|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Remember when people accused D&D of causing youth to worship Satan and video-games of making kids violent? Remember when the same was said about rock music. Remember how people wanted to ban those things? Remember how all of that was b#%%%+!$?
If you think the former statement is b!$#!&$*, then why do you think anime is any more capable of making someone sexist? Why is it any more harmful than showing anyone who is attractive or competent. And why do you think banning anime with fan-service is any more reasonable than banning games with violence? Should we ban every game where there is combat? Should we ban porn as well?
If you don't like anime with fan-service, don't watch them. If you don't want your kids to watch them, then don't let them do it. Why do you want to ban stuff other people enjoy?
There have been interesting debates about why some people want to ban what others like. One viewpoint considered it a sexual fetish/perversion itself, to get one's jollies off banning what others can see.
Kind of an odd flip here but with american comics being brought up
has anyone checked out the new He-man and She-Ra comics. He-man's design is pretty much the one from the more recent cartoon and She-ra has a nice update. Still very close to her original look.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Because Freehold and other True Gundam fans will appreciate it...
Blayde MacRonan wrote: Because Freehold and other True Gundam fans will appreciate it... lol I saw this earlier and it's brilliant.
We are this close to a holodeck
TriOmegaZero wrote: In other, more important news, I watched Kantai Collection last night. My wife said it was ridiculous, and I rather agreed, but I still enjoyed the hell out of it. Glad you enjoyed it's silliness. Seems your impression wasn't all that far off from mine earlier.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
We will see if it progresses to something more or just stays a nice fluffy way to spend my time.
My wife says it is Pacific Rim: The Anime.
TriOmegaZero wrote: My wife says it is Pacific Rim: The Anime. So... Uh... A normal anime?
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Shut up and watch Tokyo Ghoul.
TriOmegaZero wrote: We will see if it progresses to something more or just stays a nice fluffy way to spend my time.
My wife says it is Pacific Rim: The Anime.
hahaha!
That may be a bit too high of a comparison bar.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Well, we've only seen one episode so far.
Blayde MacRonan wrote: Because Freehold and other True Gundam fans will appreciate it... so, aranna decided to visit people at work....
Freehold... play nice.
Awesome Blayde, that prank reminds me of the LG prank.
Armageddon Prank
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
So I finished watching My Little Monster ("Tonari no Kaibutsu-kun") yesterday, a thirteen-episode series that was great up until the end. That is, I liked it except for its ending.
A slice-of-life comedy-drama, My Little Monster is the story of two high-school students - Shizuku and Haru - falling in love with each other. Or rather, it's the story of them trying to learn how to deal with having fallen in love with each other.
The premise is based around the fact that both of them are highly unsociable, albeit for wildly different reasons. Shizuku is emotionally unavailable, being withdrawn to the point that she's lost all interest in the people around her, caring only about her grades. By contrast, Haru is emotionally volatile, instantly acting on his feelings without any sense of restraint or decorum.
The two of them end up becoming a couple almost by accident, when Shizuku delivers some schoolwork to Haru's home after he's suspended for fighting, and he misinterprets it as an act of friendship. Overwhelmed by the overbearing nature of his feelings, Shizuku responds in spite of herself, and from there the two of them start down an exceptionally rocky path to being in a relationship.
What makes the story work is that the two of them are so mismatched that they end up balancing each other out. Haru's raw, unfiltered emotions punch through Shizuku's detachment; likewise, Shizuku's withdrawn nature allows her to weather Haru's explosive nature. He winds her up, while she calms him down.
To put it another way, this isn't a story about two people falling in love, so much as it is them trying to figure out how to deal with being in love. Whereas most anime about a couple ends with them finally admitting their feelings to each other, that's where this anime begins - Haru tells Shizuku that he loves her by the end of the first episode, and at the end of the second episode, she tells him that she loves him too. The series is them trying to figure out how to make it work between them.
Unfortunately, where the series stumbles is that it never manages to present an answer to this question. While we watch them go through their misadventures, there's always a sense that they're slowly figuring out what it means to be with the other. But by the time the show ends, there's been no overall resolution. Even the final episode feels like just another tale of happenstance; nothing happens to satisfy the main plot, nor any of the sub-plots.
