|
Post by Ike on May 13, 2014 9:33:54 GMT -5
People who are into moe and other 'cute' things also self-report a strong attraction to meta-traits surrounding those types of characters, aside from the neotenous physical traits, especially when the character possesses a strong sense of innocence and curiosity, 'purity,' helplessness and loyalty. In other words, very childlike qualities of personality as well as body. I put 'purity' in quotes because really, none of those things are necessarily sexual, but dudes I've known that have been into moe anime also tend to value those characteristics in a potential adult partner and become constantly frustrated with women who they perceive not to have those characteristics, because, surprisingly, real women are not fantasy characters stuck in a perpetual moebius* strip of idealized youth. Hence you get guys that complain online about how they can't find a girlfriend and cite high standards of virtue as a reason why. It's the same line of thinking that fetishizes virginity.
None of that is to say that someone who is into moe is a pedophile, but most of the guys I've met who are into it seem to be utterly unequipped to deal with an actual thinking, adult woman. Ditto all of this for bronies, because they're all cut from the same psychological mold. It's all got to do with covering up what are perceived to be lewd qualities and masking them in a veil of uncorrupted purity that the dominant figure (i.e. the guy) can own and control, which then fetishizes and sexualizes that purity itself - hence lolicon.
*aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Joestar on May 13, 2014 10:16:57 GMT -5
People who are into moe and other 'cute' things also self-report a strong attraction to meta-traits surrounding those types of characters, aside from the neotenous physical traits, especially when the character possesses a strong sense of innocence and curiosity, 'purity,' helplessness and loyalty. In other words, very childlike qualities of personality as well as body. I put 'purity' in quotes because really, none of those things are necessarily sexual, but dudes I've known that have been into moe anime also tend to value those characteristics in a potential adult partner and become constantly frustrated with women who they perceive not to have those characteristics, because, surprisingly, real women are not fantasy characters stuck in a perpetual moebius* strip of idealized youth. Hence you get guys that complain online about how they can't find a girlfriend and cite high standards of virtue as a reason why. It's the same line of thinking that fetishizes virginity. None of that is to say that someone who is into moe is a pedophile, but most of the guys I've met who are into it seem to be utterly unequipped to deal with an actual thinking, adult woman. Ditto all of this for bronies, because they're all cut from the same psychological mold. It's all got to do with covering up what are perceived to be lewd qualities and masking them in a veil of uncorrupted purity that the dominant figure (i.e. the guy) can own and control, which then fetishizes and sexualizes that purity itself - hence lolicon. *aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Who Brofia here? Actually I'm more afraid of Disney than Chris Hansen in this case.
|
|
|
Post by Ike on May 13, 2014 10:25:46 GMT -5
I don't know what that is
|
|
|
Post by Allie on May 13, 2014 10:27:01 GMT -5
None of that is to say that someone who is into moe is a pedophile, but most of the guys I've met who are into it seem to be utterly unequipped to deal with an actual thinking, adult woman. Ditto all of this for bronies, because they're all cut from the same psychological mold. It's all got to do with covering up what are perceived to be lewd qualities and masking them in a veil of uncorrupted purity that the dominant figure (i.e. the guy) can own and control, which then fetishizes and sexualizes that purity itself - hence lolicon. *aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa This just made me think of staff writers calling up bronies and telling them "Look, dude, she's just not that into you.", and then hanging up.
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Joestar on May 13, 2014 10:27:38 GMT -5
I don't know what that is It's what all the pedos are into on 4chan now. She's also supposed to be the first Hispanic Disney Princess but she looks super white.
|
|
|
Post by wyrdwad on May 13, 2014 11:05:21 GMT -5
I've got a coworker that's been using ok cupid for booty calls. He tried Plenty of Fish but he refers to it as "Plenty of Single Moms". Here in SoCal, that seems to be all OKCupid is too, honestly. -Tom
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Joestar on May 13, 2014 11:40:59 GMT -5
I've got a coworker that's been using ok cupid for booty calls. He tried Plenty of Fish but he refers to it as "Plenty of Single Moms". Here in SoCal, that seems to be all OKCupid is too, honestly. -Tom I guess it's what you make of it; another coworker has been doing pretty well with a girl he met off there (who is a single mom), certainly better than with the woman he'd lived with for 11 years before. About the only red flag I see is that they're both pretty hot tempered, but at least she isn't an alcoholic like his ex. For better or for worse - it was hilarious watching him and his ex get in fights with hotel/bar staff at Christmas parties, and his current girlfriend reigned him in this year.
