#we can and should have these types of discussions and approach media analysis thoughtfully

[ringofsilver]

I would love to weigh in with some observations I’ve made about the series! Btw it’s 4:00 am and I’m not as articulate as I usually am, but here are my thoughts:

I believe a lot of these points being made are intentional storytelling decisions made by Rumiko Takahashi - an important theme in the manga is the growing uselessness of certain archaic traditions, and familial and social hierarchies in a society that is moving away from those norms.

A big part of this is expressed as the uselessness and continuous failure of fathers and father figures - each one - Genma, Soun, Principal Kuno, Happosai, etc., are repeatedly shown to be either incompetent and/or openly hostile to the children they’re responsible for.

Their inability to set aside their own desires and goals for themselves proves them to be such ineffective and contrarian leaders, that they can’t help but leave those with whom they interact, even passingly, in a wake of pain and destruction. The Pantyhose-taro arc is a great example of this - it’s played up as a gag, and it is funny, but it’s a great example of how Happosai’s relentless pursuit of his obsession, motivated only by his need to serve himself, immediately sets up a newborn child for an adulthood of continuous failure and self-defeat. (Cologne’s relationship with Shampoo is an immediate contrast to this!)

Another important theme is the silence and invisibility of women and mothers, despite their increasing relevance and importance in, yet again, a society moving away from norms where gender inequality and the dominance of men were once widespread. This comes up again and again, in some surprisingly sobering moments in the story.

The younger male characters are shown to be affected by this cycle of patriarchal violence, but I would argue that Ranma is supposed to be the one who is meant to obfuscate this and challenge this (even at his most piggish moments), the one who is supposed to break cycles, and I do ultimately believe he, as a character, is successful in this.

Even without taking into consideration that Ranma is literally half-woman, we can look at how the male characters interested in Akane interact with her.

Ryoga, as well as all of her other suitors, are repeatedly shown to fantasize about her as their hyper-traditional, subservient wife. Ryoga actually has SEVERAL of these fantasies illustrated (lol….). Ranma is the only one who sees Akane for what she is - and yes, he “weaponizes” it, he teases her for being macho, he calls her a dweeb, and all else contained in the continuous drip feed of insults he unleashes on her.

Even though he’s unkind to her, he still sees her for who she is. He sees her strength, her skill in martial arts, and wonders how these other men can be attracted to her when what they really want is a female partner like Kasumi. (The irony in this is that is what Akane initially strove for, she wanted to be seen as being like her sister, even though she isn’t like her. The only one capable of forcing her to confront that truth is Ranma, and he does make her confront it, by continuously reminding her that she’s strong, she’s “macho.” And whether or not it’s unkindness or kindness is up to you to decide - it’s unkind of Ranma to try and hurt Akane with his insults, but it would be a terrible unkindness to let her go on attempting to live up to the stereotypical femininity expected of her when she repeatedly fails to do so, and possibly doesn’t actually want to). I do agree though that it sucks for Ranma to withhold the secret of who P-Chan is from Akane, but I am curious as to how some people have come up with thoughtful ways for the narrative to address it - I guess I need to read these fics!

I think I’m digressing, but this cycle of patriarchal violence is continuously addressed in the story (in the manga, at least), and we’re supposed to see that Ryoga is yet another man caught in this enduring cycle and that he does not have Akane’s best interests in mind, but rather his own. He’s literally a pig. A male chauvinist pig lmao.

Controversial (?) Ranma 1/2 opinion below the cut. This particular one isn't very Ryouga-positive; brief discussion of SA

This has been brewing for two weeks for me now. I was hoping that the 2024 anime would deviate from the manga plotline concerning P-chan somewhat, and... it didn't.

There are some issues in the Ranma 1/2 canon that really bother me, and one of the biggest is the matter of Ryouga-as-P-chan. I understand that having P-chan around as Akane's pet and sleeping with her in her bed adds dramatic and comedic tension to Ranma 1/2's story-telling & character dynamics. I understand that, to a degree, it's also functional. But that doesn't mean that I like or agree with it.

I feel like this is a problem that gets skated over a lot in fandom or discussions of canon, and it really, really bothers me. The bare-bones issue is this: Ryouga acting as Akane's pet pig with Ranma being in on the secret and Akane never knowing her pet's identity is both a betrayal of her trust from both of them, and a violation of her autonomy, privacy, etc.

The whole P-chan... debacle is kept very superficially innocent—no doubt from necessity—but it by nature cannot be fully innocent. A teenage boy is using his canonically-fully-aware cursed form to sleep in the bed of a teenage girl upon whom he becomes romantically fixated (as we see as the series continues). Canonically, Ryouga doesn't have the mind of an animal when he transforms, and reacts like a hormonal teenage boy. Even if nothing ~sexual in nature~ actually occurs, this is tantamount to sexual assault.