It's fairly ironic that, much like the main characters don't know what to do with each other when they realize their feelings, the anime doesn't know how to bring things to a conclusion when it runs out of episodes. That's a shame, because it's very heartfelt in its presentation; the characters are engaging for how they're a group of misfits learning not only how to open up to each other, but what it means to maintain a relationship after they've done so. The anime is quite mature in that it acknowledges that simply opening your heart and saying how you feel isn't enough - it takes work to learn how to share your life with someone else.
Overall, My Little Monster was a very good anime that didn't know what to do with itself, and so it doesn't end so much as it just stops. It's a shame, because by the time it does I really wanted to see if Haru and Shizuku were able to make it work between them. While the manga may answer that question, the anime is ultimately inconclusive.
And now the latest Animator Expo short... Gridman
A friend of mine saw this and was like... "This is Superhuman Syber Squad, dude."
And he's right... sort of. Servo was based on Gridman.
Sad news... Singer Origa , best known for her vocals on the GITS:SAC opening tracks, has passed on.
My favorite song by her will always be Inner Universe .
Blayde MacRonan wrote: Sad news... Singer Origa , best known for her vocals on the GITS:SAC opening tracks, has passed on.
My favorite song by her will always be Inner Universe .
Oh man, I love her stuff. So sad to hear this...
Right, that settles it, time for that tattoo with some of the Inner Universe lyrics I've been contemplating for a while now.
so apparently Digimon is returning to the Generation 1 kids. All aged up to High School now.
I'm ok with this, as generation 1 and 2 were always my favorite...wonder if netflix or hulu has them....WHY AM I AT WORK AND UNABLE TO CHECK THESE THINGS?!?!?
thejeff wrote: Caineach wrote: TOZ wrote: Relevant to the tangent. And in comics there is a problem because the only fan service is for men. If you think that is true about anime, you have never seen shoujo. There are tons of shows geared towards women, and I can think of a number of reverse harem shows. That's probably the best counter argument I've seen yet.
Despite some similarities and despite common impressions in the US, anime is a very broad term. Much more a media than a genre. As my female friends like to say Just Ship It
Just finished macross.
Now watching macross plus 4 episode ova, to be followed by the movie and then macross 7.
One more movie left in the gundam trilogy. Will watch that tonight followed by apocalypse 0079, what bits and pieces I can find of the gravity front, and 08ms team.
You're better off skipping Macross 7 and going straight to Macross Frontier. M7 had a terrible protag, bad music and went on waaaaay too long.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote: You're better off skipping Macross 7 and going straight to Macross Frontier. M7 had a terrible protag, bad music and went on waaaaay too long. Apparently you have never read any of my posts on Macross 7. It is one of my favorite series of all time, was the first anime soundtrack I bought on my first trip to Chinatown, and brought my disparate group of friends together. I'm still fuming that I missed out oN the chance to meet the band that played fire bomber and listen to them live at the anniversary special performance.
I do agree that the series went on a bit long.
The rest of your post made the vein in my forehead bulge uncomfortably.
Freehold DM wrote:
The rest of your post made the vein in my forehead bulge uncomfortably.
I aim to displease.
Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Haven't been finding many hits lately. Magi had great artwork, but was just a little too slow for me even after the first three eps. I've run through half a dozen eps of other series, and nothing even that noteworthy.
Ah well, I'm back to school now anyway!
Alzrius wrote: ... Sorry bro, but I don't argue with people who make so many offensive assumptions and misinterpretations of my words.
Good talk though. Maybe you'll figure it out someday on your own.
Lemmy wrote: Ban ban BAN ban baaaaaaan! Is all this talk of banning in reference to my posts, or someone else's?
Caineach wrote: As my female friends like to say Just Ship It I haven't read any fanfics since university... Is there a good site for them? It would be fun reading.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Tequila Sunrise wrote: Is all this talk of banning in reference to my posts, or someone else's? It wasn't a reply to anyone in particular, just my view on the subject. And the idea that something should be removed form media because it doesn't fit someone's personal tastes. You (general you) don't like a certain type of media? Don't consume it.
Don't like violent games? Don't play them.
Don't like rock music? Don't listen to it.
Don't like anime with fanservice? Don't watch them.
But don't try to stop others from doing it if they want. And yes, censorship is exactly what some people are advocating here.
Aranna wrote: Caineach wrote: As my female friends like to say Just Ship It I haven't read any fanfics since university... Is there a good site for them? It would be fun reading.
fanfiction.net springs to mind. You will have to wade through a lot of chaff to find the wheat, though.
this thread might be useful.
