AZAREL I KNEW I COULD COUNT ON YOU GOD BLESS YOUR BEAUTIFUL SOUL.Azarel said:
In short, it's okay to find women sexy, it's not okay to think women exist for you to find them sexy.
yesss yess exactly!!debbie is trying to point out that in anime/manga there's always the same pattern on how women are shown and treated and that it can have harmful consequences on how women are seen and treated in real life.
when sexist males realize there are aspects of a womans life that are rich and fulfilling and, especially, completely independent of them, they get offended. they get offended the woman has an independent life and it doesnt matter what they think about it, whether they like it or not, whether they are attracted to it or not. they fail to realize the world is much bigger and wider than just their own selfish desires. its no longer abour the woman and how amazing she is, her qualities, ideals, troubles and dreams; sexist males make it about themselves. you summed it up really beautifully, azarel!! kudos to you!!
men kill women every day, every time, with those constant attempts of domination and erasure of authentic life and psyche, either to fit the patterns they find pleasurable, or submitting their positive aspects to his service.
it is a systematic and violent exploitation of womens lives which deforms their true brilliance and capacity.
im severely disappointed with so much protest and "but"s ive been seeing in this thread. this only further proves that men are afraid to lose their privilege, afraid to admit they are wrong, and completely unable to be empathetic towards women and control their selfish impulses towards others.
whats the problem with us women talking about our life experience, our beliefs? if you arent misogynist then you shouldnt be bothered by women voicing their opinions. why bother, if true gender equality really exists, as you say it exists? notice what a paradox and contradiction it is to protest against people who are protesting against sexism. youre only showing the oppression you exert in a daily basis. youre being sexist. you can protest, but we cant. this isnt equality. not in a million years. gender equality does not exist in this planet.
but not everyone is sexist forever. you can change. empathy is a good start. imagine if you were born a girl. would you be on the same place you are today? would you have the same freedom you have today? think about it. its never too late.
if you are seriously quoting femfreq, then you have gone completely off the deep end.Debbie said:
a short (6 min) and nice video comparing the roles of man and woman in comic books, and their deaths. http://feministfrequency.com/2011/04/07/tropes-vs-women-2-women-in-refrigerators/ please check it,the girl is extremely coherent, objective and argumentative!
sosleezian is not objective in the slightest, she is a brazen ideologe who's tropes vs women series has been demonstrated as deceitful sophistry time and time again.
your own logic debbie, is full of the misanthropic pretentious toxicity that the supremacist hate-mob ideology of feminism has become well known for. the prejudice you display for human sexuality is all to clear even if you have dressed it up in academic language. along with the passive aggressive disparaging of anyone not subscribing to the morally and intellectually banckrupt ideas of the sjw filth.
who after after years of crying and demonising white western men for being evil patriluminaty oppressors of women with a rape culture, have scurried off to hide under their rocks after the immigrants in europe decided to play taharrush with the women of cologne, and dare not say a damn thing agains an actual 'rape-culture' which they demanded be given perchase in europe.
there is a very popular meme amoung the sjw filth, which is that 'offensive' things should be ban-able.
well, i find everything about the decietful sleekit, despicable ideology of the feminist sjw's and their duplicitous double standards, to be deeply offencive.
i find their rape enabling offensive. which is exactly what we have seen from them following the migrant rape gangs.
i find their inherently racist prejudice that people are their race before anything else, and idea its ok to descriminate based on race, offencive.
i find their inherently sexist prejudice that peoples genitals decide their capability and value for a given job or role, offencive.
i find their not only anti-social, but outright anti-civilisation lynch-mod and witch-hunt mentality, offencive.
and next time you feel like claiming feminism is about equality, you might want to look up apartheid. a key point of which, where laws apecifically created to inconvenience one group specifically on the bases of an immutable physical characteristic. since this is what the 'manspreading' laws that feminists have created against men, amount to. so dont bother. that lei is utterly and completly exposed as false, and it was feminism that demontrated such.
Considering how much this topic has already gotten coverage and talk, I really do not believe it is as imperative as it was. And when the language turns accusatory or discriminatory and makes assumptions about another party on behalf of the benefit of the party being argued for, then it is not equality that is being sought. Equality requires a two-way mutual respect, not simply looking at the rights of one otherwise you simply go from one extreme to the other. This is a problem that social movements have seen numerous times in the past and prevents real progress from taking place. No one party or person is more important than another. The interests of everyone should be the concern of everyone. Only this sort of omnipresent and equal concern is capable of leading humanity to true progress in this kind of a conflict.
However, in terms of using certain stereotypes in anime, I do not believe the primary problem is any form of discrimination or any lack of caring about isolating any individual group. Such a thing would require a preordained malicious intent. The real thing that such stereotypes are evidence of is uncreative and lazy writing. Basically, mass produced and shallow work or even good work with some characters that are not given as much development time. It is essentially a form of archetype or stock character. It is not easy to make every character in a work deep, realistic and compelling so sometimes the minor or side characters are given these sorts of filler traits to basically be plot devices or to help the work flow along. it is not good writing certainly, but it is a lot quicker to develop, and due to the fast-paced demand of the anime industry they tend to take such shortcuts to meet with corporate demands.
