/otaku/ - Japan / Otaku / Anime

What makes you think I'm anywhere near that open about my hobby?

Idiots misinterpreted "hide your powerlevel" as an elitist mantra rather than a mechanism of self-preservation of a person's social standing and the hobby from widespread scrutiny. Nobody save a few people know I watch anime and even those people think I stick with what's most known and safe. I do this precisely to avoid a possible confrontation the kind you describe. It sucks but that's how it is. If people can't take anime as an entertainment medium at face value and choose to read deeper (read: misinterpret in a way that allows outrage from a morally superior position), then there's nothing you can do about it. Normalizing anime/otaku subjects is not my hill to die on, nor an objective worth pursuing. I've seen what happened with all other "normalized" nerd hobbies. To normalize is to neuter.

I will say it's hypocritical to force me to make all sorts of ethical choices for entertainment and lifestyle when no-one lives a life free of ethically unsound consumer choices (whether it be wearing designer clothes made by sweatshop children or watching netflix reality shows glorifying self-destructive behavior). But I will never willingly put myself in that discussion.

I think the problem with your question is it's a bit too broad? It's like saying, how would you defend movies against the accusation that they're glorifying violence. Which movies? Which series of anime/manga? As far as your examples:

>Aqua being a 16 or 17 year old character…
If we look at historical deities this is mostly on line with roughly half of the female ones. They weren't necessarily at that age group specifically, but very few of them were conventionally unattractive by the standards of their time and even fewer were particularly caring about propiety beyond the standards they themselves set. Furthermore, consider the fact that every major protagonist in the series, except for potentially Lalatina (I forget if she's supposed to be 20something) is a teenager, besides Wiz, who is one of the rare female liches in fiction, and the literal demon from Hell.

>no pants
She's wearing a miniskirt and in the original is wearing shimapan. In the anime proper she loses it, but even then I don't particularly see the problem. You wouldn't call it promoting misandry when you have shirtless guys or men wearing undershirts (read: muscleshirts) without a jacket.

>huge boobs
She's like, a DD. She's big, but she's not massive. As for jiggle physics - that's what happens to tits without a bra and it looks pretty obvious that nobody has a bra in that series.

Now when we talk about the series in a broader sense, I think the best defense is "what are you even on about?" because your examples are focusing on sexualization, which is inherently independent of sexism. Sexism is about treating one sex or another differently because they are of that sex, and more to the point usually implies an unjust treatment. The first problem with that is that unjust treatments inherently don't exist in fiction, because you, the author, have supreme power over your own creations. The second problem is that sexualization of characters attractive to your intended audience is a basic play for artists and authors and always has been - one of the world's first novels, Genji Monogatari, is essentially a laundry list of what the (female) author found sexy but disguised with good prose.

A "sexist subculture" is itself an unclear thing and in my mind largely a buzzword. What is a sexist subculture? What does it entail? If being attracted to wide hips, fat thighs, and tiddies is part of being a sexist subculture, then all mentally healthy post-pubsescent males are automatically and biologically part of a sexist subculture. If consuming media that depicts this is part of a sexist subculture, then what you're really saying is you're not allowed to enjoy things that you're biologically programmed to enjoy - as absurd and scientifically (and philosophically) illiterate as using a moral argument against consuming meat. If creating media that depicts this is part of a sexist subculture, then you're creating an unstable equilibrium - anyone who breaks the rules has an advantage over those who don't, and therefore the rules will eventually be broken.

Now, on the other hand, you could legitimately make an argument for a sexist subculture - in the actual PLOTLINES and CHARACTER INTERACTIONS of many works, which are not inherently restricted to moeshit; in fact, Berserk - with the entire damsel in distress situation - actually could qualify. Anime of certain genres, especially harem, does have an annoying tendency to flatten female characters into being mostly various toys for the male MC; though even this is not a straightforward thing and there are harems e.g. Rokujouma and even Negima that have the female characters, or some of them, gain actual character arcs. More importantly, reverse harems do the exact same thing to male characters.

While I can see the argument for this being sexist, realistically speaking I don't think any of this is an issue; it IS sexist, but it also doesn't matter, because - sexism, and in fact discrimination of most types, is not inherently bad. Discrimination, the word, means 'to treat differently' or 'to see difference between'. The fact that we have different terms for the groups means that we've acknowledged there is difference; to treat them differently, in light of intended audiences and in light of intended themes, makes perfect sense.

tl;dr Konosuba isn't sexist, and most things that are sexist can be defended by asking 'so what'

>>838
It's kind of interesting how people will find ways to be outraged about everything and grant themselves the moral high ground. I've seen people do that with monopoly (the board game) and just miss the fact that it's meant to be a brainless, fun party game with no real message.