Lemmy wrote: Tequila Sunrise wrote: Is all this talk of banning in reference to my posts, or someone else's? It wasn't a reply to anyone in particular, just my view on the subject. And the idea that something should be removed form media because it doesn't fit someone's personal tastes. You (general you) don't like a certain type of media? Don't consume it.
Don't like violent games? Don't play them.
Don't like rock music? Don't listen to it.
Don't like anime with fanservice? Don't watch them.
But don't try to stop others from doing it if they want. And yes, censorship is exactly what some people are advocating here. Oh there is a place for the type of fan service that objectifies women, under the hentai label. Where there is no question at all about what your going to see when you play it.
Yes, but some of us like fan service, but don't like or care much for hentai.
As I said, Aranna, there is nothing preventing you from starting a service for people who don't want to see such fanservice where they can look up which anime series don't contain it. Then all who want not to see it can be certain they won't. Do it yourself, market this service to the various anime syndicates, set up subscription models or marks of decency that all can follow, whatever you choose can be done just as you wish it.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tequila Sunrise wrote: Sorry bro, but I don't argue with people who make so many offensive assumptions and misinterpretations of my words. It's telling that you don't seem to recognize the difference between an argument and a debate. All the moreso that you characterize a difference of opinion of being "assumptions" and "misinterpretation" of your words, rather than understanding and finding fault with your points.
If you don't feel up to debating the issue, that's fine, but saying that the other person just can't understand what you're saying, and so it's a waste of your time, is simply disingenuous.
Quote: Good talk though. Maybe you'll figure it out someday on your own. Maybe someday you'll figure out that I've already figured it out, and just disagree.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Aranna wrote: Oh there is a place for the type of fan service that objectifies women, under the hentai label. Where there is no question at all about what your going to see when you play it. Aranna's point is worth underlining here, in that her call for segregating anything that's at all meant to be arousing or titillating for the audience to purely pornographic works is actually a call to lower standards of expectation.
The reason for this is that it's reasonably assumed that any work of creative expression is to be lauded for being able to be appreciated on multiple levels simultaneously. If we can find something appealing in more than one fashion, then we in turn recognize additional merit in that thing.
As an example, one can find a statue to be well-crafted, and so finds it appealing for the skill it conveys. Hence, the statue is appreciated on one level. By contrast, a statue of a historical personage, such as Gattamelata, can be appreciated both for the skill of the sculptor as well as the history that it evokes, being pleasing on two levels.
Likewise, something like the Venus Callipyge, can be appreciated for its skilled work, for its historical appreciation (as recalled in the Deipnosophists), and for its erotic appeal. As it can be appreciated on three different levels at once, it can therefore be enjoyed to a greater degree than the previous two examples.
As such, saying that "all erotic or titillating qualities should be confined purely to porn" is a disingenuous statement with regards to appreciating artwork in any form. It's a call to hold things to a lower standard, masquerading as a higher one.
Aranna wrote: Lemmy wrote: Tequila Sunrise wrote: Is all this talk of banning in reference to my posts, or someone else's? It wasn't a reply to anyone in particular, just my view on the subject. And the idea that something should be removed form media because it doesn't fit someone's personal tastes. You (general you) don't like a certain type of media? Don't consume it.
Don't like violent games? Don't play them.
Don't like rock music? Don't listen to it.
Don't like anime with fanservice? Don't watch them.
But don't try to stop others from doing it if they want. And yes, censorship is exactly what some people are advocating here. Oh there is a place for the type of fan service that objectifies women, under the hentai label. Where there is no question at all about what your going to see when you play it. I think I'll cycle in my old h in my yearly watching...I actually met Peter Payne the year I got Guy on dvd...he approved of my tastes. That was an amazing experience.
Alzrius wrote: Aranna wrote: Oh there is a place for the type of fan service that objectifies women, under the hentai label. Where there is no question at all about what your going to see when you play it. Aranna's point is worth underlining here, in that her call for segregating anything that's at all meant to be arousing or titillating for the audience to purely pornographic works is actually a call to lower standards of expectation.
The reason for this is that it's reasonably assumed that any work of creative expression is to be lauded for being able to be appreciated on multiple levels simultaneously. If we can find something appealing in more than one fashion, then we in turn recognize additional merit in that thing.