As for why fanservice is so popular, that is another product of lazy writing coupled with traditional trends taken to extremes. It is also however, a product of certain issues in Japan's cultural and social system. Particularly, the extreme focus careers and dedication to a given company or putting a large portion of one's time into the work place. These trends have lead to the number of young Japanese people to be on the decline and this means that the population as a whole is getting older. This is because people are not getting married or having kids and are focusing primarily on their careers. But biological needs still persist so many people turn to entertainment to attempt to meet their need for companionship, relationships and well, sex.
This is one aspect to why fanservice is so prevalent, it fill the gap to meet these needs that people are not otherwise able to address. Also, this means that it sells. And as long as it sells in Japan, it will at least have some market. It is also these sorts of anime that tend to be exported to the USA but I do not know enough about international exports to be able to provide a decent explanation for that.
To make a short point, we must remember the cultural context where any given piece of art is coming from. Anime and manga come from Japan, thus they primarily meet the social, cultural and entertainment needs of the Japanese populace and is made by artists immersed in the country's culture. Though I assume everyone here is a fan of these art forms, it must be remembered that external audiences are generally an afterthought for these productions, so our standards on what is proper or not have to come with the knowledge of the role anime and manga play in the society that made them to begin with.
However, in terms of using certain stereotypes in anime, I do not believe the primary problem is any form of discrimination or any lack of caring about isolating any individual group. Such a thing would require a preordained malicious intent. The real thing that such stereotypes are evidence of is uncreative and lazy writing. Basically, mass produced and shallow work or even good work with some characters that are not given as much development time. It is essentially a form of archetype or stock character. It is not easy to make every character in a work deep, realistic and compelling so sometimes the minor or side characters are given these sorts of filler traits to basically be plot devices or to help the work flow along. it is not good writing certainly, but it is a lot quicker to develop, and due to the fast-paced demand of the anime industry they tend to take such shortcuts to meet with corporate demands.
As for why fanservice is so popular, that is another product of lazy writing coupled with traditional trends taken to extremes. It is also however, a product of certain issues in Japan's cultural and social system. Particularly, the extreme focus careers and dedication to a given company or putting a large portion of one's time into the work place. These trends have lead to the number of young Japanese people to be on the decline and this means that the population as a whole is getting older. This is because people are not getting married or having kids and are focusing primarily on their careers. But biological needs still persist so many people turn to entertainment to attempt to meet their need for companionship, relationships and well, sex.
This is one aspect to why fanservice is so prevalent, it fill the gap to meet these needs that people are not otherwise able to address. Also, this means that it sells. And as long as it sells in Japan, it will at least have some market. It is also these sorts of anime that tend to be exported to the USA but I do not know enough about international exports to be able to provide a decent explanation for that.
To make a short point, we must remember the cultural context where any given piece of art is coming from. Anime and manga come from Japan, thus they primarily meet the social, cultural and entertainment needs of the Japanese populace and is made by artists immersed in the country's culture. Though I assume everyone here is a fan of these art forms, it must be remembered that external audiences are generally an afterthought for these productions, so our standards on what is proper or not have to come with the knowledge of the role anime and manga play in the society that made them to begin with.
Well said, Glitchseeker. And it's the aspect I want to hear about this topic.
I don't really think sexism plays a significant role in objectification in anime, manga and related Japanese arts. We see more objectified women because most of their customers are male. You can see similar stereotypical couterparts in Otome anime/games on men, too.
I don't really think sexism plays a significant role in objectification in anime, manga and related Japanese arts. We see more objectified women because most of their customers are male. You can see similar stereotypical couterparts in Otome anime/games on men, too.
Why is Debbie so concerned with the portrayals of women in male created stories? Male portrayals in female dominated markets such as the Romance or Harlequin novel business are just as 'unrealistic' and also portrayed as a 'piece of meat' (almost literally in some cases). One of the most popular genres in women's entertainment is reading homosexual romance novels, even though homosexual men only make up less than 5% of the male population. You can bet the farm that these gay characters are objectified to the moon and back, yet there isn't even a sniff of any protest against these kinds of objectifications.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/what-women-want-gay-male-romance-novels/article565992/
"The uber-masculine stock characters portrayed in gay romances have always had great appeal with heterosexual women," Rinaldo Walcott, an associate sociology professor at the University of Toronto, notes, adding that soap operas have banked on them since their inception. "It's like a constant reliving of the Rock Hudson narrative. The unattainable is what makes these books so desirable and many straight women are now willing to investigate their own sexual curiosities."
The point isn't to protest their use of objectification. As we know, there's absolutely nothing to worry about with these portrayals. Its simply to illustrate the point that these portrayals have little to no influence on real life and any squawking about how these female characters make women feel insecure is merely a bludgeoning attack on men so that feminists can feel secure in their bubble of positive reinforcement.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/what-women-want-gay-male-romance-novels/article565992/
"The uber-masculine stock characters portrayed in gay romances have always had great appeal with heterosexual women," Rinaldo Walcott, an associate sociology professor at the University of Toronto, notes, adding that soap operas have banked on them since their inception. "It's like a constant reliving of the Rock Hudson narrative. The unattainable is what makes these books so desirable and many straight women are now willing to investigate their own sexual curiosities."
