(L+CR) selector infected WIXOSS

[NinjaRealist]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Because without personal responsibility, how do you hold people accountable for their mistakes and misdeeds? And if you don't hold people accountable for such things, then how do you influence them to do better, or become better people? There's not always proverbial carrots available to provide incentives.

You might be right that people can change others more than they can change themselves, but part of changing others is often holding others to a higher standard of personal responsibility than what they're currently doing. In some cases, you have to convince others to start taking ownership of their lives and stop blaming everybody else for their problems.

In Yuzuki's case, it could be argued that she needs to stop blaming the whole world for her unrequited love, and take the initiative to actually talk things over openly with her brother, whatever comes of that.

I realize it's a controversial viewpoint and I don't want to get too far outside the confines of this show explaining it, but I think that there's a lot of examples you could use from just this past episode. You present the notion that "stick" style of instruction is solely dependent on making other people blame themselves for their mistakes. I would disagree with that assertion.

For example, let's say you want to teach a kid not to steal alcohol from your refrigerator. You could blame him for being a bad kid, but wouldn't you potentially achieve an even better result if you simply explained the consequences of drinking and then explained that the punishment isn't because they're a bad person, it's because they need to think about this incident and remember why it's wrong? That's really the purpose of punishment IMO and as long as you're still punishing I don't see the need for blame.

In terms of how others can change you more easily than you can change yourself, I think WIXOSS offers a great example of this. Ruko had her heart set on losing on purpose and I doubt she would have ever come to the conclusion that this was the wrong thing to do on her own. But when Hitoe spoke to her she was able to convince her not to lose on purpose. Isn't that scene an example of being able to influence others more easily than you can influence yourself?

Originally Posted by apotheosis

But based on your logic, we should have more power to change your mind about this than you do?

I will agree it is rare to find people who can step back and examine even some of their personal bias.

You do have more power to change my mind. It's unlikely that I'm going to change my mind on this issue on my own and my own personal bias probably even drives me away from information that would contradict my views.

But keep in mind that this is an opinion formed, not on my own, but through countless interactions with thousands of people. It's hard for you to change my mind on this issue because so many people have influenced me to do feel the way I do about this subject.

[FateAnomaly]

Akira strategy is based on insulting the opponent and making them do stupid moves. Luckily there is no referee or anything because in a RL tournament, personal attacks will get you disqualified. The mind reading just make it easier to provoke the opponent. That's why she cannot win against the other idol since she is cool as a cucumber. And she will lose against the MC because she has no wish.

The lack of a coherent gameplay is a real big minus in this show. Players don't even wait for the other player to end their turn before starting their own.

Ya, I think the 2 idols got their babies .. I mean LRIG switched lol.

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by FateAnomaly

Akira strategy is based on insulting the opponent and making them do stupid moves.

Actually she doesn't really trash-talk much. Just revealing the opponent's wish and making one or two incisive comments is more or less all she does. But it's true her strategy is mainly based on this. It probably can't be helped since her LRIG doesn't seem to have powerful offensive abilities.

[NinjaRealist]

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

Actually she doesn't really trash-talk much. Just rrevealing the opponent's wish and making one of two incisive comments is more or less all she does.

If it wasn't a big deal then Yuzuki wouldn't have spent the whole night out crying by herself. And if you're going to respond by calling Yuzuki weak then I reject that argument. Just because someone has a lower threshold for certain forms of abuse doesn't make them weak. If you call Yuzuki weak for being unable to handle being mocked and shamed, for her deepest, most painful, secret, then you have to call Akira weak for being unable to control her rampant jealousy.

But I don't think either is weak. I reject the idea of "weak" people.

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by NinjaRealist

If it wasn't a big deal then Yuzuki wouldn't have spent the whole night out crying by herself.

Sucks to be her, but Akira doesn't have to hold back. It would worse for Yuzuki if she did.

[NinjaRealist]

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

Sucks to be her, but Akira doesn't have to hold back. It would worse for Yuzuki if she did.

How would it be worse for Yuzuki if she didn't make fun of her darkest, most painful, secret?

I honestly think that you don't understand how trauma works. Do you just reject psychology? Do you not think PTSD is a real thing?

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by NinjaRealist

How would it be worse for Yuzuki if she didn't make fun of her darkest, most painful, secret?

Holding back is disrespectful to your opponent. Yeah, Akira's strategy is tough and mean, but we're talking about wishes here. It's obvious it's not going to be a walk in the park.

