Ottservia

Even if I did and I have, that doesn’t erase the fact that lesbian and bisexual women like boobs too. Unless of course you mean to imply their opinions don’t matter in this conversation but that would be homophobic. I can also name plenty of examples of sexual and fan servicey pieces of media made by women like Nekopara for instance. Women also make up over 40% of comiket vendors who sell pornographic doujins. The Senran Kagura fanbase is 45% women over the age of 25 despite how fanservicey the franchise is. I could keep going but I think you get my point. If you’re trying to accuse me of sexism here it’s not going to work.

I have actually plenty of women I know both online and in real life. Some straight, some bisexual, and some lesbian. And they fully agree with me. I know plenty of female artists too who like to draw sexy female characters because they’re lesbian and into that sort of thing. Like where should I find shame in finding women attractive. It’s not like I’m hurting anyone. Why should lesbian or bisexual women feel shame in finding other women attractive? And it’s not like anyone is getting hurt. It’s just a drawing of a fictional character after all

True and I can think that’s a highly arrogant view of things but that’s just me. We don’t judge people for liking male characters for just their looks so why should we do the same for people who like female characters. Seems like a bit of a double standard to me. And that’s not the only hypocritical thing here. Look all I’m saying if that if you believe there are people who only like characters like Camilla, Charlotte, or whatever because they’re hot not only is that extremely reductive and disrespectful to both the character and the people who like them but there’s also a hint of body shaming in there if you ask me. It’s just reductive and to be frank I despise it. Just because a character is sexy looking that doesn’t automatically make them any less of a compelling character. I like Severa because she’s sexy and cute. I also like her because I relate to her as a character on a deep personal level. Those two things are not mutually exclusive. And again so what if I like a character for superficial reasons? What’s wrong with that? Who gives you the authority to judge or shame others for why they like something. Unless you are legitimately hurting someone else no one should feel ashamed for liking something

Personally I don’t see what’s so wrong about people liking a character solely for being attractive. I don’t see how that’s a problem. People can like whatever they want for whatever reason they want. And I find it kind concerning that people dismiss a female character’s merits because boobs. Like a character being sexy doesn’t suddenly take away from the nuance of their character and why people relate to them. Oftentimes the fact that they have massive bozangas is just a bonus. And again what’s so wrong with liking a character solely for that reason?

If you want to I won’t stop you because I actually enjoy debating this stuff with you.

Ah yes how dare a Japanese company pander to its domestic audience with things they think they’ll like. Oh no a Japanese company creating a story about the Japanese idol industry with a heavy anime aesthetic to appeal to that demographic of people. How dare they! How dare they don’t care about my western sensibilities that finds that stuff icky and uncomfortable. It’s not like atlus and IS are Japanese companies or anything that care about their domestic market first and foremost rather than their overseas audience

That’s not exactly what I’m doing but whatever believe what you want to believe I suppose. I’m kind of done with this debate. No my issue with Alm is more so the game says he’s a commoner it’s because of that he represents the idea of anyone can be king with the right ideals not necessarily hard work because the story does make that distinction. But then it turns he was royal all along which just kind of makes the whole conflict pointless. Maybe it’s because I’ve heard those complaints a million times. Thought about them for a long time and realized how dumb they really are. Cause I used to have those exact criticisms of fates once upon a time but after really thinking about those criticisms I’ve concluded those criticisms don’t make sense for varying reasons

Honestly you don’t wanna debate this anymore that’s fine because you’re right these debates do go no where. As for why you think I don’t listen. The answer is quite simple. I’ve heard these arguments a million times before maybe not in regards to Fates specifically but other stories as well. If you genuinely think I don’t understand the arguments being presented then I’m sorry you’re wrong. When you hear the same argument repeated a million different times in slightly different ways then it starts to get a little annoying. Hearing how Lilith’s death is dumb because it’s underdeveloped is similar to criticism of how some people feel about [REDACTED]’s death in One Piece. People saying Ryoma’s death is stupid is like saying pain’s death in Naruto is stupid. Like I’ve heard these arguments before trust me just in slightly different contexts. Then there are the world building complaints and “plot contrivance” which are also really stupid. And the complaints about the game being too anime can actually be seen as somewhat xenophobic but I’ll leave that where it lies.

