#anto woke feminism | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

leportraitducadavre · 10 months ago

Text

Before I reply to you, let me get this straight for good measure: I think it's extremely disrespectful to reblog an anti-post correctly tagged and put the character's tag on it; it serves no purpose other than for "pro" fans to find such writing, bothering them as they encounter a post not meant for them, and me, personally, as I wanted to respect my fandom's boundaries. My subsequent response to you will be quite harsh because of it.

You keep mentioning "sexist situations" inside the Naruto manga as women were underutilized during significant fights, yet you completely disregard the original point of my post where I stated that Sakura's personality, specifically, was a conscious decision on Kishimoto's part as almost all the rest of female characters behave differently regarding the men they're attracted to or approach differently the women they interact with. Sakura is the only one seen badmouthing both Ino and Tsunade, the latter never speaking badly nor "threatening" Sakura's beauty or capacities as Ino did.

There are instances of sexist writing throughout the manga, yes. Kishimoto is a man raised in a patriarchal society, and he wrote a story during the nineties, yet he gave his female creations independence, power, and even designs that other mangakas didn't even bother with giving them; he is not obligated to reflect today's standards and your own personal tastes either, albeit I'm sure he apologies for succumbing to the cultural standards regarding women's position in society that he grew up with.

With the exception of Tsunade, all female characters are either done dirty and/or underutilized. That's not "good writing" of a purposefully unlikeable character (Sakura is not meant to be unlikeable, the story compares her to Kushina and Kishimoto has said Kushina is inspired in his own wife), but rather, it is awful character writing based on the author's misogynistic bias.

Underutilized? Somewhat. I remember instances in the war when Ino alone saved Team 10, where Tsunade and Sakura saved hubdreds with their medical techniques, when Madara himself complemented Mei, when Konan alone almost took out Obito, and so on, meanwhile, Kakashi's only significant move was against Kakuzu, and even then Naruto had to finish him off for him.

You're confusing their personality traits with their overall position inside the manga, narratively they're all unimportant but a few exceptions (like Rin, and for a specific character only); what does them "not having good enough fights" have to do with Sakura being purposefully selfish and mean towards other female characters? You're proving my point by taking the "likeability" aspect of my post (which is a very specific trait that I focused on, never denying other instances of sexism inside the manga) and overlapping it with other characteristics of their participation in the story.

(Sakura is not meant to be unlikeable, the story compares her to Kushina and Kishimoto has said Kushina is inspired in his own wife)

I never said she was meant to be unlikeable, but that her "unlikeable traits" are specific to her and her alone, which means such aspects were purposefully written for her. What does "her being compared to Kushina" (by whom? The fandom made that parallel between both characters, not the narrative) have to do with him not exploring "controversial" aspects of a person? Furthermore, who cares if Kushina is based on his wife? Kushina is not Sakura, that's a point to be made regardless of the "similarities" they might possess, and also what exactly is stopping him from writing what he considers are negative characteristics of those he loves and based his work on? Do you truly think a person reflects just the good parts of those they care for?

Misogyny runs deep in Naruto's writing and shonen overall. For example: something prominent in shonen is the sexualization of teenage female characters. We don't justify it as being good writing just because it's intentional on the author's part, right?

Are you trying to have a "gotcha" moment by mixing up two different points of discussion that have actually, by your own admission, no actual relevance to this specific manga or mangaka? How can you compare complex personality traits of a female character that disputes pre-conceptions of patriarchal norms (such as how all female are "good-spirited" as that's in their nature) with the sexualization of teenage characters?

We don't justify it as being good writing just because it's intentional on the author's part, right?

What? Is this what you understood? Is this what sent you raging against my post?

You read me, pointing out a specific character with specific traits and comparing it to another female character within the same universe, yet with different traits, and you thought "mysoginist motherfucker" whilst the point just flew over your head. Here, I'll simplify the point as it might be quite difficult to understand:

An author has two different female characters: Female A and Female B. A, is specifically shown to be mean-spirited, badmouthing others around her and obsessing over a boy; B, on the other hand, is shown to be nice towards the first girl, and while she likes the same boy as character A, she never puts others down nor pursues the boy as obsessively as A.

We can conclude, over the analysis of these very different characters, that Female A was made like this on purpose, as Female B shares little to no personality traits that A has, so A being the way she is, has less to do with misogynistic ideals of the author and more to do with the creator's want to explore such characteristics.

The most egregious in-universe example of this is Hinata, who by Shippuden has no other single motivation outside of liking Naruto and being noticed by him.

