Get Your Rifles, Boys & Girls - It's Hunting Season

[redbrunja]

autoschismatic  has an amazing and absolutely dead-on article about Kishimoto and his kunoichi and the problems therein. This has also brought all the misogynics to the yard.

Basically, they're saying, 'so what if Kishimoto is sexist? It's just shonen manga, it's made for boys anyway (implication: it doesn't matter if boys are taught that women are less than), you're just thinking too hard about this.'

As I'm sure you can all imagine, I look that as meekly as Maka would, because everyone knows that girls can't be kickass in shonen manga lololol.

Comments

[cynchick.livejournal.com]

It pisses me off too, only I dont have the energy (or the time) to participate in a rage war with a bunch of ignorant, ass-backwards hypocrites. A lot of my fandom friends and acquaintances are all over this though, and I love that. XD

Honestly what makes me rage more than all the male asshattery in that thread is the female asshattery. Nothing is worse than a misogynistic woman.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Oh, god, I know! It's like, it's one thing if you don't want to fight the good fight, but have the brain to get out of MY way when I'm going to bat for YOUR RIGHTS.

[goldengrimoire.livejournal.com]

Yes, many of the posts there make me cringe.

While it's valid to say that yes, part of the reason that Naruto is the way it is is because it's a Shounen Jump manga, written by a Japanese guy who is surrounded by a culture that tends to be more openly sexist than we are here in the West, that's just an attempt at an explanation as to why it is the way it is. It doesn't make any sexism or misogyny in the manga OK and I think that distinction escapes some of the people posting there.

It's a shame, because really, Kishimoto does have some good female characters, they just don't get nearly enough screentime. Sakura feels like a bit of a deliberate attempt to combat the weak shounen heroine stereotype, because she starts out as the typical weak link of the team but is *actually bothered by it* and works to improve herself. She just gets sidelined way too much.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

*nods*

Exactly. Saying it's a product of a sexist culture (which it is) doesn't mean that it can't or shouldn't be better.

[fani.livejournal.com]

What about Bleach? All the girls there kick their arse, HARDCORE.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

No they don't. Personally, I find the sexism in Bleach to be worse than Naruto, partially because people keep saying that it's so not sexist.

[mildmay.livejournal.com]

Okay, so this is a late reply, but.

Personally, I find the sexism in Bleach to be worse than Naruto, partially because people keep saying that it's so not sexist.

I agree so hard. Every time I see someone say how not sexist Bleach is a part of my soul dies.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

*nods*

Exactly. And Kishimoto, I feel, for all his flaws, is trying (he's not succeeding very well). KT just seems to get worse and worse.

[mildmay.livejournal.com]

He really does. This arc has been terrible. In a lot of ways, really (I'm not even sure what the plot is any more. Is there one? I can't find it), but the treatment of the female characters has been offending me pretty regularly. Just about every week, actually.

Kishimoto frustrates me. But KT makes me seethe.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Actually, I've been up and down on this arc for it's treatment of the ladies. On the plus side you have Sakura being smart with Shikamaru, punching out a monster, healing people, and then bossing people around. On the minus side you have Iruka telling Sakura to get to the kitchen, Naruto telling Tsunade to get to the kitchen step back, and Hinata NOT having the epic multi-chapter fight she deserved.

[mildmay.livejournal.com]

Ahhh, I was actually talking about Bleach's current arc. |D;

In the current arc in Naruto I have gotten frustrated a few times, but EVERY WEEK Bleach has been pissing me off.

Sorry for the confusion.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Oh, sorry, then I agree utterly. It's terrible and just goes to show that KT doesn't know how to write a plot that not based around utterly victimizing his female leads and supporting characters.

[mildmay.livejournal.com]

KT doesn't know how to write a plot that not based around utterly victimizing his female leads and supporting characters.

Exactly. It's awful.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Such a damn shame. The early chapters were so enjoyable.