The point isn't to protest their use of objectification. As we know, there's absolutely nothing to worry about with these portrayals. Its simply to illustrate the point that these portrayals have little to no influence on real life and any squawking about how these female characters make women feel insecure is merely a bludgeoning attack on men so that feminists can feel secure in their bubble of positive reinforcement.
If you seriously consider drawn fictitious characters created without evil intent deeply offensive, sexually exploiting, and can have profound negative impact to human equality and well-being, I don't have much else to add.
I'd save my breath until a battle against censorship needs to be fought or boycotting begin to target artists I care for.
I'd save my breath until a battle against censorship needs to be fought or boycotting begin to target artists I care for.
found this via searching something completely unrelated...so much for relevant results.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Blake_Ashforth/publication/233729899_Social_Identity_Theory_and_Organization/links/583c91ee08ae502a85e3e966/Social-Identity-Theory-and-Organization.pdf
Ashforth & Mael, Social Identity Theory and The Organization, Academy of Management Review
Abstract
It is argued that (a) social identification is a perception of oneness with a group of persons; (b) social identification stems from the categorization of individuals, the distinctiveness and prestige of the group, the salience of outgroups, and the factors that traditionally are associated with group formation; and (c) social identification leads to activities that are congruent with the identity, support for institutions that embody the identity, stereotypical perceptions of self and others, and outcomes that traditionally are associated with group formation, and it reinforces the antecedents of identification. This perspective is applied to organizational socialization, role conflict, and intergroup relations.
Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_agency ; life and all the power struggles.
Also, what is statistically normal, or is it all in our heads? What makes good news, and what sells? Coverage/sampling bias, transmission distortions, and receiver acceptance...
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Blake_Ashforth/publication/233729899_Social_Identity_Theory_and_Organization/links/583c91ee08ae502a85e3e966/Social-Identity-Theory-and-Organization.pdf
Ashforth & Mael, Social Identity Theory and The Organization, Academy of Management Review
Abstract
It is argued that (a) social identification is a perception of oneness with a group of persons; (b) social identification stems from the categorization of individuals, the distinctiveness and prestige of the group, the salience of outgroups, and the factors that traditionally are associated with group formation; and (c) social identification leads to activities that are congruent with the identity, support for institutions that embody the identity, stereotypical perceptions of self and others, and outcomes that traditionally are associated with group formation, and it reinforces the antecedents of identification. This perspective is applied to organizational socialization, role conflict, and intergroup relations.
Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_agency ; life and all the power struggles.
Also, what is statistically normal, or is it all in our heads? What makes good news, and what sells? Coverage/sampling bias, transmission distortions, and receiver acceptance...
pointtech86
The notion of 'objectification' is one of sexualization. To view women as a 'piece of meat'. Objectification isn't ever used to promote the elimination of the big, dumb male bully in school. It isn't used to stop the portrayal of men being objectified into any negative trope. It's only ever brought up when a female is portrayed in a modeling photoshoot, or a beach/pool/bedroom scene in a movie/show/picture. If you even look up the word on google, every entry you click on is going to be one focused on female sexualization. In practical use its a joke to use it in any other context.
Its worth noting that the argument relies on the idea that men can only view females or their character portrayals as a whole through one lens. If the character is seen in any context in a sexual light, that's the only thing that males can apparently remember. This would mean that the minute a female is intimate with a male, the man will from then on only view them as an 'object', something to be gratified with whenever it suits the male. This argument is extremely condescending towards men and is far more objectifying then even the most blatant fan-service a show can do.
If you really get down to the foundation of all entertainment industries, every character made is objectified. All of it is artificially produced and we simply argue over what the current generation thinks is an overdone cliche. Stories that try to upend those objectification concerns end up objectifying the characters in other ways. Why focus on side female characters? Honestly anyone other than the MC is just there to make the story appear wider and more grand, more fleshed out. In storytelling the MC is the center of the universe. Everything revolves around him, and anything focused on outside of the MC is just augmenting the universe around him.
This essentially means that there is no way to not objectify every character. Plus if we really examine how we ourselves look at the world, this is how we view everyone around us as well. We may know that the universe and the world and the people around us move irrespective to our own motivations, but our thought process when meeting people always compares anyone else to ourselves and how we act. To those that we've interacted with before. We don't know what their motivations are, or what their life is like. We may not mean to act like we are the center of attention, but its how we physically interact with the world around us. Its just how our brains function.
The standards of character development will change with the times naturally. If the audience gets tired of seeing that old trope being drug out and shoved in their faces, they will stop watching that kind of show and watch another that portrays characters in ways that please them instead. The vocal minority wants the industry to pander to their tiny demographic in spite of the overwhelming majority having no particular issue in these character's portrayals. Merely claiming that these portrayals negatively affect male opinion of women is fear-mongering. There is no evidence to suggest such a phenomenon, and it is akin to saying that violent video games distort reality for people and make them more apt to become violent themselves, more likely to become criminals.