As an example, one can find a statue to be well-crafted, and so finds it appealing for the skill it conveys. Hence, the statue is appreciated on one level. By contrast, A statue of a historical personage, such as Gattamelata, can be appreciated both for the skill of the sculptor as well as the history that it evokes, being pleasing on two levels.
Likewise, something like the Venus Callipyge, can be appreciated for its skilled work, for its historical appreciation (as recalled in the Deipnosophists), and for its erotic appeal. As it can be appreciated on three different levels at once, it can therefore be enjoyed to a greater degree than the previous two examples.
As such, saying that "all erotic or titillating qualities should be confined purely to porn" is a disingenuous statement with regards to appreciating artwork in any form. It's a call to hold things to a lower standard, masquerading as a higher one. OTOH, it's a bit of a stretch to say that the usual pantie shots and towel scenes are really high art.
Nor of course did she say that anything "that's at all meant to be arousing or titillating" should be relegated to porn. Just "type of fan service that objectifies women".
You may not think she sees a difference, because you don't believe any of it "objectifies women" and thus can't see any distinction.
Okay...phone lost my post.
Long story short, antagonistic girlfriend aranna, please watch Kinos journey and tell me what you think. I think you might enjoy it, and I recommend it strongly. I may put it on my watch list for the year.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote: OTOH, it's a bit of a stretch to say that the usual pantie shots and towel scenes are really high art. Is it? Note the linked statue of Venus, above. It's considered high art now, and it's a woman admiring her own butt. Shakespeare is full of naughty double-entendres, and it's considered high art now.
Saying that fan-service can't be considered high art - or art of any kind, for that matter - is far, far more of a stretch.
Quote: Nor of course did she say that anything "that's at all meant to be arousing or titillating" should be relegated to porn. Just "type of fan service that objectifies women". Leaving aside the unsupported allegation that fan-service objectifies women, her saying that hentai anime was "a place" to see such fan-service implies that there's no place for it to be found anywhere else. Hence, she did indeed communicate that she believes that all such titillating qualities - at least with regards to female characters - should be relegated to porn.
Quote: You may not think she sees a difference, because you don't believe any of it "objectifies women" and thus can't see any distinction. This is the same disingenuous "you only disagree because you don't understand; if you did understand, you'd agree" argument. I do see the distinction she's making - e.g. her idea that seeing any fan-service of women is only okay (in what I presume is a moral sense of what's okay and what isn't) if it makes sense within the context of the scene's presentation. I just don't find that distinction meaningful, or her overall point to be a valid one.
And it doesn't answer the question of which types of fanservice that objectify women, and who decides that?
Alzrius wrote: thejeff wrote: OTOH, it's a bit of a stretch to say that the usual pantie shots and towel scenes are really high art. Is it? Note the linked statue of Venus, above. It's considered high art now, and it's a woman admiring her own butt. Shakespeare is full of naughty double-entendres, and it's considered high art now.
Saying that fan-service can't be considered high art - or art of any kind, for that matter - is far, far more of a stretch. Quote: Nor of course did she say that anything "that's at all meant to be arousing or titillating" should be relegated to porn. Just "type of fan service that objectifies women". Leaving aside the unsupported allegation that fan-service objectifies women, her saying that hentai anime was "a place" to see such fan-service implies that there's no place for it to be found anywhere else. Hence, she did indeed communicate that she believes that all such titillating qualities - at least with regards to female characters should be relegated to porn.Quote: You may not think she sees a difference, because you don't believe any of it "objectifies women" and thus can't see any distinction. This is the same disingenuous "you only disagree because you don't understand; if you did understand, you'd agree" argument. I do see the distinction she's making - e.g. her idea that seeing any fan-service of women is only okay (in what I presume is a moral sense of what's okay and what isn't) if it makes sense within the context of the scene's presentation. I just don't find that distinction meaningful, or her overall point to be a valid one. Fine. You understand. You just ignore.
Bringing up the high art makes that glaringly obvious. That wouldn't fall into the "type of fan service that objectifies women" category, so it's not relevant. You don't find the distinction meaningful, so you write as if others aren't making the distinction either and want anything arousing to go away. Including things that make sense in context and things that reach the level of high art.
Which is a blatant misrepresentation.
Even in this post, where you say that you see the distinction you do away with it: Hentai is a place for such fanservice (where such refers to fanservice that objectifies women) leads immediately to "all such titillating qualities - at least with regards to female characters should be relegated to porn."