[the-sun-is-up.livejournal.com]

*points up* What she said. Bleach has pretty horrid gender politics.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

If she asked for examples, I was going to point her to your epic and utterly made-of-word rants on Bleach.

[fani.livejournal.com]

"she" would like to see the essay.

I just read Bleach up till...I think it was 5th volume and I've been busy with school and work so I haven't really updated myself on that. Bleach didn't keep my interest going as good as Avatar or 20th Century Boys, so I sort of gave it up.

And up till 5th volume it was still pretty light-hearted.

[the-sun-is-up.livejournal.com]

If you're only up to volume 5 then you haven't gotten to the head-desky bits yet. I thought the gender stuff in Bleach was fine until the Soul Society arc, which starts around volume 7 (?) and then it all went downhill from there.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

As the_sun_is_up mentioned, it's later in the series that thinks get insanely headdesky on the sexism front. If you don't mind spoilers:

http://the-sun-is-up.livejournal.com/106642.html#cutid2

http://the-sun-is-up.livejournal.com/134043.html#cutid1

http://the-sun-is-up.livejournal.com/114182.html#cutid1

http://the-sun-is-up.livejournal.com/111664.html#cutid1

[fani.livejournal.com]

...holy cow.

And the girls probably get the depictions tenfold because there are around 20 + mangas in publications like Shounen Jump (not to mention other shounen magazines)

I wonder how they feel about all this...

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Yes. So Bleach? Not a shining ideal of feminist shonen.

Honestly, I think a lot of girls are trained to think 'oh, that's just the way it is.'

[goldengrimoire.livejournal.com]

Yes, I never got into Bleach for this reason.

Part of the problem is that I think that there's a huge component of the female fandom in Japan that read Jump manga just for yaoi fuel, so they don't really *care* about the characterization of female characters (and of course I'm sure we're all familiar with the ridiculous female character bashing that happens in fandom if it's a character that happens t get in the way of the TRUE LOVE of Favorite Yaoi Pairing X as well.) I figure that the editors probably don't see much of a reason to encourage their mangaka to be more progressive on this front at least partially because of that. They probably get less pressure about improving gender roles than what happens here.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

*nods*

Agreed about the pressue from editors - I think that within another decade or two, shonen jump (if it's still around) will look far different than it does not.

...unless Naruto and Bleach are still running.

[cherryfruit.livejournal.com]

Haha, I didn't even want to LOOK at the post or comments, since misogyny makes my eyes bleed.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

smart move.

Also, great icon.

[wicked-seraph.livejournal.com]

Mega-applause to autoschismatic, first of all :]

Grr. I hate when people try to make excuses for something that is so clearly sexist - I've seen some say something along the lines of, "well, he has female ninjas so he's not being sexist".

lolwut

That doesn't prove anything D:

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Yeah, autoschismatic was doing a great job of meta-ing.

And yes, the mere presence of women doesn't make something not sexist.

[qualapec.livejournal.com]

I think she makes a good argument about sexist behaviors and why Kishimoto can send some bad messages, especially considering the majority of his demographic IS a younger male population. And I greatly disagree with some of the people who have replied.

However, what I feel she fails to take into account is the idea of artistic expression. What is to be said about an author that simply imagines his main characters as male? Should he force himself to have female characters that he isn't enthusiastic about? If he doesn't have female characters, he probably WILL get flak for it. But on the other hand if he has characters that he doesn't really care for then he isn't likely to write them to his best ability, and will also be criticized. I feel like there's a very fine line.

While I admit that he DOES marginalize his female characters, and that IS rather sexist. It's his artistic expression. It's the job of the parents of the children reading it to remind them what's wrong with it.

But it works both ways. When the time comes, it's MY artistic expression to write a story about Amazon's smiting the enemies of Hyppolita.

So, in short, while I feel it's important, there just isn't anything that can be done about his artistic choices. All I can do is adjust mine...or choose not to read it.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

However, what I feel she fails to take into account is the idea of artistic expression. What is to be said about an author that simply imagines his main characters as male? Should he force himself to have female characters that he isn't enthusiastic about?

