Why the general hate for anime/modern Japanese pop art & culture?

[adzi]

If this was agreed upon, I doubt this conversation would be happening in the first place. You can tell for the most part who is discussing from this point of view and who is assuming a degree of objectivity on the subject both by what they say and how they say it; up to this point, it just hasn't been as explicitly clarified. I fundamentally disagree with your statement as a denial of what "morality" means. As you stated it objectively (descriptive of reality, true for everyone), I will state my objection in the same way: morality is objective, transcending cultural standards and personal convictions.1 Our individual/collective understanding of the standard will vary, which is the subjective aspect to the discussion. As such, acknowledgement of the standard does not justify anyone to be excessively judgemental or condemning of other's adherence thereof, as each will have their own shortcomings.2

Spoiler

1Romans 1:18-20
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly see, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

2Romans 2:1-4
Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgement, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgement of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgement on those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgement of God? Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?

It doesn't matter here if morality is objective... because people act in accordance of what they believe, and this may vary greatly, especially between cultures. That was my point, and I'm not sure what is yours.

Also, no, Bible is not any sort of proof that "our" standards of morality are automatically natural to all people in the world.

 

[Turbonator]

Also, no, Bible is not any sort of proof that "our" standards of morality are automatically natural to all people in the world.

Spoiler

View attachment 2980

 

[Nekoko]

@adzi are you claiming that being a pedophile is normal ? are you claiming that breaking a child innocence and personality is normal ?

You should know that it’s not a part of nature since : 

*When human were without any form of civilization, they would have sex only to have child

*A child cannot bare a child or would die of it

*So prehistorical men wouldn’t try to have sex with kids because it would be useless and counterproductive 

 

[adzi]

@adzi are you claiming that being a pedophile is normal ? are you claiming that breaking a child innocence and personality is normal ?

You should know that it’s not a part of nature since : 

*When human were without any form of civilization, they would have sex only to have child

*A child cannot bare a child or would die of it

*So prehistorical men wouldn’t try to have sex with kids because it would be useless and counterproductive 

"normal"

I wasn't trying to argue that pedophilia is normal.

I'm merely pointing out that our point of view cannot be the "only true and natural one", because if it was, there's no way Japan would allow for loli and shota content to be created so openly.

I also considered going and dismantling in great detail your view that nature somehow always revolves around (modern) human logic and reasoning, but, risking sounding too smug, I'll just say that I frankly can't bother. I'll just say this: apparently there were cultures that didn't really connect the dots between having sex and having babies.

Just because humans are sapient, doesn't mean they don't have mere instincts too, and it's not like humanity has ever received some sort of instruction manual on "humaning" (and all answers saying otherwise are most propably religious in nature). Saying that prehistoric humans only ever had sex for deliberate procreation is a very bold claim, if not a presumption.


...how far can (should) we veer off into this anthropologic-philosophic offtop, I wonder.

 

[Nekoko]

I'm merely pointing out that our point of view cannot be the

"only true and natural one", because if it was, there's no way Japan would allow for loli and shota content to be created so openly.

Do you really think that pedophilia is a part of Japanese culture just because loli and shota are legit ? 

I think their is something else than moral that makes it legit like, the ones who decide the laws are actually lolicon aka pedophiles.

I also considered going and dismantling in great detail your view that nature somehow always revolves around (modern) human logic and reasoning, but, risking sounding too smug, I'll just say that I frankly can't bother. I'll just say this: apparently there were cultures that didn't really connect the dots between having sex and having babies.

Of course, if their is culture we cannot talk about instinct at 100% anymore. If there is culture, there is civilization,so here you’re proving nothing… 

I mention that by "civilization" I’m not talking about the modern society we have know or about a type of culture or behavior. I’m referring to when any kind of tribe has etablished their language or/and laws.