>>838
I really like your viewpoint. I think there's some sort of human disposition to fight for the underdog that makes me want to defend the medium, but like you said, that might not be what's best for it.

>If people can't take anime as an entertainment medium at face value and choose to read deeper (read: misinterpret in a way that allows outrage from a morally superior position), then there's nothing you can do about it.

I think that's really the crux of the matter, and the only justification you need.

>>839
I can't believe you're trying to argue Aqua isn't sexualized. Anyway, I don't want to get into specifics because for every example you or I try to counter, an accuser could could find ten more easy. If we're talking about Konosuba, what about the loli succubus? To use another popular anime, what about No Game No Life where you get a panty shot of Shiro in the opening scene? They're just examples of a broader phenomena. I think you can see what I'm getting at.

>The first problem with that is that unjust treatments inherently don't exist in fiction, because you, the author, have supreme power over your own creations.

That's like saying that depictions of black minstrels aren't racist because it's fiction. The minstrel trope depicts African Americans as big, dumb entertainers with pitch black faces and big red lips. Anime (often, not always) portrays female characters as necessarily young, perfectly proportioned, erotic objects of desire.

>The second problem is that sexualization of characters attractive to your intended audience is a basic play for artists and authors

"Sex sells" isn't a justification.

Despite my gripes with the first half of your post, I do think you have some points.

>Discrimination, the word, means 'to treat differently' or 'to see difference between'. The fact that we have different terms for the groups means that we've acknowledged there is difference; to treat them differently, in light of intended audiences and in light of intended themes, makes perfect sense.

I really can't argue with this. I guess I could imagine someone arguing that the negative tropes of the media could translate to real life and affect how one treats 3d women, but I think that's such a ridiculous stretch.

>What is a sexist subculture? What does it entail? If being attracted to wide hips, fat thighs, and tiddies is part of being a sexist subculture, then all mentally healthy post-pubsescent males are automatically and biologically part of a sexist subculture.

My imagination of mainstream-think would have me believe that that modern culture believes exclusively representing sexy attractive girls makes "realistic" body-standars look bad by comparison and thus should be diluted, but I'm probably just straw manning.

I'm sure glad this little slice of world culture exists.

>>842
>I can't believe you're trying to argue Aqua isn't sexualized
I didn't say that, I said it's both justified and fine. Aqua's clearly sexualized just by virtue of being young and attractive, but most female divinities were sexualized even when sex wasn't part of their portfolio.

>The minstrel trope depicts African Americans as big, dumb entertainers with pitch black faces and big red lips
And African Americans do have dark faces and larger lips than most. It's racist; but it's an exaggeration of a character trait that people actually have, and beyond simply being lazy writing no more offensive than making Asians in movies short with flat faces. They're short and their faces are flat.

>necessarily young, perfectly proportioned,
Meh? The thing here really is that this is a product of fiction and especially visual works. Conservation of detail implies that any character trait that is atypical should be relevant; this is why if someone is 'fat' in fiction then it's usually relevant to their character and something notable because other people are not fat. The same goes for exceptional beauty and people who are ugly - especially people who are ugly, because it's not the norm. It's basic common sense - if you're going to draw people, why not draw people who are attractive? It sells better and is just something proven to make people happier. This is why movies have 'ugly' people who are like, maybe a 4 at worst, and struggle so hard to make abnormally hot characters from books stand out.

>erotic objects of desire
Eh. Mostly shounen and some seinen in my experience? Which makes sense considering it's aimed at kids and horny teenagers. See Vinland Saga for a popular, extremely sexist (because of the historical time period) manga that doesn't really sexualize its women at all. In my experience it's actually the sexism that doesn't manifest itself as just being sexy that is more annoying; nobody complains about someone being hot, but if the characterization is lacking and shallow, if the interactions are boring and cliche, if the personality is stereotypical and nothing else; well then we have a problem, not because of sexism but because of what it can engender - bad writing.

Also NGNL is a bad anime in general that panders to people who want to feel smart because they've read wikipedia. I'm so fucking sick and tired of people who introduce crop rotation like it's unknown or who revolutionize the world because they know what print is, despite not knowing the slightest bit about sociopolitics or actual historical development. I'll take sexism that would make Japanese people curl their lip before dealing with more blowhards to who write manga to feel like they're smart. The only good character in the entire series is Jibril because she manages to be the one who has a personality, however basic, that doesn't revolve around the smartass pair.