Yeah but that doesn’t mean that awakening was intentionally written with that allegory in mind. Also death of the author is stupid. I personally don’t believe in it. I mean sure you can kind of read that. Though I don’t think there’s enough concrete evidence within the narrative itself to really make a coherent thesis. I mean it’s like every time you open book the words suddenly change context. That’s not how that works. How one relates to a piece of art is subjective that much I will agree. But like again if you say Naruto is about hard work vs talent that just isn’t true. Like that claim is just wrong and provably so. It’s like saying SoV is hard work vs talent because it never really was about that and there’s zero evidence to really suggest that it is.

Alright I’ll bite name one genuine criticism of fates and I’ll actually try to debunk it with no strawmanning or anything. I can guarantee two things. 1. No matter what argument I make you’re gonna call it a strawman 2. the criticism you bring up is probably gonna be a highly subjective point that cannot be argued.

That still doesn’t take into account how Walhart, Validar, or Grima play into all of that. If you’re gonna say awakening is about that then you have to make all the pieces fit otherwise it’s not really an overarching theme because none of it connects. Also Gangrel being an allegory for trump is ridiculous because these games came out in japan 4 years before he came into office and 9 years before the whole invading the capital fiasco so any connection is either fitting a square peg into a round hole or just a general similarity in what awakening’s story is actually about and what it has to say about the corruption of truth and perpetuating conflict.

First of all that’s not what strawmanning means. Strawmanning is creating a strawman or a fake argument and attacking that instead of the actual point being made. I’m not doing that. Again Etruian says he stands by what he says in that Fates sidelines quality for the sake of pandering. How is that not the same as saying “fates can’t have deeper themes or ideas because it’s too busy pandering” it’s more or less the same argument and I don’t understand how you can try and tell me otherwise I mean you’re right but it’s not like the argument you actually made is that much better but I don’t have the time or energy to go into why.

I never said my argument was perfect First of all, I’m not saying your argument is of those exact words just that each argument I listed is similar. You’re just being pedantic at this point. Both Etruian and Sunwoo are exactly that though and I don’t see how they can be interpreted any other way in that fates can’t have a deeper meaning because it’s just pandering to horny people. Your argument is mostly on the grounds of Fates cannot have a deeper meaning because it’s just there to virtue signal. I mean yeah I agree. I actually think my old Fates essay is terrible and I wanna rewrite it. Okay then tell me how Awakening’s story is a commentary on the flaws of democracy and capitalism or how it criticizes the judiciary system? Or how its a story about succumbing to your own fate. Yeah but what are those plot issues? You’re not specifying. Cause from where I’m standing those plot issues don’t exist. If it’s the plot contrivance of the Valla curse. Then that’s subjective because contrivance is a suspension of disbelief thing. There are a couple if places where it does break verisimilitude but aside from one they’re all small instances that don’t really matter all that much. If it’s Leo’s teleport tome again that’s suspension of disbelief. If it’s world building then that’s a subjective thing because the story had no intention on expanding on the world in the way you wanted it too. It only goes down to aesthetics. Okay why is that a bad thing? Not every story needs to explore their setting with a huge amount of depth. Like what plot issues are you talking about? Cause I don’t see any