I won't speak for Aranna and I don't actually agree that the place for such things is Hentai, but I do have problems with fanservice and objectification in anime. Despite that I do see a big difference between a risque scene as part of the plot in a romance anime and upskirt shots in a fight scene in an action one. The first could easily be more arousing, but neither fanservice nor objectifying.
Drawing that line is of course difficult, as Sissyl mention, and I would oppose any kind of official ban or censorship, but that doesn't mean I don't want to see less of it. Especially when it's crammed into otherwise quite good shows.
The only problem, thejeff, is that there is no way from here to there. I have yet to see anything beyond censorship to solve the issue. Getting some companies to produce less will shift their market shares to others (since it apparently is profitable).
So if a ban is the only way you will get less at all, are you still going to oppose a ban?
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
thejeff wrote: I won't speak for Aranna and I don't actually agree that the place for such things is Hentai, but I do have problems with fanservice and objectification in anime. Despite that I do see a big difference between a risque scene as part of the plot in a romance anime and upskirt shots in a fight scene in an action one. The first could easily be more arousing, but neither fanservice nor objectifying. Best example I can think of is the second Underworld movie. That scene was erotic and fit the plot, and not just fan service.
Sissyl wrote: The only problem, thejeff, is that there is no way from here to there. I have yet to see anything beyond censorship to solve the issue. Getting some companies to produce less will shift their market shares to others (since it apparently is profitable).
So if a ban is the only way you will get less at all, are you still going to oppose a ban?
Yes. Absolutely.
I'm not as sure that's the only way though. There have been shifts in apparently profitable businesses before in response to public pressure. The approach is to change what the public wants, which is a harder and slower process.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote: Fine. You understand. You just ignore. Incorrect. I disagree.
Quote: Bringing up the high art makes that glaringly obvious. I should point out that you were the one who specifically referenced "high" art to begin with. I was speaking to works of creative expression of all stripes.
thejeff wrote: That wouldn't fall into the "type of fan service that objectifies women" category, so it's not relevant. I don't recognize that category, as I don't believe that the depiction of fictitious characters within the context of a work of fiction at all dehumanizes real people, nor that it has any particular ability to modify the attitudes or beliefs of sane, rational adults.
thejeff wrote: You don't find the distinction meaningful, so you write as if others aren't making the distinction either and want anything arousing to go away. Including things that make sense in context and things that reach the level of high art.
Which is a blatant misrepresentation.
It's not misrepresentation; I find her point about "X kinds of female fan-service is not objectification" to be disingenuous, as I've stated previously, due to the inherent subjectivity of her distinction undermining the morally-objective classification she makes about how "not-X kinds of female fan-service is objectification of women."
Since her qualifiers don't match the nature of her objection, and can't be meaningfully responded to anyway, since she's not quantifying how one judges "makes sense in the context of the scene" (since she can't), the only possible response must therefore overlook said qualifiers and respond to her overall point regarding the supposedly-objective charge of "fan-service objectifies women."
thejeff wrote: Even in this post, where you say that you see the distinction you do away with it: Hentai is a place for such fanservice (where such refers to fanservice that objectifies women) leads immediately to "all such titillating qualities - at least with regards to female characters should be relegated to porn." See above. When someone says "this thing is harmful to society, except for these instances that I don't think are so bad," it's not at all misrepresentative to overlook their exceptions, since they haven't quantified them, and debate their larger point.
thejeff wrote: I won't speak for Aranna and I don't actually agree that the place for such things is Hentai, but I do have problems with fanservice and objectification in anime. Despite that I do see a big difference between a risque scene as part of the plot in a romance anime and upskirt shots in a fight scene in an action one. The first could easily be more arousing, but neither fanservice nor objectifying. The more salient detail is if you think that such "objectification" is in any way morally corrupt, or has any kind of detrimental impact on society (or at least more detriment than worth, or even more detriment than any effort to remove it would generate).
thejeff wrote: Drawing that line is of course difficult, as Sissyl mention, and I would oppose any kind of official ban or censorship, but that doesn't mean I don't want to see less of it. Especially when it's crammed into otherwise quite good shows. Sure, that's your opinion. But you're not presenting your opinion as a fact, by making categorical statements that "fan-service reduces us to sextoys in the eyes of boys" the way Aranna is. I disagree with her, and I feel that she's spreading a negative message that does far more actual harm than what she's speaking out against, and so I speak out against that.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote: The approach is to change what the public wants, which is a harder and slower process. All the moreso if you don't try to characterize something as being immoral just because it's not to your tastes, and by extension imply that anyone who likes said thing as being immoral themselves, and deserve to have shame and humiliation heaped upon them.
