Now that I have my writing fingers back, I'd like to address an issue that's commonly around in popular "culture", especially in the bloody anime that I so much, eh, invertedly like. Hmm, hmm, what could it possibly be, the dear reader might now wonder. Well, I won't keep you wondering any longer.
It's about, surprise, surprise, lesbians!
Seriously, besides the suddenly expanded Google factor of this blog, what is it with them? It's like the bloody things are on every corner of the internet and/or anime (at least from my humble - and minimal - observations). Mind you, I'm not actually meaning the real things - the ones in the real world that go about their lives and business like everyone else. It's the intensely irritable glamorous image of the male fantasy put into graphical viewable version.
I mean, what the hell? I suppose it's understandable that two attractive women are more appealing than a male and a female. But still. Why does every anime I happen to be given links to/stumble across have a lesbian side-kick that will constantly be hitting on the huge-chested heroine? (How they walk with those things without traumatic experiences is another big question. Pun intended) Why are there lesbians in commercials? Well, actually, why are there half-naked women in drenched, revealing shirts on TV in the first place? Where are the feminists looking?
Alright, alright... So I suppose it's an attractive fantasy that is all too easy to abuse when you're out of other ideas. And I suppose it can be awesome and so on and so forth, potentially. But stopping to think about it for a moment...
Question A: If female homosexuality is so awesome, why is male homosexuality, then, such a horror to many of the people concerned?
Question B: What do you figure your chances to be hit on by one/two hot lesbians? I'd gather pretty low. Why would they want a male? Hm? HMMM? Can't answer it? Oh well. I suppose reproductive instinct kinda fails here by making false assumptions.
Question C: Imagine yourself falling in love - unknowingly - with one. Maaaaaaan. Talk about a hopeless situation. Are the lesbians still that hot after that thought?
Question D: Just... what is it with the fascination? I fail to understand, mind explaining it?
Whew. Finally, a bashing of things that deserve being bashed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well, obviously beautiful females are a beautiful thing in a male's eyes.
ReplyDeleteYou have to consider, as with every other thing, the target audience - kids in their early-to-mid teens.
These kids obviously find male sexuality as threatening to their own masculinity. They will be considered gay if they witness two males kissing, let alone going at it. This fact is expressed well in Valve's Raising the Bar book about the creation of Half-Life and Half-Life 2. In short, the monster designer decided to abandon the traditional claws and fangs and instead went in another direction: he made slimy monsters that were reminiscent of phalluses. The hidden phallic imagery has indeed done the trick by undermining the kid's masculinity without depicting gay people having sex. The kids never knew what hit them, figuratively speaking.
Another point that I observed personally is that for a dude, women equal curves and likewise, curves equal women. It's only natural, I guess, but when taken to extremes like it is in many an anime flick, it just serves to fill the viewers' minds with those same curves: they're not longer -women- but merely a collection of curves that in turn invoke more thoughts and recollections of women. It is literally a curve orgy.
As a final note, one of the first episodes of the brilliant show called Coupling (the original UK version, not the bastardised mockery that the Americans derived from it) deals with lesbians as well (in pornography though) and points out that some men enjoy lesbian erotica purely for the fantasy of going in there and converting them. This is a form of male dominance that can only be exercised upon lesbians.
Sorry for babbling,
Seagale.
Fast answer A: On the contrary. I've been told that lots of women like to see men crawling over eachother.
ReplyDeleteStraight men probably just don't like the thought of having a sausage up their rear end. (I know I would pass when offered.)
Fast answer B: A lot of men want the things that they cannot have. Silly us.
Fast answer C: I don't see why she should be any less hot. :)
Fast answer D: Let's just say that women are beautiful. Two women are twice as beautiful. Women know how to love. How to REALLY love I mean. And they know how to please eachother in every minor detail with pure passion. It's something that most men just cannot hope to accomplish... ever.
"he hidden phallic imagery has indeed done the trick by undermining the kid's masculinity without depicting gay people having sex. The kids never knew what hit them, figuratively speaking."