I mean is that not what Etruian thinks fates is. He literally says he can’t believe Fates is good because the developers are too busy pandering to the audience. Like he’s said that multiple times same with sunwoo who keeps saying that Waifusm is ruining FE stories because IS can’t have people’s precious waifus be bad people so they tack on a sympathetic backstory or something when there is literally zero evidence to support that claim and is just an assumption they’re making. I have plenty of grounds to be making statements like that. Hell even you have said this before. Something about Fates being some kind of trashy story solely meant to virtue signal. Yeah That statement has plenty of ground to stand on And that’s totally fair. Like if you don’t something then you don’t like something. Like I can say all day that awakening’s themes of defying fate and overcoming the cycle of conflict we’re all trapped in resonates with me on an emotional level but that doesn’t mean others will think the same way. That’s just how personal taste works. It’s when people start trying to justify their subjective tastes with objective reasoning that bothers me. I can say all day how boring Demon slayer is but I’m not gonna say it’s bad because the side characters are underdeveloped because they’re not underdeveloped. I just find whatever development they go through to be completely uninteresting. And that’s fine because that’s my opinion. That doesn’t mean the story is bad though. I’mma have to disagree on themes being subjective. You can only really interpret a single sentence so many ways and in regards to storytelling which is just a collection of sentences, events, and other things dependent on the medium they work much the same way. You can only really interpret a story so many different ways. To suggest awakening is not a story about overcoming fate through the power of bonds is just wrong cause it’s not exactly subtle about that fact. I mean if you couldn’t comment on it you should’ve said do to begin with otherwise I wouldn’t have to assume. I know that’s bad faith debate but still it’s not a strawman because I never attacked an argument that was never made simply using it as an example to bolster my own point. Again I’m starting to think you don’t know what a strawman is. I mean you’ve strawmanned multiple times and I can prove it.

I don’t understand how that’s a strawman. I’m starting to think you don’t understand what a strawman is. I only bring up Naruto a lot because it’s the story I’m most familiar with so it’s an easy example for me to talk about in relation to other topics. I brought up fates because as a way to jab at Etruian’s double standard. Guy can read that much out of Tobin’s character but refuses to apply that same rhetoric to Fates because apparently it’s short comings come from the devs intentionally sidelining quality for pandering when he has zero evidence to back that up which is the definition of a bad faith. like bringing up Naruto as an example to help strengthen my argument is not a stawman because I’m not using it to attack a point that was never made. It’s just an easy example I can point too as a story that people have misinterpreted for really dumb reasons. At worst it’s a false analogy but it’s not.

Look man it doesn’t matter how much you say it’s your opinion that Naruto is a story about hard work vs talent that doesn’t make you any less wrong about it. All I ask is that if you make a claim then cite your shit. It really isn’t much all things considered. It’s really not that hard to follow up on the burden of proof. What frustrates me is people criticizing shit without trying to understand it. I hate criticisms of stories made in bad faith and that’s exactly what most criticism I see is Ah yes because it’s fates I can’t write a 30 page essay on it because obviously I must be overthinking it. Fates can’t have a deeper meaning because it’s garbage and so anyone who likes it must be stupid or horny. Cause of course no one can actually like fates because they relate to it on a deeply personal level or anything. It’s just stupid anime tropes meant to pander to horny people. Stop overthinking it. Christ you people are so predictable

Yeah but that’s more a you problem cause me and many others can get up the mountain just fine without any issues because our suspension of disbelief is not so easily strained. Suspension of disbelief is entirely subjective so you can’t blame the story for your broken suspension of disbelief unless you can prove the story broke verisimilitude which fates doesn’t do. And even in regards to Corrin you can’t blame the story for not being able to relate to them because again that’s entirely subjective. Like a lot complaints towards Fates are either small nitpicks that really don’t matter or highly subjective things that while perfectly valid to have aren’t really objective faults with the story as it is that the story just is not for you.

And that’s what I was trying to do and I thought I gave a reasonable enough explanation but then it still gets misunderstood by you saying “well my opinion won’t change even if I try to look at something differently” which duh that’s obvious. You can’t change your personal preference that easily. Like it’s not like my argument doesn’t take that into account. But the fact is that’s not what my point is nor was that ever my point. To repeat. My point is that criticism should be devoid of personal bias and preference. It doesn’t matter what your personal opinion on a story is, that shouldn’t give you the right to spread misinformation or criticize it for not being something that it was never intended to be. My argument has little to do with personal preference and opinion because that’s all subjective and I’m not trying to change your mind. It’s more about being able to separate criticism from personal bias. If you don’t like something then you don’t like it. I cannot change your mind. But if you don’t like something for a reason that’s not true and provably so then there’s a problem.

