#I just hate it when the narrative is so blatantly biased toward one character

[musclesandhammering]

Late to this post, but I see nothing but facts.

It’s also annoying how obvious it was that the writers intentionally manipulated this scene in Wanda’s favour. Like the things you mentioned (Mr Fantastic giving away Black Bolt’s power, them all standing politely as their team mates got killed one by one instead of attacking wanda as a group, Maria being killed by a statue) were all clearly done that way specifically so it wouldn’t be as unrealistic for Wanda to win.

If they had all engaged her at once and Maria help her off while Black Bolt surprised her with his powers, she 100% would’ve lost. And probably died.

*Multiverse of Madness SPOILERS*

Time for me to talk about the Illuminati death scenes, cause this was some bullcrap.

First, Black Bolt: I genuinely feel sorry for fans of the character and the Inhumans. Honestly, I haven't seen the Inhumans show, so I don't know if it's bad or good (even though I've heard from some people who said it was a bad show). I did hear that Anson Mount played the character in the show, and he was fine in MoM. He even got the comic accurate costume, tuning fork and all. Although, I feel bad for the actor since he got to reprise his role only to get killed off in a brutal way for a PG-13 movie. I understand taking Black Bolt out first since he's a major threat to Wanda, but the reason she was able to do that was because Reed had to tell her what his power is, which is so stupid. You don't tell your enemy what they're capable of! Also, I thought he'd be the one that should've held his own against Wanda (the other two should've been Professor X and Captain Marvel) based on his abilities. Dude could level an entire town with a mere word!

Mr. Fantastic: I'm so sorry Fantastic Four fans. Now, because he was in the movie for a couple of minutes, I can't judge how well John Krasinski acted as Reed Richards, but he was fine in the movie. Speaking of Krasinski, this was a fancast made by so many fans for years. Well, we got the fancast we wanted....only for him to turn into string cheese and get his head popped off by Wanda. The effects for his stretching was okay, and the costume was okay, but god damn was Reed done dirty here. His death was the slowest out of the Illuminati, which I don't understand why the hell Peggy and Maria just stood there and not attack Wanda to save Reed! Also, Reed's supposed to be one of the smartest people in Marvel, but he tells Wanda Black Bolt's power, and stretches his arm to grab her when he saw what he did to his teammate. Yeah, Reed in the comics messes up, but come on! Now, if the Fantastic Four movie's still happening and Krasinski isn't casted, that's gonna be a huge insult to fans who wanted to see him play that role.

Captain Carter: Anyone noticed that Wanda easily get rid of the two male members, but struggles to fight against the two female members? I don't know how I feel about that. Anyway, I still don't get why Peggy is a member of the Illuminati, but okay. And she has a jetpack for some reason. Did it suck that she died? Yeah, it was a bummer. But, I'm surprised that Wanda had a longer fight with her than Black Bolt and Mr. Fantastic, and that she struggled against Peggy and Maria more than the others. Also, "I can do this all day"....seriously?! She had to have Steve's catchphrase?!

Captain Marvel: So, she's one of the three that should've held her own and she did. But, her death was a giant statue falling on top of her? I wanted to call bullcrap on that cause Carol has flown through space ships, and this Maria variant dies from a statue. Maybe it was because Wanda absorbed her powers, but it was hard to tell. If she did do that however, why the hell doesn't she do that to everyone else?! Also, Maria's attitude rubbed me the wrong way, but I think the writers made her and the others arrogant so that they'd easily get killed by Wanda. It's still annoying though.

Now, there's still Charles Xavier but that's gonna be a long post for later. And, I know some people are gonna say "they're variants, it's fine". No. No, it's not fine. This was the first introduction to Mr. Fantastic, and Black Bolt in an MCU movie. Them getting brutally murdered shouldn't be part of that. It's insulting to the Fantastic Four fans and the Inhumans fans. This is also Captain Carter's live action debut, and this would piss off some of the Peggy stans too. Too bad Wanda is "dead", otherwise, I'd hope Sue Storm, Medusa, or Franklin Richards would've hunted her down and kicked her butt for killing their loved ones. I pick them because of how close they are to them. Anyone else who's capable of beating up the witch is fine by me if they join in.

[kurtmustdie]

okay heres the fucking thing about this script controversy that some people don't seem to get.

just gonna say it blatently:

strap in babes this is gonna be a long one!

The way Miguel O'Hara is written in the leaked transcripts is blatantly racist, here's why from a Latino himself!

all wrapped up in a sweet little bow for everyone who doesn't know how to comprehend what they're reading, cheers!

er. i mean.

¡Salud!

Miguel fans are not mad that they depicted him in a bad light and that they made it clear that he is in the wrong

WE FUCKING KNOW. WE'RE NOT STUPID.

Miguel has been depicted as a morally grey asshole since the early 1990s, which is when Spider-Man 2099 was initially debuted. And while yes, the movies are.... inaccurate, to say the least, it still stands.

The issue here is how he is depicted. They directly call Miguel O'Hara, a Latino man, an ANIMAL (he is directly called an animal TWICE. FUCKING TWICE.)

[1st image id: Miguel leaps onto Vulture, Clawing his way in past the renaissance armor. he is an ANIMAL. (keep in mind ANIMAL is literally in all caps.) /end id]

[2nd image id: Miguel SLASHES at the walls of light that surround Miles. Clawing the energy field apart, an animal in the throes of bloodlust -- /end id]

I need you to really soak in the fact that he is called "AN ANIMAL" twice. I'm awful at alts and ids but I feel I must so you can read it in plain text. sorry if they suck.

Our issue is not that the writers seem to have a bias against the character. a lot of writers write characters they dont particularly like and in turn tend to write them from a foggy lense of their own perception. An example would be Kate Cary and how she didn't like Crowfeather, a character she had to write about. I'm sure some of her bias seeped through. but this is different.

writing a Latino man as a bloodthirsty animal, implied to be called a predator because they call one of the people he fights (im not sure if its miles or the vulture, im leaning towards believing the former.) his "prey", THOSE ARE ALL RACIAL STEREOTYPES. ALL OF THEM.

[3rd image id: But Miguel can only see his prey: /end id]

There is no context to be needed here, the context is that this is miguel we're talking about and that they call him an animal. it does not matter if he is a villain or not (which he isnt, factually he fucking isnt im tired of having this conversation, fuck you). it matters that he's depicted in a racially insensitive way.

and this person brought this up pretty well actually, I didn't even think of it:

[4th image id: Tumblr user @/404-505 saying:

i want to be so mean to them

they couldn't write miguel crossing the border and stealing a job so they wrote him crossing into another universe and stealing his own identity

they couldnt write miguel as a drug addict so they gave him spider steroids instead /end id.]

They bring up a really good point about these clear stereotypes being seemingly. . . disguised behind points that are narratively relevant? This could literally just be pure coincidence, but noting how the writers wrote him before... it isn't looking too good for them. Sorry. Not sorry.

It is clear that there is some kind of bias against miguel that led to really disgusting, racist retoric. Whether or not it was intentional or if it was a first draft or whatever, the writers, which may i remind you were white, still wrote this at some point.

it makes me question whether or not they hated him because of his "bullshit utopia", their words not mine, or because of their own racial biases.

We cannot know because miguel is the only mexican character on the cast. I know Miles is Puerto Rican, but there are differences between how they were portrayed. also Puerto Ricans and Mexicans come from competely different cultural backgrounds that share simularities but are still different dont even try i will destroy you.

Using another users words again, but:

[5th image id: Tumblr user @/transmiguelohara says:

Don't talk to me about the Miguel parts in the script. I'm so disappointed in how the writers view him.

The difference between the way Miguel is written (antagonist, not the villain) vs Spot (the villain, whats to kill Miles' dad and everyone he knows) is soooo.....I don't know man it just screams racism in sorry. Describing Miguel as a bloodthirsty animal? Repeatedly? Treating him like he's mindless and has no motivation beyond having a hair trigger temper? It sucks man. /end id]

It also strikes me that now that we finally have a brown-skinned miguel, they write him like, well. this.

I don't really know if this is petty or not, but I want to wrap this back to the way the fandom also sees Movie Miguel.

Because TRUST ME it is not good either.