ReplyDelete*goes into a fit of laughter* Good one there.
"merely a collection of curves that in turn invoke more thoughts and recollections of women. It is literally a curve orgy."
That's sort of my problem here - it's kinda like failing to see the trees while looking at a forest. Besides, an utter objectification of a body there. Well, nothing new in our society, of course.
"and points out that some men enjoy lesbian erotica purely for the fantasy of going in there and converting them."
Yeah... I'm aware of that side too - but speaking technically, it's impossible, and I doubt the "converting" man would ever be that much of a God's gift to women to be accepted with wide-open arms.
Nice comment, C.
"Fast answer D: Let's just say that women are beautiful. Two women are twice as beautiful. Women know how to love. How to REALLY love I mean. And they know how to please eachother in every minor detail with pure passion. It's something that most men just cannot hope to accomplish... ever."
ReplyDeleteLies.
Clarifying which part is "lies" - It's something that most men just cannot hope to accomplish... ever.
ReplyDeleteIf a male can't arse and acts like he's the center of the world, naturally, not.
Yeah, objectification of the body sucks.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, it's natural. When you look at a woman, you see a woman to the full meaning of the word. Likewise, when women look at a man they see an object as well.
Denying the instinct altogether wouldn't lead to better results, in my opinion. I think there's a time and a place for everything, but certainly not something as vile as how women are depicted in mass media.
More generally speaking, I think humanity hit its peak ages ago and is now slowly declining back into ape-stage.
"On the other hand, it's natural. When you look at a woman, you see a woman to the full meaning of the word. Likewise, when women look at a man they see an object as well."
ReplyDeleteDefinitely. And the woman is a whole lot better to behold than a man, as well. Can't suppress 'em instincts, obviously. Or it *could* be possible, but what's the point?
"More generally speaking, I think humanity hit its peak ages ago and is now slowly declining back into ape-stage."
So I take it you disagree about the whole "Indigo Child" thing, then?
Indigo child, according to Wikipedia:
The Indigo child movement believes that the children in question are born with an empathic connection to Earth and others' thoughts. However, due to natural limits in infant communication, Indigo children's supposed abilities, such as empathy, telepathy, extra-sensory perception and extra-normal perception are suppressed by negative parental or societal influence. There are also many other rare and almost impossible to come by talents, such as communications with nature, and/or controlling emotions of others. These talents have maybe one or two citizens in the world who posess them. The Indigo child movement therefore encourages parents to support those children in whom can be seen traits which are often labeled as negative by mainstream authorities but as positive by the Indigo child.
The following characteristics are said to identify Indigo children:
1. They come into the world with a feeling of entitlement, which is often reflected by their behavior.
2. Self-esteem is a big issue; they often decide to stop talking all together when upset or stressed.
3. They have a connection with authority and understand things that many people never could.
4. Many times they will feel the need to add creativity to their life. (Many are musical)
5. They often see better ways of doing things, and tend to be non-conforming.
6. They seem antisocial unless they are with their own kind or people they can heavily trust.
7. They are typically shy and normally always quiet unless something is brought up they disagree on.
Nope, I support the Monkey child theory instead. :P
ReplyDelete"That makes me the monkey's uncle!" - brilliant stuff.
ReplyDelete...I wonder if male monkies fantasize about lesbian monkies.
To add to my last replay;
ReplyDeleteThe differences in men and women are still here, like they were there when we were still cavemen.
Men hunt, impregnate women and are basically... well... crude cavemen.
They still are today, in a lesser extent ofcourse.
Women have always had the job of caring. They grew plants for food, took care of their children etc.
They still take care of the children for the biggest part today and are generally found more in jobs where people or animals need to be taken care of.
It only strikes me as natural that two women making love do this with all the passion they can muster, because they just care more, while men still have this cavemenic influence that wants them to drop their drop into a woman to get it over with.
