Tawawa on Monday

[FlareKnight]

Honestly it was fitting to end it with that wedding. Mostly since Maegami was absolutely the main character of this season. Ai-chan was definitely a supporting character by comparison. We got to see her romance really take off, get together with the guy she likes, and even ending with her marriage. There wasn't much progression outside of her story. Maybe the girl's modeling career taking off was the second most legitimate development. Senpai/Kouhai didn't really go anywhere besides their usual antics. Ai-chan did have that one date, but outside of that she was pretty well in the background.

So in that sense I'll say season 1 was way better. Adding more pairs and characters had a benefit. But it also muddied the waters and pushed the main characters into the background. Which I don't think is a great choice. The characters that got the second season basically didn't gain any benefits of it happening.

[Lex79]

It felt strange to see Maegami without bangs.

[Shadow5YA]

Originally Posted by FlareKnight

So in that sense I'll say season 1 was way better. Adding more pairs and characters had a benefit. But it also muddied the waters and pushed the main characters into the background. Which I don't think is a great choice. The characters that got the second season basically didn't gain any benefits of it happening.

That is your own assumption. What makes you think the other well-endowed girls shown this season aren't main characters like Ai-chan?

[Ghostfriendly]

Originally Posted by Shadow5YA

I'm not sure how you came to that interpretation of Lolita, considering it was only narrated from the guy's point of view, and he not only married the girl's mother, but he had raped her and later bribes her into having sex while she is still 12.

While Maegami-chan is still young, the teacher still held back until she graduated and their relationship is fully consensual afterwards.

'In 1958, Dorothy Parker described the novel [Lolita] as "the engrossing, anguished story of a man, a man of taste and culture, who can love only little girls" and Lolita as "a dreadful little creature, selfish, hard, vulgar, and foul-tempered." In 1959, novelist Robertson Davies wrote that the theme of Lolita is "not the corruption of an innocent child by a cunning adult, but the exploitation of a weak adult by a corrupt child. This is no pretty theme, but it is one with which social workers, magistrates and psychiatrists are familiar."' (Wikipedia article)

Plenty of other critics disagree with them, and I don't think its the likeliest interpretation of Lolita, but it is an interpretation, and a very relevant one here. ex-teacher student relationship isn't outright non-consensual but based on the girl persistently exploiting the teacher's duty of care and refusing to take no for an answer, so not exactly wholesome, or the sort of behaviour we want to encourage in real life, in any sense. The correct idea isn't that it's okay if teachers wait for students to graduate, it's that they can't allow this sort of thing at all. Particularly, they can't abdicate responsibility to a minor who is attracted to them (or that they believe is attracted to them) by pretending that makes it alright. An especially toxic fantasy, even more so than the other male chauvinist fantasies this show blatantly serves...although it's blatant enough about it that fantasy can hopefully be separated from fact in most cases.

Again, in real life, Volleyball-chan's groping of Ai wouldn't be particularly wholesome. It doesn't seem to be something Ai greatly minds in the anime, however, which has every right to be distinct from the manga, and another woman isn't physically or emotionally threatening as the aggressive, violence-associated other of a man. I'm aware lesbians can have as many bad qualities as heterosexual men, but toxic masculinity is so ubiquitous in society and familiar to me as a man that Volleyball-chan is best girl as far as I'm concerned. It's another symptom of bias that the male characters are all dishonestly portrayed as earnest, reasonable people, whose gaze, lusts and even porn habits in the OVA are unrealistically indulged by the female characters, while the lesbian character is shown, albeit in a rose-tinted fashion, as a sex offender. In a sense she can get away with it because she's a girl; in a much more profound sense, she deserves a much better part, because she's got more potential to be a good person with a good relationship than any males. Romantic relationships, especially heterosexual ones, aren't best portrayed by a soft porn series.

Alas, Japan doesn't have gay marriage. That made VB-chan fantasy of marrying Ai in ep 11 very poignant, and dishonest of the show. Same-sex couples can have the wedding ceremony Volleyball-chan imagines, of course, but no legal recognition, which leads me to suspect this show of considerable superficiality. As superficial fanservice, which of course the show is, Volleyball-chan and little sister in ep 7 was definitely the best.