Alzrius wrote: thejeff wrote: Bringing up the high art makes that glaringly obvious. I should point out that you were the one who specifically referenced "high" art to begin with. I was speaking to works of creative expression of all stripes. That's nonsensical splitting of hairs.
Yes. I first used the term, but in reference to your description of the statues. You brought it up. I used a short term which I assumed that you would understand from context rather than repeat the entire bit about statues and Shakespeare every time.
Your argument here pretty much boils down to, "I don't agree with the distinction you're drawing, so I'll just ignore it and assume you mean everything - and then use examples that you obviously didn't mean".
Completely disingenuous misrepresentation.
Alzrius wrote: thejeff wrote: The approach is to change what the public wants, which is a harder and slower process. All the moreso if you don't try to characterize something as being immoral just because it's not to your tastes, and by extension imply that anyone who likes said thing as being immoral themselves, and deserve to have shame and humiliation heaped upon them. Like racist stereotype characters.
Or for that matter female stereotype characters.
Both areas in which there has been vast improvement over decades, due at least partly to the exact strategies you suggest.
Freehold DM wrote: Okay...phone lost my post.
Long story short, antagonistic girlfriend aranna, please watch Kinos journey and tell me what you think. I think you might enjoy it, and I recommend it strongly. I may put it on my watch list for the year.
I only caught bits of that when my roommates were watching it in college. It looked really interesting. I should find a copy.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote: That's nonsensical splitting of hairs.
Yes. I first used the term, but in reference to your description of the statues. You brought it up. I used a short term which I assumed that you would understand from context rather than repeat the entire bit about statues and Shakespeare every time.
I brought up the fact that one can find erotic appreciation of artwork that also is appreciable on other levels, and that its ability to be appreciated on multiple levels at once is a virtue, rather than a vice. If you wanted to use a short term to encapsulate that, you could have just said "art" rather than "high art" which adds the "high" qualifier, suggesting that it needs to reach some sort of lofty pinnacle to achieve that level of recognition.
thejeff wrote: Your argument here pretty much boils down to, "I don't agree with the distinction you're drawing, so I'll just ignore it and assume you mean everything - and then use examples that you obviously didn't mean".
Completely disingenuous misrepresentation.
This is a strawman, as you've misrepresented my position here and then responded to your misrepresentation, rather than me.
It's more correct to say that my argument boils down to dispelling the points that Aranna labelled as being objective problems with fan-service, while pointing out that her qualifier of "objectifying except when it makes sense" is a sop due to her inability to objectively categorize "when it makes sense," and pointing out that her standard of "if you want to view objectifying fan-service, go watch hentai" is not only disingenuous for her pernicious insistence that fiction can cause objectification, but would also run afoul of quite a bit of other artwork that is stronger, rather than lesser, for its inclusion of erotic content that presumably "wouldn't make sense" (and I say presumably here simply because she can't make that quantitative).
thejeff wrote: Like racist stereotype characters.
Or for that matter female stereotype characters.
Both areas in which there has been vast improvement over decades, due at least partly to the exact strategies you suggest.
You do realize that "the exact strategies" that I suggest are to not use public shame and humiliation to somehow make things better for society, right? Because if you're saying that not using those tactics have played roles in making things better over the decades, then I agree completely.
Presuming that you meant the opposite, however, then your point is misapplied as an apples-to-oranges instance. The presumption that people like Aranna are making is that fan-service implants and reinforces negative ideas and beliefs, akin to the insanity of people who say that D&D causes Satanic self-sacrifice, rather than suggesting that such materials are too unpleasant to countenance (if they were, one questions why she's fine with them within the context of hentai anime).
That's leaving aside the counterproductive nature of shaming "bad people" to stop doing "bad things," partly because that drives such sentiment underground and breeds resentment rather than actually changing attitudes, and parly because it's very easy to do terrible harm that can't be undone. Just ask the families of the teenagers who committed suicide due to online bullying.
|