Miguel O'Hara Vs. FANDOM: Spoilers, it's been troubling since the beginning.

From the beginning (and by beginning in this case I mean since he was announced to be a character in this movie) Miguel has been continuously sexualized, beyond belief. He is repeatedly called "papi cholo" which NEED I REMIND YOU "Cholo" is a derogatory term used to call someone, usually a mexican person, a criminal or a delinquent.

FUCK YOU if you are not Latino OR hispanic and use this to describe people. from the bottom of my heart.

I'm pretty sure the majority of the people who called/ still currently call him "papi cholo" are mixing it up with "papi chulo" (white people moment.) which means something completely different but is still troubling as hell.

"papi chulo", which is slightly different in the way, just directly translates to "big daddy". Which again, Latino men being overly sexual "Latin Lovers" is ALSO A RACIAL STEREOTYPE. also its just blatant fetishization. Point blank fucking period.

Not only that but I notice a lot of art and fanfiction depicts him doing a lot of violence, or being very overbearing and demeaning, or in short terms.

a lot of people write him as physically and sexually aggressive.

fuck do you mean he growls during sex i can and will send you to space with no return.

which

for the millionth time

racial stereotype

halleluiah or however you spell it.

Having him say random spanish phrases you don't know the meaning or connotations of in your fanfiction is icing on the cake at this point.

fucking end me.

it isn't even only sexual depictions, since he's been shown in the movie, a lot of people seem to just see him as this guy who goes off and tries to kill children at a hairs trigger. which uh. fun fact no he fucking doesnt.

you clearly didn't watch the movie as well as you thought you did. hes just sarcastic and generally pretty level headed through the majority of his runtime, whether its implied by how characters around him act, or its just what we see on screen.

He doesn't necessarily have anger issues, the moment we see at the climax of the film is quite literally a mental break. he is not acting in a way that he usually would because he was cracking under the stress of holding the multiverse together with some scotch tape and orange glitter glue.

Also side tangent but he also has a mental break in the comics that's a little more... droopy and sad as compared to the movie, but it still happens. he has shitty mental health is what im saying. he only really lashes out angrily when hes at his wits end because that's how he grew up. he was taught to suppress his feelings and seem smaller when he was upset.

he is the result of abuse and neglect. of course he wouldn't be amazing at emotional regulation.

Which before anyone says it no, this is not an excuse for his actions. just an explaination that isn't "hes an angry animal that has it out for miles UwU" that everyone seems to have in their brain. I'm tired of you all. truly.

the sentiment that hes agressive and angry and his only emotion is anger and upsetness unless he's horny which is when he experiences all these emotions tenfold is. racist. idk how clear i have to be for people to get it through their damn skulls that the way the fandom depicts him is harmful. do i need to slap you in the face with a fish until you understand. do i need to burn your fanfiction. will you get it now that a 15 year old latino boy has to scream it in your face.

and dont even get me STARED on how inaccurately he is written

this is a more light hearted section because idk. feels like i should have it because this part is just comical, pun intended. How can you fuck up this hard guys.

I was gonna give them the benefit of the doubt because "Miguel has fresh trauma!" "He only shows up for like 10 minutes!" "insert 3rd reason!" for his drastic change in demeanor and personality, which, without context, are valid reasons for him to be a little different. trauma fucks you up man. we only see 10 minutes of him. but at this point im chalking it up to complete incompetence

it doesnt take that long to read a comic book guys. you could have done a little research, I know you can do it.

first off:

[6th image id: Miguel's SPIDER-SENSE goes off! He races to the edge if the building and peers into an empty alley -- /end id]

LMFAO WHAT THE FUCK DO YOU MEAN "SPIDER-SENSE"

Unless you didn't get the total of TWO jokes that they made in ONE scene (the vulture fight scene), Miguel doesn't have a spider sense. at all. He has elevated senses, but he doesnt have a spider sense.

guys

guys.

you made TWO jokes IN A ROW about it. YOU WHACKED HIM IN THE HEAD TWICE WITH IT. HOW DID YOU FORGET

I cant help but laugh! this is a rookie mistake! these are seasoned writers! They could have done at least a little research, or at least remembered that he doesnt have one, no? is it that hard? or does his lack of a spider sense only matter when you're making fun of your least favorite character? thats what I thought.

this one is less funny. not to sound like a stereotypical comic nerd but this infuriated me a little bit I'm not gonna lie.

[8th image id: tumblr user @/darksidecorner reblogged tumblr user @/spiderxpawz with:

They definitely didn't

a screenshot of the script reads:

AN INDUSTRIAL TANGLE OF HUGE PISTONS -- the literal DARK UNDERBELLY that undergrids Miguel's bullshit Utopia.

Miles doesn't know where to go... but he doesn't need to: SOMEONE YANKS him up into the safety of an alcove.

the user then continues:

This in particular made me PISSED because they quietly canonized that Miguel is CEO of Alchemax while conveniently ignoring that he did everything in his fucking power to BETTER Neuva York. Downtown wasn't built by him. It was built by people WAY before him.

I can excuse and defend some comic deviation, but THIS? Holy FUCK /end id]

I honestly cant tell if I find this part funny or pathetic because seriously. he did not do this. why are you blaming him for something he had nothing to do with. i dont think he decided "hey i should build a city for rich people over poor people because reasons" when he was like... not even alive. Alchemax did this before he was even sentient. it had always been this way since he was born. he also actively hated this decision. because he actively hates alchemax.

but right MIGUELS bullshit Utopia yeah HE did this that EVIL LITTLE BABY i cant believe him

kill me.

In conclusion:

I. . . Don't really know, to be honest. I'm still processing all this. I am genuinely disappointed and upset because this isn't okay. It never will be, and if it takes yet another blunt essay with absolutely no filter for people to understand it then so be it. I don't care if this comes off as mean. This is something I feel qualified to talk about and I will express my disappointment and anger if I want to.

All of the posts I reference I have reblogged within the last 24 hours of making this post, they shouldn't be that hard to find, but if you want the links to them here they are:

https://www.tumblr.com/spiderxpawz/735344322114977792/live-mexican-reaction?source=share

https://www.tumblr.com/404-505/735289664739606528/they-couldnt-write-miguel-as-a-drug-addict-so?source=share

https://www.tumblr.com/transmiguelohara/735289238625648640/cant-believe-the-writers-have-the-same-reading?source=share

if you want your image to be removed or for your link to be removed just ask and I'll do it. but currently im kinda bummed out and tired.

goodbye.

[akookminsupporter]

Hi! I think the biggest difference between Jikookers and Tkks as a whole is the conspiracy theory thing. 

Most Jikookers I've seen on the bird app, post and retweet Jikook's moments from original content, concerts, lives, Run BTS, interviews and behind the scenes. No matter how tiny of a moment, it's still a cute moment. 

A vast majority of them is OT7 with a bias towards JK and JM (as it should be, being OT7 with your own biases. Solo stans who blatantly hate the other members and their achievements? Yikes). 

And, of course, bad apples are everywhere but, personally I very rarely saw Jikookers hate on Taehyung. Most post Jikook's interactions with all the other members as well, including Taehyung, or simply only post about Jikook. I don't think anyone actually see Taehyung as an "enemy" in the bond between JK and JM. 

We love their bond whatever that may be, we listen to what they told us over the years, and the consistency of their behavior in those years and yes, most think they are indeed in a relationship.

Tkks post the moments of their biases, but a big part of it is edits or sentences taken completely out of context, blatant mistranslations (and not by mistake), and straight out made up lies. All of this, seasoned with an unhealthy dose of conspiracy theories. 

This is one of the biggest differencies in my opinion. Almost all Tkks believe there's a conspiracy, corroborated by HYBE, the members, staff, their families and everyone around them, that keeps TH and JK apart. And they keep brainwash about it anyone who listen, especially baby ARMYs and younger people.

And it's not only just that, because for this absurd theory to function, they have to explain how come TH and JK barely interact, and how come, instead, JK and JM are always attached at the hip or looking lovingly at each other (on stage, on interviews, in lives, behind the scenes and their own recounts of their free time). 