To me, this feels like a more sophisticated version of the 'it's shonen, it's always been this way, there isn't a problem' argument.

A while back where I talked about this - about how I tended to envision characters that were white for my original fiction and then write white characters. Now, I could just go, 'this is how I see them, there's nothing racist about it,' but I didn't. I looked at how white-washed my stories were and went, 'you know, there is a problem here' and made a conscious effort to write more PoC. Because my 'artistic expression' is molded by my culture just as Kishimoto's is - but that doesn't mean that I have to swallow and repeat everything my culture tells me. I can choose what I agree with and make a conscious choice to change what I don't agree with.

So, in short, while I feel it's important, there just isn't anything that can be done about his artistic choices. All I can do is adjust mine...or choose not to read it.

You're right in that I can't make Kishimoto write a less sexist society, you're wrong about there being nothing I can do besides not reading it and writing my own things - I can critique it. I can say, 'hey, this is problematic and here's why' and I also go, 'just because Kishimoto is a product of a sexist culture doesn't mean he gets a free pass to be sexist'.

[qualapec.livejournal.com]

"To me, this feels like a more sophisticated version of the 'it's shonen, it's always been this way, there isn't a problem' argument."

Looking back at my post, I can see why you'd think that. Although I intended my statement to put more blame on the individual, instead of just chalking it up to a societal trend. If the "It's the Culture" argument was valid, then we wouldn't see things like Soul Eater. Also, by that logic we wouldn't see multi-ethnic characters in Bleach.

Just to clarify, because I am honestly confuzzled, what you're saying is that by not making the conscious choice to have female characters with a stronger, less sidelined role, it's sexist? Don't get me wrong! That would be a good thing! It's just that it seems like there are SO many different sides to that. It seems to me that there are an infinite number of issues that could be raised. Everything from religious appearances to lack of ethnic diversity could be problems.

For an extreme example, an author wants to write a book entirely about an alien race that asexually reproduces. Is this somehow anti-human or anti-sexual reproduction because no human characters appear, or because no sexually reproducing characters appear? Or is a book that takes place in the Mughal empire racist because there are no white characters?

Also, for a less-extreme example. What if a writer wants to write a book about a society that is entirely female or entirely male, is this sexist?

Or, am I just totally missing the ball here? Are you saying that whether or not an author HAS female characters isn't important so much as the fact that they are all treated the same or they all act the same?

And you're right in that you can critique it, I forgot about that pathway.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Just to clarify, because I am honestly confuzzled, what you're saying is that by not making the conscious choice to have female characters with a stronger, less sidelined role, it's sexist?

Well, yes. Kishimoto wrote a sexist series and while I think he tries, he doesn't do a very good job of giving the ladies their due. And my point about choosing to put more of a misrepresented group was me saying that ow one writes is not static or unchanging and that making a deliberate effort to change an aspect of your imagination that is dissatisfying is not somehow against an artist's 'vision.'

I'm not saying that women should be in every story or that people who reproduce sexually should be in every story - but it should be a conscious choice. It shouldn't just be 'oh, I never thought of any of the characters as females or having sexual parts, lololol'.

If someone was writing about asexual aliens, I would assume that they had a purpose to do so - if someone wrote a society about all women or all men, I'd assume they'd put some thought into it - why are there no men/women, what does that mean. And if the answer is 'there's no men/women because men/woman are evil' I would go, 'yeah, you know, it's sexist.'

It basically comes down to awareness and skill in writing. You should be aware of the fact that you don't have men/women/sexually reproductive being in your work, and you should have a damn good reason why.

[qualapec.livejournal.com]

Okay, that really clears things up. My original point in posting was that, although I agree with Autoschismatic in general, I felt her argument was incomplete without taking that viewpoint into consideration. Thanks for clarifying!

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

You're welcome.

[okroginator.livejournal.com]

What I really liked about her post was the way she presented it--in a level-headed and rational way, using evidence to support her statements rather than just saying them, and the way she did give credit to Kishimoto for trying. Becuase I do have a problem when people don't give credit where credit is due (I also have a soft spot for Kishimoto because of my exposure to Bleach before Naruto).

