"Action Girl" Characters in Anime (Are they still sexist?) [Archive]

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-11, 22:56

This is a topic I've actually wanted to create for a while, but first I think it's best to start off by explaining just what exactly I mean by Super Flying Sex Doll. It's actually something of an in joke between myself and some friends from the forum who tried to decide exactly what we should classify a certain character type as. It actually sprang from the character Inori Yuzuriha from Guilty Crown who was depicted as an almost custom made attractive female that could leap through the air and do all sorts of improbable feats of combat. Feel free to suggest a better term, but I mostly use it because I think it's an emerging trend and I don't know what else to call it at the moment. :heh:

Not all characters of the type fit Inori's personality and growth though (in fact they tend to be quiet the opposite) and I've actually come to jokingly apply the term to a type of female character that I feel we're seeing a lot more of lately and am not sure fits directly under the original definition of moe which as I recall has something to do with the feeling of wanting to protect something innocent. These characters tend to be amongst the more capable in the context of whatever it is they are trying to do, tend to be perceived as the most physically appealing amongst fans and even in the show but also as amongst the most interesting character and personality wise, but for all their big seasons showcasing martial prowess or general competence they also tend to get a lot of fan service scenes as well that show off their sex appeal, and development wise it could almost be argued that if viewed from a certain perspective they could be considered to be the actual leading heroes of their shows or at least equal to the male lead. In general they tend to really stand out and be the breakout characters for the series.

The question is is this still an overtly sexist portrayal of women? Are these characters an example of stronger female leads that are independent and interesting in their own right (some complain there's not a lot of these in anime) or does the nature of their costumes and obvious design for sex appeal cancel out these particular qualities. Here are some examples from the past few seasons that I feel illustrate the type of character I'm talking about.

Akemi Homura (Madoka Magica)
Asuna Yuuki (Sword Art Online
Sakura Ichiko (Binbogami-ga)
Yui Takamura (Total Eclipse)
Kuroyukihime (Accel World)
Morgianna (Magi)
Hakaze Kusaribe (Zetsuen No Tempest)
Layla Malkal (Code Geass Akito The Rebellion)
Most of the female cast of Horizon On The Middle of Nowhere

I'm going to let this topic stand for a while and see where the conversation goes, but personally I'll say I think these are all pretty interesting characters that don't come off as particularly misogynistic or purely fanservice material and that they represent something of an upward trend in the portrayal of female characters at least as far as Action series go. I recognize that sex sells and this holds especially true when it comes to anime, but I don't necessarily think it cancels out anything positive about a character and consider this type something of a trade off. And with that I yield the thread.

Marcus H.

2012-10-11, 23:53

Isn't superwomen a much less sexist term than "Super Flying Sex Dolls"? :heh:

The term sounds like some rock band or something. :P

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-12, 00:04

Isn't superwomen a much less sexist term than "Super Flying Sex Dolls"? :heh:

The term sounds like some rock band or something. :P

Yeah a little bit lol. Okay I'll go with superwomen, that fits pretty well actually.

wontaek

2012-10-12, 00:05

While I agree that the characters you listed are complicated and interesting characters, their clothing, posture, and camera angle do show some attempts to sell them as sex objects as well. If the anime producers wanted, these things could have been avoided and focus could have been given more to the difficult situations and complex state of mind of these characters.

Marcus H.

2012-10-12, 00:10

Thread naming aside, I don't think I have a problem with powerful women. In fact, they are always refreshing when put in a world where men are normally the more powerful ones, particularly in fantasy series. I don't see a problem with them being put in situations wherein they are regarded as sex objects, either. Maybe I'm just used to them, or have accepted that it is normal, or I personally get turned on myself. :heh:

Well, IIRC Wonder Woman also got this same treatment in Western comics, right?

Westlo

2012-10-12, 00:19

Well, IIRC Wonder Woman also got this same treatment in Western comics, right?

Just Wonder Woman? lol

Shoutouts to Powergirl and her boob window.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.comicsalliance.com/media/2012/02/pgboohoo.jpg

CrowKenobi

2012-10-12, 00:25

wontaek

2012-10-12, 00:36

Whatever the name, the fact is that in many recent anime series, there are plenty of scenes that seems to be more about presenting female characters as sexual objects instead of furthering the plot or delving deeper in to consciousness of the characters.

relentlessflame

2012-10-12, 00:47

I don't know if "superwomen" really is the right term. TVTropes uses "Action Girl (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ActionGirl)" and has a separate page that analyzes (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Analysis/ActionGirl) it. :)

Okay, let's go for that then... though I'm still not sure if it's quite right.

...I've actually come to jokingly apply the term to a type of female character that I feel we're seeing a lot more of lately and am not sure fits directly under the original definition of moe which as I recall has something to do with the feeling of wanting to protect something innocent. I think all of the characters listed have some degree of "innocence" to them, even if they are sort of "action heroes" a lot of the time. This is certainly the case, for example, with characters like Kuroyukihime or Asuna. So I think these characters are still often designed to produce "moe" feelings in the male audience. Perhaps you could say that there's a certain type of "moe" that revolves around "characters you'd want as a little sister", and another type that's "characters you'd want as your girlfriend/wife" (and of course, the amount of fan polls about those very two things are neverending).

As for the "sexist" question... I am assuming that the reason this accusation happens for "moe" characters in the first place is because it's felt that they exist as little more than a shell of traits (both physical and personality traits) to be fawned over by the male characters in the shows and the male audience perhaps by proxy. In other words, it's sexist because they're just objects and not "people" (or even fully-developed characters). But I think part of the problem in that regard may be because shounen stories generally revolve strongly around the male protagonist, so all of the female characters exist in context of that protagonist. So even if a female character is strong and capable, they'll inevitably be intertwined somehow in the protagonist's web. So it could be seen as if the female characters have little real value as a character except as they relate to the male lead. I suppose, as wontaek keeps alluding to, the "sexualization" and fanservice do not help if the goal is to not present them as simple objects.

So in the end, I'm not sure how much of a difference this makes. I think the character in my avatar, Corticarte, arguably fits into this category too, but, despite being a terribly powerful fighter in-universe, she: a) requires the male lead to act, b) is the primary love interest for the male lead in her story, and c) is certainly the "victim" of a lot of exploitative character marketing (resulting goods I have dutifully bought, being the sucker that I am!). Probably sexist, yes, though I suppose one might consider there to be varying degrees. I do think that, in spite of it all, Corticarte is an interesting character set in an interesting story and story universe, and is not just an "object" in my view.

Whatever the name, the fact is that in many recent anime series, there are plenty of scenes that seems to be more about presenting female characters as sexual objects instead of furthering the plot or delving deeper in to consciousness of the characters.I will say, though, just to be clear, this is definitely not something limited to "recent anime series". This has been the case for decades. I'm not trying to say that makes it right, only that I don't really think this particular aspect is a recent trend.

0utf0xZer0

2012-10-12, 01:03

I think it depends how chauvanistic your fanservice is, to be honest.

I don't think that putting an action girl in a costume like Kuroyukihime's weakens her or puts her down at all. On the other hand, you have stuff like Yui's photoshoot scene at the end of Total Eclipse's beach episode. Though I feel that in the grand scheme of things the impact on her character was minimal.

BTW, I think this rule applies to fanservice involving any female character, not just action girl types.

Vexx

2012-10-12, 01:19

I prefer women that can participate in the action needed. "Action Girls" are just an exaggerated version of those women (just as 'helpless princesses' are exaggerations in the other direction).

Characters can be quite moe and still kick butt and take names ... absolutely.

wontaek

2012-10-12, 01:24

I will say, though, just to be clear, this is definitely not something limited to "recent anime series". This has been the case for decades. I'm not trying to say that makes it right, only that I don't really think this particular aspect is a recent trend.

Indeed, this has been the case for decades, but I feel it has gotten slightly more prevalent these days compared to 70s and 80s. The sad thing is that this is still prevalent.

Vexx

2012-10-12, 01:29

I guess we could pull out Daisy Duke, Wonder Woman, and almost any character in the old Batman series ...

We have seen some progress .... more tomboyish types in bomber jackets or gear that actually protects them.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-12, 02:03

Positive portrayals can be bigoted too, especially if the conversion is to something that is just safe for the male audience, and ultimately consumption.

This doesn't mean a character can't appeal to a audience's taste, but when a strong female character is made strong but then still forced to suit the audience's tastes of femininity it would be sexist.

It's for this reason I despise the "faux action girl" trope, where a strong female character is strong on paper but it's really only to grant a token female position, mostly for fanservice. If a female character is portrayed to be competent, then they better actually be competent in practice, or it's just really a concept of making her still safe for the audience.

Sex appeal isn't inherently sexist either. For example, art in the Nanoha series often depicts Fate Testarossa as having an exceptionally notable posterior and the angles in a lot of pics would draw attention to that. However, this is just a feature of the character. It is not the character. It's ok to show characters as being sexy, but they shouldn't be used for that purpose. (Which is why the Vivid Manga is trash, since it went that way)

Now take Kaioshin's "Super flying sex doll" example. Inori's outfits, at least at the start, seems to have served no purpose rather than to flaunt her assets. Unfortunately it was to the degree where I simply wasn't even paying attention. Now, note, it's not even about how revealing an outfit is-- Fate's typical outfits are quite skimpy as well. I can't go into this without spoiling too much, but she definitely falls under the Rei Ayanami clone, in having very little or constantly changing personality. IMO, the majority of Rei Ayanami clones simply haven't worked for me simply because they try to focus on the sexuality of said characters and their seemingly indifference to it, except Rei was supposed to be creepy. It's not supposed to be moe inducing or for one to do something inappropriate later tonight for. :p

Overall, this is an pretty sensitive issue to me, since practically every favorite female character of me tends to be under the action girl category. I think they just stand out more in a world dominated by male protagonists. In general, for it to not reach an insulting and condescending portrayal is to have these characters do to fit the bill on paper, and also have a certain will. Essentially, they can't just spend all day doing cool stuff on screen. This is true of both males and females-- I mean sure, MD Geist is badass and all, but he's a terrible character. When I mean will, I mean they aren't just puppets meant to spread appeal to the audience. True appeal works on its own.

I would write a diatribe about each one of my favorite female characters individually but I think we're good for now-- you don't really want to scroll down for a few years, anyone? :heh:

But honestly, it seems anime handles this a bit better than say... Hollywood.

aohige

2012-10-12, 02:11

Take my Super Asswhopping Sex Dolls away, and I will curse your firstborn to eternal damnation in Hell.

Just sayin'.

Lenneth4

2012-10-12, 02:13

why people associates action woman with independant , strong etc
I'd love an action woman wich is married and loves his husband (or her wife whenever)

Vexx

2012-10-12, 02:46

why people associates action woman with independant , strong etc
I'd love an action woman wich is married and loves his husband (or her wife whenever)

I don't see how those traits are opposed in any way. Independent, strong, married, loves her mate? That all easily works together.

Triple_R

2012-10-12, 02:57

In real life, do people generally prefer to be perceived as physically attractive, or as physically unattractive? The obvious answer, for both men and women, is "physically attractive".

So I don't see any harm or sexism in having an "Action Girl" character that's generally portrayed as being physically attractive, and hence as having "sex appeal".

That being said, nobody (male or female) wants to be seen as "just a pretty face".

But in a way the "Action Girl" characterization combats this at an intrinsic level. At a bare minimum, a reasonably well-written Action Girl is good at, well, action! She's good at kicking ass, to put it bluntly. That clearly distinguishes her from the classic damsel in distress, and shows that she is more than just a pretty face.

Mind you, it is possible to screw this up, and take a portrayal that should be inherently empowering to women and turn it into a sexist caricature.

Do you know why I object to fanservice in action scenes? The main reason is indeed that I find that these two "tastes" (erotic arousal, and thrilling combat) clash nastily for me when they're mixed together. But a very important secondary reason is that I do think that you hurt the image of an "Action Girl", and risk having her come across as a sexist caricature, if her action scenes are fanservice-loaded.

Remember that what makes an "Action Girl" stand out from "the Damsel in Distress" is that the Action Girl is not "just a pretty face". But if you take the Action Girl, and emphasize her sex appeal even when she's doing things that shows that she's not just a pretty face, then that just inherently undermines any perception of her being more than just a pretty face.

Why? Because it shows that even as she is being more than just physically attractive, what is the camera choosing to focus on? If it's choosing to focus on her sex appeal even when she's in action, then the production is basically saying that her sex appeal trumps everything else about her, which does come dangerously close to saying "Yeah, she's just a pretty face".

So in my view a character may become a sexist caricature if their beauty, handsomeness, or sex appeal is overemphasized at the expense of other positive character traits. But sex appeal alone is not a negative character trait - It only becomes one if it starts to override everything else.

Thankfully, that's not the case for just about all of the girls on Kaioshin's list that I've personally watched, so neither one of Akemi Homura, Asuna Yuuki, Yui Takamura, or Kuroyukihime are sexist, imo. In fact, I think that Homura and KYH are two of the least sexist female characters in all of anime, if not in all of fiction. They're very strong and well-developed characters, and KYH is extremely well-rounded.

I haven't seen enough of Zetsuen no Tempest to take a strong position either way on Hakaze Kusaribe, though.

So, tl;dr, most action girls in anime are not sexist. And the basic concept itself is certainly not sexist either. The key, imo, is to not allow sex appeal to override everything else. Sex appeal in and of itself is fine, but it shouldn't define the character. If it does start to define the character, then yeah, we're probably now into sexist caricature territory.

relentlessflame

2012-10-12, 03:56

Do you know why I object to fanservice in action scenes? The main reason is indeed that I find that these two "tastes" (erotic arousal, and thrilling combat) clash nastily for me when they're mixed together. But a very important secondary reason is that I do think that you hurt the image of an "Action Girl", and risk having her come across as a sexist caricature, if her action scenes are fanservice-loaded.

Remember that what makes an "Action Girl" stand out from "the Damsel in Distress" is that the Action Girl is not "just a pretty face". But if you take the Action Girl, and emphasize her sex appeal even when she's doing things that shows that she's not just a pretty face, then that just inherently undermines any perception of her being more than just a pretty face.

Why? Because it shows that even as she is being more than just physically attractive, what is the camera choosing to focus on? If it's choosing to focus on her sex appeal even when she's in action, then the production is basically saying that her sex appeal trumps everything else about her, which does come dangerously close to saying "Yeah, she's just a pretty face".
I think, if you take this too far the other way, it's just as bad, because then you're just saying that a capable female action hero can't have her femininity emphasized when she's in combat. Which means that, basically, whenever someone turns into "action hero mode", it's like they're automatically male. Now, I'm not saying that this excuses gratuitous fanservice by any means, but by the same token I think a female action hero actually has a lot of sexual appeal when they're in combat. So if you try to deny their sexuality during the action scenes, but choose to emphasize it every other time... it seems odd -- almost like your female character has a split personality or something. I don't really see how that's any more empowering, really. I think the point is that a female character can be both a "pretty face" and a formidable character/contender/opponent at the same time; no odd dichotomy involved. But this basically depends on being a fully-fleshed out character throughout the story, and not just given "perceived depth of character" by inserting random action scenes. In that case, it wouldn't actually be the fanservice that's out of character, but the perception of empowerment.

(That said, I recognize that the mixture of fanservice with other elements in anime is something that a lot of people have a lot of different opinions on. There are some combinations that just bother some people for various reasons, whereas they may be fine with others.)

NoemiChan

2012-10-12, 04:07

An action girl is still an action unless a lot of panty shots and torn clothes and skin are exposed... then that's fanservice girl.

Triple_R

2012-10-12, 05:02

I think, if you take this too far the other way, it's just as bad, because then you're just saying that a capable female action hero can't have her femininity emphasized when she's in combat.

Well, a physically attractive character is going to be physically attractive almost regardless of the scenes that he or she is in. But the thing is that true sex appeal doesn't need a close-up zoom shot of a character's breasts, or a lingering shot on a character's butt, or a panty shot. I'm not saying that such shots should be avoided like the plague throughout the entire anime, but if a particularly scene is meant to be an intense action scene where we're supposed to be emotionally invested in this combat and to be held in suspense as to how it'll play out, it might not be a good idea to break all of that with a random panty shot.

Femininity can (and probably should) still be there, of course, but that can be achieved through character design as much as anything.

Part of the reason why I love magical girl anime is that the magical girl costumes are extremely feminine, and also carry a certain elegance to them. Madoka Magica is a perfect example of this - All of the Puella Magi costumes for the main cast in that show just exudes femininity, but none of them rely on blatant fanservice to achieve it.

I don't think there was a single panty shot in all of Madoka Magica, but the sort of passive, automatic sex appeal of its cast is still there and clear as day. Mami Tomoe is clearly a buxom blonde bombshell, and that's as obvious in action scenes as it is anywhere else. They didn't hide her breasts (which would be going too far the other way, yes), but they didn't need "~Boing!~" sounds or impossible jiggling either. ;)

Now, I recognize in more lighthearted works that this more boing-y style of fanservice may in fact be fine here and there. For example, there was no scene in Koi to Senkyo to Chocolate that I felt was too fanservicey - The fanservice that was in that show felt well-placed and helpful to showcasing the character's strengths (including, yes, their beauty).

DonQuigleone

2012-10-12, 05:39

Whether an anime with action girl characters is sexist or not is a tricky thing. For the record, I think Anime does on the whole ten to be a more sexist medium then not (however, it's similar to Hollywood, if different in how it's sexist).

For me, the primary thing you really need to look out for is whether the female characters have agency; are they capable of independent action from male characters, and do they drive the plot? That's what really makes the difference. The sin of many anime using "Action Girls" is that while the female character may be strong, it's the main character (invariably male) driving everything forward. The female character may start stronger, but she doesn't evolve at all, while usually the hero trains up and ends out exceeding the female. The Action Girl ends out just helping the hero, and not doing anything independently herself.

I would actually say it's a lot worse in the Romance Genre then in action. In Shoujo "Smut" manga you get cases where the heroine falls in love with a guy who almost rapes her, and in shonen you get harems, where the guy gets legions of women to serve his every need without doing anything.

As for the examples the op gave, the ones I've seen are Madoka Magika, and Binbougami-ga, and neither of them would strike me as sexist. The female characters there are perfectly capable of acting independently, and have complex personalities.

As for Sexuality in action scenes, I don't think there's anything wrong with female characters being attractive while in an action scene, the human form is an attractive thing anyway. Do we begrudge male characters being attractive in an action scene? I doubt it. Though my perspective is that it's more tasteful if the sexuality being shown is more like a ballet dancer rather then being like a stripper. But I would view that as more of a matter of obscenity, rather then one of sexism.

Blatant fanservice is not in itself sexist, but it's often symptomatic of it. If the plot treats women like objects, then the visuals tend to follow. So a show filled with panty-shots don't usually tend to be models for portraying women in a constructive manner. But that doesn't mean it's impossible for a show to have good female characters and panty shots co-existing. People will criticize something if the women are nothing more then eye-candy for the male audience (say Transformers...).

Basically, for me there are two sexism litmus tests:
1. Are the women just objects?
2. What are the gender power dynamics, and how are they presented?

Marcus H.