That is not at all what I meant. I was speaking more generally. If someone says they don’t care about the themes of fates or anything then they have no right criticizing it because that’s hypocritical. Again if you enter the discussion then basic literary rhetoric should be expected. I’ll admit I’m not perfect and I feel like I could argue my points better and not get so heated. But I feel like I’m not the only one handling things poorly. And personally I don’t appreciate it when I give an indepth look into my perspective only for someone to reduce it down to “it’s just an opinion bro” like @Vicious Sal is the one who wanted to better understand my perspective so I gave them what I felt was a reasonable explanation and I apologize if that upsets you. Everything before that was something I felt was fair to be reprimanded for. If you disagree with my perspective then I don’t mind having a discussion just that I personally feel like my perspective is being misrepresented in this discussion.

Then don’t dismiss when I write that essay. If you don’t care about the themes of Fates’s story then don’t act like you do. Like you can’t say you don’t wanna analyze something then go on to criticize it for what you perceive is a flaw because that is in fact analyzing it. It’s just hypocritical. If you’re going to make a claim about anything then be prepared to have it be contested. Like what are you trying that I don’t argue with anyone that I think has a faulty claim? If you’re going to make a faulty claim then don’t get mad when people call you out on it. I mean I’ve done this but at least I’ve acknowledged that fact right now and I Am not perfect. But the point remains that your opinion does not shield you from making a faulty claim. if you don’t want to be a part of that discussion that’s fine then don’t be but when you engage in that discussion and debate then basic literary rhetoric should be expected. You make a claim and provide the evidence. If that claim is faulty then it’s no longer a worthwhile claim.

The themes of a story aren’t subjective. Like the themes of a story don’t change everytime you read it. It’s not a shrodinger’s cat situation. Like you can say all day that Naruto is a story about hard work overcoming natural talent. That doesn’t make it any less wrong because there’s no evidence to support that claim. In fact there’s more evidence that contradicts that claim if nothing else. And again, I don’t care for demon slayer at all but it would be completely disingenuous to say it’s bad or that it explores its ideas poorly simply because I personally found it boring. And I can name plenty of other examples but my point is don’t dismiss something just because you don’t like it. Try to better understand it and why someone could resonate with it where you didn’t. Try to find what other people see in something you don’t like.

Well I never said that doesn’t happen. Like it doesn’t matter if you like soup or not. The fact remains is that you’re not supposed to eating it with a fork. I’m not trying to have you change your opinion on anything just understand that your opinion shouldn’t impact your ability to meet and judge the story on it’s own terms and what it’s trying to say. I don’t care for demon slayer. I think it’s extremely boring but I’m not gonna say it’s an awful story with no worthwhile themes or messages or that it excutes on those things poorly because it’s still a manga worth reading that explores themes of human depravity, despair, and what being a demon truly represents. Like there are people who legitimately like Demon slayer and resonate with its themes and characters and that perspective shouldn’t be dismissed because I personally found it boring. Like I could write an entire essay on the themes and ideas of this story even if personally I find it more boring than watching paint dry.

