sound just like Cinder when she fought Ozpin, "she was right about you".

............And in the process you dismiss the fact that even if Ozpin could be biased, so could Hazel. Honestly, I would take someone like him saying Ozpin killed Gretchen with a mountain of salt.

1) Motivation for a goal does not mean one is blind towards the reality of it. A guy could train to be a soldier because he wants to protect his country and loved ones, yet still be aware that that could involve killing other people.

Ruby wanted to make the world a better place. Doesn't mean she was blind about the dangers. Considering she knows her mother died on a mission, it would be unbelievable that she didn't know the risks of being a Huntress.

Gretchen could well be the same. She wanted to be a Huntress, she made that choice. Hazel says "she was a child, she wasn't ready", but that's HAZEL who says that, not Gretchen. Gretchen could well have been perfectly aware that she could die when she made that choice.

-

2) Except Ruby enrolled early because she was practically a prodigy with the level of skill she showed with her scythe, which Ozpin himself said he only knew one other guy with that much skill: Qrow.

That, and the Silver Eyes.

If Gretchen enrolled early, then she must've been very damn skilled, like Ruby, or had something special, and we have nothing to assume that either was the case.

-

3) First option is an accident. Not all dangers are going to be Grimm. She could've fallen off a cliff during a fight and fell to uncertain doom.

Second option is unexpected variables. Maybe the mission was to kill an Ursa, and when they get to the Ursa a giant Adult Beringel appears and starts smashing them around. The team panics due to inexperience and Grimm arrive more and more, and there's just too many enemies for the assigned Teacher to babysit the entire team. And so, someone dies.

---

4) Or Three: Educate yourself.

--

5) And? Different people are different. Just because Bob can move on after his sister's death in just 1 month it doesn't mean Larry will move on after his sister's death in the same amount of time, if ever. Not to mention, 2 things:

1> Ren was a kid when his parents died, and science has proven that kids are less likely to suffer lasting trauma than adults are.

2> We have absolutely no idea what kind of relationship there was between Hazel and Gretchen. For all we know, their parents died and Hazel had to raise her alone, and then she takes on a dangerous job against his will and dies, leaving him completely alone. Ren, for comparison, had Nora all the years after Kuroyuri was razed.

---

6) Obviously. But you just assume Ozpin is lying is ass off, which is just a fallacious way to look for the missing pieces. Be neutral.

Of course, this leads to the second problem with your logic: O. S. C. A. R. They feel the other's emotions, and they can remember the memories of the other; Though it took Oscar some conscious effort, back when Oscar had just met Ozpin, he was able to perfectly recall Leo's office.

NOW, months later, with some training and even being able to switch control to him? Please, it would be, at the very least, much easier.

So, quite literally - and I'll say it clearly because you keep ignoring it due to that stick you have against Ozpin - OZPIN CANNOT LIE TO OSCAR IN ANY WAY, BECAUSE OSCAR IS PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF TELLING WHEN OZPIN IS TRYING TO BULLSHIT HIM, AND IS PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF READING OZPIN'S OWN MEMORIES TO CONFIRM THINGS HIMSELF.

So the idea that Ozpin is lying falls flat, by that simple fact. And if you, or anyone, wants to analyze Hazel's story, you cannot just assume Ozpin is lying. It's an ignorant, fallacious logic.

-

Also, your analogy with that line Kenobi told Luke fails due to context. From a certain point of view, remember?

When Anakin fell to the Dark Side to the point of nearly killing his wife and non-chalantly deciding to fight his friend and mentor, it was at that moment that, in Kenobi's eyes, Anakin Skywalker was dead and in his place there was just Darth Vader.

The truth is that Anakin became Vader, and in fact Vader died at the last minute as Anakin. But what Kenobi said wasn't wrong, from his point of view; it was really just more poetic.