And that's where it gets even more toxic, cause I don't care if people think TH and JK could be in a relationship, my problem comes when they blatantly forge photos and subtitles and outright make up moments and interactions and shit on Jikook's bond, to fit their narrative, and think there's a conspiracy and the bad guy at the center of it is JM. Cause most of them outright hate JM. Most twitter accounts on JM and Jikook report pages are Tkks insulting and threatening him and his family. Because if you don't take out JM and Jikook's bond out of the equation, Tkks' theories are simple bullshit. 

They don't even care when call out with actual proofs and original content. Most would simply answer with "I don't care what you're saying, for me it's like this" or "Jokers got mad". They don't care about truth or reality. They transformed their ship into a fictional one where the "characters" should behave like they want them to and if they don't, they simply change the narrative, while insulting JK and TH too for not behaving like they want. 

The whole fanservice discussion is purely stupid. Every behavior by anyone on a stage is some sort of fanservice cause they're there performing for their fans, but that doesn't mean it isn't genuine affection, especially in BTS' case, where we know exactly how much they love each other (at least the actual fans know). But the affection is not even the point cause only Jikook get called out for their interactions. Everybody else's interaction is perfectly fine and genuine and cute, but when it's Jikook, everytime is a wave of Tkks belittling them, their characters and their bond, at best calling them fanservice and scripted, at worst calling for harassment and abuse (and this is fucking serious). 

And all this hate isn't even called out if not by Jikookers, cause the so-called big OT7 accounts don't say anything about it and barely post Jikook themselves not to run into Tkks' bullying and losing followers.

Sorry for the endless rant by all the double standards of this fandom are making me crazy.

"They transformed their ship into a fictional one where the "characters" should behave like they want them to and if they don't, they simply change the narrative"

YES. YES. YES!!! ALL THIS!

[princeasimdiya12]

That anon is an asshole. Why do you hate Shuichi? I think he fits the theme of truth and lies, but his character development is a complete joke as he has zero struggles after his waifu dead. He never once second guess his actions in class trials and doesn’t even think of major consequences (killing the de facto prime minister and not noticing a serial killer is amoung them). His stans over analyze his actions and try to justify everything he does.

They were quite a jerkhole. I can imagine that most stans would be protective of their favorite characters if anyone were to express disapproval.

And thank you for giving me the opportunity to express my personal feelings on the matter anon. And those are some interesting reasons to dislike him but I have some other reasons.

My answers will be hidden under the “Read More” because they’re long answers. But these are my thoughts and reasons for why I hate Shuichi Saihara.

Reason 1: The Protagonist Switch was Lackluster

Right off the bat, I personally dislike that we were promised a unique and compelling protagonist like Kaede only to switch her with a generic insecure protagonist like Saihara. The use of the protag switch isn’t a bad plot twist and it can be clever, it’s just that the result of switching Kaede for someone like Saihara left a bad taste in my mouth.

I loved Kaede because she was unique as a DR protagonist. Along with having a colorful design and talent, she was assertive, confident and willing to take charge. She was actively involved in the story by stepping up as the group’s de facto leader and trying to motivate them. She was also flawed in the sense that she was quick to butt heads with others and she didn’t completely trust others or practice her own beliefs of trusting in friends. And personally, I’m not even upset that she tried to kill someone. It’s still considered something different for a DR protagonist to do, especially if it was for the greater good. 

But when we get Saihara, he continues the trend of being a generic sad boy who feels insecure about his talents and wants to be stronger. Most of his screentime is spent moping about his problems and how he doesn’t feel good enough. He doesn’t have the same presence as Kaede and just stays in the background while the rest of the cast move the story as much as they can.

In all honesty, if they had introduced Saihara as the new protagonist, or at least make it so that his predecessor wasn’t as compelling as Kaede, then I wouldn’t have been too upset. At the very least I wouldn’t have gotten my hopes up for a protagonist who was actually different compared to the past protags.

Reason 2: Waifus In Refrigerators 

For those that don’t know, fridging is the concept of (brutally) killing off a fictional female character in order to create an emotional impact for her male love interest and his character development.

Kaede’s death and how it impacted Saihara is textbook fridging.

I strongly detest fridging since it robs a female character of her agency and role in the story. It treats her as a tool meant to motivate her male love interest to either avenge her death or grow as a person. Kaede’s death along with her final wish is what pushes Saihara to try and beat the killing game. And from then on, Saihara will take the moment to reflect on Kaede’s tragic end and how he inspired him with her kindness. Kaede loses her identity as a complex leader who was willing to commit murder for a greater good. Everyone just remembers her as Saihara’s innocent dead love interest who inspired him to keep on fighting. It’s also worse in the 6th case when it’s revealed that Tsumugi took advantage of Kaede’s trap to kill Amami which further pushes Kaede into the image of an innocent angel that did no wrong.

And it’s also frustrating since this isn’t the only time that the Danganronpa series has killed off its female characters in order to develop their male love interests.

In SDR2, Peko dies trying to save Fuyuhiko which in turn motivates him to stop acting like a jerkhole and be more cooperative with the group.

In DR3 Future Side, Chisa is the first victim of the killing game which pushes her boyfriend Munakata to become a more direct antagonist towards Naegi for protecting the Remnants.

In the same series, Kyoko allows herself to be poisoned in order to protect Naegi. It’s through her death that Naegi decides to confront Munakata in a final showdown. And while Kyoko does get brought back to life at the end of the show, it should be noted that she was only brought back just to be part of Naegi’s happy ending package. She loses her agency and is brought back just to be his newly revived girlfriend.

In DR3 Despair Side, Chiaki is brutally killed in order for her classmates to become Remnants of Despair. But it’s her final heartwrenching moments with Izuru that inspire emotion inside of him aswell as deciding to turn against Junko.

So Kaede being killed for Saihara’s development is the fifth fridging example in this series and it sucks that Kodaka and his crew rely on this trope throughout Danganronpa.

Reason 3: The Narrative Forces You To Like Him

Another issue that I found irritating about Saihara is how everyone began praising him.

Just after the first case, everyone constantly praises and coddles Saihara for being such a great detective and for growing so much. For me, that praise feels undeserving since he barely did anything to earn it. Thinking back to each of the past protagonists, they didn’t have everyone’s respect in the beginning. They each had to work had and face adversity throughout their stories in order to earn their praise and respect. Even Kaede, who despite being a confident leader, had to deal with people frequently judging her leadership and actions. So I find it questionable that Saihara already earned everyone’s respect after solving only one case. 

By having all the characters praise Saihara, the narrative pushes you to accept him as the new protagonist and recognize how awesome it is to have him. But for me, it just makes me dislike him even more. I refuse to like something just because everyone else does and it won’t take away my admiration/love for Kaede.

It’s also jarring since anytime a character has the spotlight, it somehow has to involve Saihara.

“Wow Himiko! You’re much more expressive now than before. Just like you Saihara!”

“Man, it sounds like you had a harsh life growing up Harumaki. Just like you and your detective work, eh Shuichi?”

The narrative can’t help but force Saihara to be around and praised by the people around him despite the spotlight not being on him in that given moment. 

Reason 4: He’s Not a Good Detective

While Saihara’s role as a detective may fit the theme of Truth and Lies, that doesn’t mean he was good at the job. My issue being that he was unproductive and biased for the role.

While he did set up that trap in Chapter 1 to catch the mastermind, he doesn’t do anything as proactive in the later chapters. He spent most if not all of his time going to training with Kaito and moping about his problems. It goes on like this for 4 chapters and it takes Kiibo threatening to blow up the school before he actually gets to work on solving the mystery of the killing game. As a detective, you’d think he would put more effort into actually solving the mysteries of the killing game or try to put some thought on who the mastermind could be.

The biased part comes with how he interacts with others and how he’s more critical of people based on how they treat him. Saihar has a tendency to be very judgmental towards the students and doesn’t look at the entire picture. 

He writes off Ouma as the embodiment of lies and doesn’t bother trying to learn more about him or his true motivations. 

And on the opposite side, he openly praises his friends while blatantly ignoring the problematic things they’d done throughout the story. 

He considers Kaede to be an inspirational role model despite how she betrayed him and wanted to commit murder behind his back.

He worships Kaito and treats him as a perfect hero despite never noticing his ongoing illness or the fact that Kaito didn’t trust his friends enough to reveal his own insecurities.