Just because humans are sapient, doesn't mean they don't have mere instincts too, and it's not like humanity has ever received some sort of instruction manual on "humaning" (and all answers saying otherwise are most propably religious in nature). Saying that prehistoric humans only ever had sex for deliberate procreation is a very bold claim, if not a presumption.

Err… of course they had sex because they feel the dopamine while doing this, but let me ask you a question : why every species on this planet produce dopamine while having sex ?? I hope you know the answer 

+pedophilia is not an instinct but a fetish or moral deviancy just give me some better proof that it’s a part of our instinct (real one like some neuro stud about the subject or something) and maybe I’ll believe you

(I also hope not being rude to you )

 

[adzi]

I've never said that pedophilia is part of Japanese culture. Would you please stop jumping to such extreme conclusions?

...although I'd say that hating pedophilia the way it's common among us certainly doesn't seem to be part of theirs.

Also, the assumption that, somehow, for multiple decades already, Japanese lawmakers are all (or at least in majority) pedophiles, is also pretty extreme... besides, if it was only that, and the Japanese people actually had views about pedophilia similar to ours, then, well... where are the riots?

Point is: just because a culture doesn't hate something with passion, doesn't mean they surely fully respect something and treat it like it's something good. And the other way around - just they doesn't love something, doesn't mean they hate it.

As for the dopamine rush - I get what do you mean, but, ultimately, it means nothing. A person doesn't need to think about making babies or parenthood during sex to feel good. The fact that it just so happens that the activity usually tantamount with procreation causes a dopamine rush is meaningless... Idk, would you say that homosexuals do not experience dopamine rush, because they do not procreate?

And about pedophilia not being an instinct, or an orientation, or being a deviancy or disorder... To be frank, I don't believe such labeling has any real use.
AFAIK, what science seems to reach about pedophilia are things that increasingly divorce it from human decisions: it doesn't require a person to be molested in childhood, or straight genetic inheritance, and pedophiles, regardless of their own apparent willingness and whatever support they actually get, are unable to stop being attracted to children, regardless of whether they already did something bad or not.... so, atm, it's a similar black box to sexual orientation; the only reason that people oppose that and want it to be considered a fetish, or disorder, etc. (and it actually being defined as a disorder officially) is nothing else besides it being objectively harmful - and nothing pointing at any potential bad side-effects if, somehow, pedophilia ceased to exist; but all that say nothing about the "how"s and "if"s of it existing or treating/curing/controlling it.... As far as I know, this is how nature is: regardless of whatever will be done, some people will, in spite of everything, including upbringing, sanity, and personal morality, grow up sexually attracted to children. So, in a way, it is an instinct, just not universal across all humans. Such is reality and I do nothing else than describe it here.

...it's not because you're rude, but you did make me rant.



so now you know why I have about 0 issue with loli/shota enjoyers.

 

[CountVonNumenor]

@Nekofire and @adzi please, let's keep this calm. I really do not want to know I have started a heated argument on such a sensitive topic, even if said topic was to be mentioned due to it being usually thrown around as an argument on the "why anime sucks" camp. Therefore, let's try keep it more connected to the general topic of the thread, or at least try to slowly reintegrate things together. After all, this is a thread about the stigma anime/manga gets (or at least used to get). Even though perhaps your points may have a place in this whole greater talk. 

So... anime and the artistic style, and why the style gets so much of a stigma in society outside Japan... 

 

[Nekoko]

Sorry @CountVonNumenor I didn’t meant to make it looks like an argument. Anyway it’s a part of the topic since we are talking about a subject that makes people hate Japanese pop culture, some of my friends hate anime because of the lolicon and etc… and I’m explaining right now why people don’t feel naturally okay with lolicons.

I've never said that pedophilia is part of Japanese culture. Would you please stop jumping to such extreme conclusions?