I think the only justification I need is that it's fiction. In the same way that "violent video games encourage violent behavior" is a debunked myth, the idea that anime somehow encourages sexism is equally ridiculous. It's pure fiction, and trying to draw parallels between anime/manga and real life doesn't work as well as you would think. People often praise realism and realistic depictions of characters as though it were the gold standard that all media is trying for, but to use violent video games as an example again, Call of Duty proves that realism isn't always the goal. If Call of Duty were halfway realistic it would be unimaginably boring; the whole game is built off kill-streaks, trick-shots, and fast paced dopamine producing competitive play. Similarly, the anime/manga aesthetic of simple, clean, rounded lines; large eyes; colored hair; unrealistic characters which often fit into simple archetypes; all of it is not even trying to represent reality.

>>837
since the people making those arguments tend to be leftists, I would make a counter argument using post-colonial critical race theory.

The entire stance you're representing is built on white supremacy. If a muslim starts critiquing western media for it's immorality according to islam, westerners would find it ridiculous and offensive. Of course western media doesn't use the same moral framework as islamic media. To suggest that it should do so would be absurd.
Why then is it considered perfectly reasonable for white people to constantly attack asian media based on their morality? The answer is because white europeans and americans view their moral code as the one true objective morality in the world. This has historically been used to justify all kinds of colonial atrocities in the name of "civilizing the savages". There is an inherent assumption by westerners that their morality system, their culture is superior to all others. They may not do it consciously, but this ideology is systematically prevalent throughout western institutions. This ideology has to be enforced through a process known as cultural imperialism, assimilating all other cultures into the framework of white europeans, to reinforce the supposed superiority of western culture, and by extension the white race. If these people really truly cared about sexual morality in media, they would devote their time equally to criticizing western porn which simulates rape or incest, we all know it's very common. Except, they instead seem to hyper focus on asian cultures. This strange attitude only makes sense once you consider that this is actually cultural imperialism masquerading under the veneer of feminism. It's part of the "white savior" complex which supposes that other cultures and races are in need of saving by the white man, because they are too inferior to save themselves. Again this goes back historically to western imperialist powers colonizing african and south american countries to spread Christianity.

This has kind of come up in the discussion already, but OP, it's not particularly clear how you make the leap from the sexualization of anime grills to sexism.

Is the issue just about sexualization of the female form in general? Or about the sexualization of young females in particular?

If it's the former, then the 'devil' you are advocating for must be quite a puritan. If anime is not allowed to sexualize the female form in general, then most (heterosexual and lesbian) porn goes out of the window too. A lot of Western films too, I would expect, because many of them use pretty actresses as eye candy. At this point, almost nobody in the West is free from guilt about the media they watch, and the position implicit in the OP becomes ridiculous.

If it's the latter, then the question is more difficult. Is it really okay that I watch animated middle school girls non-consensually fondling each other's breasts for a laugh in the club-room?

>>843
I'm getting tired of arguing with you since we're both really on the same side, lol. But I have a few more thoughts, so here goes.

>The thing here really is that this is a product of fiction and especially visual works. Conservation of detail implies that any character trait that is atypical should be relevant

You're saying that anime girls look the way they do because that's just what cartoon girls necessarily look like and an artist would need a specific reason NOT to draw them super hot, which isn't true. Some shows, like Mob Psycho 100, subvert the traditional anime style, and in doing so show us that an alternative IS possible. Those characters are all drawn in an almost Western cartoon style, with straight bodies, almost no curves, no particularly attractive features, and are never shot from revealing or suggestive angles. It is possible to have a show without the so called "male gaze" (I hate to use that term), but the vast majority of anime choose not to.
Like you said earlier, though, maybe that's not inherently a bad thing.

>See Vinland Saga for a popular, extremely sexist (because of the historical time period) manga that doesn't really sexualize its women at all.
There's a huge difference between between media that depicts sexism and media that engages in sexism. There is absolutely nothing wrong with depicting uncomfortable subjects, but promoting them (in the sense of "look at all these scantily clad girls slobbering over mc-kun") is different.

>Also NGNL is a bad anime in general
I couldn't agree more.

>>844
Reality isn't realistic anyway. "Realism" is like, its own weird set of things at this point that's like an offshoot of 'gritty', and mostly unrelated to actual reality.

>>848
>There's a huge difference between between media that depicts sexism and media that engages in sexism.
Eh. People who call things sexist in seriousness seem to mostly not see the difference. Really, what you seem to be complaining about is less sexism and more just lazy haremshit.

