0

The following post is a translation of this article written by Dokuninjin_Blue aka Seishiki Aron.

青識亜論(せいしき・あろん)💉💉 @BlauerSeelowe

中村香住氏 @rero70 の現代ビジネス記事について、ねっちょりと批判しました。「ましな消費」とか余計なお世話ですよねという話を粘着質に書いています。 オタクコンテンツにエシカル消費はいらない ~青識亜論のネチネチnote~|青識亜論 @dokuninjin_blue #note note.com/dokuninjin7/n/…

2020-06-28 17:36:30

Seishiki Aron's sticky note: Otaku contents does not need "Ethical consumption".

Good afternoon.

I'm Seishiki Aron. The one known to have sticky criticism.

Well.

I wrote previously about this statues destruction movement in America but since Gendai Buziness uploaded an interesting article so I will stop writing about statues being smashed and write my argument about this one.

リンク 現代ビジネス 「オタク」であり「フェミニスト」でもある私が、日々感じている葛藤(中村 香住) @gendai_biz 「現代ビジネス」は、第一線で活躍するビジネスパーソン、マネジメント層に向けて、プロフェッショナルの分析に基づいた記事を届ける新創刊メディアです。政治、経済からライフスタイルまで、ネットの特性を最大限にいかした新しい時代のジャーナリズムの可能性を追及します。 285 users 93

"The conflict I feel as being feminist and otaku at same time." By Kasumi Nakamura
https://archive.vn/ulyOG

The writer is Kasumi Nakamura that have PhD specialized in sociology.

She is an "otaku of female idols, maid cafe, female VA and 2D idols" but at same time she

does research for gender studies in university. It's the so called "feminist".

In article she describes otaku as:

The meaning I used for otakus this time for my tweet is "the one who follows and loves more than a average people contents that have female actors or female characters as center point".

Meanwhile she described the "feminist" as :

The "feminist" I used to define myself is in a nutshell everyone who agrees in pursue to make gender equality a reality. More specifically, is the one who sees the inequality based on gender and gender norm forced by society as problem and wants it to be fixed.

Talking from the conclusion, I completely agree on Nakamura's opinion that you can be

feminist and otaku if both words have these meaning.

By that meaning she has presented, I am a feminist (of course there will be disagreement

depending of the situation) and I'm also otaku.

Despite of that, what I see as problematic is the use of "sexual CONSUMPTION criticism".

This thing that is used by certain part of feminism.

Let's begin to see it in a sticky way.

Is otaku contents really "sexist"?

The easy summary of Nakamura's logic is something like this.

1: Feminists are not demanding censorship. It is just criticizing the fact that otaku expressions is contrubuting on sexism against woman via "sexual objectification".

2: Since otaku contents have female actors or female characters to be "gazed" it's hard to not be criticized as "objectification".

3: Despite being made to be consumed, works where females acts as protagonists can contribute for empowerment of female independence and sorority.

4: So one should self discipline about the internalized violent tendency in consumption of otaku contents while finding a "better" way to consume it.

I think Nakamura's article was an article made very carefully written caring to many sides.

She takes the feminist complaint as something that has validity at same time shows that otaku content have the possibility for the empowerment.

I agree on the part 3 and I wish more feminist say about this. But I see some leaps in logic in order to accept the feminism's complaints.

Let's see it in a sticky way.

First, let's talk about "sexual objectification". At same time she agrees in some scale about the fear that the sexist gaze towards female that appears as "sexual objectification" lies

fundamentally in Otaku culture itself, she argues this:

The consumer who gets the contents are "the ones who gazes". The female actors and female characters are "the one who are gazed". This creates the asymmetry of "object". At this point you can not deny the criticism of objectification of a woman.

And at same time she point out that it does not only objectify the woman but also at least it focus on charm of femininity, she argues this:

Also the contents creators know that the consumers are strongly attracted to femininity. For that reason, they sometimes can offer expressions that can be seen as "sexual objectification" in order to facilitate the consumption of femininity for the consumers.