There are plenty of men who try to be good in pleasing women but they will never achieve the same level of care and passion that a woman has. Men just aren't born with it.
Also, women have always been in the shadow of men, being the weaker of the two. Women would never be allowed to get together in the past, since men would be there to subject women to their rules.
In these modern times women have finally gained the freedom they deserve in most rich countries and can explore themselves as much as they wish. You would be surprised to know how many lesbians and bi's are out there.
Blabla, wanted to say more but I am losing track of my mind. Enough of this.
Point about the difference between man and woman is certainly valid. Starting from different chemical composition and physiology to upbringing and post-upbringing conditioning from the society is quite influential. And yes, men are still brought up to be brutes - or rather, either brutes, or the *twitch* metrosexuals. [Must not start talking about metrosexuals in fear of total derailment of the thread]
ReplyDeleteHowever, I disagree with the point about women meant to be more caring from birth. That's not true. They're more caring due to the maternal instinct, but to get that to kick in, you're supposed to be subject to *maternal* feelings, which are, I think, more asexual than otherwise. (Correct me if I'm wrong - but then again, that might be rather disturbing). So when considering a normal man/woman state, both have as much potential for an equal amount of love, tenderness, hatred and violence. I, for one, am rather tired with the way how women are portrayed through this, too. Quite a few cases have revealed - in cases of split families and kids being ruled over to the mother - that mother is quite a monster, contrary to court's expectations.
The legend of innate sensitivity and tenderness in a woman and lack of such things in a man are generally speaking an excuse to the males to continue being brutes - why try when you can't hope to achieve it anyway? So, by proliferating the myth, the population proliferates the causes of the myth, a vicious circle.
Also, you would be surprised about the number of powerful/free women in the middle/upper classes starting from the Middle Ages - Chaucer's Wife of Bath story is the brightest illustration to it. While legal equality has been achieved rather recently, women have had the means to acquire and exercise power for centuries.
And, lastly, the myth of the weak woman - women have far more endurance than a man can dream of - physical endurance (try giving a birth, for one, or have an experience emulating that) - and, in a situation where a woman has to set on the path of war (due to loss or anything else, causes vary), a woman is far more dangerous than any man can dream to be - and not just because of the different mindset.
Women in World War 2 have shown that quite well.
I am talking about men and women in general ofcourse.
ReplyDeleteThere are always exceptions to any rule. There are wimpy emo men as there are violent women. But I am sure the instinct of these people has been disrupted by negative influences from their surrounding environment. Or perhaps nature itself made a little 'mistake'. Who knows.
True, but as far as I'm concerned, the way of acting of male and of female differ only because of the actual social "norms". Besides, I would suspect that a large part of actually caring males prefer to not have it publicly known in fear of being considered gay, wimpy or effeminate. Social norms, you know. You're supposed to be cool and tough and have women in stacks of ten an evening to be considered "in" in over 60% of male groups.
ReplyDeleteOutward personality of a clumsy violent lumberjack for the win. That way the friends won't mock. [/bittersocialsarcasm off]
Hell hath no wrath like a woman scorned, and on the other hand music soothes the savage beast.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree, Ang.
Also, males make their "deficiency" all the more visible thanks to their own writings - images of great lovers, knights in shining armour, brilliant and kind and giving and gallant... And then, when you look at the male in real life, how many actually follow any of that as a guideline for moral code or general behaviour?
ReplyDeleteFemale entry alert.
ReplyDeleteI think it's a bit narrow to say women were born to take care of others. Yes, some women are born with that instintc, and some women just don't have it, not even when they have children whom they should be taking care of. I know both types personally.
Also, women are physically weaker. It's a fact. I could never lift up as much iron as a man who'd be physically equivalent of me. Unless I was on steroids. Which would make me a man, so the comparison wouldn't stand anymore.
Maternal love is not sexual by nature. Neither should paternal love be. You men try to get in to your heads that there are forms of love which do not include any sexual reference.
Hmm, I might add more later when I'm less tired.
- Inny.