[Nachtwandler]

Another guy that grown with modern US morals tries to overanalyze a fanservice romcom show. Dude, chill out or stop watching anime if you react at everything this way.

[Ghostfriendly]

Originally Posted by Nachtwandler

Another guy that grown with modern US morals tries to overanalyze a fanservice romcom show. Dude, chill out or stop watching anime if you react at everything this way.

I think I've succeeded in overanalysing a fanservice anime; rather than the analysis being wrong, it's so obvious as to be hardly worth stating, if anything. Except that toxic values can be absorbed from 'light' entertainment more insidiously than 'serious' works, if we don't get the differences from reality clear. They hopefully are clear to most people watching a blatant fanservice show, but you'd be surprised, and it's the most notable thing about the series I can think of to say. Furthermore, I'm British, and aware of a large proportion of people in the US who would seriously disagree with me.

[Nachtwandler]

Sorry, but go bait someone else.

[Infinite Zenith]

Originally Posted by Ghostfriendly

I think I've succeeded in overanalysing a fanservice anime; rather than the analysis being wrong, it's so obvious as to be hardly worth stating, if anything. Except that toxic values can be absorbed from 'light' entertainment more insidiously than 'serious' works, if we don't get the differences from reality clear. They hopefully are clear to most people watching a blatant fanservice show, but you'd be surprised, and it's the most notable thing about the series I can think of to say. Furthermore, I'm British, and aware of a large proportion of people in the US who would seriously disagree with me.

You haven't succeeded in analysing anything. In fact, what you've done isn't even analysis. You draw no meaningful conclusion and there is no substantial evidence backing your claims. In fact, you're off base: this is what most people have to say about Tawawa on Monday. It is evident that whatever conclusions you reached were based purely on your own (limited) understanding of "morality" and is more of an attempt to impose your own world-views on others.

[Ghostfriendly]

Originally Posted by Infinite Zenith

You haven't succeeded in analysing anything. In fact, what you've done isn't even analysis. You draw no meaningful conclusion and there is no substantial evidence backing your claims. In fact, you're off base: this is what most people have to say about Tawawa on Monday. It is evident that whatever conclusions you reached were based purely on your own (limited) understanding of "morality" and is more of an attempt to impose your own world-views on others.

That looks like principally what you have to say about Tawara on Monday. It's not bad, but taking a superficial series at face value isn't going to give us profound or really worthwhile commentary. This isn't fundamentally a series about love, friendship, precious everyday moments, or anything in honest reality. It isn't Non Non Biyori or Yokohama Shopping Trip; experience of girls buying underwear together is not its reason or point. It is a dishonest male fantasy of friendly female lust-objects; a creepy soft porn series. Soft and blatant enough not to be unacceptable viewing, but it doesn't have any qualities more absolutely significant than that. There's not much worth saying about the series unless you tackle the profound negative values it's rooted in.

As for my worldview, I can't imagine how I could view or comprehend the world without one; my perception of truth and value is going to determine what I write and value.

Anyway, the least deserving girl got a white dress in ep 12, though treating a wedding as 'a woman's happiness' is really the problem. Society has invested homosexual relationships with so many lies and heterosexual relationships with so much real toxicity, superficial treatments of het sex are worse than anything but soft porn masquerading as romance. Superficial treatments of homosexual relations that aren't actually hateful can be not so bad; gay characters deserve better when their faults are build on the prejudices of het writers and readers, rather than their desires.

[Infinite Zenith]

It's easy to be dismissive of a commentary when someone else has done all the heavy lifting, as I have in this case. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what analysis is: it is a critical evaluation of a work, and in order to do this, evidence from said work must be derived and drawn to formulate a conclusion. In my case, I've taken the moments Ai and the others have experienced to draw a concrete conclusion of what the author is trying to state about the human condition. Because Tawawa on Monday is prima facie about creating amusement through awkward moments, the conclusions I have reached add value to the discussion.