Proof it’s not a part of their culture « In 1999, Japan passed a national law criminalizing the production and distribution of child pornography.[106] The law's original draft included depictions of fictional children in its definition of child pornography… » since 2014 loli hentai are authorized because they said it’s only artworks but since 2015, being in possession of fictional or not pedopornography is a crime 

source : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_Japan
 

...although I'd say that hating pedophilia the way it's common among us certainly doesn't seem to be part of theirs.

I’m not going to Google everything for you, you have Internet so why you don’t use it. Just read how the legality of loli hentai has been forged+discussed and you’ll see that only the one who were against forbidding it were the producers of loli hentai

Source : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolicon

Point is: just because a culture doesn't hate something with passion, doesn't mean they surely fully respect something and treat it like it's something good. And the other way around - just they doesn't love something, doesn't mean they hate it.

As for the dopamine rush - I get what do you mean, but, ultimately, it means nothing. A person doesn't need to think about making babies or parenthood during sex to feel good. The fact that it just so happens that the activity usually tantamount with procreation causes a dopamine rush is meaningless... Idk, would you say that homosexuals do not experience dopamine rush, because they do not procreate?

I’m talking about the primitive human so you understand that it’s definitely not a part of our instinct.

You didn’t understood what I meant with the dopamine rush : if primitive humans/animals wouldn’t feel pleasure while doing sex, they wouldn’t have sex, and if they wouldn’t, so they would have no humans/animals on earth.

Now, don’t make me say what I’ve never said. I’ve never said that having babies will makes one feel dopamine, I’ve said having sex or stimulating the sexual part is making feel this dopamine. I know my English is not good but at this rate, sorry for the confusion…
 

And about pedophilia not being an instinct, or an orientation, or being a deviancy or disorder... To be frank, I don't believe such labeling has any real use.
AFAIK, what science seems to reach about pedophilia are things that increasingly divorce it from human decisions: it doesn't require a person to be molested in childhood, or straight genetic inheritance, and pedophiles, regardless of their own apparent willingness and whatever support they actually get, are unable to stop being attracted to children, regardless of whether they already did something bad or not.... so, atm, it's a similar black box to sexual orientation; the only reason that people oppose that and want it to be considered a fetish, or disorder, etc. (and it actually being defined as a disorder officially) is nothing else besides it being objectively harmful - and nothing pointing at any potential bad side-effects if, somehow, pedophilia ceased to exist; but all that say nothing about the "how"s and "if"s of it existing or treating/curing/controlling it.... As far as I know, this is how nature is: regardless of whatever will be done, some people will, in spite of everything, including upbringing, sanity, and personal morality, grow up sexually attracted to children. So, in a way, it is an instinct, just not universal across all humans. Such is reality and I do nothing else than describe it here.

It’s not instinct. Or else children would be 100% okay with being f*cked by an adult.

Are you really trying to make me believe that it’s a sexual orientation or that it’s instinct ? Pedophiles are usually the kind of people who have been rejected by the society or a group they would belong to, they are scared of women and prefer innocent and weak little girls because they are easier to « tame ».

That’s not because some person find kids hot and sexy that it’s normal, scatophilia is also a sexual orientation or what ??

Also I asked a neurological proof not a personal statement 

...it's not because you're rude, but you did make me rant.

Haha why ? I hope you didn’t took it personally 
 

so now you know why I have about 0 issue with loli/shota enjoyers.

Maybe because you didn’t understood  yet how fast it can be dangerous for children 

 

[Nekoko]

Lolicon in a nutshell 


EP.1.v0.1641064403.480p - copie - copie.mp4

 

 

[adzi]

not want to drag this subject any longer, but the Wikipedia article on pedophilia literally has a section about its causes, with lots of links to sources. Also, there's this thing called personal accountability - whatever bad things any one, or several lolicons/pedophiles do, should not condemn those who don't. Live and let live (those who let live).