He deems Maki a reliable friend despite the fact that she went behind his and everyone’s back in order to kill Ouma and was willing to gamble everyone else’s lives if it meant taking revenge on the supreme leader.

Shouldn’t a detective be more persistent when presented with a mystery while also acknowledging all the sides (both good and bad) of a given person? If his personal bias was treated as a flaw by the narrative, then that would actually give his character significant depth. Especially if he worked on managing his biases and learning to acknowledge all the sides. But it isn’t treated as a bad problem.

For me, the fact that he’s supposed to be a detective who “grows stronger” and is so good at his job despite all of this really rubs me the wrong way. If anything, it shows me that he’s really bad at the job.

Also, I would like to bring up that I don’t count him investigating the murder cases as being a good detective. Why? Because Hajime and his class in SDR2 were able to solve their class trials without a detective figure. Being a detective, or having one, doesn’t make solving the class trials any easier.

Reason 5: An Unnecessary Cliche

Personally, I really see no reason for why Saihara’s character needed to be the generic insecure protagonist for this particular installment of Danganronpa. It’s the same cliche storyline featured in a grand majority of anime and light novels. It’s repetitive and irritating knowing that so many stories focus primarily on a sad generic boy who doesn’t feel good enough and wants to be stronger. 

It’s also worth mentioning that in comparison, the past protagonists at least had narrative reasons for why they were generic and insecure in the first place.

For Naegi, he was the first protagonist of the installment and his normalcy was meant to contrast the extremely talented and radically different students he’d be involved with. As the game progresses, he uses his normalness to bond with the students and rally them together in the name of hope.

For Hajime, he’s treated as a deconstruction of the generic insecure protagonist. It’s because his feelings of inferiority and longing to be special that he decides to accept Hope’s Peak’s experimentation and become Izuru Kamakura: an incredibly talented super-being who lost his humanity.

For Komaru, she was regarded as an ordinary girl that had the potential to lead others which is recognized by the adult resistance and Monaca. So throughout the game, both sides were pushing her into becoming either the next symbol of Hope like Naegi or next symbol of despair like Junko. But she ultimately decides to be neither of them and wants to be her own person.

There were reasons for why each of these protagonists were considered generic and insecure as it contributed to the narratives. But for Saihara, there’s really no solid reason for why he’s the only normal one of the V3 cast. And everyone is more than happy to praise him as the best one out of the cast despite doing so little to earn it. At most, Tsumugi reveals that Saihara being an insecure boy who grew stronger thanks to his friends was for the sake of a fictional storyline. Obviously it was meant to mentally break him but it honestly feels like a weak reason to keep the trend of a generic insecure sad boy. Not to mention there are other reasons for why I believe this doesn’t work.

The setup for the “Danganronpa is a fictional TV show” twist didn’t have enough buildup so it doesn’t make the cliche that strong.

Saihara still continues the role of the insecure boy who grows strong and saves the day. While Tsumugi states that his role was written for him, Saihara still continues the tropes of his archetype by saving the day. It’s ultimately because of him that he’s able to convince his friends and the viewing audience to give up on Danganronpa. It was the writer’s way of having their cake and eating it.

If the reveal was meant to be a shot at how it’s become a cliche, then why not live up to it? If they wanted to show how Danganronpa was running for too long or how it’s cliches were getting old, then why not commit to those ideas? Instead of having everyone praise and worship Saihara, make them question if they’re really going to depend on a generic guy to save them. Instead  of being just a cute quirk, actually show the negative sides of Saihara’s anxiety and depression and how they would hinder him from participating in trial discussions. Maybe even have Kaito lose his temper at Saihara because of how much he mopes around.

There’s so many ways they could have gone with deconstructing Saihara’s stereotype or showcasing how it’s become old and stale. So it feels disappointing that they never went that far.

And another reason for why I dislike his characterization is because it brings to mind Ryota Mitarai from the DR3 anime. Just like Saihara, Mitarai is a main character who’s described as generic, insecure and spends most of his time whining about how useless he is. Despite this, he manages to survive the killing game since the other more unique characters are killed or move the events of the story. I personally found Mitarai to be a frustrating character. I detest characters who constantly whine about how useless or miserable they are as a means of getting sympathy from the audience. So having to deal with Saihara who more or less shares multiple characteristics with Mitarai felt very exhausting.

Conclusion

So those would be my reasons for why I hate/strongly dislike Saihara. I can admit that alot of these reasons weren’t so much because of Saihara or his actions but how he was written throughout the story. He still did alot of things I didn’t like don’t get me wrong, but alot of fault can be traced to the writers and how they decided to write him and Kaede’s characters. I still find his archetype as a generic insecure boy who mopes around to be an unappealing archetype but I’m sure most of his fans would suggest otherwise.

If you’ve managed to read everything here, I’d like to thank you for taking the time to do so. I can’t imagine many people would want to read a critical post targeted towards one of the most beloved characters in Danganronpa. So thank you for doing so.

And as always, if you agree or disagree with anything I’ve written, you’re more than welcome to reblog this with your comments. I’m always up for friendly discussions. 

[lady-bluebird-luv]

Figuring out how to handle SNK

The last few chapters of AoT have set off a lot of alarm bells, and I’m not really sure how to feel. There have been a lot of weird, uncomfortable revelations for a while now: Erwin has connections to Erwin Rommel, who is sometimes considered almost heroic for his involvement in Operation Valkyrie, and whose contributions to the Holocaust are sometimes debated, but who was nevertheless a major component to the Nazi war machine and not nearly as innocent as he’s sometimes made out to be (often by Nazi sympathizers and apologists). Isayama has also defended Japanese war crimes in Korea and glorified a sanitized Yoshifuru Akiyama with his portrayal of Pixis. I’ve stuck by the series for a long time - I wasn’t actually aware of the Akiyama/Pixis stuff and the Korea comments until recently, embarrassingly, and because I love the story and its characters, I was willing to give Isayama the benefit of the doubt. It’s pretty common to see a love of German language, culture, history, etc. in anime and manga (as weird and uncomfortable as I think that is), so the Rommel stuff seemed, several years ago, like a really misguided character design that was potentially a result of insensitive and uneducated, but not necessarily fascistic or antisemitic, fascination with the man. 

(Spoilers for recent chapters below)

In light of recent chapters, I’m a lot less willing to give Isayama the benefit of the doubt. Zeke’s comments about his and Eren’s goals set off all the alarm bells. Previously, we’ve seen Holocaust parallels in the treatment of Eldians in Marley, and the narrative that they are essentially the cause of the world’s suffering. My first thoughts reading Zeke revealing his ultimate goal was that he was essentially suggesting the final solution. 

Given that Isayama has courted fascism, and war crimes in the past, I think it’s pretty clear at this point that those sentiments have bled into his work. It’s incredibly alarming, makes me very uncomfortable, and brings up the question of whether SNK is a love letter to the Nazis - Which lots of people can and have argued, but which I’m not entirely convinced of. Isayama’s views have obviously influenced the series, and we see references to the Nazis and their allies frequently. Some of these references (again, Pixis) are glorifications that don’t reflect the very real, horrific things these figures did, and that’s unacceptable. But I’m not entirely convinced that the story is a validation of the Holocaust. 

Yes, there are pretty clear parallels between the Eldians and the Jewish people, as well as increasingly clear Holocaust parallels. Militarism, Oppression of people based on their ethnic group, war, and fascism feature heavily in AoT, especially in depictions of Marley and Marleyian characters. But a distinction that I think is important to make is that these themes are not glorified. Dominating rulers of the world’s various factions are corrupt, or liars, or ineffective, or some combination of the three. Time and time again, war and imperialism are shown to not be glorious and exciting, but rather a pointless, brutal exercise that leads to nothing but loss and enduring societal scars. Those who condemn Eldians, calling them devils and working towards the destruction of the Eldian people, are not heroes. Saying that Eren’s goals, or that Eren himself at this point, is “good” is a massive stretch - maybe because of the morals of readers, but also because I really don’t see his goals portrayed in a positive light. The Eldian people he wants to end are victims, and I don’t think the fiery narratives they’re bombarded with negate the fact that they are not, in actuality, demons - they live in a brainwashed society that hates them for crimes that aren’t their fault, forced to respond to people who want to destroy them. People have pointed to the designs of the titans as mimicking anti-semitic caricatures:

And yes, in this case the comparison is there, but this is the only titan that really supports this particular criticism of Isayama’s work. From what I saw when I googled “Attack on Titan titans”, the others don’t have similar features. Titans are also meant to look grotesque, often with features in strange proportions, so the features of this titan that people have zeroed in on doesn’t necessarily scream anti-semitism to me, even in the context of the series. It’s also important to note that, while the unsavory comments like the ones Isayama has made are often made in conjunction with those that are anti-semitic, he hasn’t (as far as I know) made openly anti-semitic remarks, and hasn’t responded to the recent concern over his series. 