This isn't consensual; canon also makes this clear. There are loads of instances where Ranma hints at Ryouga being P-chan to Akane—or just calls him "P-chan", threatens to expose Ryouga and/or averts exposure of the P-chan secret when Akane is watching/nearby. Ryouga goes to great lengths to conceal his identity as P-chan from Akane, sometimes aided by Ranma, so it's clear that both boys know on some level that what Ryouga is doing—and Ranma is passively enabling—is wrong. (It's not just the lying that's wrong, obviously; they're both aware on—I'd argue different—levels that Ryouga's actions are dishonourable at best, or at least that Akane would never be okay with it).

I'm not sure how much Ryouga knows about Akane's previous "boy troubles" courtesy of Kunō, but Ranma certainly knows how Akane has difficulty trusting boys because of her trauma. The violation of knowingly allowing Ryouga to sleep in Akane's bed is significant, and it's both a betrayal from Ranma regarding having Akane's best interests at heart, but also a failure to consider her honour as equal to his own*.

(Incidentally! Akane's father is in the same position! It was made explicit in the Kodachi intro ep that aired today; Ryouga came into the ofuro as P-chan and transformed in front of Sōun! With no reaction or ramifications! I was so disappointed that they kept this throwaway scene!!!)

And! we know from the manga canon that others know about Ryouga being P-chan, too! Once Shampoo and Cologne are introduced, they find out essentially the same way Genma did (which reminds me that Genma also knows about this and says/does nothing! I doubt he's so out of touch not to realise that he'd met Ryouga before in China), and presumably Mousse is told by the other Amazons, as he doesn't seem surprised when Ryouga transforms in the onsen race arc.

I understand Ryouga being Mr Lonely Hearts Club, given his abysmal sense of direction or lack thereof, but all the loneliness in the world doesn't make these choices okay or less harmful. Akane never learns this secret in canon, so I guess we'll see if the anime ever deviates, but... I'm so angry and disappointed that the recurring plot point of Ryouga-as-P-chan sleeping with Akane with some regularity when he's around hasn't been changed or addressed as being harmful and exploitative.

*This is made more explicit in the manga: Ranma silently makes a promise to Ryouga to protect the secret of his Jusenkyō curse according to what's translated as "warrior's code" in the official Viz translation (lit. 武士の情け/bushi no nasake, which roughly translates to "warrior's mercy/compassion"; the implication is that he's taking pity on a fellow warrior). What he says in the 2024 anime is simply that he'll "protect [Ryouga's] secret". It's an interesting change, to make the promise more vague and less binding wrt a link to Ranma's honour as a martial artist, but ok...

[akathecentimetre]

Hey there, so I really like history as a subject, and I'm pretty good at it. The thing is, I don't know what my career options would be if I studied it, or if I would be able to make money. My parents are heavily discouraging me from taking it as a major. As a 'historian' in training' what's your take? Thank you

Hi there! Sorry for the delay, ‘tis the hectic season…

Oh man, I have so many thoughts for you. Full disclosure: this is something I have worked on a LOT over the course of my graduate career both at my uni and on a national level; most of my advice, however, comes from a PhD candidate’s perspective and may not be directly helpful to an undergraduate, and I should also emphasize that everything I can say on this is very firmly based on the U.S. market only. That being said, a lot of what I can say can be universally applied, so here we go - 

The number of history undergraduates in the U.S. has plummeted in the last decade or so, from it previously being one of the most popular majors. There are many interacting reasons for this: a changeover from older to younger, better-trained, energetic professors who draw in and retain students has been very slow to occur, partly because of a lack of a mandatory retirement age; the humanities have been systematically demonized and minimized in favor of the development of STEM subjects, to the occasional benefit of students of color and women but to the detriment of critical public discourse and historical perspective on current events; with many liberal arts colleges going under financially and the enormous expansion of academic bureaucracy everywhere, resources are definitely being diverted away from social and human studies towards fields which are perceived to pay better or perceived, as mentioned in the article above, as being more ‘practical.’ (We do need a ton more healthcare workers/specialists, but that’s a different conversation to have.) But now I feel like quoting a certain Jedi Master: everything your parents say is wrong. Let’s dive into why being a historian is a positive thing for you both as a person and as a professional - 

You will be a good reader. As you learn to decipher documents and efficiently and thoroughly read secondary literature, you will develop a particular talent for understanding what is important about any piece of writing or evidence (and this can go for visual and aural evidence as well). This will serve you well in any position in which you are collecting/collating information and reporting to colleagues or superiors, and evaluating the worth of resources. Specific example - editorial staff at publishing houses either private or academic, magazines, etc. 

You will be a good writer. This will get you a good job at tons of places; don’t underestimate it. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been astonished (not in a punitive way, of course, but definitely with a sense of befuddlement) by how badly some of my Ivy-league students can write. Good writing is hard, good writing is rare, and good writing is a breath of fresh air to any employer who puts a high premium upon it in their staff. History in principle is the study of change; history in practice is presenting information in a logical, interesting, and persuasive manner. Any sort of institution which asks you to write reports, summaries, copy, etc. etc. will appreciate your skills. 