As for the ACTUAL topic... I can think of some reasons, some obvious, some less

- the thing with common sexualization/fanservice. Especially when characters involved are minors (and not necesssarily loli/shota).
- the oversaturation of the isekai genre might color the perception of anime among people from outside the community, with all those power and harem fantasies... especially when the protagonist could be described as a "loser".
- otherwise, there are still people who assume that "animated thing=for kids", which either leads to them not having a high opinion about adult people watching it, or getting shocked and/or disgusted when they crash head-first into something not kid-friendly (especially if that person is concerned about things looking like they are kid-friendly when they aren't)

 

[Nekoko]

@adzi No problem but I really didn’t meant to hurt or offend you… 

I feel somehow that it’s like, the +30 years old generation (I guess they are called the Milleniums or something) who are still stereotyping animes or people who enjoy animes.

There is also another stereotype about anime, some people tend to think that it’s always some complex and "geek"-like stories as multidimensional monsters who fights with human against the demon’s kingdom, I know it’s exaggerated but some people just perceive anime’s story like that 

 

[Ken Hisuag]

Bible is not any sort of proof that "our" standards of morality are automatically natural to all people in the world.

I believe you are correct in saying that my references to the Bible do not serve as sufficient "proof" for my statements. "Proof" is typically a reference to evidences that convince; if you are not convinced, the evidences presented are not proof.

The Scripture references serve as justification to my statements; that is, the why of what I believe. What I justify my statements by is determined by my worldview: the bias by which I reason and make decisions. I cannot expect anyone to accept my statements on this basis, anymore than anyone can expect me to accept their statements based upon their worldview. The goal is not acceptance (i.e. "proof"), but merely justification. It would be foolish of me to demand of someone else to use my worldview to justify their beliefs, which are a product of their own worldview. Additionally, it is important that I justify my statements so that those I am communicating to may understand the foundation of what I am asserting, and thus may answer (if they wish to do so) in accordance with it.

Morality being objective means that people's subjective beliefs about good and evil can be correct or incorrect, and as such their actions are either wrong or right regardless of what they themselves think; that is a matter of definitions. What is "natural" is not necessarily reflective of what is moral; that is a matter of worldview.

If you are interested in doing so, I wouldn't mind hearing about what you believe your worldview to be.

So... anime and the artistic style, and why the style gets so much of a stigma in society outside Japan... 

I said months ago that I intended to reply to this, and in the meantime I've been quietly observing the existence of said stigma, formulating my considerations on the matter. The response is coming.

 

[CountVonNumenor]

- the oversaturation of the isekai genre might color the perception of anime among people from outside the community, with all those power and harem

Interesting, this is exactly one of the things I was talking about in the past page of the thread. And speaking of isekai genre, how did it become so popular? Was there an anime.manga that became extremely popular, then everyone decided to copy it? Or does i have success through the simple fact it works as wish-fulfilling fantasy for a life that is generally felt as unfulfilling? (insert stereotypes about Japanese work ethics... or lack thereof)

otherwise, there are still people who assume that "animated thing=for kids", which either leads to them not having a high opinion about adult people watching it, or getting shocked and/or disgusted when they crash head-first into something not kid-friendly (especially if that person is concerned about things looking like they are kid-friendly when they aren't)

The problem about "animation/anime = for kids" still truly is a problem. I guess it is mostly a western problem? Especially since at least until recently, there have been few good animations for adults. Animation should be a medium of expression, not something that is strictly limited to the younger demographic. I feel the west took the lesson wrong though. When you think of animations for mature public from the west, you usually think of stuff like South Park, Family Guy or maybe Primal if you are going for a more recent example. For the former two (Primal is actually surprisingly good, but I guess that just comes from being a Genndy Tartakovsky animation), the "adult" element seems to mostly focus on the use of profanity, gross humour and violence. Which none of them would be necessarily needed for a good series. I think they still have to learn a little bit about how to make adult animations. 