2012-10-12, 07:14

I don't see how those traits are opposed in any way. Independent, strong, married, loves her mate? That all easily works together.

Gin Tachibana from Kyoukai Senjou no Horizon comes to mind. Can fend threats decently, married to a strong guy, and wishes that her husband would give her rowdy nights in bed (her husband is too gentlemanly for that tho :heh: ).

SeijiSensei

2012-10-12, 07:31

DonQuigleone

2012-10-12, 07:44

Mine Fujiko in the recent Lupin III spinoff poses an interesting issue for this thread. It's hard to see a character who spends a good portion of the anime in the nude as not designed for fanservice. Yet Fujiko's use of her sexuality is cunning and instrumental and designed to get what she needs out of the men around her. In answer to DonQ's two questions, I would say Fujiko is objectified by the men around her, but not necessarily by Okada's script or the show's direction. As for question two, since Fujiko is at least as strong as any of the male characters, she's not simply presented in relation to any man but as a self-reliant woman in her own right.

My idea of a compelling "action girl" character would be Balsa in Moribito, though at thirty she has moved beyond being called a "girl." Not a hint of fanservice about her, nor is she portrayed in any sort of sexist role. Maybe it has something to do with stories written by women.
Men can use their sexuality in something without anyone thinking anything of it. I see nothing wrong with female characters doing the same.

Ultimately, it's a lot more about how they the work uses their sexuality, then whether or not it does. If the sexuality is purely to titillate a male audience, it's probably sexist. However, from what you say, the example you gave doesn't seem sexist to me. She has agency.

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-12, 12:07

My idea of a compelling "action girl" character would be Balsa in Moribito, though at thirty she has moved beyond being called a "girl." Not a hint of fanservice about her, nor is she portrayed in any sort of sexist role. Maybe it has something to do with stories written by women.

Balsa almost comes across as being a one of a kind character in that regard or at least an exceedingly rare one as far as TV anime are concerned. It'd be interesting for sure to see more characters like her, but I'm not sure we're going to all that much as to use a character like that raises the question of how you are going to sell merchandise surrounding it.

DonQuigleone

2012-10-12, 12:13

Main Characters in Anime over the age of 20? This is Heresy!

Vexx

2012-10-12, 13:44

Maybe it has something to do with stories written by women.
It isn't a pure rule ... but I have found I *tend* to get better results with material written by women that have primary female characters in them. Its a trend though, not a hard line. Men *can* write good portrayals of women (heh, start by thinking of them as people I suppose).

Kirarakim

2012-10-12, 14:13

There is a quote I once read (I am sorry I forgot the source) that explains my feelings on this quite well:

When we said we wanted strong female characters we didn't mean "the kick butt type" we meant "strongly written female characters".

Now do I think female action girls are inherently bad or sexist? Absolutely not! But when their character is only defined by the fact that they are an "action character" then yeah this to me is a poorly written stereotype. It's not what I want to see from my female characters.

A strong female character can be a character who kicks butt but it can also be one that isn't the fighter of the group. I want a female character who has hopes & dreams, and flaws. Who has just as much of a character arc as the male character. It's perfectly fine if the male & female character falls in love, but the female character should not only be defined by this relationship, let her have her own story.

Random32

2012-10-12, 15:33

It seems like I'm a bit late

1. Character designs and characters are completely different things. I like my "sexist" character designs a lot. Saying that girls in stories can't be attractive is like saying guys in stories can't be attractive. It's just retarded.
2. Strong female characters should be able to be to stand on their own. They are strong characters that happen to be female. They should be able to do something other than follow their love interest around and aren't defined by their love interest.
3. To build on that:
a. They should have goals, to have sex with the mc doesn't count (most of the time).
b. They should have flaws, being in love with a shitty mc doesn't count (no exceptions unless you can convince me otherwise).
c. They should try to achieve their goals and overcome their flaws. The mc can help, and probably should if they are in a relationship, but it shouldn't be "mc solves all problems so we can get to part that has the two of them having sex asap".

winhlp32

2012-10-12, 18:53

This article (http://www.overthinkingit.com/2008/08/18/why-strong-female-characters-are-bad-for-women/) sums up pretty nicely what I think is a problem with some "action girls". They basically start off strong but become putty for the sake of male empowerment.

aohige

2012-10-13, 00:40

There is a quote I once read (I am sorry I forgot the source) that explains my feelings on this quite well:

When we said we wanted strong female characters we didn't mean "the kick butt type" we meant "strongly written female characters".

No I do mean girls that whoops asses. Give me.

A strong female character can be a character who kicks butt but it can also be one that isn't the fighter of the group. I want a female character who has hopes & dreams, and flaws. Who has just as much of a character arc as the male character. It's perfectly fine if the male & female character falls in love, but the female character should not only be defined by this relationship, let her have her own story.

Drop what you're doing right now, and go watch Tweleve Kingdoms.
It will not dissapoint you. Especially the three girls arc.

Sumeragi

2012-10-13, 00:58

Gin Tachibana from Kyoukai Senjou no Horizon comes to mind. Can fend threats decently, married to a strong guy, and wishes that her husband would give her rowdy nights in bed (her husband is too gentlemanly for that tho :heh: ).

You are now making me interested in Horizon.

Chaos2Frozen

2012-10-13, 01:09

You are now making me interested in Horizon.

Sumeragi-san, please watch Horizon :)

DonQuigleone

2012-10-13, 03:32

Good female characters are not necessarily "strong". They can be weak, dysfunctional, idiotic and severely flawed.

The important thing is that they have agency. If they are in a relation with a man, it's okay for the man to be completely overpowering her, it only becomes a problem when the anime portrays this as a good thing.

Only having virtuous strong perfect women is just as bad as only having weak women always playing damsel in distress.

Just because a show has female characters that kick ass doesn't mean that the show is suddenly egalitarian.

Kirarakim

2012-10-13, 08:24

No I do mean girls that whoops asses. Give me.

:p

Drop what you're doing right now, and go watch Tweleve Kingdoms.
It will not dissapoint you. Especially the three girls arc.

I could in fact do this because I own the series, one of my absolute favorites.

aohige

2012-10-13, 08:43

:p

I could in fact do this because I own the series, one of my absolute favorites.

Ah, so you're in the same boat I am.

Wishing for more anime like 12k.

asaqe

2012-10-13, 13:47

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-10-13, 14:25

How about series with the only worthwhile fighters being women then? Isn't that technically empowerment? In fact they are as averse to men as possible with the setting design to eliminate Male Presence. You can't do that in Hollywood, in Hollywood there must be a male lead like Akatsuki from Hagure.It still depends on the female characters themselves, plus writing, execution and focus of the story. Imo shows about all-girl fighters like Strike Witches, Ikkitousen, Queen’s Blade, Freezing etc are not exactly good examples of woman-empowerment. First, most of the female characters are there mainly for the fanservice (nudity, panty-shots, boob-jigles, etc). Second, most of the female characters are poor and not complex enough to be considered as “strong characters” (mostly, they’re only some one-note archetype characters like the “shy” one, “easygoing” one, “strict” one, etc).

Note: Freezing manga is a different beast from the anime, but we're talking about anime here, right?

NinjaRealist

2012-10-13, 14:38

There is a quote I once read (I am sorry I forgot the source) that explains my feelings on this quite well:

When we said we wanted strong female characters we didn't mean "the kick butt type" we meant "strongly written female characters".

This post pretty much sums up the entire the thread.

These are sure to rub someone the wrong way but here are some examples using this logic.

ex. #1

Madoka = Strong female character

Nanoha = Weak character with strong powers.

or ex. #2:

Caska = Strong female character.

Saber = Female character who has strong powers (but just talks about honor and fighting all the damn time, I'm sorry I loved Fate/Zero but I did not love Saber)

ex. #3 :

Boa Hancock = Strong female character

Miu (from Kenichi) = Female character who is strong.(A better comparison would be Miu and Moka from Buyuden but no one reads Buyuden. If you do you'll have no trouble guessing which one I think is truly a strong female character.)

Finally...

ex. #4:

Almost any Miyazaki protagonist = Obviously these are some of the strongest female characters in all cinema let alone anime

Almost any other anime = Pales in comparison.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-13, 14:39

lordkas

2012-10-14, 00:04

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbr53vyZDJ1rnoltyo3_400.png

and that is why most people think Japan is sexist and the WSJ too, bear in mind "the mangaka" helped on this for the uncoming movie so yeah:rolleyes:

asaqe

2012-10-14, 00:39

That would be sexist against men. :p

Also, it would be catered to male audience's desires. That's not necessarily bad; it depends on degree.

Still more progressive than America's action heroines. Japanese Action Heroines have outgrown the need for manly male support to come in and help out.

brocko

2012-10-14, 00:42

Triple_R

2012-10-14, 00:43

This post pretty much sums up the entire the thread.

These are sure to rub someone the wrong way but here are some examples using this logic.

ex. #1

Madoka = Strong female character

Nanoha = Weak character with strong powers.

I'm a big magical girl anime fan, and hence I'm very familiar with both of these characters, and I like both of them a lot. That being said, I'm at a real lost to understand how someone could consider Madoka a "Strong female character" while considering Nanoha a "Weak female character".

Madoka is every bit as much the archetypal magical girl as Nanoha is - In fact, I think a strong case can be made that Madoka captures that archetype even more than Nanoha does. Just because Madoka Magica is a genre deconstruction doesn't mean that Madoka herself is anything unusual for magical girl leads. In fact, I would say that the whole point of her character at a meta level is capturing the essence of "the magical girl" as well as any one character can (and to Madoka's credit, I think she does achieve this). But being strong at a meta level doesn't necessarily mean you're strong at a narrative level.

Nanoha is a much more proactive character than Madoka is - IOW, Nanoha drives the plot and displays agency in her show much more than Madoka does in PMMM.

I don't want to be insulting, but given your listings of Nanoha and Saber as supposedly "weak characters", I have to wonder if you have a bias against "lawful good" characters that's overly influencing your take on whether or not a character is a strong character. If you are, I wouldn't worry too much about it - A lot of people today sadly seem to think that a character has to reflect modern cynicism in order to be a strong character. But I don't see any good reason whatsoever for that position. Cynicism is hardly the only way to display strength, and in fact cynicism can showcase weakness if it goes to a certain paralyzing extreme.

Anyway, Nanoha is actually my favorite anime character of all-time, and I did a write-up of her here (http://assessingtheanime.blogspot.ca/2010/08/number-1-nanoha-takamachi.html).

Perhaps that can change your mind. Perhaps not. But either way, I would be interested in getting your take on it.

DonQuigleone

2012-10-14, 05:43

Sheba

2012-10-14, 06:01

How about series with the only worthwhile fighters being women then? Isn't that technically empowerment?

It is as much empowerment as allowing a woman to ride through the Tour de France on a motorbike while leaving men riding kick scooters. Not something to be proud about on the writer's side.

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-14, 09:52

Haven't watched Nanoha, but Madoka is an interesting character. She wants to help all the people around her, but the people who she wants to help, don't want her to help them.

She has to watch all this terrible stuff happen while being powerless to do anything about it. Madoka channels the despair of the show, because the viewer can't do anything either...

Yeah she's a lot like a character from Victory Gundam right now who I actually consider a stronger female character than she appears to be simply for watching all these horrible things happen to the people around her caused by people she's related to and manages to not only break (though she comes close a couple times) but handle it with grace and try to find a solution. Being Shakti is suffering too.

asaqe

2012-10-14, 13:28

It is as much empowerment as allowing a woman to ride through the Tour de France on a motorbike while leaving men riding kick scooters. Not something to be proud about on the writer's side.

Still more progressive than Western Action Girl Films. The only one I know of that is more in line with the Action Girl Anime was Sucker Punch.

NinjaRealist

2012-10-14, 16:47

I'm a big magical girl anime fan, and hence I'm very familiar with both of these characters, and I like both of them a lot. That being said, I'm at a real lost to understand how someone could consider Madoka a "Strong female character" while considering Nanoha a "Weak female character".

Madoka is every bit as much the archetypal magical girl as Nanoha is - In fact, I think a strong case can be made that Madoka captures that archetype even more than Nanoha does. Just because Madoka Magica is a genre deconstruction doesn't mean that Madoka herself is anything unusual for magical girl leads. In fact, I would say that the whole point of her character at a meta level is capturing the essence of "the magical girl" as well as any one character can (and to Madoka's credit, I think she does achieve this). But being strong at a meta level doesn't necessarily mean you're strong at a narrative level.

Nanoha is a much more proactive character than Madoka is - IOW, Nanoha drives the plot and displays agency in her show much more than Madoka does in PMMM.

I don't want to be insulting, but given your listings of Nanoha and Saber as supposedly "weak characters", I have to wonder if you have a bias against "lawful good" characters that's overly influencing your take on whether or not a character is a strong character. If you are, I wouldn't worry too much about it - A lot of people today sadly seem to think that a character has to reflect modern cynicism in order to be a strong character. But I don't see any good reason whatsoever for that position. Cynicism is hardly the only way to display strength, and in fact cynicism can showcase weakness if it goes to a certain paralyzing extreme.

Anyway, Nanoha is actually my favorite anime character of all-time, and I did a write-up of her here (http://assessingtheanime.blogspot.ca/2010/08/number-1-nanoha-takamachi.html).

Perhaps that can change your mind. Perhaps not. But either way, I would be interested in getting your take on it.

After reading your write-up, which clearly comes from the perspective of someone who is extremely well-versed in Nanoha, I can see that any criticism of Nanoha (the character) I post will probably seem inadequate and poorly-researched to you. Honestly, I have never been the biggest Nanoha fan so maybe I my opinion is biased.

But I loved both Berserk and Fate/Zero so maybe I can try with the Caska-Saber example.

Whereas Saber (until the awesome, mind-bending, ending that made Fate/Zero so great) was depicted as not only fearless, but also superhumanly strong and immune to pain (I mean she fearlessly fought Caster's demonic hordes even while having the tendons in her left hand perpetually severed by Diarmuid's attack, uuggghhh!). In this way, Saber seems less like a person and more like the inhuman personification of an ideal.

Conversely, while Caska is certainly an incredible warrior, who survives dozens of intense life or death battles throughout the course of the show, she is shown in both big and little ways to be nonetheless, extremely human, and prone to the physical weaknesses that her gender and her humanity impose upon her. For example, in one climactic scene, she loses a battle against a sexist pig who sexually harasses her on the battlefield and it is later revealed that she only lost because she was on her period. Later in the show, after Caska finally kills this same asshole, she clutches an arrow wound on her chest that is still bleeding and says aloud to Guts: "It's nothing serious...I hope."

So it's not to say that Saber was a bad character, and like I said I really loved both of these anime, but the difference between Caska and Saber to me is that Saber seems to effortlessly summon the courage to face her problems, whereas, Caska succeeds only in the face of the severe mental and physical hardships that such a scenario would impose on anyone but the toughest and most fearless of superhuman badasses.

I think this is what I mean when I say Caska is a truly strong female character.

Oh, and you are totally right about me being biased against "Lawful" character types. I just can't relate to them like I can relate to Neutral/Chaotic Characters.

Vexx

2012-10-14, 17:02

Heh, its hard to call "beat them senseless until they're your friend" weak. :)

Decent characters should be hard to pigeon-hole though.

n120cky

2012-10-15, 11:22

They need some appeal come from the character as it's one of selling point, for example is Kozuki Karen she is look sexy when in action using plug suit riding robot with a right camera angle.

Guernsey

2012-10-15, 12:58

Lord of Fire

2012-10-15, 13:24

You know some fans hate Madoka for being passive and uninvolved int he plot but I kind of consider to be mostly like Yuna from Final Fantasy X. Yuna may be the typical princess character wearing miko garbs and she may not necessarily be kicking ass and taking names in that game but she grew as a character nonetheless. I kind of hated what they did to her in FFX-2 but it was nice to see to progress from a passive character to an active force. Madoka didn't rush into things like Sayaka but only after she got the information she needed that she was able to make a well informed wish.

But it still required intervention from Homura to make sure Madoka got that far. I can name at least two situations in the TV series where Homura not intervening would have surely resulted in Madoka making a wish prematurely.

Triple_R

2012-10-15, 18:00

You know some fans hate Madoka for being passive and uninvolved int he plot but I kind of consider to be mostly like Yuna from Final Fantasy X. Yuna may be the typical princess character wearing miko garbs and she may not necessarily be kicking ass and taking names in that game but she grew as a character nonetheless. I kind of hated what they did to her in FFX-2 but it was nice to see to progress from a passive character to an active force. Madoka didn't rush into things like Sayaka but only after she got the information she needed that she was able to make a well informed wish.

Honestly, I don't think it's fair to say that Sayaka "rushed into things".

Kyubey (and Mami) made the Puella Magi pitch to Sayaka (and Madoka) in Episode 2. Sayaka didn't choose to become a Puella Magi until Episode 4. That's not what I would call "rushing into things". Keep in mind that people can sometimes make the wrong decision even when they do take a lot of time to carefully consider their options.

Anyway, the Madoka/Yuna comparison is a pretty good one. Madoka is a very good character, but I just don't think she's a stronger character than Nanoha.

Guernsey

2012-10-16, 12:11

You know I keep thinking that Madoka is too girls as Shinji is to boys, she just seems to passive for most people's tastes. I may oversimplifying things but Madoka seems to irritate a lot of viewers and I am not talking about sex appeal. There is a trope on TVTropes called 'Real Women Never Wear Dresses' and I even though I cannot link to the trope page, it kind of speaks volumes about this phenomenon. That is not say that women who wear dresses cannot be badass, it just that some people don't seem to like passive characters like Madoka who just sit back do nothing to impact the storyline. Orihime gets this trope from Bleach fans who hate that Orihime doesn't kick ass like Rukia, Rangiku and Yoruichi although it isn't limited to her as Momo gets this despite showing competency when Aizen isn't around.

Sheba

2012-10-16, 12:36

More and more people are forgetting that strong female characters doesn't mean "women who can kick ass", but that they 1. have their own agenda. 2. can handle the bad with grace and/or dignity. And a couple of other qualities that I cannot remember right now. To be with a boy doesn't demean the girl and her strenghts. To get married is NOT the end of the girl's... career, as an anime character. I can think of Frederica and Hildegard from Legend of Galactic Heroes as example of STRONG female characters. You will never see them in boarding parties or leading battles. But they carries that kind of gravitas that many of the Action Girls can only envy.

About Madoka, her strength lies in the fact that while she was scared, cowering and crying and getting her view of the world and what it meant to be a magical girl challenged by Kyuubey and the grief endured by her friends, she, in the end, have NEVER given up on what it meant to be a magical girl. Her wish is a triumphant affirmation of her own definition of a mahou shoujo.

I'll add that I believe in a STRONG female character more when she is getting challenged in the core of her morale and values, and come out stronger out of it, and also when I have seen her flaws and weaknesses.

SeijiSensei

2012-10-16, 13:08

To get married is NOT the end of the girl's... career, as an anime character.

One of the more impressive married characters in anime is Fee Carmichael of Planetes. She's off piloting a space craft while her husband and son are back in Florida.

Kirarakim

2012-10-16, 13:41

I can think of Frederica and Hildegard from Legend of Galactic Heroes as example of STRONG female characters. You will never see them in boarding parties or leading battles. But they carries that kind of gravitas that many of the Action Girls can only envy.