I don't really care if it's sexist or not, I don't even care to know what exactly sexist means, whether it be a popular definition or some other definition from a particular subject, all I know is that whenever the word sexist comes up in the conversation it usually always preoccurs censorship and harassment of the things I like, so I refuse to debate or engage anyone using the word sexist, too much of my favorite art and communities have already been harmed. people who go around throwing accusations of sexism are the antithesis of creativity, I loathe them, and don't want to have anything to do with them.

Because I'm not promoting anything. Apart from most of fiction media produced before the nineteen hundreds (which would be considered sexist by todays standards), I have consumed a lot of, uh, questionable material. I have read books in which women are literally inferior to men. Sure they are truly sexist, but I'm not supporting any movement by reading it. I did not get swayed by any objectivism, and I don't treat women any differentlyBecause I have no contact with them, nor am I supporting the publisher by reading them. I do not care about the current trend, and it is a trend, of moral standards. My question is why aqua? She doesn't even look that young(Megumi looks preteen) and isn't as sexual(the blond girl) as some of the other characters. Isn't Aqua around the age of biological blooming?
>>848
>but promoting them (in the sense of "look at all these scantily clad girls slobbering over mc-kun") is different.
If that's the case then any form of escapism is bad. You're assuming that by depicting girls in an unreasonable way and pronouncing their sexual organs, you are shaming those who are fat and ugly and making sex the only defining part of a girl, but this is not the case. By introducing an isekai or parallel world, are you flaming our perception of reality, saying that in it brave people and opportunities don't actually exist by start contrast? No, those that pursue in escapism are conscious of unreasonable portrayal of women and adventure. A beautiful depiction of nature must be an absolutely disgusting thing in the world because it portrays nature in an unreasonable, attractive way. Likewise so must be a picture of a beautiful large breasted woman. Ah, what shame it rains down upon the rest of the ugly small breasted women because they are so ugly and small breasted in comparison! How sexist OF HER because the other women are so ugly and small breasted! Ah, how it gives man the assumption that women have no redeemable qualities and whos only use is to fondle their tits. A titless ugly woman should represent the population so you KNOW that she's not just the representative because of her beautiful objective beauty, face, body, and gentle grace

>>852
Megumin is like 14 or something if you look at her body, Aqua is clearly way past 'biological blooming'.

>>853
>looking at an underage anime girls body
Do not leave your house for 7 hours.

>>839
>If being attracted to wide hips, fat thighs, and tiddies is part of being a sexist subculture, then all mentally healthy post-pubsescent males are automatically and biologically part of a sexist subculture.
Even ignoring the implication that homosexuality is a mental health problem (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that wasn't intentional), there are plenty of men who prefer women with narrow hips and small breasts. Sure, it's almost certainly much rarer than men who like curvier women, but I don't know why you would think that literally every mentally healthy straight or bi man would have the exact same taste in women.

I realize this is a bit of a nitpick, but it was just bugging me that no one had addressed that yet.

hehe bugging

>>837
I wouldn't, a lot of anime and manga is sexist. I just don't consume those there are because i dislike it; of course there are 'cameos' of sexism and other things i don't enjoy but that just means i won't like it as much as opposed to disliking it.

>>845
Honestly, there is way more critiscm of porn than of anime in regards to sexism.

>>837
I don't really see what you mean. It's pop culture and that's always been sexualized since that's what people like to see but I don't really think either medium as a whole, or even specific parts of them, promote inequality or discrimination based on gender.

Are you confused with regards to what sexism is?

>>855
>Even ignoring the implication that homosexuality is a mental health problem
Homosexuality was classified in the DSM until the third edition's revised version as I understand. I would say that whether or not it's a mental health issue depends a lot on whether or not you believe it's genetic or not, which afaik is mostly confirmed to not be the case. It's definitely a disorder and claiming otherwise seems to me to be kind of delusional considering that it directly interferes with proper function and biological fitness as a living, sexually reproducing being? Like you could argue that it's ok to be gay and I'd agree, just like it's fine to be asexual or be a savant, but you can't really argue that it's not a disorder in the sense that your body, biologically, would prefer not to have it.

Also I wasn't saying there were no men who preferred a slimmer profile, just that in almost all cases the wide hips fetish and such is essentially biologically baked into you, like how the fear of heights can be overcome but is still something that's hardwired into your monkey brain.

>>859
Not that sushi roll but generally to be classified as a disorder something needs to cause harm or distress. You might argue that interfering with reproductive activity is harmful but it's not on an individual basis and we don't consider fetishes or paraphilias disorders unless they harm the individual or manifest in ways that harm others. Most sexual deviancy is considered within the healthy range of sexual expression these days. Your position only makes sense if you believe not reproducing is harmful to the individual or dismiss the past several decades of psychiatry. We'd have to get into evolutionary biology and populations and stuff but basically the human body doesn't really have "preferences" independent from the mind except for things that don't noticeably harm it.

