Why must Hollywood butcher just about everything they adapt?

[Esau of Isaac]

i mentioned how in bakuman the two main female protagonists literally only live to serve the male protagonists. one of them is dim, has a curvy body, and is flirtatious, and all she does is hang around and get the men what they want. she is unsure what she wants to do with her life and then decides her life dream is to marry one of the male protagonists and be useful to him in his journey as a mangaka.

I am not seeing how any of this is misogynist. She's crazy about Takagi and has had a crush on him like Azuki had on Mashiro. Her relationship with him is played mostly for comedic effect. Being unsure of what you want to do doesn't mean you are an insult against women. Wanting to marry a man and be useful to him isn't either.

the other is an extremely submissive and "femenine" character whose life dream is to become a seiyuu so she can star in the protagonist's anime and then marry him. she is a goal to him, and this idea is reinforced throughout the work.

How is this misogynist at all? Her dream is to become a seiyuu. She also has had a crush on a boy. He wants to draw a manga, and she wants to be in his anime. Her relationship is obviously part of the protagonist's story but her existence isn't to be strictly subservient to the protagonist because she's a woman but because she's a side character.

This is like saying Takagi is misandrist because he's initially cold to Iwase and Miyoshi.

misa's purpose is very similar, but she's just fucking crazy, right? i mean, there are totally other strong female characters in the work. uh

Yeah, there is. Naomi is an FBI investigator who originally outwits Light and nearly reveals him quite early on.

Not that that matters, because having strong or weak women has nothing to do with whether something is misogynistic or not. And it especially has nothing to do with whether the creator themselves is a misogynist.

really, there's a fuckton to say about it. you can google "bakuman sexism" and i am sure you'd come up with something.

I could, but I'd rather not see the constant complaints that this or that fictional story doesn't feature a quota of characters behaving in an inoffensive enough way.

Edited July 3, 2014 by Esau of Isaac

[Chiki]

Uhh, that's a character in the series that said that. A random father-figure. It's not even misogynist, by the way. The character is remarking that men and women are different, not that one is necessarily superior to the other. Many men make statements like that all the time, in fiction or otherwise. You name me a good author you think isn't sexist, and I'll hunt down something vaguely insensitive one of their characters says. Would it be cool for me to personally attack them then?

There's like three women in the anime, and one of them was a federal agent that would have killed Light if she hadn't been manipulated by him. I don't know why you guys are attacking an author's personal character based upon the behaviors of random people in their fictional works. Like, is Mark Twain racist because of Huck Finn?

The word misogyny does have a lot of ramifications. Its application is becoming so universally used, however, that it's quickly becoming hollow. It appears it can be used and applied to anyone who so much as dares to dream of characters that act even vaguely insensitively towards women.

I am not seeing how any of this is misogynist. She's crazy about Takagi and has had a crush on him like Azuki had on Mashiro. Her relationship with him is played mostly for comedic effect. Being unsure of what you want to do doesn't mean you are an insult against women. Wanting to marry a man and be useful to him isn't either.

How is this misogynist at all? Her dream is to become a seiyuu. She also has had a crush on a boy. He wants to draw a manga, and she wants to be in his anime. Her relationship is obviously part of the protagonist's story but her existence isn't to be strictly subservient to the protagonist because she's a woman but because she's a side character.

This is like saying Takagi is misandrist because he's initially cold to Iwase and Miyoshi.

Yeah, there is. Naomi is an FBI investigator who originally outwits Light and nearly reveals him quite early on.

Not that that matters, because having strong or weak women has nothing to do with whether something is misogynistic or not. And it especially has nothing to do with whether the creator themselves is a misogynist.

I could, but I'd rather not see the constant complaints that this or that fictional story doesn't feature a quota of characters behaving in an inoffensive enough way.

All you keep doing is repeating the same thing: "I don't see how it's misogynistic." Well, too bad for you. Most other people can understand why it is: if you don't understand it, the problem is most likely with you, and not with us. Just google "bakuman sexist."

http://www.mangatherapy.com/post/1543578362/sexism-in-japan-bakuman

http://mangahelpers.com/forum/showthread.php/65503-Sexism-in-Bakuman

http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2012/09/i-hate-you-because-i-love-you-shonen-jump-boys-club-edition/

http://bakumansux.blogspot.com

Edited July 3, 2014 by Chiki

[jiodi]

But Chiki and Fuccboi are right. Almost every world culture is steeped in misogyny. It's systemic. Dismissing it as a buzzword is disingenuous. The only way for us to break out of it is to realize this is really an issue and reflect on it.

To keep it at least slightly back on topic, take horrible movies like The Room, where everyone is very one-dimensional but all the women are exceptionally evil and vapid. This stems from the writer/producer/director/star guy's own views of the world. Because he has this particular view this "artistic" expression of his is a means of us being able to see what he thinks women are like. It IS misogyny.