I am not finished the series (finished through the 2nd season) but I definitely agree with this.

LOGH is somewhat lacking in female characters but I am very impressed with the ones that are there.

jdennis007

2012-10-18, 17:07

A recent trend, hardly, you probably just noticed it, but it goes all the way back to Jun from Gatchaman at least, and up.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-19, 15:06

Sheba

2012-10-20, 03:50

About the skeptical people who thinks that such women cannot possibly exist in real life, I'll point out to: Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth_The_Queen_Mother) who refused to evacuate to Canada and decided to stay with her people during the Blitz. Also Geneviève de Galard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genevi%C3%A8ve_de_Galard).

sunset

2012-10-20, 14:33

Isn´t the concept of an action girl inherently sexist?

It promotes/glorifies a girl who does stereotypicaly manly things like kicking ass and taking names.
The subliminar message being "manly stuff=cool, girly stuff=lame".

Vexx

2012-10-20, 15:54

Isn´t the concept of an action girl inherently sexist?

It promotes/glorifies a girl who does stereotypicaly manly things like kicking ass and taking names.

I'll argue that it isn't *inherently* sexist, but such characters were nearly non-existent until relatively recently. I think Firefly did a relatively good job of showing various women in a variety of physical or social roles of power.

If we drop back to the '60s - you might see 2 or 3 women in a week of television who did much besides wring her hands or scream in a situation. Now you might see 2 or 3 a night.

In anime, you're dealing with a culture with differences in attitudes toward women.

The subliminar message being "manly stuff=cool, girly stuff=lame".There's the error though - you used the word "manly" for violent/shallow/action and the word "girly" for relationship/thinking/feelings :)

sunset

2012-10-20, 17:57

you used the word "manly" for violent/shallow/action and the word "girly" for relationship/thinking/feelings :)
It´s how society usually associates them, isn't it?

Kirarakim

2012-10-20, 17:58

I am going to have to agree with Vexx: what is sexist is assigning things as traditionally girly or manly.

Well in general I don't like labeling for guys or girls. Hence speaking of anime this is why I really like when characters (male or female) go against traditional gender roles (but this is something different from the female action role.)

An example I am talking about would be Kino is Kino no Tabi who actually doesn't really identify as a woman or a guy but as a traveler.

Then there are series like Rose of Versailles and Utena who explore gender identity as well.

As for male characters I feel the character in my icon (Natsume Takashi) also has characteristics that aren't considered traditionally masculine.

I think we shouldn't pigeonhole in general. Society might deem something as "masculine" or "feminine" but I think it is wrong to label that way.

Triple_R

2012-10-20, 18:52

Well, there were at least some real life female warriors in history. Joan of Arc, for example.

And there's many female soldiers and police officers today, and I'm sure they at least occasionally have to engage in serious combat, just like male soldiers and police officers have to.

So I don't see why an "Action Girl" would be any more inherently sexist than a female police officer or soldier would be.

willx

2012-10-20, 18:58

This entire thread makes me think of Najica Blitz Tactics:

-VqlWUBqRoE

asaqe

2012-10-20, 20:43

Guernsey

2012-10-20, 22:06

I believe it has more to do with cultural and gender roles, I am not sure how it is in the East but I know in the West women are often portrayed as the caretakers while men went out and did stuff. It may be outdated now but it still there in some shape or form. Seeing women who kick ass and take names may not be a new thing but the cultural norms and gender roles make it seem so.

US Female soldiers are never put in front line engagements. But the difference between female action girls here and in Japan is the dependency on a male supporting hero. Japan has at least outgrown that

Maybe not entirely but at least it is a step in the right direction. Hollywood on the other hand....

Vexx

2012-10-21, 00:14

US Female soldiers are never put in front line engagements. But the difference between female action girls here and in Japan is the dependency on a male supporting hero. Japan has at least outgrown that
Hah!!! You need to talk to pilots and soldiers of the female persuasion. They're IN front line engagements all the time and the whole idea of a "front line" is historically obsolete.

The only combat *assignment* women are excluded from are direct infantry assault roles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Exclusion_Policy

sunset

2012-10-21, 11:13

Well, there were at least some real life female warriors in history. Joan of Arc, for example.

IIRC, Joan d´Arc was more of a banner carrier.
Memory is sketchy, but she motivated soldiers, she didn´t actually participate in the infantry/cavalry charges.

Queen Boudicca would probably be a better example of a female warrior.

asaqe

2012-10-21, 11:47

Maybe not entirely but at least it is a step in the right direction. Hollywood on the other hand....

That is one of the problems with Hollywood is the near requirement to force a male love interest into the action girl's life. Why can't she be like a Japanese Heroine, happily in an almost lesbian relationship with some other girl

Sheba

2012-10-21, 11:50

So... It's okay for action boys to have a female love interest, but when an action girl gets to be with a guy, it's not??? Gee...

Guernsey

2012-10-21, 12:15

That is one of the problems with Hollywood is the near requirement to force a male love interest into the action girl's life. Why can't she be like a Japanese Heroine, happily in an almost lesbian relationship with some other girl

So... It's okay for action boys to have a female love interest, but when an action girl gets to be with a guy, it's not??? Gee...

Values Dissonance maybe?

Sheba

2012-10-21, 12:19

More like double standards to me.

sunset

2012-10-21, 14:08

So... It's okay for action boys to have a female love interest, but when an action girl gets to be with a guy, it's not??? Gee...

Theory #1:
I think people are affraid a male love interest may ruin the whole female empowerment thing.

If the action girl falls for a guy, they fear she´ll love her independence and sideline her own quest/interest/agenda for the sake of loverboy.

Theory #2
They just may not be too keen about heterosexual relationships.

Theory #3
[Insert your own theory here.]

willx

2012-10-21, 16:31

Lara Croft is THE North American "Action Girl" .. And she always has love interests.. Who usually betray her.. and/or die..

At least she's not always showing her panties off though.. There was another episode of Najica "Fanservice" Blitz Tactics where every time someone jumped into a prone position or were knocked out or shot, the camera would be facing their crotch/butt 100% of the time.. I gotta find that one.. I hated that show.. and my friend LOVED it..

sunset

2012-10-21, 16:48

Lara Croft is THE North American "Action Girl" .. And she always has love interests.. Who usually betray her.. and/or die...

I don´t think I´ve ever seen a Lara Croft love interest, at least not in the games.
Maybe that pretty boy in Angel of Darkness?
Dunno, if they existed they were quite unremarkable for me to completely forget them.

aohige

2012-10-22, 01:25

IIRC, Joan d´Arc was more of a banner carrier.
Memory is sketchy, but she motivated soldiers, she didn´t actually participate in the infantry/cavalry charges.

Queen Boudicca would probably be a better example of a female warrior.

How about that female sniper in WW2 Russia, that sniped and killed like... what, 200 nazi soldiers? :heh:

sunset

2012-10-22, 09:51

How about that female sniper in WW2 Russia, that sniped and killed like... what, 200 nazi soldiers? :heh:

Oh, if we go by WW2 heroines, we´ll be here all week.
The french resistance alone must have had oodles of uncelebrated warrior women.

asaqe

2012-10-22, 10:56

So... It's okay for action boys to have a female love interest, but when an action girl gets to be with a guy, it's not??? Gee...

I like male love interests for action girls. But the thing is over here in Japan the action heroines clearly have no male love interests AT ALL and may even have a female love interest (the undertones ahoy). In American film and action, the action girl must always have a man in her life.

But that may be a side effect of the "gender segregation" that Japan takes to media.

willx

2012-10-22, 11:24

I don´t think I´ve ever seen a Lara Croft love interest, at least not in the games.
Maybe that pretty boy in Angel of Darkness?
Dunno, if they existed they were quite unremarkable for me to completely forget them.

I was thinking the movies, not the games. There's no freakin' way gamer boyz would want to see their lady getting it on with anybody .. :heh:

4Tran

2012-10-22, 13:07

Sexism in anime usually consists of three types: female characters in lots of actions or poses that are designed to titillate, affirmation of gender roles, and making female characters specifically weaker than male ones. All of these are fantasy-serving depictions that take the place of good charcterization. And when you boil it down, sexism is just an explanation for why a character is written or portrayed poorly.

Action Girls seem to me like a completely unrelated concept from this. Whether the depiction of a particular action girls is sexist would depend on how she is handled. I'm sure there are lots of examples of all these kinds.

That is one of the problems with Hollywood is the near requirement to force a male love interest into the action girl's life. Why can't she be like a Japanese Heroine, happily in an almost lesbian relationship with some other girl
That's really more a problem that Western action shows in general have a tendency to shoehorn in a romance of some sort. You might as well ask why Hollywood has a near requirement to force a female love interest into the action boy's life. :)

Oh, if we go by WW2 heroines, we´ll be here all week.
The french resistance alone must have had oodles of uncelebrated warrior women.
The Soviets had some 800,000 women in the Red Army during World War II, many of them in front line combat. There were 89 women Heroes of the Soviet Union! It's going to be hard to top that.

asaqe

2012-10-22, 21:03

Maybe, but Western Shows should learn from Japan's examples an embrace lesbianism.

Guernsey

2012-10-22, 21:19

Except that the Japanese didn't truly embrace lesbianism (I could be wrong) but they just don't have as much of that Puritan baggage that is all.

4Tran

2012-10-22, 21:29

Maybe, but Western Shows should learn from Japan's examples an embrace lesbianism.
You mean to only have lesbian innuendo? Seriously, there's lots of Western films with lesbians in them, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's true of European TV as well. It might not be common in Hollywood blockbusters or American TV, but it's your own fault for not watching other stuff.

Vexx

2012-10-22, 22:58

I'll drop a Xena reference here and wander off.

sunset

2012-10-23, 02:16

Maybe, but Western Shows should learn from Japan's examples an embrace lesbianism.

Why?

Is there something wrong with heterosexual women?

The Soviets had some 800,000 women in the Red Army during World War II, many of them in front line combat. There were 89 women Heroes of the Soviet Union! It's going to be hard to top that.

When I think of soviet warrior women, I usually turn to the female pilots whose night bomb runs filled german hearts with fear. ^^

Sheba

2012-10-23, 03:47

I'll drop a Xena reference here and wander off.

Not too sure about this movie, but I shall drop the title anyway: Heavenly Creatures.

NorthernFallout

2012-10-23, 03:52

asage: The embrace of yuri I think you're referring to is just another pandering/fanservice scheme towards men since it's so easily misinterpreted by privilege (both East and West), though, and would be included in the sexist category. With some exceptions, of course.

As a clever dude told me, and which I know ascribe to myself, they should try and write good balanced characters instead of sorting them into categories.

4Tran

2012-10-23, 11:40

asage: The embrace of yuri I think you're referring to is just another pandering/fanservice scheme towards men since it's so easily misinterpreted by privilege (both East and West), though, and would be included in the sexist category. With some exceptions, of course.
I don't know about that. Most of the lesbians I've watched in Western shows/movies aren't there for either pandering of fanservice. It's generally treated a lot more seriously than in anime.

Sheba

2012-10-23, 11:49

I don't know about that. Most of the lesbians I've watched in Western shows/movies aren't there for either pandering of fanservice. It's generally treated a lot more seriously than in anime.
He is talking about the portrayal of lesbians in anime tho. In my opinion, those are just a poor reason to keep the girls celibate because the target audience would not stand their objects of adoration to be "just another guy's girl". I think this is what the Swede meant by "otaku pandering". As for the issue, I still stand by the opinion that it is still possible for a female character to kick ass, to be a loving wife and/or mother, and still be a strong and dignified character. My role model in that archetype, in fiction, is Sarah Connor. I can't think of an anime character that can stand the comparison to her.

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-23, 11:57

I'll drop a Xena reference here and wander off.

What about it's sort of Canadian equivalent La Femme Nikita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Femme_Nikita) which I always used to see advertised on TV as a kid? Anyone else even remember this, I'm not sure how far down into the states it made it? It was supposedly based on a French film about a delinquent that is forced to become one of France's top assassins and her struggles trying to escape the life of a professional killer. I recall it being pretty good actually and being focused on character drama and morality as opposed to straight up action, but I never really saw all that much of it.

4Tran

2012-10-23, 12:39

He is talking about the portrayal of lesbians in anime tho. In my opinion, those are just a poor reason to keep the girls celibate because the target audience would not stand their objects of adoration to be "just another guy's girl". I think this is what the Swede meant by "otaku pandering".
That's fair enough - the "Perfect Waifu" syndrome is pretty bad. Branching out further, there's the older-style yuri as characterized by Oniisama E. It's a lot better than some of the current version, but it's still nothing like the Western lesbian works.

As for the issue, I still stand by the opinion that it is still possible for a female character to kick ass, to be a loving wife and/or mother, and still be a strong and dignified character. My role model in that archetype, in fiction, is Sarah Connor. I can't think of an anime character that can stand the comparison to her.
I prefer Ellen Ripley since Sarah was a terrible mother :). In anime, Balsa from Moribito compares very well. And if you take the mother part out, Youko from Twelve Kingdoms is pretty good as well.

What about it's sort of Canadian equivalent La Femme Nikita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Femme_Nikita) which I always used to see advertised on TV as a kid? Anyone else even remember this, I'm not sure how far down into the states it made it? It was supposedly based on a French film about a delinquent that is forced to become one of France's top assassins and her struggles trying to escape the life of a professional killer. I recall it being pretty good actually and being focused on character drama and morality as opposed to straight up action, but I never really saw all that much of it.
There's also the Nikita TV show starring Maggie Q. It's arguably the best version of the story, and the third season just started.

NorthernFallout

2012-10-23, 13:13

@4Tran: Yea, what Sheba said. The Wire comes to mind as an example where it's done well, for instance, and I'd agree it's often handled much more seriously. I wanted to point out something bad as well but actually couldn't come up with anything directly.

And the sheer mention of "Perfect Waifu" makes me cringe. Dang I hate that one.

NinjaRealist

2012-10-23, 18:29

What about it's sort of Canadian equivalent La Femme Nikita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Femme_Nikita) which I always used to see advertised on TV as a kid?

I can't speak for the TV show, but the 1990 Film by Luc Besson is one of the best "action girl" movies ever.

Some truly epic shit, only outdone by its predecessor the equally incredible Leon aka The Professional .

Both examples of how an action movie need not be ultra-realistic to be good.

The Wire comes to mind as an example where it's done well, for instance

Few TV shows depict homosexuality as honestly as The Wire. Kima Greggs is one of the coolest lesbians ever and Omar Little is pretty much the baddest character ever, gay or straight.

Key Board

2012-10-23, 22:32

I think men and women should be free to sexualize their fictional representations of each other in fiction

Characters are not people. They are objects or concepts. Thus the author is free to do whatever they want with them. The alternative is censorship or thought crime. Though by the same logic, the audience is entitled to voice their opinion about it as long as the author is not bullied or pressured to modify his work.

Other than that..

I don't ask much. I only ask for a female character to pass the Bechdel test.

http://bechdeltest.com/

What this means is I ask for female characters to have other aspirations in life besides a man.

It really bothers me when there is a token childhood or love interest character in a particular movie doesn't have any other friends besides the token male lead.

It really bothers me when a girl's plan for college is to follow wherever A-kun is going to enroll in.

It really bothers me when a girl's plan in life is "I want to be with A-kun forever and I need nothing else".

It really bothers me when a girl's dream is to to help A-kun's dreams come true.

God damnit.. even married wives have a life outside of her husband. At least the ones in civilized countries.

To illustrate my point, I am going to use the heroines of Accel World and SAO as a comparison

Snow Black: Deeply in love with Haruyuki. Some say, unrealistically. However, she has her own ambition and goals which are UNRELATED to Haruyuki. Her original intent was actually to use Haruyuki to fulfill her own goals. She has since became more personal with him, but at her core she's still ambitious and unwavering.

Asuna: One of the best players in SAO. She falls in love with Kirito and... that's just it. I really don't see anything other facet of her other than "I want to be Kirito's wife". The treatment of her in the show doesn't help either. She is a prize for Kirito. She is something that he tried to win from Knights of Blood in a duel (why did she even consent to this? why didn't she fight for her own release?). And how she is something for him to win in ALO. It's hard to see her as a character instead of a trophy.

So in regards to the original poster's examples:

Akemi Homura (Madoka Magica)
If she did all of that for a boy, I would personally be annoyed.
But the context of the show makes me overlook a lot of things.
There's more than just a "doing it for a girl" theme. There's also a moral aesop and a word of caution against wishes.

Asuna Yuuki (Sword Art Online
As stated

Sakura Ichiko (Binbogami-ga)
Delicious mix of selfish and nice
But she's a comedy character. Why would I take anyone from a comedy seriously?

Yui Takamura (Total Eclipse)
She's comes of as a token love interest.. yes.
But I can see that there's an other side to her besides "Yuuya... Yuuya!" x 99

Kuroyukihime (Accel World)
I would join her legion

Morgianna (Magi)
I already read the manga but.. she's a solid character.
She's really starting from zero and is trying to be a human being for the first time.

Hakaze Kusaribe (Zetsuen No Tempest)
Right now I don't consider her a character. I consider her the exposition narrator.

Layla Malkal (Code Geass Akito The Rebellion)
Don't know who that is.

..

relentlessflame

2012-10-23, 23:56

Snow Black: Deeply in love with Haruyuki. Some say, unrealistically. However, she has her own ambition and goals which are UNRELATED to Haruyuki. Her original intent was actually to use Haruyuki to fulfill her own goals. She has since became more personal with him, but at her core she's still ambitious and unwavering.

Asuna: One of the best players in SAO. She falls in love with Kirito and... that's just it. I really don't see anything other facet of her other than "I want to be Kirito's wife". The treatment of her in the show doesn't help either. She is a prize for Kirito. She is something that he tried to win from Knights of Blood in a duel (why did she even consent to this? why didn't she fight for her own release?). And how she is something for him to win in ALO. It's hard to see her as a character instead of a trophy.I think the big difference between these two works is the way the author set-up the narrative. In Accel World, there's a rich history of events that precede the encounter with the protagonist, and so have an on-going impact on the plot. The narrative features much more frequent shifts in perspectives, and refers to a much deeper array of interactions, even if it's in retrospect. In SAO, the plot begins with everyone being thrust in a different world and never really leaves the narrow path of the protagonist's perspective. So there is no room for either insight into anything Asuna has done outside the game, or really much of anything that she does when Kirito isn't around. And in truth, it's not as if any other character in the story is developed any more deeply, because the camera is essentially glued to Kirito the whole time. It's almost as if SAO is told from a first-person perspective, whereas Accel World is about a much broader universe (which the protagonist is entering late in the game, rather than right from the start).

Where I'm going with this is that I don't think the author really intended for Asuna's strength and independence to be downplayed as much as some perceive it to be. I think he was trying to make her a strong and independent character. But I think he sort of trapped himself by really focusing entirely on "telling Kirito's story". There is some concept of independent lives that intersect, but it isn't as well-developed as it arguably should be. Kirito had to agree to the duel because it setup a later plot point. Asuna had to get trapped in ALO because the story is told from Kirito's perspective. And so on. But I think he may have realized this when he went on to write Accel World, as in the latter he seems to have a much greater concept of independent people travelling on separate paths that happen to intersect. I think that's really the key element that makes characters like Kuroyukihime feel more like an independent person.

