Sexism In Anime

That's usually the case with Magical Girl contractors, shockingly enough.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Hence the Deconstruction.

Oh God! Natural light!

Except later works seem to ignore this. Prisma Illya, for instance, doesn't seem to see a problem with magical artifacts frivolously browbeating little girls into a mortally dangerous Gotta Catch 'Em All mission.

The only place I've seen this averted was in Mahou Sensei Negima, where, most of the times, the girls knew exactly what they were getting into trying to help their teacher.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Well, not every work after a Deconstruction has to follow that path. Any influence that Madoka has on the genre will probably take a few years for it to show.

Oh God! Natural light!

There is already one aping on Madoka...The opening was Traumerei by Lisa...Let me look for it...Genei Wo Kakeru Taiyou

... I'm not asking for a ripoff, I'm asking for something that takes the points Madoka made in consideration. Preferably for Reconstruction purposes.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

Madoka used the Magical Girl genre to make allegories about Faust. Card Captor Sakura I think already incorporated most of what made Madoka's plot a deconstruction into its basic premise. And its even older. I could be wrong but eh.

Been away for a while, so missed some conversation I wanted to respond to.

That's nothing I have a problem with. It's the notion that fanservice is objectively bad I have a problem with.

Going to agree with that (and with Toilet Humour). And the problem with the same body type goes for much of what I've seen of male characters as fanservice in female-oriented shows as well. They kind of all look the same, faces aside. Or haircuts. Well, the variation you have is smaller characters, on both sides of the gender fence.

I think the most typical in the non-substantial type is when the fanservice only applies to the audience. Nothing about the character explains why they dress like that, "accidental" fanservice moments don't do much of anything other than provide fanservice for the audience or provide a short comedy/fanservice moment that doesn't matter in the end other than as a possible mood-breaker for any actual development (which is a case of the fanservice actively hindering any substance). And as far as "funny" goes, it's never really outside seen it a million times.

To pick one example where it's actually attached to the plot, I'd say Super Sonico. Main character is a model, and most of the fanservice there is deliberate on her part. She's also not quite as thin as the usual anime girl. Overall not that spectacular from a progressive fanservice point of view, but it's better than most (and far better than most expected).

Also, funny that Dragon's Crown should be mentioned (in a different post), since the body types there are non-standard, to say the least. Sorceress aside. Maybe. Of course, that's outside quite a few of the art gallery images (which are on occasion far worse as far as sexism is concerned). I wouldn't put it as some sort of opposite to Bayonetta, though. Not quite anime as animesque, but still Japanese so it's probably not entirely off topic.

If it's someone to be potentially jealous over and/or threatening relationship-wise, gender doesn't matter, as long as the mentioned character is of the opposite sex of the one doing the mentioning.

Check out my fanfiction!

Did anyone here watch or heard about Me!Me!Me!? I'm not sure if that video is actually an appropriate discussion for this thread, because it talks about "hikikomori otaku culture" (quotes because I heard about Me!Me!Me! from a video someone did saying how that AMV was a critic to that), and then I found another video (this one simply being people's reaction to it), and then I decided to watch it myself.

I think I can link to Me!Me!Me! and both of those videos if anyone wants me to, though be warned that Me!Me!Me! is definitively NSFW.

I don't remember if it was talked about here, but I watched it. It's really nothing new, conceptually: it's criticizing the otaku lifestyle with around 2-3 layers of depth while at the same time appealing it in some ways. In execution - which is what matters much more - I'd say it's very engaging and holds your attention for a solid 6 minutes while set to some pretty sweet and varied animation and music.

The thing is, the anime industry has done this kind of thing for decades now - biting the hand the feeds it. Otaku (hardcore or otherwise) are generally reviled, but it's undeniable that they can buy a lot of stuff out of obsessiveness. Even if it's about something that opposes their way of life, if it's appealing enough they'll still buy it, which may further the vicious cycle somewhat. Anno tried it with Eva and we all know how that went.

That AMV was only one of many of an animator expo in Japan, and yet, it was the one that got most attention. Most people wouldn't even know about the expo itself if they hadn't heard of Me!Me!Me!. In a way it's very smart - a 'come for the animation/music/fanservice, stay for the surreal horror/mindscrew/faux symbolism' deal. It's a great way to market your stuff, really.

Although now that I've written all that I realize I haven't actually answered your question. I'd say it doesn't actually have that much to do with the thread.

It's not the shut-in aspect that worries me, it's the fucked-up power dynamics between the Moe archetype and the passive-aggressive male. The part where she vomits something into his mouth like a wolf to her cub or a bird to her chick was...

The Handle feels conflicted about the gruesome, grotesque creepiness of the nominally attractive-formed, sweet-mannered, multiple-instance, physics-breaking female entity's behavioural patterns.

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.

It's moe reinterpreted as the grotesque yet enticing projections of an Otherworldly Horror.

Hey, Madoka tends to get paired with Sora a lot in crossover shipping.

Makes sense.

Watch Symphogear

I know I avoid these topics because sometimes I have opinions go against what is seen as "okay" at times, so I fear i'm dipping my hand into lava here, but something I thought of.