I honestly think that you don't understand how trauma works. Do you just reject psychology? Do you not think PTSD is a real thing?

No one is forcing her to take part on this. She's doing it for her own reasons. If this is too much for her she can just give up at any moment. But make not mistake, no one is going to throw the match for her sake, and even if someone was will to (someone like Ruko, for example) it wouldn't be the right thing to do. It's up to Yuzuki to fight for what she wants. That's life for you.

[FateAnomaly]

If insulting your opponent to distract them is allowed, how about threatening them? Or drugging them or worse? Its for a wish so anything is fair game right?

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by FateAnomaly

If insulting your opponent to distract them is allowed

It's funny you say that because the one who "insulted" Yuzuki first wasn't Akira but her LRIG.

If the card does it, and out of her own accord, I would say that it is most definitely allowed.

how about threatening them? Or drugging them or worse?

I don't know. We'll have to wait and see. But it's obvious the game isn't just a game, so it wouldn't surprise me if even worse things are allowed.

[Arkeus]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

Akira coerced Yuzuki into a match that she initially wanted absolutely nothing to do with. Akira hounded Yuzuki constantly to the point that Akira came off as borderline creepy and obsessive.

Hahahahahahhaha

You mean Yuzuki tried to get a match with Akira, got cold feet when she realized that Akira actually knew how to play, and then after Akira contronted her with it gave her her number.

When Akira found her again, she provoked Yuzuki into playing. No coercicion there- Yuzuki played because Yuzuki wanted to prove 'her way' was right, and because she wanted to slap Akira.

So to say that the Akira/Yuzuki match is a lot fairer is honestly a bit ridiculous. Akira coerced/hounded her way into getting the match, and then she engaged in one-sided trash-talking against Yuzuki almost the entire match. The only reason Yuzuki tried to hurt Akira is because of how Akira enraged Yuzuki with invasive mind-reading followed up by trash-talking.

Yes, Red and Blue aren't compabtible. Instead, what Yuzuki did was /forcing/ Ruko to begin a match when she didn't know the rule.

Classic Red behavior.

The Hitoe/Ruko match was far less a matter of coercion. There was far less disrespect here. Hitoe's one comment about viewing Ruko as a weak opponent is nothing compared to Akira's almost constant trash-talking. Besides, Hitoe apologized twice for that comment (once out of simple politeness, a second time out of complete sincerity). What has Akira apologized for?

What does apologizing about being wrong has to do with anything? Hitoe chose to fight against Ruko because she thought Ruko was a prey, and Ruko chose to play because she wanted to be a prey.

That Ruko is not any better doesn't change anything.

I'm honestly amazed at how much some people here are defending Akira. This is clearly not a nice person. I don't know what more the anime could do to put her in a negative light (her facial expressions when angry were almost cheesy in how over-the-top they were ). Her personality is pretty clearly supposed to come across as ugly (in contrast to her attractive physical appearance). The only question for me is if she'll eventually become sympathetic (and likely redeemed in some way), or if she'll just go down good and hard at some point as a modern day aesop. Probably the former, since that strikes me as more Okada's style, but I'm not 100% confident here.

Because the only one casting her in a negative light is Yuzuki. Hitoe? she didn't care about the trash talking once the match was over, and just considered herself /not experienced enough/ (classic green), and Ruko, while the match was going on, could only think that she wanted to be in Hitoe's shoes instead.

This is basically Yuzuki being prejudiced, and you thinking the show is somehow agreeing with that prejudice when every other characters don't mind.

[Shyni]

I don't really see Akira as "villainous", since she hasn't threatened to injure someone or anything. I was surprised at how she was at the end of the episode, though.

Also, I'm not finding Yuzuki all that sympathetic since her wish seems more selfish than certain other love interest-related wishes I know about. Maybe I'm just being weird with this.

And why does Hitoe have something against someone "tainting" her wish by losing on purpose? Isn't using her wish to make people be freinds with her in itself "cheating", or like, tantamount to brainwashing? Not exactly "pure".

[Arkeus]

Originally Posted by Shyni

And why does Hitoe have something against someone "tainting" her wish by losing on purpose? Isn't using her wish to make people be freinds with her in itself "cheating", or like, tantamount to brainwashing? Not exactly "pure".

She's green, which is all about growth and so on. It makes sense for her to see a resolution without growth to be unworthy.