|
|
|
Post by Scylla on May 13, 2014 11:50:25 GMT -5
Has XSEED released any sample of the male and female portraits? I'm kind of curious to see what they look like and how they compare (mainly to see if they really are sexualized to the same degree). And that is precisely the root of the problem. A woman can't have a square inch of bare skin exposed without somebody considering it "erotic". What do you propose as a solution, that all women on Earth wear full-body burqa? Not like it makes a difference, women will still be viewed as sexual objects either way, hence the perceived need for the burqa in the first place. It's not the short skirts that are a problem, it's the creepos who think "look at her exposed sexually mature thighs". I haven't played the game or watched the series, but I did watch the Clannad movie a few months ago. It seemed to have far bigger concerns than the attractiveness of any of the characters (namely, telling a gut-wrenching story) and it didn't strike me as particularly sexualized. I'm far less likely to side-eye Clannad than I am you for taking from it the message "sexually mature thighs". Sometimes a pipe is just a pipe, man. Considering something erotic isn't the root of the problem; sexual attraction is not a bad thing. However, sexual objectification is a bad thing. Labeling people who notices sexual attractiveness as a "creepo" is a problem in of itself because it means you have an inability to discriminate between attraction and objectification. allthebirds.tumblr.com/post/14920792241/a-response-regarding-sexual-objectification-andHumans are sexual beings, however superstition has led people to consider sexuality and masturbation to be bad things. You mentioned burqas, but those already have been used, and they still led to the eroticisation of things like ankles, so these people would then strive towards even more extreme measures like gender segregation, male and female circumcision, and Kellogg's Corn Flakes. In the end, none of these things worked, and have only made people miserable. Moe being sexual is just that, and it's not some new thing that sprang into existence just recently; it's been around for a long, long time. In its simplest form, it's supernormal stimulus, and the oldest recorded example of this kind of stimulus is the Venus of Willendorf. There's a myriad of problems with supernormal stimulus. For example, our over-consumption of salty and sweet foods is due to supernormal stimulus, and the only thing that will help us avoid an unhealthy diet is to be informed about these things so we can be moderate in our consumption. The same goes for moe characters, since they affect the plasticity of our brains. There's books and scientific studies on this subject, so you should read those if you want to even come close to coming up with any practical solutions to these kinds of societal problems that have plagued our species. I don't know about the movie you watched, but how someone looks plays a huge role in how you feel about them. If you were to replace the characters with ones with physical traits that elicit disgust (bad skin, teeth, hair, etc.) you wouldn't feel as moved by the gut-wrenching story than you would if the characters had physical traits that are cute. Supernormally cute characters will move you even more strongly. You missed my point entirely. Like I said before, sometimes a pipe is just a pipe, and sometimes a girl in a skirt is just a girl in a skirt. The girls of Sailor Moon have skirts every bit as short as those in Clannad (and are also designed to be very pretty and cute), and that is a franchise by and for women/girls (the creator has said this herself). So what do you make of that? I don't even know where this conversation is going because first you talked as if you have experience with Clannad and now you talk as if you don't? What did you do, look it up on Google, see girls in short skirts (which are just their school uniforms), and automatically decide to use it as fodder in your crusade against moe? The Clannad anime movie/show is based on a romance visual novel, so yeah, it's intended for a male audience and it's intended that said guys find the girls attractive and appealing. That can all be true without the characters being particularly sexualized, though (after all, tons of otome games have guys that aren't particularly sexualized). In fact, one thing that's interesting about Clannad is that Key visual novels usually are adult for their initial release, but Clannad was always designed for all ages. Although even with the Key games that start off as adult visual novels, they basically throw in the sex just to boost initial sales and because it's kind of expected in the PC galge VN industry. Subsequent versions have the sex removed, and those versions FAR outsell the adult versions because Key puts so much effort into making emotional, gripping stories (and that's not just a matter of the girls being "moe"). If this stuff was all about sexualizing the characters, I, as a straight woman, would have no reason to care. In fact, when I watched the Air anime, I thought the character designs were hideous and I watched it basically as a joke. I was shocked at how much I ultimately enjoyed it, and that has nothing to do with how "moe" the characters are.
|
|
|
Post by wyrdwad on May 13, 2014 12:37:03 GMT -5
Wow, how did I miss Pleont's response?
I'm not going to say much about it, but I feel it necessary to at least comment on this:
...Because, quite simply, I find this offensive.
Moe is a literary technique. It's beautiful. It's art.
And salty and sweet foods are delicious.
You act as if moe devices and salty/sweet foods are purely harmful and have no beneficial value to them. But just as many of my precious childhood memories are bound to times spent sharing (or making) delicious desserts with family and/or friends, so too have I been moved and touched deep in my soul by the sheer beauty of a story with heavy moe elements to it -- a story that I feel would've been nowhere near as powerful or poignant without those elements.