I’m also very skeptical of the origin story of the titans that’s been used to point to Isayama’s anti-semitism. Time and time again, the history given to the characters has been falsified (e.g all the history fed to the islanders by the royal family), so I’m not inclined to believe an origin story that’s been used by the Marleyians to their political advantage, especially given the story’s almost mythic depiction. In SNK’s Holocaust parallels, if the Eldians are Jewish, then Marley is Nazi Germany, and it’s pretty clear to me that Marley, a fascistic state, is not and has never been the good guy. 

Maybe Isayama is writing an ode to the Axis powers and never meant for my takeaway from his work to be, “War is awful, and if you teach children to hate each other, you perpetuate a cycle of death, despair, and prejudice.” But that’s the takeaway I have. Considering the comments he’s made, those sentiments may have led to a deeply anti-semitic work, and it’s true that just because something isn’t blatantly anti-semitic doesn’t mean it isn’t supporting Nazis at all. Given my uncertainty, I don’t really know what to decide as to how (or if) I continue to support the series, but I just don’t see AoT as pro-Nazi. I also don’t see a lot of evidence for AoT being a reversal in which the people inside the walls are the “Aryans” and forces like Marley are the Jewish people/Africans oppressing them, which I known is a theory some people have proposed. 

I don’t deny the horrors of the Holocaust and Nazi Germany, and I’m not defending Isayama’s comments, as much as some people reading this may decide otherwise. As much as I’m not entirely convinced AoT is meant to be Nazi propaganda, I don’t deny that Isayama has made some pretty fucked up decisions while writing his manga. It brings up the debate of whether or not people should support work they enjoy when the author has been established as an unpleasant person (i.e. Ender’s Game and Orson Scott Card), and whether art can be separated from the person that makes it. I don’t think Attack on Titan can be separated from influences on the author that clearly shine through, but I’m also not convinced that the manga is one big jerk-off session to fascist, anti-semitic regimes. I’m very hesitant to condemn it, especially considering that SNK isn’t over. Maybe, based on the way the story ends or developments in future updates, I’ll change my opinion. For now, I see the alarming elements there are in AoT as more of a jumble of Isayama’s beliefs than evidence of a concrete pro-Nazi narrative, as dangerous and vile as they are. 

Granted, I’m biased. I love AoT’s characters, and I have a lot of good memories of the story. It’s been a big part of my life for a long time, and I want to preserve it if I can do so with my conscience intact - I like to think that my love of fictional people doesn’t undermine my hatred of violent bigots. I don’t want to annihilate something that I see a good message in because of vile things the author says when it’s not entirely clear to what extend those sentiments shine through and what conclusion the story will ultimately make. If, as the story continues, something happens that makes its anti-semitism undeniable, I’ll condemn it in a heartbeat. But I’m not wholly convinced at this time, and I haven’t reached that breaking point. 

[otnesse]

Been banned by ****IrisHatersSay simply for disagreeing with her on May and Misty, but will still reply to her points anyways, merely out of obligation.

“Oh my God.  You really don’t know when to stop talking, do you?”

Well, gee, considering the entire point of a discussion is to continue talking, yeah, I don’t know WHEN to stop.

“Okay, I guess we’re back to equating skill development with character development.  And the Johto stretch just wasn’t good.”

The Johto stretch may have been excessive, but at least THAT had actual lasting results that carried over into the next saga, such as Ash beating Gary, not to mention advancing to top 8, which even if we don’t count his win at the Orange Islands is still a major improvement compared to in Kanto where he barely made Top 16 (and for circumstances beyond his control, namely Team Rocket abducting him). AG, on the other hand, literally had by its end May being replaced with a girl who shared the EXACT same goal as her, rendering her arc pointless in the end, had Ash winning Top 8 AGAIN, and even when Ash did end up gaining the one actual accomplishment for that saga, beating the Frontier Brains, not to mention beating Brandon’s Regice with Pikachu single-handedly, the whole accomplishment got treated as a joke by Gary (who beat Pikachu with Electivire despite Gary pretty much being retired from training by that point), not to mention Paul twice (and both times with explicitly rookie Pokemon).

“Nah, the kindergarten teacher argument is still dumb.  Pokémon trainers are more like parents to their Pokémon.  They raise Pokémon.  And May was still not an abuser.”

If a parent outright ends up HATING the profession of child-raising and child-rearing, they aren’t fit to be a parent, period. Doesn’t matter if they’re abusers or not. Though that being said, it does tend to outright lead into abuse if they hate the child. Just look at Lois Griffin, hated Meg her eldest daughter, and was very abusive towards her.

“Okay, so you didn’t watch AG.  Let me pull out my meme.”

Just because I didn’t watch AG doesn’t mean I didn’t look up various stuff like episode summaries/synopses and getting a gauge on the episodes via trivia sections and or other things. I usually use those as compensation for when I don’t watch a series myself. Second-hand knowledge, if you will. Besides, just because you’ve watched something directly doesn’t mean you’re actually right. Thomas Jefferson personally witnessed the events of what would become known later on as Bastille Day while acting as the American Ambassador to France, and he ended up being completely wrong in his assessment of the French Revolution, singing praises for the Jacobin murderers (ironically, John Adams, who never actually set foot in France at all during that time, had a far more accurate assessment of what that event would result in, being ahead of the curve compared to even his fellow Founding Fathers’ assessments, let alone Jefferson).

“Also, reacting differently to stressors in your environment is true.  Everyone does not have the same DNA code.  I’m pretty sure psychologists are aware of this, genius.”

Of course people don’t have the same DNA code (well, barring maybe identical siblings, but even there, there’s slight variances), but that doesn’t mean people can’t have similar reactions. As far as psychologists, considering psychologists literally convinced my cousin that she was gay just because she had slight trouble with men (something which my mom, who actually HAD psychologist training from trying to train for nursing, was aghast at), I have zero reason to trust them at their word regarding that bit. Besides, even if that were true, it doesn’t change the fact that she outright hated the Pokemon Training profession at the start, which is STILL inexcusable.

“Suffering is not a competition.  This is not the Suffering Olympics.  And for the record, May and Norman’s relationship did appear to have quite a bit of emotional distance and strain in it.  If you actually watched AG, you’d probably know that.”

At least Norman’s actually IN her life, and not as a deadbeat dad, and at least she HAS an actual loving family to go to, unlike Misty and Brock, who were abandoned by their parents and in the case of Brock pretty much was forced to act as the closest thing they had to a parent until Flint came home, and had to endure fairly abusive siblings in Misty’s case. No matter how much emotional strain there might have been between May and Norman, it’s still nothing compared to outright abandonment (and not even “abandonment to protect your child and/or not deal with bad memories of a rape” kind of abandonment, but more “screw you kid, I’m not dealing with you anymore” kind of abandonment due to Misty and Brock regarding the Gym’s difficulties), to say little about outright abuse, and you know it. Now, if Norman and Caroline treated her like Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia Dursley did to Harry Potter by barely feeding scraps from the table, forcing him to sleep in a cupboard under the stairs up until his first year in Hogwarts (and even THEN, only out of a failed attempt at preventing the Owls from delivering Harry’s acceptance letter), and even doing stuff like outright starving him or locking him up for various reasons, heck, even deeply considering feeding him to Dementors, THEN you might have a point regarding how May’s interactions with her parents were a lot worse than Misty and Brock’s were, not to mention actually warranted.

“Liking a certain type of female character does not mean you are not a misogynist.  A lot of sexist dude bros like certain female characters.  Doesn’t mean they’re not misogynists.”