It's like how Akira dislike Yuzuki being straightforward, or how Yuzuki hates Akira not being straightforward. They are really milking the color alignment system.

[NinjaRealist]

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

I don't know. We'll have to wait and see. But it's obvious the game isn't just a game, so it wouldn't surprise me if even worse things are allowed.

So do you think that murder or lesser degrees of physical violence would be acceptable if the rules of the game specifically allowed for it?

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by NinjaRealist

So do you think that murder or lesser degrees of physical violence would be acceptable if the rules of the game specifically allowed for it?

It's a supernatural game. It grants wishes and all. Of course it's going to be dangerous. Whether is acceptable or no is beside the point, since it's already outside society's reach either way.

[NinjaRealist]

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

It's a supernatural game. Whether is acceptable or no is beside the point.

In my opinion the entire point of literature is to explore questions of human behavior, morals and ethics. We were talking about it before so I thought you shared a similar desire to discuss such things.

If you don't want to talk about the moral implications of the WIXOSS rules anymore then I won't bring it up anymore. I guess I was just curious because I got the impression that you saw the game rules as more important than any type of moral consideration. Furthermore, this gives the impression that you don't believe we should interact with other organisms in an empathic way.

I guess I'm just a little perplexed by your point of view and am trying to understand it given that discussion of this show centers so much around ideas of right and wrong. But, again, if you don't want to talk about it anymore then I apologize for bringing it up to you again.

[Key Board]

I disagree. Not all fiction have to be aesops and preach something.

The primary purpose of fiction is the tell a story.
And that story can be a mean spirited one, or even one that is lacking a clear moral message.

That being said, the prologue of the first episode seems to imply something terrible will happen to those who do make it to the end.
I won't be surprised if this story has a Faustian bargain theme

[NinjaRealist]

Originally Posted by Key Board

I disagree. Not all fiction have to be aesops and preach something.

The primary purpose of fiction is the tell a story. And that story can be a mean spirited one.

I'm just talking about my opinion here. I'm not saying it's the only right way to interact with literature. Your way of enjoying fiction is just as valid as mine.

I just find that most fiction is infinitely more interesting if you look at it, not just as an entertaining story, but as a rich body of subtext that can provoke contemplation/discussion about a wide range of topics that are relevant to people's daily lives.

Like, take away the subtext and WIXOSS is just a story about girls playing some magical card game. But when you add the subtext it's an analysis of human society and the way competition affects us. To me, the second option is much more interesting. But, again, I'm not trying to say your way is wrong.

[Kazu-kun]

Originally Posted by NinjaRealist

In my opinion the entire point of literature is to explore questions of human behavior, morals and ethics. We were talking about it before so I thought you shared a similar desire to discuss such things.

I was sort of interested before the last episode. Now I'm convinced the series has no interest in exploring these issues at all, so I lost interest as well.

I guess I was just curious because I got the impression that you saw the game rules as more important than any type of moral consideration.

Moral considerations are besides the point because it's like complaining about a contract with the devil having drawbacks. It's a contract with the devil. Of course it has drawbacks. It's its nature and you can't do anything about it. The point is whether you should sign the contract or not.

Furthermore, this gives the impression that you don't believe we should interact with other organisms in an empathic way.

I'm empathic enough to realize Akira didn't do anything wrong (yet, at the very least). The game is "wrong" if you want to blame someone. But that's the catch. It's pointless to complaint about the game because it's out of your reach. It's a devil's contract.

This is just my opinion. You're free to discuss whatever you want.

[Key Board]

Originally Posted by NinjaRealist

I'm just talking about my opinion here. I'm not saying it's the only right way to interact with literature. Your way of enjoying fiction is just as valid as mine.

I just find that most fiction is infinitely more interesting if you look at it, not just as an entertaining story, but as a rich body of subtext that can provoke contemplation/discussion about a wide range of topics that are relevant to people's daily lives.

Like, take away the subtext and WIXOSS is just a story about girls playing some magical card game. But when you add the subtext it's an analysis of human society and the way competition affects us. To me, the second option is much more interesting. But, again, I'm not trying to say your way is wrong.