There is also another stereotype about anime, some people tend to think that it’s always some complex and "geek"-like stories as multidimensional monsters who fights with human against the demon’s kingdom, I know it’s exaggerated but some people just perceive anime’s story like that

interesting, because at least from my own experience here in Romania, anime is not really that much of a geek thing anymore. Especially since many of us born in the late 1990s - early 2000s grew up with anime broadcasted on TV. As for the geek part, again, based on experience, it is rather mixed. In high school people may have looked a little weird on me, but now in college, it was either treated as just something normal, or someone actually getting excited to hear I have a geeky side. 

Now coming back again to the original post of the thread, I may wish to return to some questions of that post:

2) how did the whole thing evolve to be the way it is nowadays?
3) why does it look so appealing? it sometimes feels like it was created to be as cute or downright attractive (in all ways possible)
4) why is the doll proportion such a recurring theme in the art? (usually, going around the 6 heads height compared the more regular 8-9 heads tall propotion)
5) besides the odd proportions, why does everyone look like they are severely underaged? sometimes, I feel like like the only thing they try for making them look aged up is to stretch the length of their legs and give big boobs to the character (I was actually surprised the latter is also done in American superhero comics too)

PS: given my Amagami related posts from Page 2, I will probably start a special thread about that, and move information from here to there. 

 

[SoundOfRayne]

- the oversaturation of the isekai genre might color the perception of anime among people from outside the community, with all those power and harem

Interesting, this is exactly one of the things I was talking about in the past page of the thread. And speaking of isekai genre, how did it become so popular? Was there an anime.manga that became extremely popular, then everyone decided to copy it? Or does i have success through the simple fact it works as wish-fulfilling fantasy for a life that is generally felt as unfulfilling? (insert stereotypes about Japanese work ethics... or lack thereof)

I would disagree with azdi's take. Effectively all hatred of isekai as a setting comes from within the anime community, not outside of it. Isekai has a long and muddy history, since the idea of "a character gets transported to a different setting" has existed for decades; hell, even long before anime. Inuyasha is the first example I can think of for an isekai story that predates its modern interpretation. As for where that modern interpretation came from, there's no doubt in my mind that it started in 2012 with the airing of Sword Art Online.

My post is gonna cover a lot of topics brought up this video by Mother's Basement. I'd recommend watching it for the full context, and because MB is much better at explaining things than I am, but if you don't have the 24 minutes to spare, I'll be giving a shorter version of things.

 

[CountVonNumenor]

Japan has a secret legal tactic to resist it. It's really complex, and absolutely ingenious. It's called "Covering your ears and shouting "La la la, I can't hear you!"" Yeah, apparently Japan just... doesn't.

To me, this sounds a lot like the random artist you could find posted on Danbooru or Gelbooru on a daily basis. And I'm not even sure which one is the worse case - the artist who draws lewd loli under commission (sometimes, they don't even need to be commissioned for doing that), or the guy who commissioned the artist to draw the lewd loli. It's very uncomfortable to see what looks like a 4-5 year old child getting pegged by a massive...faceless buff dude who only works as a stand-in, self-insert for either the artist or the commissioner. 

But yeah, I think the perverse nature, over-sexualization of many pieces of anime-style art, "interesting body types" and gratuitous fanservice seem to be the most common source of criticism towards the entire group made out of anime, manga and everything connected to their art style. 

 

[CountVonNumenor]

On 12/1/2022 at 4:06 AM, SoundOfRayne said:

I would disagree with azdi's take. Effectively all hatred of isekai as a setting comes from within the anime community, not outside of it. Isekai has a long and muddy history, since the idea of "a character gets transported to a different setting" has existed for decades; hell, even long before anime. Inuyasha is the first example I can think of for an isekai story that predates its modern interpretation. As for where that modern interpretation came from, there's no doubt in my mind that it started in 2012 with the airing of Sword Art Online.

My post is gonna cover a lot of topics brought up this video by Mother's Basement. I'd recommend watching it for the full context, and because MB is much better at explaining things than I am, but if you don't have the 24 minutes to spare, I'll be giving a shorter version of things.