I mean not really because the example you used doesn’t make any sense. You’re not actually using my argument against because the paragraph has no logical basis. Like I don’t even how someone saying Edelgard is racist has anything to do with the messages of the story. Like what does have to do with anything? My point is that the statement of “Edelgard is racist” is just incorrect and that people use as a way to justify their dislike of her. It has nothing to do with themes the story is trying to convey. So the whole paragraph is just trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Like if you actually wanted to use my own argument against me it would be more like: ”I don’t think the GGO ark of SAO is very good because Kirito gets over his PTSD too quickly” “But he doesn’t get over his PTSD” ”Yeah but why does he talk about it with the nurse. It doesn’t make sense cause talking about it with Asuna would’ve been better” ”well you’re just not understanding the point then. It does make sense. He couldn’t talk to Asuna because he was worried about her and didn’t want to drag her into it. Like how else could the story have handled that plot point and make it work” and yes that is an actual exchange I have had with me on the receiving end of the arguments I’ve used here. Now personally looking back on it I realize I was the one being stupid in that exchange because I’ve had time to really re-evaluate what I was saying. Like yeah it doesn’t matter that Kirito got out of his funk from talking to the nurse because there’s payoff to it later and the nurse does become a reoccurring character so really it was nitpick on my part but I digress. If that’s how you’re interpreting my argument then you’re interpreting it completely wrong. That’s not how my argument works. As an example let’s look at a common criticism of fates: ”Fates’s story is bad because Revelation makes conquest and Birthright’s stories pointless” now this seems like a fair criticism except it’s not. Because that criticism only really works when you look at Fates from the angle that all three routes are supposed to be standalone narratives. However, there is another angle to look at this from in that Revelation making Conquest and Birthright redundant is exactly the intention. Because before you even start revelation the game tells you that that path is best experienced after playing the other two routes. So running with that idea, why would the game say that? Maybe because the story of Revelation only makes sense when you have the context of the two routes. Each route of fates should not be taken as a standalone narrative but rather you should view each route as one piece of a larger narrative whose ideas build off of each other and culminate into Revelation which is the climax and finale of the story. Revelation is a conclusion to BR and CQ as well as the ideas they established. When you look at fates from that angle, the story begins to make a lot more sense. The reason why Garon isn’t a focal point of Rev because he was the focal point of the other two routes and Anankos is the focal point of Rev. Anankos eating Garon in Rev is supposed to conclude what was established about him in BR and Rev. You wouldn’t know that unless you already played those two routes prior to rev and have the context of his character fresh in your head. I could go on all day about the structure of Fates’s narrative and how it’s actually ingenious but my point is that if you have the criticism of “Rev bad because it invalidates Corrin’s choice” or whatever, then you’re looking at it the wrong way. When I say look deeper. I mean try to look at it from a different angle. When something doesn’t make sense then look at it from different angles until it does make sense. Instead of dismissing it as not making sense try to find a way for it to make sense. Because you should have enough respect for the author try and understand their work in the way it was supposed to be understood. Obviously if you look at Fates from that perspective then of course it’s not gonna make sense because that’s not how you’re supposed to look at it. The story was never intended to be viewed that way so viewing it that way isn’t gonna make the story good. It’s like trying to eat soup with fork. You’re not supposed to eat it that way so try something else. It’s not the soup’s fault for you refusing to eat it the way it was supposed to be eaten.

Because their arguments usually aren’t even arguments as they are statements of opinion. It’s not that I don’t understand the opinion. It’s perfectly valid to have personal preference but that’s not an argument. And I want to make that point perfectly fucking clear. I have never once said you’re not allowed to have an opinion but everyone keeps thinking that’s what I’m saying. I’m saying the way you’re trying to justify your opinion doesn’t make sense. It’s like like people saying they don’t like Edelgard because she’s racist which is just not true. I don’t care if that’s “your opinion” that’s just objectively an incorrect statement. Like how do you even come to that conclusion. Not liking Edelgard is completely valid but straight up lying and spreading misinformation is not okay. When you break down that argument none of it makes any sense. And it’s not like I don’t understand the feeling. I do. It’s just when you think about it for more than five minutes the statement of “Edelgard is racist” doesn’t make sense no matter how you slice it. It only makes sense when you look at it from the angle of someone trying to justify their dislike of the character. It’s perfectly fine to have an opinion but if you’re gonna make a claim about anything you might want to have it make sense.

Dude I wrote a 30 page essay on the themes of Fates’s story and I do have it posted on this site and I have been pointing out these themes and ideas for a good while now but people always dismiss them because “Fates bad”. It doesn’t matter how many times I point out the fact that Xander is intentionally supposed to be hypocritical and how his obligation to Garon and Nohr parallel the blood family vs bond themes of Birthright’s narrative. Everyone just retorts with “ph but you’re just over analyzing fates can’t have deep ideas like that” so at this point I’ve just begun to give up. No one acknowles any of my points no matter how much evidence I have to support my claims.