As far as SAO goes, I will be curious to see if this is something that improves over time, perhaps as the author gained more insight and experience. Right now the story is a bit "on rails", but it seems like it could begin to open up during and after the current arc.

Key Board

2012-10-24, 01:43

I'd argue that it is already is the Kirito and Asuna show

so even if they give her as much as equal POV as Kirito, I think the problem will be more pronounced

As said, my problem is that Asuna does not seem as her own character.
My problem is that Asuna is seems to be a character crafted solely for the purpose of being a component for Kirito.

I'll make a fictional example..
Let's say they try to mix up things a bit
Let's have Kirito the one being captured in random VRMMORPG number 7
and let's have Asuna be the one with the protagonist POV doing all the rescuing

This will still not fix my concerns about her.

..

relentlessflame

2012-10-24, 03:15

As said, my problem is that Asuna does not seem as her own character.
My problem is that Asuna is seems to be a character crafted solely for the purpose of being a component for Kirito.

I'll make a fictional example..
Let's say they try to mix up things a bit
Let's have Kirito the one being captured in random VRMMORPG number 7
and let's have Asuna be the one with the protagonist POV doing all the rescuing

This will still not fix my concerns about her.It's funny you use this example, because I was actually going to say the same thing but edited it out in a revision -- that even if the situation were reversed, you'd say that this only proves that she has no purpose except as it relates to Kirito. But again, I think that's at least in part because the plot is trapping them on a very narrow path.

I guess the point I'm trying to get at is that, at least sometimes, I think authors get themselves trapped in this situation not because they hate women or want the women in their stories to be weak, but because they can't figure out how to properly build it into their narrative once it's taking a certain trajectory. So my question is: how, now, can the author fix this sort of problem, if that were a goal?

I personally think the main problem, such as it is, is that the story is simply too protagonist-centric. Are any of the other characters in SAO anything more than a story component for Kirito? The problem is then compounded because Asuna is a woman, and Kirito (the protagonist) is a man, and they are mutual love interests. Hence Asuna's role is defined only as it relates to the protagonist, who is male. I cannot think of any solution other than to expand Asuna's role to include situations that don't revolve directly around the protagonist, but the current plot conditions have not been favourable to such a situation (because, as I said, they're basically on rails right now until they're set free).

Edit: One example of something I think that could *help* (but not solve entirely) would be if the current arc were to ditch the protagonist-centricity for a bit, and show scenes where Asuna becomes aware of her situation and works to free herself from her current situation (and not just for Kirito's sake). Or, for that matter, have Kirito be on the way to rescuing her, but she already has dealt with a lot of the problems herself while she was "waiting", and be like "what took you so long?" :heh: Like I said, it still does not address everything, but something of the sort would help to emphasize that she's not just sitting there idly waiting for Kirito to rescue her.

P.S. I'm putting this behind spoiler tags because I don't want people who have not watched SAO to be spoiled, but by the same token I don't want this to just become an SAO thread. I do think it's a useful illustration of a problem that authors can sometimes find themselves in when trying/intending to write strong characters (female).

Key Board

2012-10-24, 09:52

Regarding a solution... hmm..

how about this.. instead of trying "fix" things, how about playing said flaw as a strength?

why not go all the way?

why not make Asuna an enchanted talking sword?

And I suppose this can apply to every other characters like that as well. Your character isn't its own person? Why bother making it a person?

Why not make it a talking sword, or an android, or a sentient space ship?
Good solution, I'd say..

Random32

2012-10-24, 10:32

Because a show generally needs more than 1 character. Even if all characters except the mc are "characters" in form only.

Also, enchanted talking swords aren't cute enough.

relentlessflame

2012-10-24, 12:29

Your character isn't its own person? Why bother making it a person?

Why not make it a talking sword, or an android, or a sentient space ship?
Good solution, I'd say..I give you partial-points for ingenuity, but none for "taking the problem seriously". :heh:

One thing that has been a bit interesting about this particular case is that I've actually seen many female viewers defend the characterization in the show and say that the accusations in this regard are overblown (whether they find the writing of the show to be particularly good or not). This is one of the reasons why I think it's likely more a case of a failure to fully realize an intention rather than a deliberate effort to "objectify" the (non-protagonist) characters.

(And, as an aside, I have also noticed that some of the people making this complaint most loudly (not you) would be totally fine with the story if the protagonist were female and everything else essentially the same -- a large part of what they don't like is that the overpowered protagonist is male. So I think another aspect of this is more about annoyance about certain gender-based clichés and stereotypes. And or those people -- again, not you -- I think their concerns would largely have been abated simply by having the current situation be reversed, since it would subvert a disliked trope.)

Archon_Wing

2012-10-24, 12:49

4Tran

2012-10-24, 13:39

I guess the point I'm trying to get at is that, at least sometimes, I think authors get themselves trapped in this situation not because they hate women or want the women in their stories to be weak, but because they can't figure out how to properly build it into their narrative once it's taking a certain trajectory. So my question is: how, now, can the author fix this sort of problem, if that were a goal?
I think that this is really part and parcel of the problem with sexism. Most writers do go out with the intent of diminishing female characters. They just end up with that result because they don't know how to do so otherwise. In many ways, this is as bad as the more active version of sexism.

The solution itself isn't really all that difficult: just write women as full-fledged people with their own ambitions, desires and foibles. Real people don't tend to be solely adjutants of other people, so the result should be far more enabling. Ellen Ripley is a good example. At the beginning of Aliens, she's isolated in a world where her former skills are rendered largely useless, so shes' forced to do menial work to make ends meet. All of a sudden, she's offered a chance to change all this provided she performs a dangerous task. There's all sorts of depth to this kind of portrayal, and it greatly elevates her character.

Something similar can easily apply to specific example of Asuna. Many of the obstacles brought up involve her directly, so simply make her more of a locus for the action. Explore how these various events affect her, and give her the power to effect change.

asaqe

2012-10-24, 14:38

Guernsey

2012-10-24, 15:01

I think that this is really part and parcel of the problem with sexism. Most writers do go out with the intent of diminishing female characters. They just end up with that result because they don't know how to do so otherwise. In many ways, this is as bad as the more active version of sexism.

The solution itself isn't really all that difficult: just write women as full-fledged people with their own ambitions, desires and foibles. Real people don't tend to be solely adjutants of other people, so the result should be far more enabling. Ellen Ripley is a good example. At the beginning of Aliens, she's isolated in a world where her former skills are rendered largely useless, so shes' forced to do menial work to make ends meet. All of a sudden, she's offered a chance to change all this provided she performs a dangerous task. There's all sorts of depth to this kind of portrayal, and it greatly elevates her character.

Something similar can easily apply to specific example of Asuna. Many of the obstacles brought up involve her directly, so simply make her more of a locus for the action. Explore how these various events affect her, and give her the power to effect change.

That is exactly what most people are saying in the TVTropes forums. Make the female characters as actual people and not just a bunch of stereotypes or tropes. It is somewhat difficult but still Whedon and Cameron did it, why can't other writers?

relentlessflame

2012-10-24, 15:23

The solution itself isn't really all that difficult: just write women as full-fledged people with their own ambitions, desires and foibles. Real people don't tend to be solely adjutants of other people, so the result should be far more enabling.That sounds simple, but I think I'd go back to what I said earlier about this requiring the author to really think through the characters in multiple dimensions, and to re-imagine the plot presentation to converge multiple separate timelines into one narrative. Basically, I think it's trickier to do. The fact that the author did manage to do this more convincingly in his subsequent work probably shows increasing maturity and the benefit of experience.

Something similar can easily apply to specific example of Asuna. Many of the obstacles brought up involve her directly, so simply make her more of a locus for the action. Explore how these various events affect her, and give her the power to effect change.In truth, I think the show has actually done this to a fair degree (she got a number of rather detailed explanations of how actions affected her personally, and her actions certainly propelled the plot). But the counter-argument being offered is that it doesn't count because it was presented in the context of her relationship with the protagonist, and because the protagonist's own actions overshadowed hers (because again of the protagonist-centric nature of the story). (She is in fact stronger than most of the men in the game... just not the protagonist.)

And incidentally, I would also point out again that I don't think the real issue here in this specific case actually has much to do with gender. I don't think any of the other characters in the story, gender-notwithstanding, are treated any differently. You could probably argue that it's a story with only one character, and a whole lot of supporting characters. And that's why I have a bit of a problem construing it as a truly sexist portrayal.

Edit: Now that I think about this a bit more, I think part of the problem is also the age of the characters portrayed. If we were talking about adult characters in their 20s/30s/40s, then it's a lot easier to portray them as full of independent, ambitious, and distinct: they can have jobs, they can have past relationships, they can have a whole mess of scars from the past, and so on. There are all sorts of natural circumstances emphasizing their independence that are easy to portray without much explanation. But here we're talking about teenagers, and more specifically in this case we're talking about a teenage girl's first love. Do we expect more maturity, independence and ambition than we should expect from characters their age?

Accel World came up with a clever way to avoid this by slowing down time for some of the characters. So although Kuroyukihime is physically a teenager, the time spent in Brain Burst makes her many, many years older. She has a wealth of experience, insight, wisdom, and independence that are not at all common for someone her age. It's the same with someone like Niko; despite the way she sometimes acts, there's a depth of experience and battle scars that befit her role in the game. But you can contrast this with someone like Chiyuri who really seems simple and childish in comparison. She takes some initiative and shows some independence, but in the end her world is really just a much smaller circle, probably more like what you'd expect of someone her age.So, I wonder if part of this is just wanting more maturity in the characters portrayed. It's interesting to me that a lot of the characters mentioned as models are older.

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-24, 15:51

Hmm, from what I've seen yea I would say KYH is by far the better character. I simply can't associate Asuna away from Kirito when i think of the two, while I can definitely seperate KYH from Haru. :p

Well the thing with KYH is that she all but changed the way I look at female anime characters from LN's pretty much singlehandedly. Before the spring season I used to think that LN's were all about supplying the masses with hawt "waifu" material that all came with pre-defined personality traits that they never really broke out of or grew from in a multi-faceted way. Her design kind of made it easy too to suspect that, "oh well here's this girl with improbably perfect proportions and this revealing butterfly themed outfit and all the promo art for her is ultra-sexualized, if this isn't the second coming of Inori Yuzuriha I don't know what is", and then too my complete surprise we get this independent and fairly complex personality that feels like as much of a driving force for the novel as the protagonist and who's popularity both in and outside the anime has as much to do with what she does as how she looks.

So while I had obviously known that there's plenty of examples of strong well developed female characters with goals of their own in anime throughout the years I've rarely seen it done well with a character that is also obviously designed with sex appeal in mind up until very recently where there's quite a few examples and now honestly I'm kind of intrigued to see where we go from here. It's actually a major reason I made this topic cause I wanted to see what other peoples thoughts were on the matter. I'm glad it's proven to be a pretty popular one at that with lots of great ideas and opinions being presented.

4Tran

2012-10-24, 16:57

That is exactly what most people are saying in the TVTropes forums. Make the female characters as actual people and not just a bunch of stereotypes or tropes. It is somewhat difficult but still Whedon and Cameron did it, why can't other writers?
Sadly theres' a ready answer for anime: anime, and anime-related media are overly insular to the point where things like playing up the "Perfect Waifu" syndrome are rewarded. Also, feminism never really made it to Japan.

That sounds simple, but I think I'd go back to what I said earlier about this requiring the author to really think through the characters in multiple dimensions, and to re-imagine the plot presentation to converge multiple separate timelines into one narrative. Basically, I think it's trickier to do. The fact that the author did manage to do this more convincingly in his subsequent work probably shows increasing maturity and the benefit of experience.
It's not that tricky if the original goal was to empower characters. But if the original intention wasn't to do so, then it can be difficult to shoe-horn in.

In truth, I think the show has actually done this to a fair degree (she got a number of rather detailed explanations of how actions affected her personally, and her actions certainly propelled the plot). But the counter-argument being offered is that it doesn't count because it was presented in the context of her relationship with the protagonist, and because the protagonist's own actions overshadowed hers (because again of the protagonist-centric nature of the story). (She is in fact stronger than most of the men in the game... just not the protagonist.)
I personally don't find actions empowering. I find decisions to be empowering. Has Asuna ever made a meaningful decision (one fully cognizant of the consequences of all her choices) to propel the story? I'm not even sure if Kirito has at this point. I don't think that it's necessary for all characters to be empowered, but the ability to affect events though decisions is the only way to do so.

And incidentally, I would also point out again that I don't think the real issue here in this specific case actually has much to do with gender. I don't think any of the other characters in the story, gender-notwithstanding, are treated any differently. You could probably argue that it's a story with only one character, and a whole lot of supporting characters. And that's why I have a bit of a problem construing it as a truly sexist portrayal.
It would be sexism if the female character in question is treated like a trophy or a prize. Or if she was present to make the male character look good. The male version of this is the male "best friend" whose purpose is to be incompetent so that the main character looks better in comparison. The latter seems less harmful if only because nobody really wants anyone to behave like this in real life.

I don't really care whether Sword Art Online should be considered sexist, but it does skirt pretty close. And so do a great many of the shows of its nature.

Edit: Now that I think about this a bit more, I think part of the problem is also the age of the characters portrayed. If we were talking about adult characters in their 20s/30s/40s, then it's a lot easier to portray them as full of independent, ambitious, and distinct: they can have jobs, they can have past relationships, they can have a whole mess of scars from the past, and so on. There are all sorts of natural circumstances emphasizing their independence that are easy to portray without much explanation. But here we're talking about teenagers, and more specifically in this case we're talking about a teenage girl's first love. Do we expect more maturity, independence and ambition than we should expect from characters their age?
Age has little to do with empowerment. Children don't make the same kinds of decisions adults do, but they can make important ones nonetheless. This is one of the most salient stories in children's fiction. Its really just a question of what the writer is trying to do with his characters.

hyl

2012-10-24, 17:27

Why not make it a talking sword, or an android, or a sentient space ship?
Good solution, I'd say..

I am not sure if your examples are intentional or not, but there have been cute sentient space ships (Ezekiel from Osadai) and androids (da capo 1 and 2) in some stories like animes or VN's.

relentlessflame

2012-10-24, 18:14

I personally don't find actions empowering. I find decisions to be empowering. Has Asuna ever made a meaningful decision (one fully cognizant of the consequences of all her choices) to propel the story? I'm not even sure if Kirito has at this point. I don't think that it's necessary for all characters to be empowered, but the ability to affect events though decisions is the only way to do so.Well, actually, I'd say yes -- but I'm sure some would claim they are disqualified due to technicalities. In truth, the story could not have progressed as shown without the decisions she made on her own, at least being as aware as can be reasonably expected of the consequences. But, by the same token, as you say, they have spent the whole story largely forced by their circumstances, so indeed neither of them have had much room to make broad decisions. (Even the current actions don't really count as "decisions"; they're just consequences and they essentially have no choice.) This is what I mean by everyone being constrained by the story. If the story opens up, I think all the characters will have more room for growth.

Age has little to do with empowerment. Children don't make the same kinds of decisions adults do, but they can make important ones nonetheless. This is one of the most salient stories in children's fiction. Its really just a question of what the writer is trying to do with his characters.This is a good point. I suppose the key, as you alluded to, is that the plot is fundamentally driven by the decisions the characters make, and not just the way the story propels them. I think it's easier for an author to create a story based on an idea of where they want the plot to go, and then have all the characters act as necessary to reach that goal. It's more difficult to imagine fully-developed characters and place them in a situation and have them each act accordingly (while still driving strongly towards a certain moral or message). But still, I guess I tend to be more forgiving of the former than some are, assuming I understand the main message.

NK_500

2012-10-24, 18:29

Take look on this, which one you rather choose?

A. 16-years old girl who wields katana or guns and ready to kick some ass in order to save her loved ones(not necessarily love interests).

B. 16-years old girl who cry and hate themselves just because they can't do anything to her loved ones(usually loved interests).

While A is less realistic and rare outside action shows made for men but I prefer A over B even though B-type girl are more likely to exists in our world than A.

Yes it's true girl A only exists to fulfill male fantasies but at least she can stand own her own, which is a good thing. The girl B in other hand while less exploitive but I think it degrades the image of women more than A.

Key Board

2012-10-24, 18:46

There's nothing wrong with falling in love, or being loyal.. or being dedicated to a man they love.

The problem is if that is all they are..

I'm going to rephrase what I said earlier.

Asuna being a component to Kirito is not the problem.
Asuna MERELY being a component to Kirito and nothing else is the problem.

Hence, why I brought up the Bechdel test. The point is to show that girls have more on their minds than just men.

I am not sure if your examples are intentional or not, but there have been cute sentient space ships (Ezekiel from Osadai) and androids (da capo 1 and 2) in some stories like animes or VN's.

That's exactly my point.

It's acceptable for an android to not have any aspirations and lives of their own, because well.. they are androids.

hyl

2012-10-24, 18:57

That's exactly my point.

It's acceptable for an android to not have any aspirations and lives of their own, because well.. they are androids.

Androids are most likely used in romance stories for their complete obliviousness of how normal people react in daily situations though. Not that they are considered as "objects" in such stories.
I don't think Asuna can be labelled as an "object", just because she does not have that much character in your opinion.

SeijiSensei

2012-10-24, 19:39

Take look on this, which one you rather choose?

I think you present a false dichotomy. How about:

C) 16-year-old girl who uses her smarts to figure out how to save her loved ones and her leadership skills to mobilize the people and resources she needs to do so.

The female protagonist of Summer Wars comes close to this, though she does have to rely on the boy's hacking skills, too. Kou Shurrei in Saiunkoku Monogatari is an even better example since she mobilizes everyone herself rather than relying on an heroic romantic interest.

Meganekko characters, while usually not the leads, often play "smart girl" roles in action stories, like Murakami Ginko does in Kurenai. There is no reason why they cannot be category (C) leads instead. Look at Rin in Mnemosyne and Yomiko Readman in Read or Die for examples.

One of my favorite "action girl" characters is Nina Fortner of Monster. She is remarkably brave throughout the story and continues to press forward despite the horrible things her investigations uncover. She's smart and beautiful yet only appears as a sexual object in the "Be My Baby" episode when she explicitly chooses to exploit her sexuality to further her ends.

http://www.takinganimeseriously.com/images/nina-fortner.png

While that is a lovely dress, I'm not sure anything can top Julia's gown in Blood+:
http://www.takinganimeseriously.com/images/julia-dress.png
I smile every time I look at David's face in this scene. Julia tries so hard, too.

Sheba

2012-10-24, 20:07

And if they want to be a wife/mother. They can adopt a child with their female love interest nowadays. In fact the action girl industry is thinking of as many ideas to minimalize male presence.
You are talking about Nanoha and Fate. Haha!! It IS otaku pandering no matter how you slice it. Tsuzuki is still writing the franchise with those otakus breathing over his neck. He, and the franchise, ARE weighted down by the inability to move past NanoFate. Vivio is thrown in to keep them "pure", their portrayal as a family with two mommies feels dishonest and striking me as no more than pandering. Sarah Connor's portrayal in the series Sarah Connor's Chronicles felt more "real", she acknowledge her failings, her doubts, she knows her son is going through his own adolescence crisis. But in the end, she focuses on her own agenda, live long enough to see her son ready,and make sure he acquires the skills and character needed to be the humanity's savior.