Also thank you so much for this entire explanation. I will probably try watch the videos some time later, as I am finally able to enjoy a few days worth of break from courses and any other activities. I really did not know any of the stuff you have mentioned. 

 

[CountVonNumenor]

I think from now on, this thread can basically be known as "Part I" of the entire discussion. Maybe it will become a trilogy?

 

[Ken Hisuag]

Alright, I've put this off long enough.

The first thing to do is examine the question to ensure proper comprehension (of course). "Why the general hate for anime/modern Japanese pop art & culture?" "Hate" is a strong word, denoting a strongly negative emotion of intense spite and disgust toward something. It isn't usually used that way anymore, at least here in America (I can't speak for any other cultures, but my experience here is of people who think very little about the words they use beyond what might get them in trouble, and sometimes not even that). Nonetheless, it's worth clarifying a distinction between an active malice toward modern Japanese art (henceforth MJA, referring to anime and manga), and a more passive distaste or aversion toward it. I understand hatred to be a passionate emotion, actively driven to express itself toward its target (not necessarily all at once); comparatively, I find most examples of negative expression toward MJA are reactionary, i.e. in response to a specific situation. Most people are content to avoid interacting or acknowledging MJA, and encouraging others to do the same; they may be vehement in their expression, but not usually fanatical enough for me to consider it "hatred." I will proceed with this understanding in mind, thus altering the question as follows: "Why the general aversion for modern Japanese art?"

The major presupposition of the inquiry is that there is a general aversion to MJA ("general" being a widespread normalization). While I don't disagree with this presupposition, it's good practice to be critical of all presuppositions, thereby preemptively encountering potential objections. This was the main reason I didn't respond to this topic for so long; I wanted to observe negative stigma of MJA in action, and attempt to gauge how common it really was. The loudest/most visible aspect of a situation tends to be more extreme, and thus not necessarily an accurate representation thereof (as we've discussed previously); I wanted to avoid assuming the stigma without in some way experiencing or otherwise reaffirming it. As expressed in the above paragraph, the results of my observations was to conclude a lack of intensive negativity as opposed to a more passive (though often convicted) aversion.

Interestingly, this stigma usually lacks conscious justification; those who express aversion to MJA do not often provide explanation for it, even when prompted to do so. This leads me to presume an experiential, rather than evidential, explanation, meaning that the stigma is likely born of association rather than essential nature. This would line up well with the general consensus of this thread: there is a general aversion to modern Japanese art because it is associated with other potentially distasteful things (the thread has specifically focused on sexual content, though consideration has been given to a few other subjects). This may be sufficient answer to the question, but leaves open speculation concerning the justifiably of the association; I intent to address this as well.

 

[adzi]

The "association" thing does seem like a good point, frankly... there are numerous articles, videos, ect. with trivia about how many mangakas of popular, mainstream titles used to draw - or might be still drawing - doujinshi of other franchises, with some of those doujinshi obviously being R18. If you like a certain title, if you don't do the research, you can't be sure if its author did not make something that would disgust you, any ordinary person (maybe out of Japan), or even potentially would put the author in jail if they weren't in Japan.


...and do not even start me on Rurouni Kenshin, it won't end well.

 

[Ken Hisuag]

I feel the need to clarify a potentially misleadingly vague word in my recent statements, that being "experiential." By this I was referring to experiences only relevant second-hand to the subject, not experiences directly with the subject itself; my intent was to contrast this with first-hand understanding of the subject, implying these as proper "evidences." My point was that a majority of the aversion toward modern Japanese artwork is based on experiences associated to it, but not directly with it. Ironically, few of those with negative opinions based on associated experiences will have actually experienced the subject directly. Again, this is not yet a critique of the conclusion; I'm merely pointing out the inconsistency in the common justification thereof.