You will be a good researcher. This sounds like a given, but it’s an underappreciated and vital skill. Historians work as consultants. Historians work in government - almost every department has an Office of the Historian - and in companies, writing company histories and maintaining institutional archives. A strong research profile will also serve you well if you want to go on to work in museum studies and in libraries public or private/academic. As a historian, you will know not just where to find information, but what questions you have to ask to get to the answer of how to tackle, deconstruct, and solve a problem. This is relevant to almost any career path. 

You will provide perspective. Historians react to current events in newspapers and online - not just on politics, but culture as well (my favorite article of this week is about the historicity of The Aeronauts). Historians act as expert witnesses in court proceedings. Historians write books, good books, not just meant for academic audiences but for millions upon millions of readers who need thoughtful, intelligent respite from the present. Historians work for thinktanks, providing policy analysis and development (a colleague of mine is an expert on current events of war in Mali and works for multiple thinktanks and organizations because of it). Historians work for nonprofits or lobbying groups on issues of poverty, environmental safety, climate change, and minority and indigenous rights. In a world when Texas school textbooks push the states’ rights narrative, historians remind us that the Civil War was about slavery. Historians remind us that women and people of color have always existed. In this time and world where STEM subjects are (supposedly) flooding the job market, we need careful historical perspective more than ever. We need useful reactions to the 2016 election, to the immigration travesties on display at the southern border, to the strengthening of right-wing parties in Europe - and history classes, or thoughtfully historical classes on philosophy and political science, are one of the few places STEM and business students gain the basic ability to participate in those conversations. [One of my brightest and most wonderful students from last year, just to provide an anecdote, is an astrophysics major who complained to me in a friendly conversation this semester that she never got the chance to talk about ‘deep’ things anymore once she had passed through our uni’s centralized general curriculum, which has a heavy focus on humanities subjects.]

You will be an educator. Teaching is a profession which has myriad challenges in and of itself, but in my experience of working with educators there is a desperate need for secondary-school teachers in particular to have actual content training in history as opposed to simply being pushed into classrooms with degrees which focus only on pedagogical technique. If teaching is a vocation you are actually interested in, getting a history degree is not a bad place to start at all. And elementary/high schools aside, you will be teaching someone something in every interaction you have concerning your subject of choice. Social media is a really important venue now for historians to get their work out into the world and correct misconceptions in the public sphere, and is a place where you can hone a public and instructive voice. You could also be involved in educational policy, assessment/test development (my husband’s field, with a PhD in History from NYU), or educational activism. 

If some of this sounds kind of woolly and abstract, that’s because it is. Putting yourself out there on the job market is literally a marketing game, and it can feel really silly to take your experience of 'Two years of being a Teaching Assistant for European History 1500-1750’ and mutate it to 'Facilitated group discussions, evaluated written work from students [clients], and ran content training sessions on complex subjects.’ But this sort of translation is just another skill - one that can be learned, improved, and manipulated to whatever situation you need it to fit.

Will you make money? That’s a question only you can answer, because only you know what you think is enough money. That being said, many of the types of careers I’ve mentioned already are not low-paying; in my experience expertise is, if you find the right workplace and the rewarding path, usually pretty well-remunerated. 

Specific advice? Hone your craft. Curate an active public presence as a historian, an expert, a patient teacher, and as as person enthusiastic about your subject. Read everything and anything. Acknowledge and insist upon complexity, and celebrate it when you can. 

And finally - will any of what I’ve said here make it easy? No, because no job search and no university experience is easy these days. It’s a crazy world and there are a lot of awful companies, bosses, and projects out there. But I do very firmly believe that you can find something, somewhere, that will suit your skills, and, hopefully, your passions too. 

Resources for you: the American Historical Association has a breakdown of their skills-based approach to the job market, reports on the job market(s) for history PhDs collectively called ‘Where Historians Work,’ and a mentorship program, Career Contacts, which could connect you with professional historians in various workplaces. There is a very active community of historians on Twitter; search for #twitterstorians. For historians who identify as female, Women Also Know History is a newer site which collates #herstorian bios and publications to make it easier for journalists to contact them for expert opinions. ImaginePhD provides career development tools and exercises for graduate students, but could probably be applied to undergrads as well. The Gilder Lehrman Institute is one of the premier nonprofits which develops and promotes historical training for secondary school teachers and classroom resources (U.S. history only). Job listings are available via the AHA, the National Council on Public History, and the IHE, as well as the usual job sites. And there’s an awful lot more out there, of course - anyone who reads or reblogs this post is welcome to add field-specific or resource-specific info. 

I hope this helps, Anon, or at least provides you with a way to argue in favor of it to your parents if it comes to that. Chin up!