Portrayals of women like Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley are progressist, Nano and Fate are not.

Edit: ask yourself that question: how many fans are going to stay fans if any of the two girls are paired with a man, and why ships with Chrono and Yuuno are sunk and why the both boys fades in the background. Yuuno DOESN'T even appear in the lastest spinoff for heck's sake. So answer honestly. Why?

Key Board

2012-10-24, 21:40

The same reason Arf is no longer an active character?
If you don't know what to do with a character, you either kill them off, have them retire, or let them fade into obscurity.

I get the feeling the author just wants Nanoha to freaking retire and open a cakeshop somewhere in Midchilda.

But he's afraid to do that.
It's as you said, they seem to have trouble moving past Nanoha, and by extension, the old cast. (Why do we even need Hayate?)

It's like Dragon's ball Goku and Gohan again. Goku will never be replaced.

So then, why should Nanoha retire?

Well, it's not just because she has passed the typical age of a magical girl. Xd

In regards to this thread, I think Nanoha's problem is the opposite of what I said earlier.
She's the opposite of not having her own life.
She has friends. She has a career. She has students who have become adult professionals themselves.
And now she's a mother. She has a goddamn fulfilling life.
She's a complete product, and thus she has very little room left for growth.

..

4Tran

2012-10-24, 23:58

Well, actually, I'd say yes -- but I'm sure some would claim they are disqualified due to technicalities. In truth, the story could not have progressed as shown without the decisions she made on her own, at least being as aware as can be reasonably expected of the consequences. But, by the same token, as you say, they have spent the whole story largely forced by their circumstances, so indeed neither of them have had much room to make broad decisions. (Even the current actions don't really count as "decisions"; they're just consequences and they essentially have no choice.) This is what I mean by everyone being constrained by the story. If the story opens up, I think all the characters will have more room for growth.
A decision that doesn't have serious consequences doesn't carry any narrative weight, and so in turn, aren't particularly meaningful. They tend to be foregone conclusion where the purpose is just to move a character from Point A to Point B. This is how Sword Art Online feels - all the action is just meant to move from one setpiece to another one, with very little input from the characters.

This is a good point. I suppose the key, as you alluded to, is that the plot is fundamentally driven by the decisions the characters make, and not just the way the story propels them.
More that the plot can be driven by the characters - really this is the fundamental difference between a character-driven story and a plot-driven story. Either method is fine as a storytelling tool, but the former is a lot more empowering by its very nature.

In the case of Sword Art Online, it's not too difficult to see places where that character-driven storytelling could have been inserted. The consequence would have been a lot less "heroic main character saves the day" as a result, but it would have made for better characterization.

You are talking about Nanoha and Fate. Haha!! It IS otaku pandering no matter how you slice it. Tsuzuki is still writing the franchise with those otakus breathing over his neck. He, and the franchise, ARE weighted down by the inability to move past NanoFate.
Do the creators of Nanoha have the guts to show them kissing yet? Or is the franchise still one of the best examples of yuri-solely-for-the-purpose-of-innuendo?

Edit: ask yourself that question: how many fans are going to stay fans if any of the two girls are paired with a man, and why ships with Chrono and Yuuno are sunk and why the both boys fades in the background. Yuuno DOESN'T even appear in the lastest spinoff for heck's sake. So answer honestly. Why?
To be fair, Chrono and Yuuno are boring characters, so the less seen of them the better. :)

relentlessflame

2012-10-25, 01:48

A decision that doesn't have serious consequences doesn't carry any narrative weight, and so in turn, aren't particularly meaningful. They tend to be foregone conclusion where the purpose is just to move a character from Point A to Point B. This is how Sword Art Online feels - all the action is just meant to move from one setpiece to another one, with very little input from the characters.There's a certain amount of subtlety to this, though. I would argue that all decisions in a story are intended to move the characters from Point A to Point B, no matter how it's presented (and even if Point B is just to deliver the moral of the story). Whatever input the characters have is still staged and designed to reach a pre-determined conclusion. The only difference, we might say, is the extent to which they hide it; the degree to which the narrative emphasizes the thought process and struggles that form the basis of the decision, and how they portray this on-screen. This all helps you relate to the character, their decision-making process, and their growth over the course of the story.

To again use the current example, Asuna's decision to stop isolating herself, to join the guild, and work her way up to the position of authority she was in were pretty serious and important decisions that had major consequences to her and to the narrative (and had little to do with Kirito except indirectly). Her then realization that her own attitude and single-minded ambition was both causing her stress and the guild tension was also a significant realization (and Kirito here was only the influence for the realization, her own decisions were the root cause). But, SAO (the anime at least; don't know the books) only relayed this information indirectly through flashbacks and dialogue (not through "action"). If you take these very same bits of information (that were present in the story) and present them differently (allowing them to be fleshed-out and developed on-screen), the perspective would be entirely different. You would be giving narrative weight to decisions by showing their "serious consequences" rather than just alluding to and referencing them.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I think it really works in reverse. Characters in stories never actually make "decisions" because they have no will or choice -- they're always necessarily strung along by the author. But the issue here is where the narrative puts its focus. I think there wasn't a lack of opportunities in the story presented to explore meaningful decisions that had real impact on the characters (i.e. they alluded to such things), but they got cut or minimized perhaps in the interest of time (and "to keep the plot moving").

I suppose all this is a really roundabout way of coming to the same conclusion you did: that there were opportunities there, but not taken. I just naturally take a sort of holistic view and incorporate both the events shown and the events referenced when forming my picture of a character's personality. But I accept, at the same time, that this isn't necessarily an ideal portrayal. Perhaps that's where I see a bit of a point in NK_500's false dichotomy; I'll still take a rough sketch of what's intended to be a well-rounded character, and not immediately dismiss it as rubbish just because it could have been better. So to go all the way back to the point that started the thread, I think it isn't really an "on-off switch" -- there are pros and cons to each portrayal.

TheFluff

2012-10-25, 01:59

I didn't read the thread and I'm going to restrict myself from flaming everyone in it but here is a relevant (and funny) comic: http://www.harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=311
maybe you will get the point, maybe not, but it's funny either way

Dawnstorm

2012-10-25, 02:58

To again use the current example, Asuna's decision to stop isolating herself, to join the guild, and work her way up to the position of authority she was in were pretty serious and important decisions that had major consequences to her and to the narrative (and had little to do with Kirito except indirectly). Her then realization that her own attitude and single-minded ambition was both causing her stress and the guild tension was also a significant realization (and Kirito here was only the influence for the realization, her own decisions were the root cause).

Heh, yesterday I started typing but deleted a post, explaining how these exact decisions had me rolling my eyes at Asuna's narrative treatment, since all her decisions are triggered by Kirito. How it's the my-waifu-pays-attention-only-to-me-and-gets-stuck-in-a-rut-when-I'm-not-around trap. (It involved a statement how she chose the least social, most task oriented guild possible, and so on.) I'd decided to shut up about it, but this quote was just to good to pass up. :heh:

Anyway, my interpretation is consistent with how I watch SAO: as gamer's fantasy with occasional self-reflection.

relentlessflame

2012-10-25, 03:26

Heh, yesterday I started typing but deleted a post, explaining how these exact decisions had me rolling my eyes at Asuna's narrative treatment, since all her decisions are triggered by Kirito. How it's the my-waifu-pays-attention-only-to-me-and-gets-stuck-in-a-rut-when-I'm-not-around trap. (It involved a statement how she chose the least social, most task oriented guild possible, and so on.)I think that's a bit of a spin to put on it. She spent nearly two years in that guild and worked herself up the ranks without Kirito (and was basically at odds with him). She certainly wasn't doing it for his sake, but for her own. And as for her "getting stuck", both of them brought perspectives to each other's lives that they were lacking. The narrative is arguably too protagonist-focused, but I at least didn't see it as so cynical.

0utf0xZer0

2012-10-25, 03:28

Asuna being a component to Kirito is not the problem.
Asuna MERELY being a component to Kirito and nothing else is the problem.

Hence, why I brought up the Bechdel test. The point is to show that girls have more on their minds than just men.

Bechdel assesses the extent to which relationships between women are important to a narrative. It doesn't provide any sort of answer to whether a women has more on her mind than a man or the strength of her character independent of her relationship with the male lead.

It's seems blatantly obvious to me that Asuna has more on her mind than Kirito and that she could stand on her own as a character were she not Kirito's love interest (or even in contact with him). That she is Kirito's love interest changes nothing for me. So I don't see much ground to argue that she's a failure as an action girl. I see grounds to argue the story fails to capitalize on her potential. And even there, my tendency is to agree with Relentless: the story isn't so much sexist as "on rails".

erneiz_hyde

2012-10-25, 03:50

I think that's a bit of a spin to put on it. She spent nearly two years in that guild and worked herself up the ranks without Kirito (and was basically at odds with him). She certainly wasn't doing it for his sake, but for her own. And as for her "getting stuck", both of them brought perspectives to each other's lives that they were lacking. The narrative is arguably too protagonist-focused, but I at least didn't see it as so cynical.From Asuna's character thread.
It's kind of hilarious in a cute sort of way how seriously Asuna takes everything Kirito says. I mean, it's like

Kirito: Hey, you can put cream on bread and it tastes better.
Asuna/ Maxes out her cooking skill and spends a year analyzing every seasoning in the game
Kirito: There are limits to what a soloer can do. Join a guild sometime.
Asuna/ Becomes second-in-command of the strongest guild in the game
Kirito: Man, it's too nice outside to spend the day in the dungeon. You should take a break.
Asuna/ Falls asleep instantly
Kirito: Hey, maybe I should spend the night at your place.
Asuna/ Starts strippingIt's what some people mean by Asuna's decisions were based on Kirito. And like I said in the thread, I don't think this is particularly sexist, but I can understand if people call it so (especially if it's simplified like this).

0utf0xZer0

2012-10-25, 04:23

@erneiz_hyde:

Okay, when you put it that way, I start to see where the other side is coming from. I don't think she's doing all that just for Kirito by any stretch of the imagination, but that is edging towards the kind of excessive devotion/worship of the male lead that I as a hardcore moe fan encounter from time to time in titles I might otherwise like (and sometimes do in spite of).

relentlessflame

2012-10-25, 04:29

It's what some people mean by Asuna's decisions were based on Kirito. And like I said in the thread, I don't think this is particularly sexist, but I can understand if people call it so (especially if it's simplified like this).It's definitely an over-simplification. :heh: But, yes -- this is the "problem" when the story basically only follows the protagonist everywhere. The only elements they introduced to call-back to are the ones introduced when he was there. That applies to everything, though -- Heathcliff, Egil, Klein, etc. Perhaps this would all make more sense if the story were being actively narrated in the first-person, as I'm guessing it probably is in the book. In the anime, it's as if we're seeing a third-person perspective (very minimal narration), but everything is still locked to the protagonist. Without all the narration, that may make everything seem unusually slanted. That is why it may seem that Asuna only exists as it relates to Kirito -- because the whole world presented only exists as it relates to Kirito. (And as we said before, even he really is only there to be pulled along by the plot.)

I guess I'd go back to the comparison I did before to Accel World to explain how the author overcame that obstacle the second time. It's a story that features many more converging perspectives, and so Kuroyukihime comes across much more effectively.

Haak

2012-10-25, 05:11

To be honest I never really though KYH is a good example of an Action Girl because I always felt they were treating her like some sort of object by making her so OP. Like a sort of "this super strong independent woman is in love with a loser like you" kind of shallow wishful thinking. I mean it was generally hinted it during the anime when they flat out stated that character dynamic right out loud in the OVA, I just couldn't help but roll my eyes. Though to be fair I suppose that's more Haru's fault than KYH. In the end, I would have to agree that KYH is a better Action Girl than Asuna (Though I still think Asuna has more personality).

Archon_Wing

2012-10-25, 11:45

It's certainly very true that these characters can be bounded too much by patriarchal wish fulfillment though completely trying to avoid societal expectations results in too much political correctness, and then nothing gets done.

You are talking about Nanoha and Fate. Haha!! It IS otaku pandering no matter how you slice it. Tsuzuki is still writing the franchise with those otakus breathing over his neck. He, and the franchise, ARE weighted down by the inability to move past NanoFate. Vivio is thrown in to keep them "pure", their portrayal as a family with two mommies feels dishonest and striking me as no more than pandering. Sarah Connor's portrayal in the series Sarah Connor's Chronicles felt more "real", she acknowledge her failings, her doubts, she knows her son is going through his own adolescence crisis. But in the end, she focuses on her own agenda, live long enough to see her son ready,and make sure he acquires the skills and character needed to be the humanity's savior.

Portrayals of women like Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley are progressist, Nano and Fate are not.

Edit: ask yourself that question: how many fans are going to stay fans if any of the two girls are paired with a man, and why ships with Chrono and Yuuno are sunk and why the both boys fades in the background. Yuuno DOESN'T even appear in the lastest spinoff for heck's sake. So answer honestly. Why?

As a minor fan of NanoFate, and a close friend any of many dedicated ones, I can't agree with this. In fact, Nanofate is one of the few things that Tsuzuki hasn't managed to drive into the ground.

While I'll agree with you that NanoFate is broken in the series and StrikerS wasted time going nowhere with it (a recurring them for that show), I wouldn't place it as the single case of what's why people are being excluded.

Ships with Chrono and Yuno were sunk just because the series has a consistent malady of not knowing what the hell to do. They love to create characters and throw them away like insignificant footnotes. Then again Nanoha has a larger cast than DBZ, and Toriyama couldn't remember some of his characters. :heh: Also, Chrono's ship got sunk for legitimate reasons.

NanoFate is a symptom of the problem. It's so prevalent in the series because Tsuzuki now uses it as a crutch instead of assistance. Well, no, at this point by Vivid, it's fucking Life Support.

Ultimately, the franchise's story is so wonky goes beyond a desire to pander. They are just so afraid of commitment that they end up doing nothing. This is a far cry from the days that a seemingly generic loli fanservice show descended from a VN side story suddenly dared to became a superhero magical girl mecha-fighting series, becoming a major footnote instead of a forgotten novelty.Well, okay, there's Force and it attempted something very different, but the less said about that the better.

Though if StrikerS did anything right, Nanoha and Fate are both career women and in StrikerS' better moments treated the whole thing casually and without too much judgement. This is a good portrayal. Though of course, I don't like Vivio at all and she clearly was a pandering tool, but really, then again we have to look at the series' roots.

To be honest I never really though KYH is a good example of an Action Girl because I always felt they were treating her like some sort of object by making her so OP. Like a sort of "this super strong independent woman is in love with a loser like you" kind of shallow wishful thinking. I mean it was generally hinted it during the anime when they flat out stated that character dynamic right out loud in the OVA, I just couldn't help but roll my eyes. Though to be fair I suppose that's more Haru's fault than KYH. In the end, I would have to agree that KYH is a better Action Girl than Asuna (Though I still think Asuna has more personality).

The OVA was a joke lol (very tongue in cheek)

Anyhow, I had felt that at first that they were definitely going for some "perfect girl goes for some reason loser that doesn't deserve it" like many, many anime out there. But ultimately, it feels like the decision was hers to make, and not just because Haru is the main character. There was a legitimate reason and advantage for her to solicit him.

Okay, well, one could argue they went too far with making Haru so pitiful looking given his VA and design, but it certainly is something other than generic bishie design #901.

But I haven't finished the main series, so that's all I can really comment.

In the end, I feel that when it comes to Kuroyukihime, that I can talk about her alone. Anything interesting involving Asuna, is usually thought of me as "Asuna and Kirito" as the best part to discuss to me is their relationship dynamic. Asuna alone is not very interesting though arguably this applies to Kirito too. There's pros and cons to this.

4Tran

2012-10-25, 13:38

There's a certain amount of subtlety to this, though. I would argue that all decisions in a story are intended to move the characters from Point A to Point B, no matter how it's presented (and even if Point B is just to deliver the moral of the story). Whatever input the characters have is still staged and designed to reach a pre-determined conclusion. The only difference, we might say, is the extent to which they hide it; the degree to which the narrative emphasizes the thought process and struggles that form the basis of the decision, and how they portray this on-screen.
That's untrue. While all characters decisions are Point A to Point B transitions, they can still be more than that. Whether the result is predetermined by the writer is unimportant - what's important is the conflict inherent in the decision. No-conflict decisions are non-meaningful because they don't really matter. Examples abound, but the first one that comes to mind is Lando Calrissian in The Empire Strikes Back.

To again use the current example, Asuna's decision to stop isolating herself, to join the guild, and work her way up to the position of authority she was in were pretty serious and important decisions that had major consequences to her and to the narrative (and had little to do with Kirito except indirectly).
This was going to be my example of a non-meaningful decision. There's no conflict involved in the matter of joining vs. not joining, and it doesn't even pave the way for any interesting storytelling. Its real purpose is to show valuable a partner Asuna is: it's validation for the hero. This is even more obvious when we see all of her fans gushing over her.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I think it really works in reverse. Characters in stories never actually make "decisions" because they have no will or choice -- they're always necessarily strung along by the author. But the issue here is where the narrative puts its focus. I think there wasn't a lack of opportunities in the story presented to explore meaningful decisions that had real impact on the characters (i.e. they alluded to such things), but they got cut or minimized perhaps in the interest of time (and "to keep the plot moving").
A work interested in the narrative weight of Asuna's decision to join the guild would have to be also willing to invest time to develop it. The lack of willingness to invest tells us how much it's valued. Yes, this is partly because of the story structure, but it's a limitation that the writer considered acceptable.

That is why it may seem that Asuna only exists as it relates to Kirito -- because the whole world presented only exists as it relates to Kirito. (And as we said before, even he really is only there to be pulled along by the plot.)
That's all quite true. And I'd really chalk it to weak writing more than anything else. It's a shame since the show's put together fairly competently otherwise.

relentlessflame

2012-10-25, 15:17

That's untrue. While all characters decisions are Point A to Point B transitions, they can still be more than that. Whether the result is predetermined by the writer is unimportant - what's important is the conflict inherent in the decision. No-conflict decisions are non-meaningful because they don't really matter. Examples abound, but the first one that comes to mind is Lando Calrissian in The Empire Strikes Back.Personally, I think this is no less illusionary. He betrays them at one point to get the plot from A to B, and he regrets it later and helps to get the plot from B to C. He's portrayed as a "conflicted character", but I still maintain that -- really -- it's no less of an illusion. So I stand by what I said, but I understand what you're saying about decisions involving inherent conflict being more interesting and making the resulting characters more interesting. And, besides that, even "no-conflict decisions" can still be meaningful to progress the plot, even if they don't develop the characters as significantly in the process.