The literal definition of misogyny is “hatred of women”. I’m pretty sure true misogynists would outright HATE a woman simply for BEING a woman at all, not caring about her personality or character. Want a real misogynist? Look at General Blue from Dragon Ball: https://youtu.be/_wyt1Aq6hm8 Also Chi Fu from Mulan. THAT’S what an actual misogynist acts like, where they can’t so much as even STOMACH being six feet from a girl, being revulsed by them (not fearful of them, just disgusted with them).

“And May did receive good development.  A narrative direction you don’t like ≠ bad writing.”

Actually, it is bad writing, and I would have said it was bad writing even if I DID like the narrative direction/character. I said the same thing about Disney’s Beauty and the Beast and Beast’s development earlier, and in case you’ve forgotten, unlike May, I actually LIKED Beast as a character. 

“Nope, the Bible was still written by men.  God was not sitting up in Heaven with a typewriter and poof it down to Earth.  And yeah, let’s glorify how Christians committed genocide in order to convert people.”

We didn’t commit genocide in order to convert people. As far as the Bible, it was written by God, and handed down to us. It was certainly not written by men. Use your head, if it were written by men, and had biases from fallable people like men, don’t you think Jesus Christ, the Son of God, would have made sure to, I don’t know, outright destroy any passages that tarnish God’s view on things, and do so in a very public manner I ought to add?

“Also, Sodom and Gomorrah is NOT about homosexuality.  It’s about hospitality.  If you weren’t an awful person, you’d know that.  And while we’re on this topic, homosexuality is not a sin.  Comparing references to homosexuality in the Bible and what we think of being LGBT in modern times is like comparing apples and oranges.  First of all, you are blatantly ignoring historical context.  The homosexuality referenced in the Bible is outlawed because of its connection to pagan rituals.  There is nothing to even suggest that two people of the same gender who happen to be in love is bad.  Being trans is also fine.   Trans men are men, and trans women are women.”

1. Regarding the first part, those mob of men who came over to Lot’s house to interact with the two men who arrived (actually angels of God) certainly were acting very “hospitable” to them, considering they were trying to make them sleep with them. Or maybe I should quote the specific passage for you just so you realize that hospitality was far from the reason for its destruction: “The two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When he saw them, he got up to meet them and bowed down with his face to the ground. 2 “My lords,�� he said, “please turn aside to your servant’s house. You can wash your feet and spend the night and then go on your way early in the morning.”“No,” they answered, “we will spend the night in the square.”3 But he insisted so strongly that they did go with him and entered his house. He prepared a meal for them, baking bread without yeast, and they ate. 4 Before they had gone to bed, all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old—surrounded the house. 5 They called to Lot, “Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.”6 Lot went outside to meet them and shut the door behind him 7 and said, “No, my friends. Don’t do this wicked thing. 8 Look, I have two daughters who have never slept with a man. Let me bring them out to you, and you can do what you like with them. But don’t do anything to these men, for they have come under the protection of my roof.”9 “Get out of our way,” they replied. “This fellow came here as a foreigner, and now he wants to play the judge! We’ll treat you worse than them.” They kept bringing pressure on Lot and moved forward to break down the door.10 But the men inside reached out and pulled Lot back into the house and shut the door. 11 Then they struck the men who were at the door of the house, young and old, with blindness so that they could not find the door.12 The two men said to Lot, “Do you have anyone else here—sons-in-law, sons or daughters, or anyone else in the city who belongs to you? Get them out of here, 13 because we are going to destroy this place. The outcry to the Lord against its people is so great that he has sent us to destroy it.”14 So Lot went out and spoke to his sons-in-law, who were pledged to marry[a] his daughters. He said, “Hurry and get out of this place, because the Lord is about to destroy the city!” But his sons-in-law thought he was joking.” Genesis 19:1-14. Does that REALLY sound like they were inhospitable to you?

2. Homosexuality IS a sin, actually. Aside from Sodom and Gomorrah as listed above, not to mention Leviticus 18:22, even the likes of Jesus’ apostles, with Jesus’s own blessing mind you, outright said that homosexuals are among those who are barred from heaven. And what’s in the past affects the present, since God’s law does NOT change (well, save for maybe dietary restrictions and/or mixed fabrics).

3. Actually, being trans IS bad. In fact, Deuteronomy 22:5 even explicitly states it’s outlawed to a man to wear a woman’s outfit and a woman to wear a man’s outfit.

“Also, there’s plenty of misogyny in the Bible.  And the Bible condones slavery, too.  Do you think that’s alright, too?”

The Bible’s reference to slavery actually referred to indentured servants or, you know, people holding jobs. If anything, God also didn’t like the kind of slavery you alluded to since... well, the Book of Exodus made that much very clear.

“Homosexuality is not a choice.  This has been proven before, you’re just a bigot.”

Homosexuality IS a choice, and even if it wasn’t, it’s a mental disorder, which means it needs to be cured. And that “proof” was homosexuals outright intimidating the APA into removing it from the list of disorders. It’s like saying psychopathy is not a problem just because it got removed from the DSM book while disregarding that it only got removed because psychopaths actually intimidated the guys writing the book into removing it. There’s even a term for it, “zapping the shrinks”, and in fact, the guy most instrumental in getting it removed,  Frank Kameny, outright admitted they got it removed due to outright intimidating them, or to quote him, “ At that point they were afraid to say no to us. So they said yes. “.

“Also, people often later discover they’re not the gender or sexuality they thought they were, so jot that down.  That’s not “choosing”, that’s self-discovery.  And please, characters are hardly ever confirmed as straight.  You just think they are because it’s the norm.”

When previous seasons or comics or what have you depicted the characters as actually dating, heck, even marrying the opposite sex without any indication of NOT being attracted to them, it’s pretty obvious they were in fact straight. “Self-discovery” is a stupid excuse to force a character to change. And for the record, the only reason my cousin became a lesbian was because a psychologist outright said that she was that just because she had some trouble with dating men, and my own mom was upset at the whole thing when she learned of it. And just as an FYI, it’s actually pretty common for homosexuals to become homosexual due to being molested by a sexual predator. It happened with George Takei, and it happened with the guy who founded the so-called “LGBT rights”, Karl Ulrichs. They even admit it, though aren’t willing to confront that they were in fact molested.

“And “ex-homosexuals”??? Either a) they found out they weren’t gay, or b) were victim to conversion therapy.  For the record, conversion therapy is abhorrent and should be outlawed.”

I am of the opposite view, that homoseuxality needs to ultimately be cured. Besides, considering the lifestyle has several maladies associated with it, not just STDs, but even being more prone to infections, it’s pretty clear it’s ultimately for their sake to do conversion therapy on them. Besides, what makes you think that the gay person DOESN’T want conversion therapy? What if said gay person actually REQUESTS conversion therapy? Should you refuse him?

“As for that CDC bullshit, homophobic studies don’t count.  And it’s literally well-documented that the healthcare issues LGBTQ people face is because of homophobia and transphobia.  You can even google this.”

Considering Google has been busted for trying to manipulate search results recently, I don’t think that telling me to do so is really good enough proof. Besides, I’m going by actual medical statistics posted by the CDC.

“Also, you can’t use the d slur if you are not a lesbian yourself.  If you do, you’re a lesbophobe.”

N-word priviledges, eh? Well, I never bought that. My idea is, if it’s bad for one to use that word, it’s bad for ALL people to use it, yes, even lesbians. And quite frankly, God already made it clear that homosexuality is a sin, multiple times, including in the New Testament, so whether I am a lesbophobe (that’s a new one) or not is ultimately irrelevant.

“And for the record, I’m not left-wing, and I certainly don’t support communism.”

Really? Because you sure are sounding like you do. And for the record, most leftists DO support homosexuality. Just ask Sartre and Foucault.

"You realize there are other choices between communism and capitalism, right?”

No, actually, there are not. Even Socialism is the same as Communism.

“And I don’t support misogynists, even if they aren’t conservative.”

It’s pointless since you probably won’t read this anyways, but prove it. Walk the walk instead of just talk the talk, to borrow an old cliche. Actually condemn the examples I listed of leftists doing that.

“And Pro-Life does NOT mean you’re not a misogynist. You literally don’t think women can do what they want with their own bodies.  And you apparently think a women should have to carry her rapist’s baby, so yeah, you’re a misogynist.”