No, you misunderstand me.
Let me clarify

I'm saying that it doesn't have to be a moral aesop.
You can make the audience ponder about things without being an aesop
It doesn't have to explicitly tackle a theme and preach a moral message likes say: "the girls couldn't find true happiness because they abandoned their morality in pursuit of their personal desire"

If the show ended with say.. Akari pulling all sorts of tricks to achieve what she wants, losing everything, but in the end being satisfied about her decisions" That would not be a moral aesop, but it would still be a story that provoke discussions.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

Yuzuki got in actual attacks on Akira's LRIG while Akira only destroyed two minor cards (level 1 IIRC) from Yuzuki. It doesn't take a genius to figure out who is winning at this point.

In Yu-Gi-Oh and Magic: The Gathering, simply getting attacks off doesn't necessarily mean you're doing significant damage to your opponent. If WIXOSS is different then it needs to make that clear, and from what I can tell, it hasn't done so.

Akira certainly seemed rather calm and composed and confident for somebody "losing", don't you think? And Yuzuki seemed rather flustered for somebody "winning".

So I don't see much evidence here supporting your position.

The point is that her powers are the tools that were given to her to play the game. You can't asked her to stop using part of her powers while everyone else gets to fight at full power.

There are particular power uses that are pertinent to the game unfolding before you, and then there are those that aren't. I mean, should Akira start reading her opponent's minds to see if they know winning lottery numbers?

I'm amazed that you really don't seem to get it. Just because you're playing a game doesn't mean that basic standards of human decency get thrown completely out the window.

The laws, norms, and moral values of the wider society don't magically and suddenly get turned completely off just because you're playing a game. If you do something in that game that would be widely considered criminal outside of it, then you can still get prosecuted for that action (as a NHLer by the name of Todd Bertuzzi learned).

I would certainly consider Akira's invasive mind-reading of innermost desires to be immoral behavior if it happened outside of the confines of a game. So I'm not going to excuse it just because it's happening in a game - Just like I wouldn't condone what Todd Bertuzzi did to Steve Moore just because it happened on the ice during an official NHL hockey game.

You're crazy if you think that would be fair.

Why wouldn't it be fair? Card destruction seems like a pretty useful ability in and of itself. That's a significant "blue" edge right there.

Originally Posted by NinjaRealist

I realize it's a controversial viewpoint and I don't want to get too far outside the confines of this show explaining it, but I think that there's a lot of examples you could use from just this past episode. You present the notion that "stick" style of instruction is solely dependent on making other people blame themselves for their mistakes. I would disagree with that assertion.

For example, let's say you want to teach a kid not to steal alcohol from your refrigerator. You could blame him for being a bad kid, but wouldn't you potentially achieve an even better result if you simply explained the consequences of drinking and then explained that the punishment isn't because they're a bad person, it's because they need to think about this incident and remember why it's wrong?

I don't get the atom-splitting you're engaging in here. It's wrong to do wrong (X=X). If someone is doing wrong, then well, he or she is doing wrong.

If you're telling somebody "Don't do that, it's wrong", it's still a matter of putting onus on that person to choose to refrain from doing wrong. It's still, at least implicitly, saying "You can change for the better here. You are able to refrain from doing this wrong thing. If I didn't think that, I wouldn't even bother trying to encourage you in that direction."

Originally Posted by Arkeus

Hahahahahahhaha

You mean Yuzuki tried to get a match with Akira, got cold feet when she realized that Akira actually knew how to play, and then after Akira contronted her with it gave her her number.

No, Yuzuki was turned off by how Akira conducted herself in her match against Hitoe, not the simple fact that Akira won. Yuzuki was disgusted by Akira's invasive mind-reading and trash-talking.

When Akira found her again, she provoked Yuzuki into playing. No coercicion there-

There was loads of coercion! Akira hounded Yuzuki constantly for a match.

Because the only one casting her in a negative light is Yuzuki.

That's not true. The anime as a whole is casting her in a negative light. I've already elaborated on that. What exactly did you take from the scene where she displayed vehement anger in a mostly private setting? Her personality came off as pretty ugly there, and I'm pretty confident that was intentional on the part of Okada and JC Staff.

Originally Posted by Kazu-kun

I was sort of interested before the last episode. Now I'm convinced the series has no interest in exploring these issues at all, so I lost interest as well.

Really? You don't see any potential whatsoever for Akira's character arc to contain a moral lesson to it?

Moral considerations are besides the point because it's like complaining about a contract with the devil having drawbacks.

No, moral considerations are not beside the point. Doing harm is still doing harm. I'm emphatic enough to realize that, and hence to realize that Akira did do something morally wrong.