This was going to be my example of a non-meaningful decision. There's no conflict involved in the matter of joining vs. not joining, and it doesn't even pave the way for any interesting storytelling. Its real purpose is to show valuable a partner Asuna is: it's validation for the hero. This is even more obvious when we see all of her fans gushing over her.Again, I think that's a more cynical perspective than I would apply. Her transition from a scared victim who locked herself in a hotel room waiting for the game to be over to one who was willing to get out there and fight for her own life (even as countless others stayed back) is a pretty meaningful decision to her, at least. Of course, it also serves the plot, as does everything. I reject the argument that every bit of characterization she is given is just to make Kirito look good, but I continue to also concede that the story hasn't developed any of the characters as well as it could have. I think there are certainly areas for potential improvement, but just how severely you rate this "flaw" depends on personal perspective and preferences.

Anyway, I guess I'll leave it there because this SAO tangent (from me, anyway) has probably gone on long enough. I do think it's a relevant illustration for this thread, but at this point I suppose people will just have to make up their own mind on what or where the line is.

Triple_R

2012-10-25, 19:07

You are talking about Nanoha and Fate. Haha!! It IS otaku pandering no matter how you slice it.

I certainly won't deny that NanoFate is rooted to a great degree in otaku pandering, but I don't see how that makes either character weaker.

Both are extremely competent, no-nonsense soldiers who take their professions seriously and are very effective at they do. They carry themselves with consistent professionalism, but also have moments of weakness that keeps them humanized. Both of them have friends and loved ones aside from just each other.

Tsuzuki is still writing the franchise with those otakus breathing over his neck. He, and the franchise, ARE weighted down by the inability to move past NanoFate.

Why does the franchise have to move past NanoFate? What would be wrong with NanoFate as a lesbian couple? The hints are there, and many. It would hardly be a contrivance at this point.

Sarah Connor's portrayal in the series Sarah Connor's Chronicles felt more "real", she acknowledge her failings, her doubts, she knows her son is going through his own adolescence crisis.

I could accurately say much the same about both Fate and Nanoha (just with Vivio in the child role here).

Portrayals of women like Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley are progressist, Nano and Fate are not.

I completely and strongly disagree. Nanoha and Fate are very strong female characters. To be honest, I suspect you don't want to give them credit just because they're not "dark" or "gritty" like Connor and Ripley are. Who says that an Action Girl has to carry this grimdark image in order to be a strong female character? Is WonderWoman weak just because she's typically portrayed as somewhat idealistic and optimistic?

Haak

2012-10-26, 04:28

The OVA was a joke lol (very tongue in cheek)

I know a lot of people say that but I'm still not sure whether that bit was one of the ones the bits they were playing for laughs. Unless the entire OVA was a giant parody of their own series...

Anyhow, I had felt that at first that they were definitely going for some "perfect girl goes for some reason loser that doesn't deserve it" like many, many anime out there. But ultimately, it feels like the decision was hers to make, and not just because Haru is the main character. There was a legitimate reason and advantage for her to solicit him.

Okay, well, one could argue they went too far with making Haru so pitiful looking given his VA and design, but it certainly is something other than generic bishie design #901.

That's pretty much what I could only feel. That she was only in love with Haru because Haru is the main character and for whatever reason I could just never get past that. It's not like KYH was a complete failure or anything. They did give her some interesting backgrounds and a somewhat okayish sidestory but I still felt there was a lot missing in her character. I agree that with KYH (and unlike Asuna) I can talk about her alone but only/mostly in so far as her background.

4Tran

2012-10-26, 14:05

Personally, I think this is no less illusionary. He betrays them at one point to get the plot from A to B, and he regrets it later and helps to get the plot from B to C. He's portrayed as a "conflicted character", but I still maintain that -- really -- it's no less of an illusion.
I don't know how important it is whether the empowerment is illusionary or not. I just like conflict and meaningful decisions because we get all sorts of neat flavor - like weighing values, conflicted interests and characterizations. These happen to constitute some of my favorite character moments in fiction.

So I stand by what I said, but I understand what you're saying about decisions involving inherent conflict being more interesting and making the resulting characters more interesting. And, besides that, even "no-conflict decisions" can still be meaningful to progress the plot, even if they don't develop the characters as significantly in the process.
Progressing the plot is only of value if the plot itself is interesting. All too often, the plot of an anime is significantly less entertaining than its other elements.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-26, 17:45

That's pretty much what I could only feel. That she was only in love with Haru because Haru is the main character and for whatever reason I could just never get past that. It's not like KYH was a complete failure or anything. They did give her some interesting backgrounds and a somewhat okayish sidestory but I still felt there was a lot missing in her character. I agree that with KYH (and unlike Asuna) I can talk about her alone but only/mostly in so far as her background.

From what I saw, the interest started due to practical reasons-- she had something to gain. For whatever reasons after the events led to other emotions, and perhaps I'm a bit cynical but I think all human relationships start because some kind of need which develops into more at times. I mean ...

She's devoted to this game, it makes sense for her to be attracted to people who are going to affect it in a big way

I think the reason is deeper than many stories where it goes female = must be love interest.

Triple_R

2012-10-26, 19:22

Yeah, I agree with Archon on Accel World. I think KYH is given many good, sensible reasons for why she is in love with Haru.

Key Board

2012-10-27, 05:29

she didn't plan to fall in love with him

she planned to use him for her own purposes, because she realized his fast brain reaction speed.

she herself admits that, and she claims she has changed her perspective about him now

I don't think she's lying. However, I think that she also wants to believe her own words.
She wants to believe she is not using him. I think she's still feeling guilty about it, and it's not completely genuine yet.

It's clear that there's some very serious personal drama going on in the game that has leaked and affected her life.
And it's also clear that she is dedicated to resolve that. How much is she willing to stake for this? That, I don't know yet.

Keroko

2012-10-27, 06:06

Why does the franchise have to move past NanoFate? What would be wrong with NanoFate as a lesbian couple? The hints are there, and many. It would hardly be a contrivance at this point.

Because being tied to nanofate means more than just being tied to having the pairing, it means being tied to having to show the pairing and having to avoid stepping on the toes of the rabid fans.

In Vivid, for example, it is no surprise we see nanofate. Family and all. But here's the viper in the grass: The complete and utter absence of Yuuno. Even though this is the guy who was established as a close friend and teacher of Vivio, we see hide nor hair of him. He's even not present in a moment that would have been perfect for him, the moment where they dig for historical information on old Belka.

So a character that has been established as having close ties to Vivio, is being written out of a manga starring Vivio even during a moment where his presence would have made perfect sense. All to avoid stepping on the wrong toes.

Then we come to Force. Force could really have benefited from a completely fresh cast or a focus on the StrikerS cast rather than throwing in the old cast again. But hey, we can't have a Nanoha manga without nanofate, so in they go!

The pairing ties down the franchise to old characters. Signs of trying to move away from it are there, after all the entirety of StrikerS had an undertone of "passing on the torch" to the new generation and having them continue the franchise. But they can't, because they're tied.

Which is a shame, because SSX stared absolutely zero pre-StrikerS characters, and was a lot of fun. I would have loved to see that turned into an OVA.

Triple_R

2012-10-27, 06:32

Because being tied to nanofate means more than just being tied to the pairing, it means being tied to having to show the pairing and having to avoid stepping on the toes of the rabid fans.

If this is what the fans want, then that just makes it even sillier to say that the franchise needs to move "pass it".

There is nothing inherently wrong with NanoFate as the main pairing of the franchise. It makes perfectly good sense, and it's been built-up extremely well. Having them together does not in any way, shape, or form prevent the Nanoha franchise from presenting good stories and compelling narratives.

It's unfortunate that Yuuno has been pushed aside, but he's hardly alone in that regard. StrikerS pretty much forgot entirely about Nanoha's original season family and friends. This is the inevitable cost you pay for massive cast enlargement, some important original cast members are going to just disappear, as there's just not room for everybody.

So a character that has been established as having close ties to Vivio, is being written out of a manga starring Vivio even during a moment where his presence would have made perfect sense. All to avoid stepping on the wrong toes.

Then we come to Force. Force could really have benefited from a completely fresh cast or a focus on the StrikerS cast rather than throwing in the old cast again. But hey, we can't have a Nanoha manga without nanofate, so in they go!

The entirety of StrikerS had an undertone of "passing on the torch" to the new generation and having them continue the franchise. But they can't, because they're tied.

This isn't because Nanoha and Fate are "tied". This is because they're extremely popular within the fandom, period. This is no different than how DBZ couldn't "pass on the torch" from Goku to Gohan (which was Toriyama's plan, actually) because Goku was simply more popular than his son.

Keroko

2012-10-27, 19:04

If this is what the fans want, then that just makes it even sillier to say that the franchise needs to move "pass it".

"What fans want" does not always equal quality.

Tough choices and changes sometimes need to be made to allow a story to evolve. However, it's a risk. And the author (and more importantly, the publisher) need to have the courage to take that choice. Fans can be outraged at changes, yet grow to like or even love them later on. The Empire Strikes Back, for example, initially received a lot of very critical reactions. But now there will be few movie viewers who will say it is not the best of the saga.

Triple_R

2012-10-27, 22:25

"What fans want" does not always equal quality.

Tough choices and changes sometimes need to be made to allow a story to evolve.

Scrapping a widely beloved, very well-established, very well-developed, very well-handled, and very touching romance just because a relative few people dislike a couple of the mere side-effects of it does not strike me as a "tough choice" that helps "increase quality" by "allowing a story to evolve".

Quite the contrary, it makes me think of crapola like this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider-Man:_One_More_Day).

Sorry, but I don't see any good reason for a Nanoha version of "One More Day". Frankly, the Nanoha franchise would lose an awful lot of its appeal with me if it was to go in such a direction.

Oh, and since you brought up The Empire Strikes Back, I raise you the entire Star Wars Prequels... :heh:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-10-27, 22:54

Oh, and since you brought up The Empire Strikes Back, I raise you the entire Star Wars Prequels... :heh:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.I think that line is more fitting for the original Star Wars Trilogy which has been George Lucas’d throughout the DVD & BD releases :uhoh:.

e.g.: Darth Vader (when the emperor was about to kill Luke): NNNNOOOOOOOooooooooouuu...........

The prequels, on the other hand, are just pure waste.

Sheba

2012-10-28, 03:59

Archon_Wing

2012-10-28, 04:11

This isn't because Nanoha and Fate are "tied". This is because they're extremely popular within the fandom, period. This is no different than how DBZ couldn't "pass on the torch" from Goku to Gohan (which was Toriyama's plan, actually) because Goku was simply more popular than his son.

Yes, sir. That's exactly what it is. The torch wasn't passed because there were no legit takers.

Move on to what exactly?

Teana and Subaru were given their chance to take control of the situation but it doesn't look like they had what it took to be the leads. Nor does Mr. I got plagarized from Index either.

The series is called Nanoha for a reason. And Force did downplay most of the old cast, and NanoFate is hardly relevant there. Force is what you get when you take out magical girl, Nanoha, and Fate. And what do you have left? Well... nothing I have good words for. :heh:

Honestly I have no qualms with coming up with brilliant ideas that are new, but it should be a new series and not just Nanoha in name anyways. It would seem like just a perversion of a cash cow if done otherwise, kinda like what Rebuild of Evangelion looks to certain people. :S

Finally, I think we could go back to discussion on the strengths of the individual characters and not afraid Tsuzuki is of getting mobbed by angry shippers. :heh:

Triple_R

2012-10-28, 04:41

I honestly don't see how your romance is very well-handed and well-developed. It never got paste the teasing and suggesting phase, etc...

I would indeed prefer it if the Nanoha franchise would stop playing coy with NanoFate, but the hints are many. If you're willing to read between the lines, a rather long, well-developed, and passionate relationship becomes abundantly clear.

Their "friendship" is obviously very well-handled. The way they shifted from rivals to "friends" is a truly touching story, imo (in both the original TV anime and in the Nanoha the First Movie).

Part of the reason why I'd like to see the Nanoha franchise stop playing coy about this is precisely because it would make it easier to use Yuuno more. If Nanoha and Fate "came out", and their romance became official, then Yuuno's perceived threat would diminish greatly in the eyes of NanoFate shippers, and you could use him more (which I myself would prefer).

Plus, NanoFate is such a poorly kept secret that it would make Clark Kent blush. :heh:

a well-handed romance in recent history is Okarin x Kurisu. I bring up that one because it's not even central to the plot but it succeeded.

I agree with you on Okarin X Kurisu.

We are NOT even talking about let's make them break up something, we are talking about the story and UNIVERSE itself to MOVE past those two characters.

Well, perhaps I misinterpreted you and Keroko then. What I took from the "move pass" comment is that you both wanted the Nanoha/Fate relationship to essentially be severed. I guess in my mind I equated "move pass" with "move on from", which in the context of a relationship, tends to mean "end it".

If your argument is that the Nanoha franchise should move pass those two characters, in general, then I partially agree and partially disagree.

Since the Nanoha franchise seems to be engaging in massive degrees of world-building, it's probably time for them to have a true spin-off that doesn't rely on its oldest and most established cast members.

OTOH, I don't think that Nanoha and Fate's story necessarily needs to end completely. If nothing else, I think they could still have considerable value as major supporting cast characters in Vivio-centric works like Vivid.

At the end of the day, I'm a Nanoha fan because of its core characters, not because of its fictional universe. I often get the impression I'm in the minority there (at least here on Anime Suki), but so be it, it doesn't change what I personally care about when it comes to this franchise.

With all of that in mind...

Yes, sir. That's exactly what it is. The torch wasn't passed because there were no legit takers.

Move on to what exactly?

Teana and Subaru were given their chance to take control of the situation but it doesn't look like they had what it took to be the leads. Nor does Mr. I got plagarized from Index either.

I like Teana and Subaru well enough, but I have to agree that they never struck me as characters strong enough to carry a show. And good point on the Index-inspired character. ;)

That being said, I do consider Teana and Subaru to be pretty good examples of non-sexist Action Girl characters in anime (which Triple_R writes in order to keep this post at least slightly on-topic :heh: ).

Sheba

2012-10-28, 04:51

Teana is generally well received by fans (other than lol emo arc) because she is the character in the franchise who have shown imperfections and insecurities, and that it doesn't make her less of a character, instead those flaws makes her a more complete character. She gets her ass kicked but still can kick people's ass.

Key Board

2012-10-28, 05:12

Teana is now an adult officer. She bloomed when the audience weren't looking.
So I think she missed her chance to be main character material.

I think Japanese fans take a liking to Vivio, but I think she's been in Nanoha's shadow far too long. And it shows.

It's really hard to see her as anything more than Nanoha's daughter.
She's also too privileged.
You can't be your own character like that.

I think Miura is closer to main character material than her.

synaesthetic

2012-10-28, 05:37

I'll be honest, I haven't paid much attention to Nanoha since it went manga-only, but I agree with Triple R in that:

- Nanoha and Fate's relationship is reasonably well-written considering both fandom constraints and cultural constraints
- The relationship needs to be officially resolved "on-screen"

The thing that bothers me the most is that while there's lots of subtext, hints and fanservice moments, the narrative never touches a substantive part of the relationship with a ten-foot pole.

To put it simply, we never see them kiss. Why the hell not? Well, there are many reasons--keeping the shippers shipping (and thus paying) and cultural reasons as well.

For whatever reason, unless the story's plot centers entirely around the relationship, lesbian relationships never seem to get developed realistically or honestly--and even when the plot is centered entirely around said relationship, it's rarely dealt with fairly.

If it's acknowledged forthrightly at all, the relationship is played off as fanservice or background noise. If it's incidental, it never gets more than the barest of substantive subtext and mostly ends up, again, played off as fanservice.

Honestly I can't bring myself to care about the franchise any more. It's gone in directions I don't really care for, but most of all it continues to play coy with Nanoha and Fate, so I don't give a shit anymore.

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either kill NanoFate or acknowledge NanoFate. Continuing in this sort of fanservicey limbo is just going to piss people off--especially the fans who are actually lesbians, though I'm sure we're such a small fraction amidst the rabid fanboys that we don't even matter.

It's not just Nanoha, either. It's practically everything.

An incidental lesbian relationship in a story not primarily about said relationship just doesn't get fair treatment, period--which is one of the reasons why I started writing a book.

I'd honestly like to see this kind of character relationship get a fair shake in fiction--especially non-romance fiction. I wrote Alisa's relationship as a foregone conclusion--the story starts after it's already been officially recognized in-universe. I don't really get WHY this isn't done more--the potential for drama, character development and heartwarming (and heartbreaking) moments is incredibly high.

Seems like wasted opportunity to me.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-28, 06:18

I like Teana and Subaru well enough, but I have to agree that they never struck me as characters strong enough to carry a show. And good point on the Index-inspired character. ;)

Some people just weren't made to headline a main event of the series. Take Mikoto Misaka, who's quite badass as an action girl and pulls all the stops. But she's just not a good lead because her conflicts aren't as deep and just doesn't have as much charisma as say, Nanoha or more evidently, Touma from Index

Subaru definitely has charisma, but her potential for internal conflict and storyline of interest wasn't that great. Her twist was more lolwut. Teana's story was better, but she lacks the charisma and ran across some emo roadbumps. Together they might equal one Nanoha. Maybe. :p Still, they were workable as decent role models for action girls and were better off than poor Erio and Caro. I'm guessing a lot of people would ask me who the hell they are, and that'd just prove my point.

As for those that lament Yuno, I'm sorry to say that I feel that the writers just knew not what to do with him outside of season 1. That was the greater issue, and not any kind of shipping problem would have helped it. As for what I think of his chances?

He's the Kazumi of the series. Sorry.

You can't have your cake and eat it, too. Either kill NanoFate or acknowledge NanoFate. Continuing in this sort of fanservicey limbo is just going to piss people off--especially the fans who are actually lesbians, though I'm sure we're such a small fraction amidst the rabid fanboys that we don't even matter.

There's certainly what my friend would have termed an "identity crisis". They really do want their cake and have it too. Force would have tried the grimdark path while Vivid would pander to fanservice and shipping. But certainly the abundance of strong action girls in an idealistic series accomplishing the impossible was one of the appeal of the series. But by trying this they ended up losing that by demeaning our previously badass action crew and trying to bring in new ways. It doesn't help that one side demeans the old guard by making them job to the uber villains and the other via tons of fanservice. It's just not cool at all-- it leads to the SFSD disasters that were described in Kaioshin's OP. just write them out or kill them. :S In the end trying to please everyone ends up annoying a lot of people instead.

If they had this kind of wishy washy attitude back in 2004, I guarantee you we wouldn't be talking about it now at all. We'd occasionally list it as a novelty in certain threads, but it certainly would have never gotten the recognition it did.

synaesthetic

2012-10-28, 06:45

Keroko

2012-10-28, 06:59

Scrapping a widely beloved, very well-established, very well-developed, very well-handled, and very touching romance just because a relative few people dislike a couple of the mere side-effects of it does not strike me as a "tough choice" that helps "increase quality" by "allowing a story to evolve".

Did I say scrap the pairing? What I said is that the series is being held back by the constant need to show the pairing', which is easily solve by... you know... just not showing the characters? The pairing still exists, since nothing has changed in that regard, and the story can grow with the new cast.

Or heck, even ignoring the new cast, maybe it could give some more focus on Hayate for a change? You know, the supposed third member of the "three aces" that constantly gets shafted?