>>860
I'd generally class all paraphilias as disorders considering they are, in essence, finding sexual appeal in something without theoretical sexual appeal. Whether or not they need to be treated is something else entirely, and usually comes down to 'no'.

>Your position only makes sense if you believe not reproducing is harmful to the individual
More like I class anything that inhibits you from reproducing as a bad thing? Low sperm count is a disorder afaik, but it doesn't harm the individual.

>>861
By your reasoning, all virgins would have a mental disorder. When you said that fetishes are mental disorders, you're saying that anything which deviates from the norm is a disorder. The balls are an erogenous zone but wanting to stroke them is considered a fetish

>>837
I honestly wouldn't bother trying. My years of experience and observations on the discourse has concluded that the majority of the time the people who say something is bad thing aren't interested in having an actual dialogue at all. This is ESPECIALLY the case on social media where even if you do run into someone who wants to talk about things, the format itself makes it impossible to communicate things effectively.

The people who say these things are just going on about stereotypes and think that everyone who enjoys it is your stereotypical fat otaku and think that just because something is primarily aimed at a certain audience it means that people outside that audience cannot enjoy it. They're insecure about watching something that's outside of their norms, so they just look for any reason to hate on it.

They've been trained to believe in some way that you have to have some sort of grand justification to hate something. And hell, maybe you do in fact have some grand justification for not liking moe anime. The point is, no one is solely sexist/racist for the things they enjoy no matter how weird it maybe. There's a lot of stuff that I personally wouldn't enjoy, but I've had to learn that someone enjoying something that I don't doesn't mean they're bad, we just have different tastes.

If someone calls you sexist because you're carrying a Kuroneko daki, just say "I disagree" and move on. Don't even entertain the thought of trying to debate or convince them otherwise, if they're mature they'll move on. If they're not, be the bigger person and make it known that you're not interested in continuing this conversation. Maybe you have to leave the room, maybe you have to block or mute them.

These people aren't looking out for you, they just find you enjoying something "weird" and want to mock you for it. You'd sooner get a SSR from a gacha or get struck by lightening than find anybody in this scenario who truly has your best interests in mind.

Just reply with a "Yeah, so what?" and keep walking.

>>863
SSRs from gacha aren't really that rare when you come down to it, it's usually like a 1% chance, sometimes better (iirc GFL and AZL have something absurd like a 8% SSR rate)

I think the people who tend to say things like this, or anything about "x media" being problematic in some way (sexist, racist, transphobic, xenophobic, whatever it may be) have already made up their minds by the time they say it. You can't convince them so why bother? I think it's best to leave them be in their echo chambers - live and let live and such. Besides, why would you want to convince them anyways? Is someone who's making an attack on you someone you want to share your hobby with in the first place? And that aside, if it's just someone in your life that is threatening to stay away from you or trashtalk you to others, they would end up doing so anyways. The only way I can see it needing to be justified is if you personally feel weird about enjoying it. In which case it's up to you to figure out personally altogether.

>>868
I think you can readily admit something is problematic yet continue to enjoy it for whatever reasons it resonates with you. Art and music is full of this stuff, I don't see why the same can't be applied to media.

I come on here expecting a refuge from the desctruction of the HMS Samachan, but I am instead met with a flamewar focussing on 3dpd topics. I am disgust.

>>870
hear hear

I would point out the vast amount of shoujoshit and otome games that are available. If you don't like cute girls, then there are plenty of cute boys just waiting to be enjoyed. Now everyone is happy!

It seems to me that all forms of media that we indulge in are essentially programming to instill sexuality into our brains from an early age. Why do you think the generation that grew up in the 90's is so fucked up with serious issues like gender dysmorphia and etc.? Not to say that anime is responsible for that alone. I mean, if you think about the living conditions in Japan for male anime creators, those foos are lonely and horny, basically. At the end of the day it's a form of media/chingchong shit so if you let it affect you in such a way that results in escapism or shit like that then it's kinda your fault. Just keep it simple and enjoy watching the things you like (even if its some fruity, moe-type shit)

>>897
>filename
Hold the fuck up, when did we pass 1600000000000 base? God damn I am getting old.

>>906
We passed it on September 13th, 2020, at 12:26:40 UTC.