First of all, Pro-life means defending the baby’s life, which is the most defenseless individual out there. When you’re literally advocating for abortion, you’re advocating for child murder, and what does that make you? Besides, rapists also can demand an abortion just to get rid of any evidence to their rape, so it’s actually disingenous to claim that rapists would want to keep the baby alive. Besides, there’s a little thing called “adoption”. Just because the baby is carried to term doesn’t mean the mother must raise that baby if it was conceived by rape. If she doesn’t want to deal with the fact that she was raped, she can always place the baby into adoption. In fact, NCIS actually dealt with that bit with the character Jack Sloane (and despite the name, Jack’s a woman, a biological woman at that. Jack stands for Jacqueline in this case.). She was raped in college while drunk, yet she still carried the baby to term, and despite clearly loving her newborn daughter, nevertheless put her into adoption largely because she really couldn’t deal with the painful memories of the rape. Ayame from Dead or Alive was a similar case, genuinely loving her daughter Ayane, despite the fact that she existed because Raidou raped her one night. Didn’t have an abortion, but put her into adoption largely thanks to her husband Shiden. And what if the woman DOESN’T want the abortion at all? Besides, the Suffragettes such as Susan B. Anthony were also against abortions, and if anything, they specifically stated that men would use abortions to keep women dependent on men.

“And “let autism define you”…I’m autistic.  And upapologetically so.  So, apparently you just have some internalized ableism.”

Yeah, I have autism as well, and unapologetically as well. But I don’t use it as a crutch (in fact, rarely see the need to reference it specifically to avoid using it as an excuse), so no, I don’t have internalized ableism.

“That’s not what a Pokémon Stylist is.  Serena was a Pokémon Performer.   Pokémon Stylists got their own episode in DP.  See, this is why you shouldn’t try to complain about shows you don’t watch.”

Fine, I stand corrected there. However, after looking it up on Bulbapedia after you mentioned that it’s not the same as Pokemon Performers, it nevertheless made it VERY clear from various characters such as Paris and Hermione that they were similar to Pokemon Coordinators, and in fact, Paris even specifically stated it was a subset of Pokemon Coordinators, so my point about their similarities still stands right there.

“Lmfao, did you really just play the whole “you’re the real bigot” card??? I’m not a bigot for having no tolerance for intolerance.  There is NO REASON I should tolerate intolerance.  YOU are still the bigot.  A bigot is someone who holds prejudice against other groups, such as LGBTQ people, women, people of color, people with disabilities, etc.  YOU fit that bill, especially considering your hatred of LGBTQ people.”

Oh really? Because you seem to be intolerant towards straight people, christians, and all of those types of people, or any traditionally minded women as well. Like an SJW in other words. And for the record, it doesn’t matter what I myself think, what matters is what God thinks since He is in charge of everything. Besides, according to the dictionary, a Bigot is “obstinate and unreasoning attachment to one’s own beliefs and opinions, with intolerance of beliefs opposed to them; also acts or beliefs ensuing from such a condition”, which if anything describes you to a T. At least I make sure to take into account any mistakes I made and admit I’ve made some mistakes in my prior analysis when you point them out (case in point, the bit about Serena having a Stylist goal).

“And people can learn things from another person in ways that don’t involve giving pointers, genius.”

The entire POINT of learning involves being given pointers. That’s even why School exists, not to mention why parents tend to teach their kids life skills.

“I really hope you wake up someday and become a better person, but I doubt you will.”

What you’re acting like is not what God defines as a better person.

“Have fun being an awful and hate-filled person.”

Seriously? I’m the one who at least gave you a chance to talk, and even corrected bits of my analysis that were mistaken. You refused to correct yourself for anything like that. Not to mention you tended to rely on insults and SJW talking points. If anything, you’re the awful and hate-filled person. Nice projection, BTW. And fine, was getting tired of you anyway.

[yoosungshoodie]

Please do V, Eisuke and Nobunaga because I wanna know more about why you like your boys!! ( ˊ̱˂˃ˋ̱ )

I did V already but Rina you’re killing me dkjsdfs aLL MY BIASES. This is gonna be long so Eisuke’s is under the cut.

Oda Nobunaga

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! |love them | actual love of my life 

hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang

hogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuff

best quality: He's cunning and calculating and he knows what he's doing. I really enjoy the fact that he's a born leader because it's so obvious in everything he does—but that also doesn't mean he's incapable of being soft, too. He's got this leadership quality to him that's absolutely enchanting and I adore it so much. He’s got his eye on taking the world and he’s so passionate about it that you believe it. You believe in his dream of ending poverty and stopping wars because he’s such a captivating person to listen to, even if you already know that there’s no such thing as a world without suffering. Slight spoilers, but if you’ve read his act two you get that enchantment pulled out from under you because the whole narrative in Nobu’s route had been driven towards making you believe that he could do it. You believed he could achieve unification because that’s what the story told you and how he was so excellent in all his endeavors, yet that ends abruptly into the grim reality which is that he can’t fix suffering when it’s universal. I love characters who are able to enchant their audience, and he definitely did that for me.

worst quality: Extremely abrasive. Even if it's an act sometimes, he's stubborn to go with it as well so it's even worse. There’s a lot of times he steps on other people without meaning to, solely because he’s just so damn stubborn. He's got a hard time understanding himself from his proud bravado because he blatantly ignores his own feelings a lot of the time, resorting to anger easily instead. A poor communicator and is troublesome love interest because he doesn’t know how to treat a relationship.

ship them with: MC, because I really like his MC. She steps the hell up and doesn’t always let Nobu gets his way; it could’ve been so easy to make MC this unmoving cookie cutout of predictable and easygoing girl meets powerful man and lets him decide everything. My favorite is when she becomes an official wife and blossoms. Oh, also... Hideyoshi or Toshiie dsjgjksdf.

brotp them with: Mitsuhide if he learns how to STOP BEING A DICK TO HIM, and honestly? I find it super funny with Hide and Toshiie.

needs to stay away from: Sweets. Sorry, honey.

misc. thoughts: My first route so I’m a sucker for him. I love him so much LOL, he had red hair and was a total brat who needs attention. Cocky and can back it up, too. My SLBP bias even though he switches with Kojuro sometimes... he’s always going to have a special place in my heart. I’m into people who can lead and can boil situations down to statistics and facts, solely because I’m one of those people too, and he’s very good at that. Definitely the prettiest boy in SLBP for me LOL. I think a lot of his draw comes with being this scary warlord who’s a bit of everything, despite being called the demon king: he’s funny and can dance like a woman and there’s so many parts of him that we get to see. He’s so multifaceted with such big dreams that you can kind of buy into when he says to “never look at things from the same place as mere mortals do”. He seems so much more because everything he does seems so grandiose, and he isn’t wrong when act 2′s modern day epilogue occurs. Iconic man.

Eisuke Ichinomiya

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them | eh | they’re fine I guess | like them! |love them | actual love of my life

hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang but please fix your eyebrows honey bun.

hogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuff

best quality: His ability to always end out on top. He gets stumped at times but that's not a problem because he can always find a way to be on top of things. He knows how to maximize efficiency and he’s very good at being pragmatic and logical, even if that costs him some emotional growth, and he’s almost genius level brilliant with the way he can figure out things, IMO. Eisuke is also one of those extremely captivating characters for me that seem larger than life. He has a very strong work ethic and although KBTBB doesn’t delve into it, you always see Eisuke working. Whenever MC sees him, he’s working and you know he’s serious about his job. From right off the bat, we know Eisuke’s success had nothing to do with luck and it’s something he’s fought for tirelessly. I really, really, really appreciate those kinds of characters.  Fulfills the magnificent bastard trope.

