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.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
timeasmymeasure
I think Theodor Kaluza will not be please with me for using his theories for fandom.
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.