>>906
No kidding, I remember filenames in the late 12Xs

What's so wrong about sexualizing girls/women? Perhaps if they're children it may be objectionable, but if they're sexually mature, I don't see why it's supposed to be bad?

By the way, is porn sexist? I'm no expert but you could argue IT SEXUALIZES PEOPLE. Poor people, had they only known. I'm so glad that we live in a society that has opened it's eyes to the evil that SEX is, the porn industry surely won't last.

>>907
This can't be fucking happening to me
I'm supposed to be young
Zoomers are supposed to be kids
Millenials aren't supposed to be in college they're supposed to be minekids

>>910
context

>>912
>Millenials aren't supposed to be in college
Well I've got good news for you, the vast majority of millenials graduated college a while ago.

>>912
Zoomers will soon be the ones in college and we'll be getting 'Okay millenial' from ℵoomers

>>920
Okay millenial :)

>>918
I thought millennials were people born 1995-2005? Or are those the zoomers? I can't even keep track of these new names lmfao

>>924
I thought millenials were born from 1985-1999 and zoomers were born 2000 onward, but I might be wrong. As far as I can tell, these definitions tend to be pretty loose and vary wildly depending on who you ask.

SUCK IT ZOOMERS

>>924
>I can't even keep track of these new names lmfao
Me neither, it's like every 5 years everybody starts using a new generation name out of nowhere.

The overt sexualisation in anime and manga bothers me for some reason. It didn't use to, but it has for a while now. I guess I just don't think it's healthy to indulge in this sort of escapism, but I can't really justify that conclusion. And part of it is just being mortified at the thought of normies finding out and judging me. Because ironically, the reason it makes me uncomfortable isn't because the sexuality repulses me, but because of how alluring it I find it.

It's probably stupid to care about what other people think, but in the end I do. Maybe I'm just a hipster, but when I see young people wearing shit like ahegao hoodies I'm just filled with disgust.

But mostly it's just the sense that it now dominates the market, and that the industry in general is less interesting as a result. Maybe I'm just a grump like Miyazaki who thinks anime was a mistake, moe was a mistake, etc. But maybe all this is the symptom rather than the cause. What is it that drives people to this sort of escapism? I don't think it's a problem exclusively relating to attitudes towards women, but a problem of society in general which leads to these trends in the first place.

>>929
To me it's less sexualization that bothers me and more that some shows seem to imagine that sex alone will save it. Other times it feels like it's hamfisted and you have tiddy jiggle for more or less no reason. Albedo from Overlord is a decent example, esp. in the light novels; the blatant sexualization and honestly kind of cringe programmed love she's got adds very little to the series beyond initial comedy and I guess fap material, and it's transparently there to lure new readers in. It's just lazy, and a lot of the time - unlike Overlord - you have that laziness permeate the entire storyline and it really takes away from the rest of the show, if there's anything else at all.

>>929
I really can't agree, I've never had a problem with fanservice and while I'm not a fan of full on ecchi anime like Queens Blade etc, I'm not ashamed to say that I enjoy it in many cases. I also of course like plenty of shows that are completely devoid of it. I just can't honestly say I'd enjoy a lot of more if they removed all the bathhouse scenes and panty shots. Maybe I'm just a lonely, horny otaku but is that such a bad thing to be now?
>And part of it is just being mortified at the thought of normies finding out and judging me. Because ironically, the reason it makes me uncomfortable isn't because the sexuality repulses me, but because of how alluring it I find it.
No offense but I think that's kinda silly. It's normal to be horny, and everyone has their own potentially embarrassing interests and tastes. Just don't go around broadcasting it like an idiot like the aforementioned ahegao hoodie people. (Although I think that's less a case of anime being sexualized and more a case of people just attention seeking and/or substituting internet memes for real personalities and interests)
>it now dominates the market
I also think you could make a pretty strong case that anime these days is less fanservice-ey than it used to be.

I do agree with you that it's likely a symptom of society rather than a cause of anything bad, but that kind of discussion about loneliness and attitudes towards dating is a bit much to have here I think.

>>934
>I also think you could make a pretty strong case that anime these days is less fanservice-ey than it used to be.
Maybe it has less fanservice with traditional panty-shots and alike but it's much more uniform in the presentation of girls and their personalities, they all hover around the girl on the left of >>929's pic, it feels like them looking sexy or whatever better word is the first priority in most of the designs.

I think it often detracts from the storytelling; if a story is trying to do something else, shoving tiddies in the camera breaks the coordination of the visuals, scripts, sounds etc… that can make movies and tv compelling.

That kind of fanservice is also rarely appropriate in that even when sexual content is the intent, it's just really cringey when the way that sexuality is presented is so immature (I realize that many of these stories are told from the perspective of teenagers, but many aren't).