I've explained this before: Hinata is the embodiment of the "desirable" female prototype that existed in the genre during Naruto's publication. She's everything female characters were supposed to be: Nice, quiet, with an ample bosom, and in love with the main character.

She exists as a secondary character in Neji's story as she is stripped of any relevance beyond that. She's the reflection of a specific trope that Kishimoto literally mocks as he gives her nothing, even when he builds her up and "taunts" the audience by giving her a powerful speech where you think she might accomplish something, she fails! He's laughing at characters like her that the shönen genre loves to pair the MC's with (then Shönen Jump decided to actually pair her with Naruto, and he was fucked).

A more subtle example is Kushina: an Uzumaki who was the host of the nine tails and had ambitions of becoming Hokage. What does Kishimoto do with all that? Give all the glory to her husband and relegate her to a housewife.

What is it with you and your attempt to give me a lesson about what misogyny is? Have you read any other posts I've written? I have two regarding feminism. Allow me to repeat myself in case you missed it: Me discussing specific personality traits of a single (can't highlight it more than that) female character and defending such characteristics as "the author's wish to explore su dynamics" instead of "him being sexist" doesn't deny other sexist instances inside the manga.

It’s also shown how the Hokage is pretty much pointed out through contacts; it matters not if Kushina wished to be Hokage as that place is given in regards to who backed them up, which is why Tsunade (a female!) got the position. Kushina was also a foreigner and, above all, a Jinchuuriki, which clearly didn’t do her any favors since she was seen as an emotional “liability” as her son had to fight the preconceptions that came with it to acquire such a position. Kiba also dreamed of becoming Hokage, but he wasn’t given the hat; them expressing their desire to be the village’s leader doesn’t translate to them ever obtaining the title.

Just wonder why the male characters of the story get complex and nuanced relationships with each other, but women's relationships are centered around men or barely given screentime (if any at all).

Only two pairs of male characters have reciprocated eachother's obsession (Naruto/Sasuke -I even argue that Sasuke wasn’t as obsessed with Naruto as Naruto is with Sasuke until perhaps the very end of the manga; and Madara and Hashirama) everyone else's obsession is either one-sided or non-existent. Sakura is obsessed with Ino even before Sasuke influences their friendship and Sakura's subsequent prioritization of him/her feelings for him.

or barely given screentime (if any at all)

Are these relationships relevant to the plot or the story Kishimoto wanted to tell? Do they reflect or have any impact regarding the military bureaucracy and the repressive system that was built surrounding it? If the answer is "no," then I don't see why Kishimoto would or should bother with them.

He focuses on Naruto and Sasuke as they're the reincarnations of Indra and Ashura that "broke the cycle of hatred" and on Madara and Hashirama as they were the "creators" of the shinobi system that Sasuke (and others) are raising against. There's no point in "knowing who is better, Sakura or Ino/Neji or Lee," as that type of rivalry didn't develop further political intricacies as Naruto/Sasuke or Madara/Hashirama did; which is the actual plot of the entire manga.

Edit to add: It is also quite striking how the main plot focuses on the problems brought about by a military system whose foundations are intrinsically patriarchal and how much of the "feminist fandom" focuses on the little to no inclusion of women within that system, rather than its dismantling, which was proposed to and tried to be carried out by other characters such as Konan (to mention a female character as bringing Sasuke to the picture might "compromise" the fandom's idea of "feminism" that upholds itself under the notion that only women can be part of it).

To quote @dushman-e-jaan:

What's even funnier is that the military as an institution is deeply patriarchal: it's patriarchy at its best. So wanting Sakura's inclusion into its apparatus is just a dull, neo-liberal contextualization of locating a "middle-class side-lined girl" into patriarchy and its state strongholds, its militia arms, extensions that are extensively, liberally, and fully utilized to maintain state's oppression. Something which we saw in the case of Ame's mass-starvation, Uchiha Massacre, Hyuuga Clan's slavery, etc. In this regard, to Sakura fandom, inclusion in this oppressive-apparatus is a power-fantasy, a means to cut in on the action not cut it out; so therefore, the question shouldn't be as to why Sakura isn't included; it ought to be that why should there be any expansion on the basis of inclusivity into patriarchal institutions in lieu of smashing these systems? However, Sasuke's just a mean "terrorist" who made "weh-men tears" flow, so the misogyny is just Q-anon deep, and nothing but tumblr feminism can unfurl its insidious tentacles.

In lesser terms, the problem with this idea of "inclusivity" within an intrinsically repressive patriarchal system is that it is sustained on a smoke screen that hides the most rotten veins of the state, because then what is relevant is not the dismantling of an oppressive, enslaving and genocidal political system, but the lack of female participation within that oppressive, enslaving and genocidal political system. To this specific "woke feminist" fandom that is the real problem, that is the real issue within such a mindset.