[Esau of Isaac]

All you keep doing is repeating the same thing: "I don't see how it's misogynistic." Well, too bad for you. Most other people can understand why it is: if you don't understand it, the problem is most likely with you, and not with us. Just google "bakuman sexist."

http://www.mangatherapy.com/post/1543578362/sexism-in-japan-bakuman

http://mangahelpers.com/forum/showthread.php/65503-Sexism-in-Bakuman

http://www.hoodedutilitarian.com/2012/09/i-hate-you-because-i-love-you-shonen-jump-boys-club-edition/

http://bakumansux.blogspot.com

You're selectively choosing articles in which people go on long tirades about these events, they're not really indicative of any general public agreeing on anything. In fact, even in the links you gave there are several reasoned arguments against the arguments being made by the author. A few posts think that it's sexist against men rather than women. Just because these people are saying it doesn't make it evidence of public agreement on anything. The fact that these characters act in the ways they do doesn't indicate that they are a commentary on the sex they are. The fact that Takagi is a single-minded man who sometimes fails to understand the feelings of those around him doesn't mean that the author thinks all men behave that way.

But Chiki and Fuccboi are right. Almost every world culture is steeped in misogyny. It's systemic. Dismissing it as a buzzword is disingenuous. The only way for us to break out of it is to realize this is really an issue and reflect on it.

I didn't say anything about world culture being misogynistic, though I do think that's a complete exaggeration. Dismissing outrageous random examples of characters behaving stereotypically in a comic book as examples of misogyny isn't disingenuous, it gives more respect to a serious label that is used so disgustingly commonly that its seriousness is devalued.

[jiodi]

I took this cultural studies class in college, one time we had a really interesting conversation about an article someone wrote claiming that Lord of the Rings was subversively racist. The argument posed was that the whitest race represented purity and a lot of the things we hold in high regard while the blackest race represented the inverse: savage, cannibalistic, etc. And we eventually made our way to "well, white and black, light and dark, there's nothing inherently racist about it". We view light, which is bright and gives us the means to life as good and black, blindness and darkness and the unknown as dangerous and evil. It was a really cool talk and it kind made for an interesting reflection on parallels of racism and our natural fear of the dark.

I remember being super annoyed about the whole conversation at the time. I mean Tolkien isn't a damn racist, right? But the reason I bring this up is that, while I still don't think it's overt racism, it's helpful to dig in and try and understand it at its deepest levels, where there isn't any fault necessarily cast.

Misogyny exists in the same vein as racism. We evolved the way we did and eventually religion took hold and brought many large groups of people together, establishing the foundation of pretty much every society and culture that exists today. These religions were based on a time when, for the most part, women were subjugated waaaay more (you can see it more prevalent in some societies than others nowadays).

So, no, I wouldn't say that it's a complete exaggeration or devaluing of the real issue. It's, when you peel back the layers and try and look at it without shitting all over the art itself, a good reflection on something deeper that we should prolly reflect on.

But I do understand your argument and where you are coming from. We should allow these exercises without automatically claiming the particular artist we're talking about is actively trying to be a racist or a misogynist or anything else like that.

[Esau of Isaac]

I'm not against reflecting on gender roles or anything like that. Character analysis is fine, and I enjoy deconstructing authors' works. I'm just so jaded by the constant discussion of characters' and inclusion of this or that commonality or stereotype as being indicative of some prevalent social catastrophe, is all. Like, yeah, the characters spoken of aren't incredibly deep or sophisticated, of course they're pretty stereotypical and I'm totally understanding of people being annoyed by that. To me, though, it's frustrating to see someone take these stories and then project their stereotypes or lack of this characterization or that on reality, ignoring the entire work and attacking the creators that were just trying to please an audience. It's just impossible to enjoy anything today without it and subsequently their creators being labeled racist, sexist, or some suiting -phobic.

It works in reverse, too, when claims --however credible-- are lobbed at authors. I can't get my cousin to read Ender's Game because he's part of the LGBT community and hates Orson Scott Card. I keep trying to tell him that it has nothing to do with his works, but he refuses to humor me. And that sucks, you know?

[Nightmare]

You've all made fine posts, but that's enough of the derail. Make another topic if you'd like to continue discussing how much Obata hates women or something.

[Pixelman]

Is Tron a game or comic book adaptation?

Nobody answered this question, so I'll do it myself:

According to my sources (wikipedia), it was an original idea after Steven Lisberger (the director) became fascinated with the game pong.\

EDIT: Also, I would just like to say that Edge of Tomorrow was a good movie. It had a nice plot, some good parts, some epic scenes, nice CGI, and our favorite scientologist, Tom Cruise. I don't really see how the OP thinks it's bad, but whatever, everyone's entitled to their own opinions.

Edited July 10, 2014 by PixelmanFE