worst quality: His poor relationship with MC at the beginning. I think I couldn’t tell how extreme his character development was, playing his season chronologically, until I went back to season one for something I missed reading. Eisuke gets better so the damage is alleviated a bit, but he lacks fundamental rules of relationships; he’s very used to being used and using people, so it’s not much of a shocker that he doesn’t know how to treat someone that genuinely loves him. He’s demanding at first when they finally get together, adhering to that whole “five minute” rule and shutting her out instead of trusting her and not treating her as an equal. He’s so emotionally damaged in regards to love because he’s never experienced it (literally, with a tombstone for a mother and runaway coward for a father), that when he’s even put in Akira’s care it’s too late to reverse the damage. His biological parents had no consideration for his emotional well being so he learned to disregard it as well, which becomes a big road block for him and MC. He can’t open up to her until season 2, and just begins treating MC as someone who should call the shots too in season 3. Parents are people who serve as their children’s foundation of love and what it means to love someone, but Eisuke never had that, thus his inability to have a proper relationship (despite being in love; feelings and actions are two very different things) until later on.

ship them with: MC, even if I didn’t like their dynamic at first. She helps him grow and teaches him a thing or fourteen about how to love and she learns to call him out on his shit. She’s a bit of a pushover sometimes, but Eisuke is a scary person to stand up to, so I can see where she comes from. Thank god she grows out of it, though. Also, give me that Eisuke/Luke or Eisuke/Soryu.

 brotp them with: LUKE AND SORYU!!!! I love the three of them so much.

needs to stay away from: Hotel room service. And being a dramatic ass bitch.

misc. thoughts: I heavily relate to his emotional constipation and inability to properly be in a relationship. He can’t properly express his feelings and a lot of times him and MC have sex because he has a hard time putting his feelings in words, and I love how that was addressed when it’s MC that tells him flat out that he can’t always just have sex to fix their issues.

I find his beliefs are extremely agreeable because they’re the truth; even if KBTBB sugarcoats the world to fit a romantic narrative (and I understand that they have to!), Eisuke would be seen as a perfect fit for this world. People are genuinely like that.

It’s interesting how he knows how to present himself and knows what cards he needs to play to get what he wants, along with the moves he needs to make; he’s that perfect magnificent bastard trope that I mentioned above. I live for those types, they’re my favorite kinds of people because they’re the ones pulling the strings, and Eisuke definitely does that. Also, cuteness proximity with animals even though they hate him. What a good man.

[knightofbalance-13]

Yeah, Sure.

https://criticalrwbysideblog.tumblr.com/post/165774136389/httpschurchofthecreamygoddesstumblrcompost16

Too bad I’m not convinced.

I’m just going to assume op isn’t going to respond and I’m not going to ask for one, so I’m not going to address them directly. Don’t take this as me going behind their back, because that’s not my intention, my intention is simply to address this in a broad way while not trying to pick a fight with someone that is trying to get away from rwde.

Yeah...I might believe if your next words wasn’t:

That being said, this isn’t an uncommon argument. However, this is the argument of someone who is biased on the side of rt and mkg.

Which tells me you don’t want to risk being seen by anyone who would disagree with you.

First, the unusual assumption, that volumes 1-3 are from Ruby’s pov when in reality, it’s from a third person perspective, as this is supposed to be focused on the ensemble cast. Even if it was from Ruby’s pov, it’s not done well because we get outside scenes that Ruby would not be privy to. The Jaune arc comes to mind here as well as his focus on V2 and the Blake/Yang discussion, also in V2.

While the general idea is correct: Mind you that the series is focused on Ruby in particular so they couldn’t go into more detail at the time since the show needed to establish the main plot first and foremost.

Next, talking about how racism is portrayed vs how it’s talked about and how our characters interact with it. The worst offender is Cardin picking on Velvet, because the characters do nothing but talk about how it’s bad and a shame and Cardin is terrible, while sitting there and doing nothing about it. It’s not like this scene happened quickly, there was a good few moments where someone could have stood up and shouted. And if it was supposed to be just a split second, they could have gone after Velvet and talked to her, comforted her or something.

What can they do? Cardin is clearly stubborn and obnoxious so why would anything short of physical retaliation work? And no, physical retaliation is NOT an option: it would get THEM in trouble and allow Cardin to play the victim. Bullies do it all teh time.

And even so: They had their own problems to deal with since Jaune was defending his bully and they couldn’t make him see what the problem is. “I can’t fight your war until I’m finished with mine.”

And even so there: They DID call him out in Oobleck’s class in the NEXT EPISODE (https://youtu.be/M_Loqu0jo7k?t=2m7s).

And you can’t use the excuse of them being afraid of confrontation, because they’re all warriors and even if some are timid, we more than see them stand up to Cardin in later episodes or they blatantly revel in fighting. Weiss is the only exception, because we find out later she’s a huge racist anyway.

And look how he conveniently overlooks the option of :They’ll get in trouble if they attack someone” IE the thing kids get in trouble with in EVERY SCHOOL.

And coming to Weiss, op is right in that she moves past it. Except that she moves past it too well. There’s no struggle, no reality. Hell, there’s no apology! Its just never spoken of again.

There is no apology...because A.) Blake wasn’t any better because she was judging Weiss for being a Schnee instead of who she is and B.) Weiss made it clear she didn’t care (https://youtu.be/3b1gs8KrM-M?t=10m46s)

Ask any recovering racist and they’ll tell you it’s not easy. Hell, I grew up in a “the south will rise again” household and my mom and I both still struggle with casual racism. It’s hard, HARD, to just not slip up when your childhood has been steeped in racism. That mindset is diffused into you for years. Maybe forever.

Except that her life WASN’T steeped in racism: Her father is never shown being outright racist towards Fanaus and Blake shows that there are Fanaus outside of the White Fang, which was her ACTUAL issue.

PS: “The South Shall Rise Again” is not racist: It’s just talking about the Confederacy and diluting that into just racism ignores all the issues and problems the North and South have had in their past. So unless you were also raised to think that Black people are inferior or whatever: That’s not proof or an example.

I will allow only a little leeway here because I truly believe that Weiss is a special kind of stubborn in that she has ‘decided she won’t be racist’ and just…. Does it. Does that thing. As though she can will herself to not be. As though she can study it and just force herself to not say this thing or that. However, that still doesn’t excuse the fact that we never get an on-screen resolution to her racism.

https://youtu.be/3b1gs8KrM-M?t=10m46s

“never get to see an on-screen resolution of her racism.”

Volume 4…. I hate it. Only Weiss’s arc was complete, everyone else was stupid. I can get into more detail later, but this is already getting too long.

Maybe because RWBY is a serial story with long running character arcs. Not like RT doesn’t do that already *cough* RED VS. BLUE *cough*

Finally, onto the portrayal of TWF. Don’t mistake complaints of mishandling with woobifying a terrorist group. Twf has turned into this fake woke bullshit of ‘oh this just proves the oppressed can become the oppressors’ while ignoring the real life context in which groups like this begin and exist. Yeah, terrorist groups are bad, no one is saying they aren’t, but the fact that the terrorist organization is wide spread and a minority race in your fictional universe is bad and the ‘we gotta take it back’ is incredibly naive and feeds into the narrative going on with BLM groups and the New Black Panther Party (and the old Black Panther Party, for that matter). More articulate people than me have wrote beautiful essays on why TWF is a bad thing as a concept and a villain group. If you can still misunderstand the difference between disliking a writing concept and apologizing for a terrorist organization, the problem is with you, not the people you speak out against.

A. BLM and the New Black Panther Party ARE like that: They incite violence and cause fear and terror to get what they want. It’s at the point taht ACTUAL members of the CRM AND Black Pathers have outright said they can’t agree or condone their actions (http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-new-black-panthers-20160714-snap-story.html   / https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/08/24/i-was-a-civil-rights-activist-in-the-1960s-but-its-hard-for-me-to-get-behind-black-lives-matter/)

B.  The show doesn’t say FANAUS are bad: In fact, the show outright says the White Fang were originally the good guys. It just says the White Fang NOW is bad: There are Fanaus outside of the White Fang who disagree with them.

B1. Assuming all Fanaus are members of the WHite Fang is exactly what WEISS did. Congrats: You’re now a racist on par with how she was.

C. The narrative...Sure, just a narrative. All those reported incidents with BLM breaking laws and causing riots: Yeah, just a narrative. Can’t possibly be your trying too push YOUR narrative.

D. Mind giving a link to these “beautiful essays”? No? Then I’m gonna assume they either don’t exist or you’re over blowing them to push your narrative of “uwu oppressed people can do no wrong.”

So whose at fault? The person who goes in depth or the person who ignores facts and tries calling bias because it doesn’t agree with them?