Another problem is sexualizing stuff that just shouldn't be, like little kids or indefensible sexual harassment.

>>936
>uniform in the presentation of girls and their personalities, they all hover around the girl on the left of >>929's pic
I dunno, looking at recent anime it looks to me like most designs are in the middle of those two extremes. They all just look like anime girls in various artstyles to me so I just don't see it ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's kind of funny that Osaka is the one used in that picture since she's the only character who I don't remember any significant fanservice of in Azumanga.

>>936
Not sure what you mean by that but you probably just don't remember the dozen trash shows with cardboard cutout girls that aired every season in the years after Love Hina. I'm also not really sure what your timeline is since the left Osaka looks pretty Strike Witchy and that's nearly fifteen years old now, from back during the heyday or panty and jiggle harems.

I think fanservice these days has shifted more to a model of showcasing overall attractive characters to try to engage the viewer both down there and up top, rather than just outright titillation, though series that stick to the old model like the seasonal monmusu ecchi shows seem to be pretty popular for doing so. The animation in general has also improved a lot since the early days of digital anime and the trends in character design and animation style have changed so I wouldn't expect to see the same sort of fanservice anyways.

Either way though this is still just a slice of the overall anime market we're talking about. There's never been any uniformity across the medium so the whole thread is kind of moot.

Also, the shift in fanservice I mentioned started like ten, twelve years ago and really solidified maybe six or seven years ago. By the time the first season of Highschool DxD came out it was already kind of an oddity among the most popular shows of the time with regards to its style of fanservice.

>>937
>Another problem is sexualizing stuff that just shouldn't be
I don't like declaring things about fictional works "problems"
Can't we just ignore things we don't like?

>>929
>What is it that drives people to this sort of escapism?

Life is hard and bit of indulgence take the edge off and forces the mind away from thinking about dark and terrible things. I'm not qualified to provide an answer as to why escapism takes this form specifically in its country of origin but will note that it's far from exclusive to Japan, with the likes of the Twilight saga having been produced elsewhere.

Obviously I'd defend it by saying that what they happen to identify as "sexism" is simply a closer representation of the natural order of things.
That modern women have become corrupt and are no longer embracing the true beautiful nature of their femininity.
It's just natural male attraction towards true femininity making itself known.
In ancient times men would get married at around 20-30, their female companion would usually be around a third his age, and not to mention also his property for life.
The age difference was to make sure that she would become molded to his character, since as people become older they become less influence-able and malleable in thinking.
The man would ask the father of the girl, and her father would judge whether he was of good character.
We certainly have become quite degenerate since those times.

>>3227
lurk more

>>837
It's often sexist, but anime is just a medium and not just a genre. So you have leftist anime that are against racism or war (Gundam), and dumb reactionary anime like Mahouka.

Culture is also relative so an anime about a woman standing up to her parents and doing what she wants might be feminist and progressive by Japanese standards but rather lackluster elsewhere. One thing anime has done well is to have very strong female leads such as the Ghost in the Shell character. Song still gives me goosebumps, and there's a reason lots of trans people found it easier to insert into anime from the 80s onward than western stuff with male leads. Film critic Robert Ebert commented on how many Japanese men must find it empowering to self-insert as a powerful sexy female cop.

https://youtu.be/QxkMzn4et2U

Can we fuck off with this culture war bullshit? This is @ the whole thread not anyone in particular but I'm really sick of this garbage being inescapable.

>>3629
you know you can just hide the thread…

>>3631
The concern I have isn't that I can see the thread, it's that letting this stupid discourse exist here in the first place will only serve to drag it down to the level of places I come here to escape by attracting more people who want to have this kind of talk. If people want to argue about "degenerated culture" or "sexism" or "leftist themes" in regards to anime they can do so on twitter or 4chan (or at the very least on /hell/) and get plenty of other dumbs to engage with them on it. I'm not saying I'm the authority on what the fabric of this site should be or anything, but as a user I am a very small part of that fabric and I'd be remiss not to make my concerns heard.

Usually people stop thinking this way when they realize that fiction is fiction - for example i was pretty against lolicon stuff before, but i read some papers on it, and came to realize the attraction to lolis is for *most* people attraction to the specific fictional characters, not to actual children. It literally is fiction. The same point does apply here. Anime/manga is fiction, and plenty of fiction is sexist, anywhere you look. A bit of a rant, but i had to go for a tangent about this one of these days.