Women are forbidden or diminished from positions of power in a structure specifically designed to oppress different groups of people to keep others at the top of the pyramid, and instead of seeing such a construction as a direct reflection of the real world's dogmas and the characters that oppose them as real world's feminist, you lot complain about the lack of female representation or "female power" within that maniacal structure! You're more concerned about women not being "housewives" inside a military state that rewards blind nationalism and punishes criticism with literal genocide, than dismantling the entire structure upon which such a patriarchal notion is built.

Funnily enough, even when I point this out, you all will find a way to twist it to your own benefit, because then Kishimoto is the one responsible for not "allowing" female characters to rise against such a patriarchal system (despite Sakura never suffering any of its worst consequences as she was taught by the Hokage herself, or even Hinata getting to be a slave-owner). Inclusivity is everything that this argument boils down to, your twisted wish to see women at every single panel whether it'll be against or in favor of a genocidal state.

That's what "woke feminists" taught you and that's what you'll defend with your breath, the problem gets again individualized and the real issue, the real problem that the plot is trying to reflect, gets buried upon piles of these arguments.

"The problem is about the military state that at its core it's patriarchal" =/= "Then why did he write it as a patriarchal state?"

"The military state it's patriarchal at its core so it's the real world one" =/= "Then why didn't he write female characters rising against it?"

"There're characters that oppose such structure, which is feminism at its finest." =/= "But they aren't female."

And so on… it's impossible to "win" or get our point across as you move the end goal every time a new argument arises. It's about fulfilling your power fantasies of invincibility rather than bringing down the patriarchal structure; just like with Naruto's character, is about gaining acknowledgment within the oppressive system (becoming a renowned/desired individual) rather than dismantling the power sphere to guarantee other minorities' safety.

Their idea of feminism comes down to women having a more important part inside that tyrannical paradigm, bringing the power scale towards them. It's not about stripping oppressive institutions of their power, but rather having influence over such spaces.

This is an example of White Feminism's victory; white feminism doesn't want the oppressive structure to be questioned, they don't want their faint position of power to be argued; they want to expand their influence and reach beyond the usual cultural "female" spaces, so they bring down the discussion to simpler topics, like the idea of female participation in such affairs; if they are involved, then it's good if they're not, then it's not.

Under this premise, and I repeat myself because I must keep my arguments as simple and repetitive as possible, the patriarchal system against which they claim to rebel is sustained and deepened since the women who claim to subscribe to the feminist movement have modified their bases to obtain greater relevance, greater individuality among the exploited community -they stop being oppressed to some degree as a reward for their contribution, they become what they swore to destroy in exchange for "inclusion."

For the love of god, here we go again:

Kishimoto is an excellent writer. He owes nothing to the fandom, he’s the creator and owner of his work, and whatever he decides to do is what you get. No, Sakura didn’t fail because she was “badly written” it was a clear decision on his part to make her that way, it’s not his problem you confuse “good writing” with likability and I’m sorry woke feminism ruined complex, sometimes straight up evil, female characters for you to the point where you believe them taking shitty decisions is an explicit reflection of the author’s misogyny instead of them exploring different types of personalities. If you believe InoSaku is a relationship with “wasted potential” that’s presented in a toxic manner because Kishimoto can’t write female relationships, take a closer look at every other rivalry inside the manga and tell me how many of them develop in a healthy manner, just because they have almost no focus doesn’t mean they don’t follow the exact same rules every other relationship of the same nature does. I’m sorry Sakura is so obsessed with Sasuke she diminishes every other relationship she possess in order to elevate her status inside Sasuke’s life, but Ino, who also considers Sakura her rival and who also likes Sasuke, behaves completely opposite to her, being able to move on and respect his rejection, how come is misogynistic if Sakura is the only one doing so? Have you read Naruto’s obsession with Sasuke? The manga is pretty much dedicated to it, how is Sakura’s fixation worse than his?

#do not cross tag #anti naruto #anti naruto uzumaki #anto woke feminism #anti sakura haruno #you know these sakura stans that spew hatred towards sasuke sustain their grudge against him over this exact wokeness #Sasuke's existence and his stance against the military system to which they want to belong #and his constant personal rejection of her romantical feelings is the very core of their raw hatred #anti sakura fandom #anti hinata #anti hinata fandom #anti inosaku #anti sakuino #in defense of kishimoto #anti sasuke antis

266 notes · View notes