Oh, and since you brought up The Empire Strikes Back, I raise you the entire Star Wars Prequels... :heh:

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Yes, hence "risk." Though I quite like Attack of the Clones, crappy romance aside.

I think that line is more fitting for the original Star Wars Trilogy which has been George Lucas’d throughout the DVD & BD releases :uhoh:.

e.g.: Darth Vader (when the emperor was about to kill Luke): NNNNOOOOOOOooooooooouuu...........

On the flipside of that coin, the additions made in the 1997 re-release were mostly good. "Han shot first" aside, the addition of Jabba in A New Hope gave more urgency to Han's plight as well is introduced a villain that became important in Return of the Jedi and the addition of CGI to Cloud City made the city feel more alive.

Yes, sir. That's exactly what it is. The torch wasn't passed because there were no legit takers.

Move on to what exactly?

Teana and Subaru were given their chance to take control of the situation but it doesn't look like they had what it took to be the leads.

I would say SSX shows otherwise. It's a very entertaining sound stage with none of the pre-StrikerS cast in it.

Some people just weren't made to headline a main event of the series. Take Mikoto Misaka, who's quite badass as an action girl and pulls all the stops. But she's just not a good lead because her conflicts aren't as deep and just doesn't have as much charisma as say, Nanoha or more evidently, Touma from Index

Hold on, hold on, I will readily agree that Touma with his pre-punch speeches has more charisma that most characters I've seen in recent anime, but "I have clone sisters running around getting killed for experiments" isn't deep? Just what are your standards for deep? :twitch:

Subaru definitely has charisma, but her potential for internal conflict and storyline of interest wasn't that great. Her twist was more lolwut. Teana's story was better, but she lacks the charisma and ran across some emo roadbumps. Together they might equal one Nanoha. Maybe. :p Still, they were workable as decent role models for action girls and were better off than poor Erio and Caro. I'm guessing a lot of people would ask me who the hell they are, and that'd just prove my point.

At this point I'll just point out that prior to Vivio, Nanoha never had an internal conflict. Or any character growth. At all. Yet that didn't stop her from being the titular character or a main character for two seasons.

Then again, Nanoha has always been a series more about the characters not named Nanoha. S1 was more Fate's story, A's was more Hayate's story, the first cour of StrikerS more Subaru's story. It's not until the second half or StrikerS that Nanoha finally gets a plot to herself that allows her to actually grow.

As for those that lament Yuno, I'm sorry to say that I feel that the writers just knew not what to do with him outside of season 1. That was the greater issue, and not any kind of shipping problem would have helped it.

If the writers don't know what to do with a character who specializes in history and known for being a good teacher in a manga that throws around lots of history and has a lot of training then I am beginning to question their skills as writers.

synaesthetic

2012-10-28, 07:03

I kinda felt Biribiri got the short end of the stick because outside of the Sisters arc, she seemed mostly like a tsundere tack-on for the people who are into that sort of shit.

Sisters arc was good though; I would have preferred seeing it resolved more through Mikoto's perspective and less through Deus Ex Machina Hand Guy.

Triple_R

2012-10-28, 12:22

The best part about Nanoha has always been that Nanoha's role was pretty much blind to her sex. It would take barely any major adjustments to the writing to put a boy in Nanoha's place.

The part may have been written as a girl, but it wasn't written AROUND a girl. Nanoha's femaleness is never really a big plot point. She was written as a person first and a girl second, which is what makes her interesting as a character, ESPECIALLY in the magical-girl genre, where the main character's femaleness is usually emphasized and paraded around like a trophy. While Nanoha doesn't get all that much meaningful character development (largely due to the lack of any official resolution of Nanoha and Fate's implied relationship), she's a person who happens to be a girl.

She wasn't written around her ovaries.

I strongly agree, which is why I consider Nanoha a strong female character.

You know how they sometimes call President Obama the "Post-Racial President"? Well, to draw an analogy, Nanoha is something of a "Post-Gender Heroine".

She's a heroic main protagonist that happens to be a girl. She's completely comfortable in her own skin and she's not ashamed of being a girl (her pretty feminine attire makes this quite clear), but nor do I feel like her femaleness is paraded around as something trying too hard ("I am woman, hear me roar!") or as something that's just meant for male viewers to gawk at.

Did I say scrap the pairing? What I said is that the series is being held back by the constant need to show the pairing', which is easily solve by... you know... just not showing the characters? The pairing still exists, since nothing has changed in that regard, and the story can grow with the new cast.

Or heck, even ignoring the new cast, maybe it could give some more focus on Hayate for a change? You know, the supposed third member of the "three aces" that constantly gets shafted?

I think Hayate faced some fan-backlash from being pushed a wee bit too hard in Nanoha A's and StrikerS. Having her jump ranks over Nanoha and Fate in spite of how Nanoha and Fate were working for TSAB long before Hayate did rubbed some people the wrong way (I myself found this... questionable, at least). This is especially true since Hayate was already given plenty of limelight in how Nanoha A's really was Hayate's story (I agree with you there).

Don't get me wrong, I like Hayate, but if she's getting shafted now it's because she was "over-pushed" (to use pro wrestling terminology) before.

At this point I'll just point out that prior to Vivio, Nanoha never had an internal conflict. Or any character growth. At all. Yet that didn't stop her from being the titular character or a main character for two seasons.

I at least partially disagree with you here. On "internal conflict", I recall Nanoha briefly feeling conflicted over continuing to pursue Jewel Seeds due to how that would inevitably throw her into direct conflict with Fate. I do think that Nanoha at least considered "giving up", but admittedly she overcame this doubt quickly enough that I can understand somebody saying that Nanoha lacked "internal conflict" in the first two Nanoha anime shows.

But to argue that she didn't grow as a character is pure poppycock. Sorry, but it is.

Nanoha was certainly never weak, but both Fate (original season) and Vita (Nanoha A's) pushed Nanoha to her limits, and beyond, forcing her to get stronger. They forced Nanoha to get more adept at combat; to be more willing and able to use her powers in creative, corrective, and at times violent ways.

I also think that Nanoha learned from both Fate and Vita that basically good people can get caught up in questionable causes due to sympathetic and unfortunate circumstances beyond their control. While Nanoha never lost her core idealism, she did gain a greater appreciation for the world and some of its greyer shades.

I think that Fate initially perplexed Nanoha, and it was through working out that perplexity in her own mind that Nanoha grew as a person.

So I disagree with you that Nanoha S1 was "not about Nanoha". I think it was just as much about Nanoha as it was about Fate.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-28, 13:07

Hold on, hold on, I will readily agree that Touma with his pre-punch speeches has more charisma that most characters I've seen in recent anime, but "I have clone sisters running around getting killed for experiments" isn't deep? Just what are your standards for deep? :twitch:

Relatively speaking, I would say. But as Syn noted, outside of it she seemed to just be there for her tsundere antics, though this might just be JC staff thing, although I heard they were faithful. Then again, most of my feelings of Mikoto not being able to capture the lead was just from that spinoff they tried.

At this point I'll just point out that prior to Vivio, Nanoha never had an internal conflict. Or any character growth. At all. Yet that didn't stop her from being the titular character or a main character for two seasons.

Then again, Nanoha has always been a series more about the characters not named Nanoha. S1 was more Fate's story, A's was more Hayate's story, the first cour of StrikerS more Subaru's story. It's not until the second half or StrikerS that Nanoha finally gets a plot to herself that allows her to actually grow.

It's true. For whatever reason, Nanoha doesn't focus on herself in her own series. However, her character gets down to the very core of this thread.

The reason Nanoha's character works, and what gives it the extra punch needed to fill an action girl as well as an action lead is because the plot was pushed through her decision and will. She didn't just react to the plot; she took the initiative. We have someone that approached the issue with enthusiasm, not delving into "Oh, I want to be normal". That's what sets her apart from a number of protagonists.

Still you might scoff. Well, "Bleh, there's tons of protagonists that strive to be the best and be more then they are. Goku, etc." Well, that's why Nanoha starts to work in the success category for action girls. She's not aiming to get stronger or be the best just for the sake of being the best or saving people just because that's something to do. Her goals are far more specific from that. She wants to help people. But helping people is too broad still, and that is why Fate helped make season 1 work, and also later the Wolkies. They made this desire and goal more concrete. Eventually this grows into something else-- she doesn't end up just going around saving people-- she makes a career out of it, and ultimately she teaches other people who want to do it the same thing. As we went along, these goals of her became more clear as she grew up. And that's really something that puts this long running series over quite a few others.

And that, is what I feel, defines a character with their own existence and will beyond just being a main character. It's just like the Kuroyukihime example I used above.

It also passes the theme, that anyone, regardless of gender or age can push themselves. It helps a character to have a recurring theme around them.

If the writers don't know what to do with a character who specializes in history and known for being a good teacher in a manga that throws around lots of history and has a lot of training then I am beginning to question their skills as writers.

Lol, I agree wholeheartedly. I do not like his handling at all.

The problem with Yuno is that he just wasn't given any depth to take advantage of those traits he has. You can't define a character merely through aspects; only through in-depth diving can you create a true character. I think we should all be happy that Hayate and co resided in A's and got their development in asap since aside from Yuno, that group seems to be very disliked by the writers. :S Well, at least the first two seasons had a few cool moments. Then... :(

SeijiSensei

2012-10-28, 17:56

TheZodiac

2012-10-28, 18:01

Uhhh yeah of course, but exactly as she said ^^ "fanservice XD

Vexx

2012-10-28, 20:48

Uhhh yeah of course, but exactly as she said ^^ "fanservice XD
Hint: don't assume anything from the avatar about gender :)

But yes, seems like the thread should be retitled or the specific series discussion split into a separate thread?

Sheba

2012-10-28, 21:12

I am sorry for the slight derailing. But I had to speak against some conception about how lesbiasnism is somehow why Japan did their strong female characters right. In pen & paper RPG analogy, sexual orientation should be a perk not the defining stat of the action girl.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-28, 21:22

I just feel Nanoha is/was home to a LOT of valid action involving female characters but yea, I suppose I could talk about something else.

An interesting case is Golden Darkness from To Love Ru. Initially, she quite literally was an SFSD. To Love Ru's just a series that, well, hasn't been the most progressive of attitudes towards its female characters, and that's kinda natural given the genre.

The Darkness spinoff seems to have reversed the trend though, and suddenly Yami who has generally had a flat and generally unpleasant personality but was very slowly evolving across the end of the series was suddenly greeted with a backstory that wasn't just pointless filler but giving actual motivation.

Her transformation from mere sex symbol/low budget version of Eve or Fate to a legitimate character seems to have been inspired by her popularity, but for once this was put to really good use. And it came somewhat naturally. It's actually worked quite well for some reason and Darkness has just been a better story, for the shock of a lot of people.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-10-28, 22:05

Might I just note that this thread has become incredibly narrow over the past few pages? What started with a broad question about sexism and "action girls" has suddenly morphed into a narrow discussion of a few characters and shows. As someone who hasn't seen either these characters or these shows, I've lost pretty much all interest in this thread. I suspect I'm not alone.I fully agree with you, sensei-jiisan!:D

Okay everyone, how about Haman Karn? She’s tough, a good leader, has great charisma, has a goal of herself (independent of any man), still feminine to some extent, has her own internal conflict, and (most importantly) she has no “fanservice shots” during the entirety of Zeta Gundam IIRC. Is that a good portrait of a proper non-sexist “female fighter” or “action girl”?

NK_500

2012-10-29, 00:29

Honestly I think "action girl" stereotype is rather exploited than wholly sexist. The same can be said to so-called badass bishies in female-oriented shows such as Sebastian in Kuroshitsuji for example.

Archon_Wing

2012-10-29, 01:18

I fully agree with you, sensei-jiisan!:D

Okay everyone, how about Haman Karn? She’s tough, a good leader, has great charisma, has a goal of herself (independent of any man), still feminine to some extent, has her own internal conflict, and (most importantly) she has no “fanservice shots” during the entirety of Zeta Gundam IIRC. Is that a good portrait of a proper non-sexist “female fighter” or “action girl”?

Yea, you pretty much summarized why she's an excellent character and what good characters are made of, especially considering the era of anime she comes from. This kind of character is exceedingly rare in anime these days. I have a thing for ambitious people though.

Zeta Gundam's just a really good anime. :p

SeijiSensei

2012-10-29, 09:20

Uhhh yeah of course, but exactly as she said ^^ "fanservice XD

I couldn't tell whether you directed that comment at me, but if so, as Vexx notes I'm definitely male. I'm more puzzled about your "fanservice" comment. My avatar shows thirteen-year-old Sheila, a witch from Mahou Shoujotai Arusu, riding her broom. A rather appropriate choice for Halloween, don't you think? By the way, there's not a hint of fanservice in that show.

I use the occasional male avatar and even a couple of animal ones, too. Here, have a look (http://forums.animesuki.com/album.php?albumid=115)....

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-29, 16:16

I fully agree with you, sensei-jiisan!:D

Okay everyone, how about Haman Karn? She’s tough, a good leader, has great charisma, has a goal of herself (independent of any man), still feminine to some extent, has her own internal conflict, and (most importantly) she has no “fanservice shots” during the entirety of Zeta Gundam IIRC. Is that a good portrait of a proper non-sexist “female fighter” or “action girl”?

There's one scene where Kamille put "pressure" on her and we see her in naked newtype time and a couple of scenes near the end in the movie theater that seem to linger on her legs while she's ducking in and behind some chairs in the 3 way fight with Scirroco and Char, but yeah other than that there's not much in Zeta at least. ZZ is kind of a different story though

Haak

2012-10-29, 16:27

Haman Karn is definitely one of the best. Ryougi Shiki is still my favourite "action girl" of all time though.

SPARTAN 119

2012-10-30, 23:27

Haman Karn is definitely one of the best. Ryougi Shiki is still my favourite "action girl" of all time though.

Excellent example with Shiki.

Other "Action Girl" characters that are favorits, all of whom I don't see as overly sexualized or sexist:

Canaan from her self-titled series. Never really sexualized. OK, sure fans like to read yuri into her relationship with Maria, but her clothing are normal clothing, sensible for a mercenary working under cover in the civilian population to wear. Indeed her character is shaped much more by her tragic past as a child soldier.

By the same note, Roberta of Black Lagoon, while having the whole maid outfit thing going in the first season, it is semi-justified as a disguise. Like Canaan, Roberta is really shaped around her traumatic experiences of her past, as well as her attempts to redeem herself by protecting Garcia, the type of experiences that would likely cause similar trauma in a male or female.

Akemi Homura: I know she was on the list at the beginning, but I don't see her as a particularly sexist or sexualized. She doesn't have that much of an overly feminine side, save for her school uniform and mahou shoujo outfits. She always struck me as very strong, independent character, especially compared to Madoka. I always liked her, not only for her epic rocket spamming, but also for her never giving up in the face of adversity. Really, she was truly more a main character than Madoka.

Nanoha Takamachi has been discussed at length, feminine, even sexy, but that does not define her character, more so, she is defined by a sort of inherent sense of sympathy and caring. Exceedingly good natured, but for some reason never striking me as Mary Sue-ish.

will add more as I think of them.

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-31, 15:28

So we've talked a lot about Japanese anime and what not, but what about Japanese games. Last night my friend directed me to a trailer for an upcoming game by Sega Treasure for the 3DS, which is getting a lot of good press for it's gameplay, however it also caught my attention because I think it's pertinent to the topic I created. Why don't I just post the trailer for now:

a3VfPii3zsA

Some things I've already considered are how this game would fair here if released as is? Is the costume really necessary and how does the overall gameplay style mesh with the art design and choice of lead character? Also what does it say about Japanese games in general which already get a lot of flack from Western media for some of the content and costumes? How does it compare to Western games and their aesthetic and design at least when it comes to trailer presentation and appeal?

Random32

2012-10-31, 16:06

I'll pose the opposite question. Is it really necessary for Western games to exclude all colors that aren't shades of brown? Art choices are art choices. Gameplay doesn't get better or worse because of art choices, neither does the story.

Personally, I would love to play this
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs48/f/2009/155/3/9/No_Mercy_by_StrayShadow.jpg

(most importantly) she has no “fanservice shots” during the entirety of Zeta Gundam IIRC.
How is that most important? How is it important at all?

Sexy female characters -> Sexist? Why aren't sexualized male characters (Whoever the hell Taylor Lautner played in that Twilight thing, bishounen leads, etc for) considered sexist against guys? Because it isn't sexist.

You have attractive characters, what is wrong with them showing off how attractive they are? Even if you over do it until it's a major distraction from everything else, that's not sexism, it's bad directing.

Vexx

2012-10-31, 17:04

I'll pose the opposite question. Is it really necessary for Western games to exclude all colors that aren't shades of brown? Art choices are art choices. Gameplay doesn't get better or worse because of art choices, neither does the story.

Personally, I would love to play this
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs48/f/2009/155/3/9/No_Mercy_by_StrayShadow.jpg

I would have paid so much money for a Left For Dead mod or other zombie whatever with these four. :)

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-31, 17:37

I'll pose the opposite question. Is it really necessary for Western games to exclude all colors that aren't shades of brown? Art choices are art choices. Gameplay doesn't get better or worse because of art choices, neither does the story.

That's mostly only true of the myriad of Call of Duty FPS clones and Xbox360 games that have convinced people that if they want their games to sell and have cred that they need to all be gritty, gray dreary post apocalyptic settings with caricatures of what I suppose are supposed to be hard men. I think it really hit critical mass with the Gears of War franchise though which I simply could not get into or take even remotely seriously because it always felt like it was trying way to hard at all of the above. IMO it's all become a sad self-parody and it only took one generation for it to happen too.

Personally, I would love to play this
http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs48/f/2009/155/3/9/No_Mercy_by_StrayShadow.jpg

I'd rather not for personal reasons.

How is that most important? How is it important at all?

Sexy female characters -> Sexist? Why aren't sexualized male characters (Whoever the hell Taylor Lautner played in that Twilight thing, bishounen leads, etc for) considered sexist against guys? Because it isn't sexist.

You have attractive characters, what is wrong with them showing off how attractive they are? Even if you over do it until it's a major distraction from everything else, that's not sexism, it's bad directing.

Well going back to my above post as an example it's my personal opinion that Code of Princess is a little excessive in it's portrayal of the lead at least from the perspective of seeing it in the trailer. You can have anime girl (http://aselia.wikia.com/wiki/Milla_Maxwell) with sword (http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9n5acOKen1qfk53xo1_500.jpg) in beat em up RPG game and she can even be sexy and it's all well and good, but yeah I don't know about that get up. It kind of goes back to what I was saying above with regard to Gears of War and the feeling of trying too hard to portray a certain appeal.

Vexx

2012-10-31, 17:56

That's mostly only true of the myriad of Call of Duty FPS clones and Xbox360 games that have convinced people that if they want their games to sell and have cred that they need to all be gritty, gray dreary post apocalyptic settings with caricatures of what I suppose are supposed to be hard men. I think it really hit critical mass with the Gears of War franchise though which I simply could not get into or take even remotely seriously because it always felt like it was trying way to hard at all of the above. IMO it's all become a sad self-parody and it only took one generation for it to happen too.