On the other hand, your insistence that you are doing analysis is quite untrue, and it is doubly untrue that one must take a negative approach in order to have a meaningful conversation. For one, you are making broad, superficial generalisations about society and its moral standards without providing adequate evidence for such. In a literary analysis, said evidence can come from the work itself, but because you are choosing to apply another set criteria, it is expected that you properly conduct a literature review (using primary sources) and cite your sources accordingly. You've not done this. Similarly, you make claims about law and legality, but there are no citations to back this up. Your premise is unsound, and in the absence of substantial, useful sources, you quite frankly have no premise.

In spite of this, you argue that you have a conclusion (i.e. "this show is immoral and dishonest"), suppose that this conclusion holds true and then attempt to formulate your discussion around this. This is a classic instance of petitio principii, an informal fallacy where you've assumed what you wanted to prove. While you've managed to hide it behind purple prose, let me be the first to say that you've said exactly nothing of value. This is identical to what you attempted to do, and fail at doing, in The Aquatope on White Sand: aside from using a few big words about "morality" and raising a few pointed questions over the series' portrayal of Okinawa, you've added no value to the discussion there. In my case, at the minimum, I've drawn a serviceable conclusion about why Tawawa on Monday is more than it appears to be at first glance, and I've related this to the human condition. Of course, if you continue to believe that you can trade with me in this style, of quasi-academic language and tone, then I expect you to put in a similar effort to defend your position. That means reading through no fewer than ten primary sources, arguing on evidence rather than emotion, and trying to convince me of your opinion in a structured, thoughtful manner. Until then, I highly doubt you'll be able to convince anyone in this board that your thoughts have any merit at all beyond being a poor effort at trying to virtue signal.

[Ghostfriendly]

Originally Posted by Infinite Zenith

It's easy to be dismissive of a commentary when someone else has done all the heavy lifting, as I have in this case. You seem to fundamentally misunderstand what analysis is: it is a critical evaluation of a work, and in order to do this, evidence from said work must be derived and drawn to formulate a conclusion. In my case, I've taken the moments Ai and the others have experienced to draw a concrete conclusion of what the author is trying to state about the human condition. Because Tawawa on Monday is prima facie about creating amusement through awkward moments, the conclusions I have reached add value to the discussion.

Only read this yesterday while checking link to your blog; it's honestly rather pretentious. My analysis is firmly based on events of the show, ie. a student grooms a teacher, a sequence of contrived, gratuitous interactions between audience surrogate males and women with improbable anatomy, if you really need me to spell it out. It isn't a 'broad superficial generalisation' to identify this as soft porn, but so obvious as to be barely worth stating, based on unexceptional values and knowledge of world. If we differ in that, I don't have a responsibility to provide you with even the quote I did, let alone the absurdly detailed evidence you require for conclusions that should be trivial. It's okay for you to have a different values system, but there's no reason to claim I've pulled my analysis out if the ether without reference to the events of the series or respectable ideas you should be familiar with. Interpreting the purpose of the show as 'amusement based on awkwardness' rather than cheap sexual titillation, is naive.

This is an example of going beyond the text with an extradiegetic reading to give some much more significant information about the nature of pornography, that should require no additional evidence for a reasonable person. The student grooming teacher storyline is a very thin attempt to disguise and excuse a conventional teacher-led abusive student teacher relationship for the benefit of male fetishists. The student is only 'in love' with the teacher, and all these girls only suffer any of these characterless men to be near them, for the same reason women in hardcore porn 'want' to be abused and humiliated, with about as much likelihood or taste, albeit a much lighter example. Women like that do exist, but they people this show not because they're representative, but for crass and unoriginal male enjoyment. Incidentally encouraging the 'she's asking for it in that skirt' delusion shared by a large number of sex offenders and toxic males.

[Lex79]

I'm still failing to see what is wrong in providing a series with well endowed girls for the enjoyment of male viewers.

[Infinite Zenith]

Originally Posted by Lex79

I'm still failing to see what is wrong in providing a series with well endowed girls for the enjoyment of male viewers.

That's because there's nothing wrong with it.