It's all right to rage once in a while--I do it a lot--but it's really great when someone presents a problem in an educated way in order to call attention and not alienate people.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

*nods*

And I really liked how she teased out the difference between a character's actions and personality and that character in a larger context.

I think Theodor Kaluza will not be please with me for using his theories for fandom.

[devimelete.livejournal.com]

When a civilized, meta-ing argument goes down to just posting macros, the fail is like . . . like, triangulated, cubed, rounded off, and wrapped up in all five dimensions of fail.

I mean, the "it's a shounen manga, it is not meant for the teh ladies" excuse is so, so weak. Does this mean that we should encourage such mediocrity for treating half of his cast? This is like excusing Twilight on the grounds it is made for hormonal young girls, so they should enjoy Edward being a creepy motherfucker to Bella. To excuse the dominating male because it is what the young, tween audience wanted to read. I am willing to bet that if this was an opposite scenario with Kishimoto giving the women their due and marginalizing the men, then I can bet that there will be some serious criticisms heading at his direction.

And what I don't get it why people are saying that we are looking too hard into it. Don't we look "too hard" into other works of art as well? How many times have we analyzed the Batman comics, Jane Austen, LOST, Harry Potter, George Orwell, and many others. Why is it that it is always the Japanese works that are always put aside? What is wrong with dissection at all? This is the question I find most troubling, and I've noticed that no one seemed to take up that question.

Re: I think Theodor Kaluza will not be please with me for using his theories for fandom.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Oh, fuck, it's at the posting macro levels now?

I mean, the "it's a shounen manga, it is not meant for the teh ladies" excuse is so, so weak. Does this mean that we should encourage such mediocrity for treating half of his cast? This is like excusing Twilight on the grounds it is made for hormonal young girls, so they should enjoy Edward being a creepy motherfucker to Bella.

Fucking word. And as for the 'you're reading to much into it? That is the classic excuse that gets used when people A says something person B don't want to hear. "I don't want to hear about sexism in my shonen, so you're just reading too much into it.' "I don't want to hear about racial issues in Lost, so you're just reading too much into it."

Re: I think Theodor Kaluza will not be please with me for using his theories for fandom.

[devimelete.livejournal.com]

That is the classic excuse that gets used when people A says something person B don't want to hear. "I don't want to hear about sexism in my shonen, so you're just reading too much into it.' "I don't want to hear about racial issues in Lost, so you're just reading too much into it."

I've already put my comment in the meta you mentioned, but I'll repeat it again: You may not like his work on whatever aspects you find yourself disagreeing, but at least you show the honesty of pointing those out.

Being a fan also means you are being a loyal critic.

Oh, fuck, it's at the posting macro levels now?

By the first commentator who is made of complete fail? Yes. People keep on questioning him on his opinions, and he keeps on repeating that he doesn't care such to a point where he puts in a "WHAT?" macro by other commentators.

Dude. What the hell.

[strange_quark]

By the first commentator who is made of complete fail? Yes. People keep on questioning him on his opinions, and he keeps on repeating that he doesn't care such to a point where he puts in a "WHAT?" macro by other commentators.

I find this infinitely amusing, to be honest. It's just so clear that he expected to blather on and scold all the wimminz for harshing his ninja high, but the second anyone with half a brain took him to task for his stupidity he spammed us with macros to try and make himself look ~witty~ when in reality he doesn't know how to respond.

It was basically the internet version of an bitter concession speech. So I'm not angry because we won, and the best part is that he knows it :D

[devimelete.livejournal.com]

Hah. That's what it looked like to me too, which make even more fail-tastic. Although I did laugh at the Obama macro.

Re: I think Theodor Kaluza will not be please with me for using his theories for fandom.

[redbrunja.livejournal.com]

Wow, he is really, really made of fail. And the fact that he's posting macros... just shows how much so.