Its gotten so bad, I start dragging out the "closet man-love" memes on all this "men only" gamestering.

Kaioshin Sama

2012-10-31, 18:23

Its gotten so bad, I start dragging out the "closet man-love" memes on all this "men only" gamestering.

Is it wrong that I found the Soap/Cpt. Price man love thing in the second game to be the most meaningful and "human interest" part of the story? I mean when Captain Price punched that Sam Elliot sound alike general and Soap threw that knife into his eye in slow motion....they did it all for each other man! *single tear*

Midnight2352

2012-10-31, 19:17

Action girls huh? I'd pick Inner Moka from R+V (she is not a fanservice girl. she fights to protect others) and Revy from Black Lagoon. They both aren't sexist at all.

SeijiSensei

2012-10-31, 19:50

I don't know if I'd call Revy "sexist." That is a term I usually apply to abstract concepts like ideas or social institutions or, in this case, modes of story-telling. Revy certainly is highly sexualized. Would she be as compelling if she wore a more modest dress or a body suit and did not flash so much skin? I think it would be hard to argue that Revy was not drawn to appeal to male readers/viewers. Still, as Jessica Rabbit says, "I'm not bad; I'm just drawn this way."

Midnight2352

2012-10-31, 20:01

I highly doubt she was drawn like that for men. Most girls who tend to be "bad" dress like that for free movement. I honestly think that's just how Revy is accustomed dressing up. Eda for example is just like her. Each character has their own personal style from my perspective.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-10-31, 20:26

How is that most important? How is it important at all?

Sexy female characters -> Sexist? Why aren't sexualized male characters (Whoever the hell Taylor Lautner played in that Twilight thing, bishounen leads, etc for) considered sexist against guys? Because it isn't sexist.

You have attractive characters, what is wrong with them showing off how attractive they are? Even if you over do it until it's a major distraction from everything else, that's not sexism, it's bad directing.I never said that sexy female (or male) characters= Sexist. :eyebrow: Please don't put words on my mouth. Did you read my overall post at all?

You know, there’s a difference between portraying a character’s beauty and focusing on a certain “private” areas. By “fanservise shot”, I didn’t mean “beauty shot”. Fanservice shot is more “perverted” in nature. An example of these would be a scene during characters’ conversation where they didn’t focus on the female’s face or overall body, but focusing on their breast, thigh, crotch, or belly button instead. I don’t know about you, but I think that kinda shots are belittling the female characters by treating them like a mere sexual object (the same thing also applied to male characters). That’s why I consider the absence of “fanservice shots” important (if not the most important) aspect of a true respectable Action Girl character.

Random32

2012-10-31, 21:00

I never said that sexy female (or male) characters= Sexist. :eyebrow: Please don't put words on my mouth. Did you read my overall post at all?
I read it. Seems like I interpreted something wrong. Maybe there is something above that would have put it all into context, but I stopped following this thread when the discussion started going nowhere and am only coming back in because I'm sorta bored, and I really don't want to read all the circles this thread has gone in if I don't really really have to. Sorry.

This is what I read about character Haman Karn
She’s tough, a good leader, has great charisma, has a goal of herself (independent of any man), still feminine to some extent, has her own internal conflict, and (most importantly) she has no “fanservice shots” during the entirety of Zeta Gundam IIRC. Is that a good portrait of a proper non-sexist “female fighter” or “action girl”?
From that:
1. In the eyes of the post's author, the most important part of having a proper non-sexist action girl, is lack of fanservice.
2. Further more, the rest of the traits that I think define a proper non-sexist action girl, the strong personality and good writing, are explicitly stated to be less important than lack of fanservice in making a character a proper non-sexist action girl.
3. From that I think it is reasonable to assume that the author of the post thinks that fanservice (portraying sexy female characters) -> sexist.

You know, there’s a difference between portraying a character’s beauty and focusing on a certain “private” areas. By “fanservise shot”, I didn’t mean “beauty shot”.
Nor do I. By "fanservice," I meant "sexy shots" not "beauty shots."

An example of these would be a scene during characters’ conversation where they didn’t focus on the female’s face or overall body, but focusing on their breast, thigh, crotch, or belly button instead.
So we agree. Just used different terminology.

I don’t know about you, but I think that kinda shots are belittling the female characters by treating them like a mere sexual object (the same thing also applied to male characters).
And here we disagree. I do not believe that those shots are belittling to the characters they are applied to. Images of attractive shirtless men do not belittle the men they feature, it shows that they are attractive and emphasizes that. The same with women.

If their attractiveness is the ONLY thing being emphasized, that is sexist, but if it is one part of many, I really don't see a problem with that.

Sheba

2012-10-31, 21:11

Agent Aika is the perfect illustration of what Obelisk tries to convey. Aika herself is a okay character, and the series would have been okay as a b movie style action OAV. But the staff's constant obsession with ass and crotch shots just killed. There is nothing wrong with eye candy, I mean I like my scantily clad sword girls in bikini armor as much I love dignified women in full plate like Hildegard from Soul Calibur, but too much of those service shots just kills it as surely as the excessive use of any tropes.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-10-31, 21:26

If their attractiveness is the ONLY thing being emphasized, that is sexist, but if it is one part of many, I really don't see a problem with that.You know, I think we agree on the same thing. We just have a different definition of "fanservice shots". What I quoted from you is how I define "fanservice shots". I'm not anti-"characters being portrayed as sexy individuals".

Also @Sheba. Thanx for making my point clearer ;).

Triple_R

2012-11-01, 01:29

I don't think that the occasional fanservice shot necessarily undermines a strong "Action Girl" portrayal.

Also, how the fanservice shot is executed can be pretty important. If it's a passive sort of thing, where a skirt just flips up or breasts bounce a bit while the girl is in motion, then that's not necessarily a problem. If the scene draws massive attention to it by having male characters gawk and shout like fratboys over it, though, then it starts to feel a bit sexist to me. :heh:

Basically, if the male characters have a tendency to treat a female character as a sex object, then the narrative is kind of implying that this is how the viewer should approach her as well. But if the anime just quietly winks at the audience and throws out some "eye candy" then that's not necessarily a problem. A lot of it really does come down to execution.

Personally, there's a certain threshold for me, a certain point at what a specific female character is thrown into fanservice so often (and/or with such little subtlety) that I can't take her seriously any more. I would say that Code Geass' Kallen is right on the line for me there, as I could still take her seriously, but it was a struggle at times. So any female given less fanservice than Kallen was, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Any given more than what Kallen was, then I'd start to find it a bit sexist (or at least objectifying).

With respect to Obelisk ze Tormentor's point, I think there's something to be said about a female character that can seem strong and sexy without ever needing a pervy camera angle to get there. That's much of what I take from his comment - Haman Karn is so strong that the anime never felt the need to sex her up.

Mind you, Gundam (especially the older ones) don't have a lot of conventional fanservice anyway. I don't recall many fanservice shots of Sayla, Relena Peacecraft, or Lacus Clyne, either.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-11-01, 01:56

With respect to Obelisk ze Tormentor's point, I think there's something to be said about a female character that can seem strong and sexy without ever needing a pervy camera angle to get there. That's much of what I take from his comment - Haman Karn is so strong that the anime never felt the need to sex her up.That's a Bingo, buddy ;).

I also agree about Kallen. IMO her entire "being in the cockpit of Gurren" (among other things) is one big fanservice which is a distraction from the actual battles.

I don't recall many fanservice shots of Sayla, Relena Peacecraft, or Lacus Clyne, either.In MS Gundam Movie 3, there's a nudity scene of Sayla taking a bath (nipples and all).

asaqe

2012-11-01, 01:56

Gundam Double Zeta would beg to differ. There was a complete artbook dedicated to that. It was only during AGE (which was a practice in misogyny) that really curtailed female roles in gundam by killing off 99% of the female cast or relegating them to non action roles. There was only ONE federation female pilot and that was during second generation.

Its gotten so bad, I start dragging out the "closet man-love" memes on all this "men only" gamestering.

I think Vert's fujoshi stance came from that, now I have a horrible image in my mind about Vert's naked male butlers being Marcus, Price, Soap and Shepard.

synaesthetic

2012-11-01, 06:52

SeijiSensei

2012-11-01, 08:38

willx

2012-11-01, 08:55

The best kind of fanservice is the subtle kind--the kind that leaves you both interested, yet wondering if it was actually intended as fanservice or if your brain just found fanservice in an innocent scene... :D

Blatant fanservice is obvious and clunky, an "easy" way to keep the audience's attention.

Agree 987% .. which is why I keep referencing Najica Blitz Tactics and certain other ecchi shows that have action tacked on .. it's the spawn of the devil! :heh:

So to tie this back into the whole forum topic .. Action Girls definitely can be sexist, but ultimately is a trope that can be used to show a strong powerful woman or the inverse!

totoum

2012-11-01, 09:18

I saw one of the weirdest examples of a "male gaze" shot in episode four of Shin Sekai Yori. The camera was positioned at ground level just behind the heroine. She was standing with her legs slightly apart, and the camera showed her cute stockings with laces and the subject of the shot through her legs. We never saw anything else, but it was obviously intended to suggest the putative camera operator would have had a good look at her panties. I guess syn might consider that an example of "subtle" fanservice; I just found it distracting.

I'd disagree with that case in particular,the storyboarder for that episode just seemed to have an affection for ground level shots, we got the reverse shot of the one you mentioned when at one point the "camera" was right behind the "library" or we go a shot of the kids through the monk's legs or later on when they're attacked by the queerats there's one of the kids through the queerat's legs.

That shot is often used when there's confrontation,like a standoff in a western or a fight in a shonen action show,I think that's what they were going for here.

Though of course yes,in many other cases this type of shot can be used for fanservice, especially in fanservicy action shows.

Archon_Wing

2012-11-01, 17:22

There's one scene where Kamille put "pressure" on her and we see her in naked newtype time and a couple of scenes near the end in the movie theater that seem to linger on her legs while she's ducking in and behind some chairs in the 3 way fight with Scirroco and Char, but yeah other than that there's not much in Zeta at least. ZZ is kind of a different story though

Well, that's the thing. Not all nudity is fanservice. Nor is all sex. But I guess it seems to be the exception.

SeijiSensei

2012-11-01, 18:20

I'd disagree with that case in particular,the storyboarder for that episode just seemed to have an affection for ground level shots

I'll take another look. This particular shot was just so strange that it caught my attention. Pehaps it was just a directorial style.

Xion Valkyrie

2012-11-01, 20:38

The criteria for a strong female character can really be boiled down to this: If the show was switched to focusing on the female lead as the main point of view, would you still watch it?

Archon_Wing

2012-11-02, 21:32

You know, how exactly do we get so far without mentioning Evangelion's Rei Ayanami, especially when she gets referred to as a doll in series? She's arguably the trendsetter for the extremely passive demure and attractive sex symbol that does cool stuff and Inori's definitely a homage (or bastardization if you want to be cynical). But that's not really faulting her-- many many have tried to copy Rei although few have succeeded.

She literally is a super flying sex doll here as Gendo planned. Though something went very wrong. :heh:

Though it is funny, because Rei was not intended to be a sex symbol at all. But it clearly didn't turn out that way and it seemed like people were going ZOMG TEH REI for the wrong reasons. Weirdly enough, the Rebuild version of Rei seems to come off as a straight kuudere-type that was inspired partially by herself. I don't know what to think of that.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-11-02, 21:56

Weirdly enough, the Rebuild version of Rei seems to come off as a straight kuudere-type that was inspired partially by herself. I don't know what to think of that.I always think that some characters in Evangelion Rebuild have been “tamed” to entertaining-level. I think that’s the main purpose of Rebuild. To make Evangelion more accessible/enjoyable to newcomers by not being as grim as the original (so far).

Sheba

2012-11-02, 22:25

One can see Rebuild as the Eva of Anno who have come in terms with himself and have become a happier man. Which makes you wonder what kind of anime he'd make if he gets a child.

Guernsey

2012-11-02, 23:40

Moar Super Robot anime maybe?

synaesthetic

2012-11-03, 05:40

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-11-03, 05:52

That's actually blatant fanservice and it was used in a lot of older movies, most famously a James Bond flick, For Your Eyes Only.You mean in one of its movie posters?

I own the movie on DVD, and I don’t remember there's a similar shot/scene like SeijiSensei described in For Your Eyes Only.

totoum

2012-11-03, 07:26

That's actually blatant fanservice and it was used in a lot of older movies, most famously a James Bond flick, For Your Eyes Only.

There's a big difference between this (http://i46.tinypic.com/1zxkqw9.png) (the shot SeijiSensei is talking about) and this (http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BOTEwNzY5OTgyNl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMDAxNzczNA@@._ V1._SY317_.jpg)

And the storyboarder just seemed to like (http://i45.tinypic.com/6jj9sy.png) that type (http://i50.tinypic.com/kec38p.png) of shot (http://i48.tinypic.com/9fmbg3.png)

synaesthetic

2012-11-03, 16:33

Yeah that doesn't even look like any sort of fanservice, just weird cinematography.

Archon_Wing

2012-11-03, 17:05

I always think that some characters in Evangelion Rebuild have been “tamed” to entertaining-level. I think that’s the main purpose of Rebuild. To make Evangelion more accessible/enjoyable to newcomers by not being as grim as the original (so far).

Unfortunately in my mind tamed means to sap out all the personality they had-- they almost seem to have turned into the archetypes they subverted in the first place.

Though the worst is definitely the new character, that really fits the bad kind of archtype in the OP. She has zero depth, a flat personality, and is really just there to do cool possibly inhuman feats as well as show off tits and ass. Though I guess that's why her nickname is "Mari Sue" :S

But this is a rant for another day. As I've said before, there's nothing wrong with showing off a character's body or abilities. But it can't just be an end to itself.

I really do feel like Rebuild was supposed to reflect a more matured creator that moved out of their depression, but the characters here don't really have enough luster. We can hope they boost themselves past the halfway point, but it doesn't look that way atm.

Soliloquy

2012-11-03, 19:59

Anime is not really great medium that make great female characters of course there are some great exceptions like Ghibli. However when the anime has to portray certain strong female character, it had to be a bit too blatant, or over the top, I guess it has to pander to the target demographics to be successful. That was one thing I liked about Ghibli, they can make a strong female character without making her actually ridiculously strong but she is independent and doesn't need to rely on brute strength at the same time still be feminine like Princess Mononoke and the others (I can't remember the names). By all means I welcome the tomboys and variety of strong females but I guess I really don't appreciate this particular character archetypes. As long as they can manage to create a character keeping a fine balance like Ghibli does, I like it.

I guess I'm the only one with this preference and have yet to try Ghost in the Shell nor Black Lagoon. Well action isn't really my cup of tea anyway.

Obelisk ze Tormentor

2012-11-03, 20:29

Though the worst is definitely the new character, that really fits the bad kind of archtype in the OP. She has zero depth, a flat personality, and is really just there to do cool possibly inhuman feats as well as show off tits and ass. Though I guess that's why her nickname is "Mari Sue" :SLOL yeah. I also think that Mari is a “WTF character” in this new Eva universe. She’s always genki, she kicks some asses, she lectures our beloved protagonist, and overall gave a different aura to the movie(s). She’s almost like a representation of the jaded fans who enters Eva universe and says “WTF with all these gloomy atmosphere and angsty characters! Let’s make this show more cheerful and exciting! I’ll show you how to do it!” :D.

I admit that she's my guilty-pleasure in the movie(s).

Guernsey

2012-11-03, 22:12

Unfortunately in my mind tamed means to sap out all the personality they had-- they almost seem to have turned into the archetypes they subverted in the first place.

Though the worst is definitely the new character, that really fits the bad kind of archtype in the OP. She has zero depth, a flat personality, and is really just there to do cool possibly inhuman feats as well as show off tits and ass. Though I guess that's why her nickname is "Mari Sue" :S

But this is a rant for another day. As I've said before, there's nothing wrong with showing off a character's body or abilities. But it can't just be an end to itself.

I really do feel like Rebuild was supposed to reflect a more matured creator that moved out of their depression, but the characters here don't really have enough luster. We can hope they boost themselves past the halfway point, but it doesn't look that way atm.

One of the things that Evangelion as known for is the strong character development, dynamics and drama. Despite all the doom and gloom of the original series, you have to admit the characters do play well with each other. There was never a character that didn't have some depth or characterization andl they were not only deconstructions of their respective archetypes but they were more than just their archetypes. I had to see this with Rebuild but I'll forgive it considering that they are mostly two hour movies and you can only fit so much in it.

Anime is not really great medium that make great female characters of course there are some great exceptions like Ghibli. However when the anime has to portray certain strong female character, it had to be a bit too blatant, or over the top, I guess it has to pander to the target demographics to be successful. That was one thing I liked about Ghibli, they can make a strong female character without making her actually ridiculously strong but she is independent and doesn't need to rely on brute strength at the same time still be feminine like Princess Mononoke and the others (I can't remember the names). By all means I welcome the tomboys and variety of strong females but I guess I really don't appreciate this particular character archetypes. As long as they can manage to create a character keeping a fine balance like Ghibli does, I like it.

I guess I'm the only one with this preference and have yet to try Ghost in the Shell nor Black Lagoon. Well action isn't really my cup of tea anyway.

I guess they best to make a strong female character is not to make a strong female character but create a good character who just happens to be female. Ghibli females are miles ahead of Disney's princesses in terms personality and character.

LOL yeah. I also think that Mari is a “WTF character” in this new Eva universe. She’s always genki, she kicks some asses, she lectures our beloved protagonist, and overall gave a different aura to the movie(s). She’s almost like a representation of the jaded fans who enters Eva universe and says “WTF with all these gloomy atmosphere and angsty characters! Let’s make this show more cheerful and exciting! I’ll show you how to do it!” :D.

I admit that she's my guilty-pleasure in the movie(s).

You and every other Mari fan. :p Seriously though, I hope Mari gets more character soon or becomes less of a mary sue in the future.

Soliloquy

2012-11-04, 05:02

I guess they best to make a strong female character is not to make a strong female character but create a good character who just happens to be female. Ghibli females are miles ahead of Disney's princesses in terms personality and character.

Most Disney princesses were damsels in distresses anyway so it's a bit unfair to compare. It is funny how from what I see Ghibli or Hayao Miyazaki was the one of the first to create a believable yet strong female character in the media. Because honestly not including the books, I have trouble remembering who the female main characters were with the independent attitude and generally strong in general medium of entertainment. At the same time, it's a bit understandable there was still a bit of prejudice. So far I can only think of 1 or 2 at least from live-action movies.

Even with live-action movies, it was a bit hard to find female characters who had actual personalities. At least if I look at best movies in the 80's, most of them were plot devices. Ironically, the horror movies do typically good jobs of establishing good female characters. I think rather than treating them as the same as male, I wonder if planning the setting or situation works the best to make a strong character. For some reason, placing the character in a dreaded situation allows them to explore their personalities and nature. When I think deeper, I see often that the female characters show their best traits when they are in precarious situations while the male characters on their own act recklessly and dies.

I think anime shares that same factor as the films, often the horror genres show the female characters at their best. Doesn't really matter whether they are main or minor characters. They show their strong personality without being over-the-top and pandering towards the audience.