Originally Posted by Ghostfriendly

Only read this yesterday while checking link to your blog; it's honestly rather pretentious. My analysis is firmly based on events of the show, ie. a student grooms a teacher, a sequence of contrived, gratuitous interactions between audience surrogate males and women with improbable anatomy, if you really need me to spell it out. It isn't a 'broad superficial generalisation' to identify this as soft porn, but so obvious as to be barely worth stating, based on unexceptional values and knowledge of world. If we differ in that, I don't have a responsibility to provide you with even the quote I did, let alone the absurdly detailed evidence you require for conclusions that should be trivial. It's okay for you to have a different values system, but there's no reason to claim I've pulled my analysis out if the ether without reference to the events of the series or respectable ideas you should be familiar with. Interpreting the purpose of the show as 'amusement based on awkwardness' rather than cheap sexual titillation, is naive.

This is an example of going beyond the text with an extradiegetic reading to give some much more significant information about the nature of pornography, that should require no additional evidence for a reasonable person. The student grooming teacher storyline is a very thin attempt to disguise and excuse a conventional teacher-led abusive student teacher relationship for the benefit of male fetishists. The student is only 'in love' with the teacher, and all these girls only suffer any of these characterless men to be near them, for the same reason women in hardcore porn 'want' to be abused and humiliated, with about as much likelihood or taste, albeit a much lighter example. Women like that do exist, but they people this show not because they're representative, but for crass and unoriginal male enjoyment. Incidentally encouraging the 'she's asking for it in that skirt' delusion shared by a large number of sex offenders and toxic males.

Park your pathetic attempts at a serious academic discussion. Unless you can prove you have credentials in the field, your use of jargon does you no credit and only shows how ignorant you are.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Lex79

I'm still failing to see what is wrong in providing a series with well endowed girls for the enjoyment of male viewers.

Twitter sees anything for the enjoyment of males as bad.

All Himura Kiseki wanted is to make our Mondays a little better.
And the animators are certainly having a field day with it

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

[Lex79]

Originally Posted by Infinite Zenith

That's because there's nothing wrong with it.

That's an undeniable truth.

Originally Posted by Sheba

Twitter sees anything for the enjoyment of males as bad.

All Himura Kiseki wanted is to make our Mondays a little better.
And the animators are certainly having a field day with it

Images

Sorry; dynamic content not loaded. Reload?

And he manages to do that really well.

[Ghostfriendly]

As an Azur Lane fan, I can hardly say that all fanservice is evil, though the Shipgirls are kicking Siren butt as well as dispensing fanservice. I wouldn't have got through Tawara if it were unequivocally unsuitable for human consumption like Shield Hero and Goblin Slayer. I do think it's good to understand what you're watching, as well as the dehumanisation and real dangers inherent in 'male entertainment', which at least I've somewhat explained. I'd hope anyone playing Azur Lane would be conscious of its workplace sexual harassment element, and be mindful of the distortion. On the other hand, I don't believe Carole and Tuesday has a serious problem with racism or transphobia, but I'd respect someone who did, and acknowledge where the series could do much better, because prejudice supported in media is a serious issue.

[Ghostfriendly]

https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/int...ws-ire/.184654

A bit of good sense and valid criticism. I, at least, am okay with fanservice within anime, but not fanservice anime.

[LG-MAX 2.o]

Interestingly, ads in which real men appear half-naked or characters from teen series like Free are very well accepted by the community.



If this is indecent/obscene/something on the level of a sexual act, then Japanese schoolgirls should urgently start wearing clothes that cover the entire body.

[Nachtwandler]

Originally Posted by LG-MAX 2.o

Interestingly, ads in which real men appear half-naked or characters from teen series like Free are very well accepted by the community.



If this is indecent/obscene/something on the level of a sexual act, then Japanese schoolgirls should urgently start wearing clothes that cover the entire body.

Don't mind the person above (or radical feminist groups in general). Radical persons just cannot think rationally.

[Infinite Zenith]

Whereas people are entitled to their own thoughts, we've been over this before: if one doesn't like a genre, don't watch it. Nothing is gained by attempting to change the thinking of others.

There is nothing wrong with that ad, of course, and Anime News Network is known for their performative activism. The author of that particular ANN article also has a history of stirring the pot previously, and lacks the credentials to write anything of merit regarding the topic anyways.