I wouldn't want to live in a world without moe any more than I'd want to live in a world without salty and sweet foods, and I find the description of these as "societal problems that have plagued our species" almost shockingly intolerant on your part. You may dislike salty and sweet foods, and you may dislike moe, but they are NOT societal problems, nor are they "plagues" of any sort. They bring joy to countless human beings every day. They have every right to exist, whether or not you approve of them.
Sexualizing children, yes, that's a societal problem. While I believe lolicon has every right to exist as well (as I'm a strong proponent of complete artistic freedom), I fully admit that lolicon is a symptom of a deep societal issue that plagues us as a species, and I think lolicon will naturally disappear if and when the underlying problem that spurred it into existence disappears -- though I feel attempting to artificially remove it from society before such time would only exacerbate the problem.
But lolicon is not equal to moe. And moe itself, when uncorrupted, is not negative in the slightest. It is a powerful, beautiful literary device that I will always support wholeheartedly, and not just for the sake of artistic freedom. I support it because I love it.
EDIT: Rereading, you're more stating that moe, like salty/sweet foods, should be consumed in moderation... but even that, to me, seems kind of ridiculous. It's like saying deux ex machina should be consumed in moderation. Moe is a literary device -- nothing more. If one really enjoys it, there is no reason one should not immerse oneself in it to his/her heart's content. It does not "affect the plasticity of our brains" any more than any other literary technique, and certainly does not harm us through its consumption any more than any other form of high literature would.
Apologies for getting overly defensive and misinterpreting your words -- I'm just really flabbergasted by all this.
-Tom
|
|
|
Post by Ike on May 13, 2014 14:02:04 GMT -5
Sexualizing children, yes, that's a societal problem. While I believe lolicon has every right to exist as well (as I'm a strong proponent of complete artistic freedom), I fully admit that lolicon is a symptom of a deep societal issue that plagues us as a species, and I think lolicon will naturally disappear if and when the underlying problem that spurred it into existence disappears -- though I feel attempting to artificially remove it from society before such time would only exacerbate the problem. So if someone took photos of exploited children in compromising positions and cited artistic freedom as a reason to not face punishment or citation for doing so, you would agree to that? I'm not talking about kids-in-the-bathtub family photos, I'm talking erotica. edit: To clarify, I'm not asking if you're okay with child porn existing. I'm asking if, under your definition of artistic freedom, child porn that has already been produced has a right to exist and face artistic scrutiny.
|
|
|
Post by wyrdwad on May 13, 2014 14:11:00 GMT -5
Sexualizing children, yes, that's a societal problem. While I believe lolicon has every right to exist as well (as I'm a strong proponent of complete artistic freedom), I fully admit that lolicon is a symptom of a deep societal issue that plagues us as a species, and I think lolicon will naturally disappear if and when the underlying problem that spurred it into existence disappears -- though I feel attempting to artificially remove it from society before such time would only exacerbate the problem. So if someone took photos of exploited children in compromising positions and cited artistic freedom as a reason to not face punishment or citation for doing so, you would agree to that? I'm not talking about kids-in-the-bathtub family photos, I'm talking erotica. Actually, that already exists. I've seen art books sold in regular bookstores in Japan containing pretty much exactly this. And while it made me very uncomfortable to see them (I felt like all eyes were on me and I was about to be led away in cuffs just for having opened the damned thing!), the answer to your question is yes, I believe that book has every right to exist due to artistic freedom, and would gladly fight to ensure that it not be removed from shelves. (And to clarify on my end, the book I saw contained black-and-white photos of nude prepubescent children posed provocatively on beds of flowers and such. It did not show actual sex acts occurring, but it was very definitely erotica. If a work of art shows sex acts occurring toward actual human beings, and those human beings are obviously under the legal age for their country of publication, then they're basically crime photos at that point -- but it would take explicit sex acts against obvious real-life minors to make me view photographs of that nature as nonviable for protection under artistic freedom.) -Tom
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Joestar on May 13, 2014 15:07:05 GMT -5
I'll just leave this here:
|
|
|
Post by moran on May 13, 2014 15:17:46 GMT -5
I don't know if it happened to anybody else, but I found it humorous that among all the you tube recommendations for other anime after that clip was Slayer's new song.
|
|
|
Post by Ike on May 13, 2014 20:15:45 GMT -5
Did I read correctly that the subtitle of this game is "Undead and Undressed"
Why are you defending this again?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2014 20:28:27 GMT -5
So you still haven't died in this thread yet, Tom?
|
|