Is "equal opportunity" sexual objectification an okay thing? Sure, males are the dominant demographic of Otaku, so we get moe (though I think moe isn't always sexual) and Girl on Girl Is Hot yuri bait, but there is a pretty obvious presence of the BL / Otome genre in anime that seems to have an actual presence, and I really wonder, that stuff is also about "objectifying" men for the sexual gratification of females / gay men, doesn't that seem actually progressive in a way?

Unless you have the belief that any objectification of any genders is bad, in that case I suppose not.

edited 13th Feb '15 5:00:48 PM by Thorn14

well first off, the yaoi/otome genere don't really "objectify" the men in it the same way women can be objectified in anime. one of the reasons Free! got noticed was because its muscle-y fan-service was comparable to how women tend to get objectified.

secondly, and more of a side note, Yaoi isn't really for gay men. not to say it couldn't be enjoyed by a gay guy, but that's not the intended audience. they have their own sub-genre Bara, which has differnt tastes to it (namely less melodramatic plots, and characters tend to be rather bulk in stature, to name a few), and is much more niche in its presence in anime.

but as to your main point, it really depends on the person. I know people like King Zeal who want there to be more equality in that area. then there are people like myself, who can't stand that stuff. For example, I can't watch Kill La Kill because of their character designs alone, despite knowing several people who have recommended it to me. so its all relative.

I'm afraid I can't explain myself, sir. Because I am not myself, you see?

Objectification has bad thins inherently in it, no two ways about it there. But "is objectification inherently" bad is a trap argument that I, for one, am sick of. Let's just talk about the good parts of it and the bad parts of it, and leave it at that.

Equal objectification helps the "disproportion" problem of sexism, but anime and hentai have a long way to go before I'd say everything's A-Okay and there's nothing more to talk about. Just what is objectified to begin with, for example, is a talking point. There's still a predominant "sex is something done TO another person angle that hentai relishes, which is very much a problem. Not much anime or hentai that I've personally seen treats it as an equal act of two people. Even when the "object" is really into and digging the sex, there's also this insistence that they've gone "out of control" or that "their body is acting on its own".

I know that this is part of the whole Japanese cultural ideal of "never voice/express your actual desires", but if you want to talk about some of the harmful aspects of objectification, there you go.

It's progressive in the way of more openly admitting that women have a sex drive. And acknowledging gay men, if they do that (which as noted may depend on the exact genre). That's not something you generally get from anime.

As for the objectification itself, it's much too often cast in a purely black-or-white tone. Mostly I'd say that the bad parts are when it spreads to real life interactions, but in itself it's not bad. Context is everything.

Check out my fanfiction!

&

So are you guys saying you're against any kind of sexualization in anime?

Because thats never going away. Sex Sells and all that.

Please try that again when you actually read what was said.

I did and I asked a question, because I didn't understand exactly what you two meant. No need for this to get heated.

Jetyl said they don't like Kill La Kill because of the sexy, so I wasn't sure if ALL sexy is something you dislike or just "objectification" which I admit I hear many different definitions of.

edited 13th Feb '15 7:33:42 PM by Thorn14

If you did, then your question already has an answer within the post you responded to, and thus you will see why the question is both loaded and irrelevant.

EDIT: So then you're talking to him and not me.

edited 13th Feb '15 7:34:41 PM by KingZeal

Come on, really? I'm trying to be polite here and just figure out what you meant. Sorry if it sounded like a loaded question.

Edit: Well I'm talking to both of you, I don't venture in discussions of sexism because things get way too heated and fast and its often not worth it, so I'm not entirely sure what you mean by some cases of objectification. I know it sounds like a trap argument to you, and yeah, I admit now reading it what I asked earlier sounds like a loaded question, but I just wanna know what it really means, and if the fact in anime, I see males be "objectified" from the definition I understand it to be.

And I just mused, in its own way, thats somewhat progressive, because I don't see us ever being able to remove "objectification" in well...any form of media, so wouldn't the solution just it being equal opportunity?

edited 13th Feb '15 7:37:26 PM by Thorn14

Again, if you're being polite, then my answer is already there.

If you didn't read my post, do so. If you don't understand my post, say so. If you've done both, then it's obvious why your question isn't "polite".

Well alright then, in that case:

Well in your post you say there are good parts and bad parts of objectification worth talking about.

Can we talk about that? Because I admit I've never heard of it being used as a "good" thing, whenever its brought up by people who mention the objectification of people, so hearing you say its a good thing makes me curious.

~

And yeah, there is rare consensual hentai out there, so the "sex happens TO someone" thing is very true, but I figured the discussion was going to mostly be about anime not...porn haha.

edited 13th Feb '15 7:41:56 PM by Thorn14

Objectification can make a person more than just a "person". For example, a leader or hero is an "object" based one property. Specifically, Instrumentality. Martin Luther King, Jr. serves as both a leader and a hero for many. He inspires people to this day and stands as a symbol of hope. Which is basically an object.

That's the good news. The bad news is that anyone can use that object for their own purposes. That's why it's .. . an object. Martin Luther King, Jr. is dead, so he can no longer clarify his message. That means that even racists can use him as a symbol for something like silencing or tone policing.

edited 13th Feb '15 7:50:16 PM by KingZeal