It is sexist, though. It promotes harmful stereotypes of women, it infantilises them. Just acknowledge that it's degenerate but that you like it anyway, for some reason. That's honestly a better take than trying to unsuccessfully convince people that it's not sexist. They have eyes.

>>842
I agree with most of your points but

>I guess I could imagine someone arguing that the negative tropes of the media could translate to real life and affect how one treats 3d women, but I think that's such a ridiculous stretch.
What about how idols and voice actresses are treated? The same tactics are used to draw in fans for those mediums, so it does bleed into real life.

>>3634
>it infantilises them
Any more than they do males that are portrayed as useless perverted idiots?

>>3636
In anime? I don't think that's a common trope at all.

>>3637
Cutie Honey, Golden Boy, Great Teacher Onizuka and Prison School to name a few.

>>3638
Okay. Still don't see how it's comparable though.

>>3636
i mean, that's sexist too. it's not a contest over who has it worse, it's whether a work's qualities are better than its issues

>>3639
You really truly don't? Come on.
>>3640
>issues
Just because something fictional portrays people in a certain way doesn't mean it has "issues". People want to see attractive characters in the media they consume. This isn't causing anyone harm, and if it makes people uncomfortable they don't have to watch it and can watch thousands of other things instead.
This attitude of wanting to analyze everything and anything to find the "problems" with it is fucked and it's how you end up with situations like when the UN tried to tell Japan to stop drawing certain things. Nobody in this thread arguing that anime is sexist has yet stepped over the line to calling for it to be censored but that is exactly where this kind of critique leads.

>>3641
No, I don't believe media depicting grown women with child-like proportions/personalities or actual fictional minors being sexualised or fanservice is comparable to self-insert pervert male characters. Do you, genuinely?

>>3642
>actual fictional minors
>actual
>fictional
lmao

Anyways, you've moved the goalposts from their personality to their appearance. Do I believe that male anime characters always being toned and super handsome highschoolers is comparable to making female characters equally unrealistic? Yeah, I do.

If you're talking about their personality then yes, again, I think it's perfectly true that anime presents a cartoonish and unrealistic version of how boys act and does the same for girls.

>>3642
>self-insert
You missed the point. Those characters aren't there to self yourself into, but to laugh at them. Have you sat down to watch any of those shows listed?

>>3642
>actual fictional minors
I like how you had to add "actual" here because you know how dumb complaining about fictional minors sounds. btw, every available piece of evidence points to sexualized drawings having no negative societal effects at worst, and positive ones at best.

>>3634
You should get your eyes checked, because mine work fine and I don't think anime is sexist.

I'd show them my Takamichi artbooks.

>>3660
The only real point here is that sushi roll is a moral busybody and shouldn't get so bothered by people liking completely harmless stuff.

>>3666
Nice trips
And it's not harmless, it's actual literal factual fictional minors.

>>3669
>>3645
"actual" as in their official age is that of a minor and they act like minors to further drive home the point that they are indeed, meant to be minors. I suppose watching moe anime would rot your brain to the point where you can't read though, that makes sense. Thanks for proving that.

>>3670
>"actual" as in their official age is that of a minor
Okay, and? What is your point here?

>>3676
that they are csushi rollically minors, stop being obtuse

>>3685
I'm not being obtuse, I want to hear what your problem with that is.

>>3690
You want to know what my problem with lusting after csushi rollical minors is? I think that it's very clear and if not you're being deliberately obtuse…

>>3695
I don't like to just assume what other people think because I don't like to argue in bad faith, but you're basically inviting me to state your position for you so here goes:

If I had to guess it's because you think finding any character under the "csushi rollical" age of 18 attractive is morally reprehensible. At best you think it's "gross" and should be censored, and at worst you think anyone who commits such a thoughtcrime should be shot/tortured/fed to a woodchipper/etc. (The latter end of this spectrum is concerningly common). You probably don't have a good reason for this beyond how it makes you feel but if you do I'd genuinely like to hear it instead of just smug non-replies.

The response to this argument would be that the availability of fictional, sexualized depictions of minors has been studied and everything I've seen seems to show that it causes no societal/real world harm beyond hurting your feelings, and may in fact be a positive force. In addition to that, you're ignoring basic, proven biology. The majority of adult men are going to find neotenous features and the expression of secondary sex characteristics attractive. It doesn't matter what character those features are attached to. This is just science, and you can look it up yourself if you don't believe me. The reason we have laws against sexualizing minors IRL is not just because it's gross. It's because it has the potential to victimize, cause trauma, and hurt real human beings, all of which are things that cannot happen to purely fictional characters. In conclusion please take this kind of "criticism" somewhere else.