The argument of they sometimes can offer expressions that can be seen as sexual objectification, the statement itself is true. Because it's just a possibility. BUT, It's an phenomenon that has nothing to do with "woman being the one that is gazed aka object" or "consumption of femininity".

She tries to see validity on feminist's fear by associating the "consumption of femininity (sexualization)" and "treating the females as object" to state as if otaku content have "liability of doing rampant sexual objectification". But sexuality + objectification does not means it's "sexual objectification".

Eguchi Satochi posted an detailed article about sexual objectification so I want to cite it.

According to Nussbaum, one of the meaning of objectification in general, in other words 'treating a person as a object', is (1) Treating someone as tool or meaning. (Partial text abbreviation) If one agrees with the salary or or treatment in human relationship and spontaneously be used then there is no problem. What is wrong is using other people as if they are 'just' a tool or means for one's objective ignoring the will of the one being used for it.

リンク 現代ビジネス 『宇崎ちゃん』ポスターは「女性のモノ化」だったのか?(江口 聡) @gendai_biz 日本赤十字社が献血を呼びかけるポスターをめぐってSNSで激しい議論が生じた。この「現代ビジネス」上でも、大阪大学教授の牟田和恵氏が論説を発表している。赤十字社のコラボ相手となった丈(たけ)氏作『宇崎ちゃんは遊びたい!』は、累計で60万部以上を売り上げている人気マンガだ。 327 users 41

Is Uzaki chan poster really objectification of woman?
https://archive.vn/THPdP

So what this means.

Gravure idol is a profession that one shows own limbs in a sexy way. It's intended to be a "object to be seen" by the readers. Even so you can not say this self expression is immediately sexual objectification.

Normally it's obvious that she works acting as and with "sexual object" expression by her own will as a human and not an object.

This does not change when it comes to contents made for otakus.

She skips the Nussbaum's very important requirement for sexual objectification to validate the fear of feminism. This is not fair to the otaku side that voiced counter arguments when we had contents Kizuna Ai and Uzaki chan unjustly labeled as sexist.

Another problem is the number 2, the attitude towards the "consumption". While Nakamura unassertively praises the happiness that she gets from otaku contents, suddenly ,she argues this:

Of course in the end we otakus are 'consuming'. In my example, I'm consuming the femininity, personality, the relationship between females, etc. It's a weird thing to say but there is an feeling of resignation that all I cando is 'consume'. There are times I feel guilty over that. I discipline myself to think always about the violence that could be internalized in the consumption. But if I can not stop 'consuming' itself, couldn't we think in a 'better' way to consume it?

This "violence" come out of blue when we thought we are talking about sexual objectification.

I suppose many people got confused with this.

The limitation to possibility in "could be" is also an important point. Because if it is only a possibility, it has no other way to consider it other than "true".

If you force a woman who hates otaku contents to see it, it would be a violence. If we are talking about possibility, it exists. But it can be applied to everything. There is no need to cite it when write about consumption of otaku contents.

If you pick a bulky feminist book and beat the head of a man with the corner of the book, it is violence. Even so it does not means feminism has internalized violence.

It's impossible to say that the consumption itself is "violence" no matter the content. (Unless you force someone to read it, as I said before.)

It's completely nonsense to argue about "If you can't stop consumption itself" or "a better way to consume".

There is no need to feel guilty over otaku contents consumption.

There is no need to feel guilty over otaku contents consumption.

Nakamura stated feminists as the ones who desire "gender equality" but no matter how much the lover of otaku contents works to to make a "better" way of consumption, it will contribute nothing to the gender equality.

Even if you consume in a ethical way this makes no one happy. (Except the ones who have self satisfaction by consuming it that way.)

So there are no need to feel in trouble for consuming in that way whatsoever.

It's the fake feminism-ish argument that embed in us an unnecessary trouble by pointing out unfounded and uncontextualized "discrimination", "sexual exploitation" and "violence" on otaku contents.

Also, it is obvious to people get mad if have their content they love be labeled that way.

It's not only an emotional problem.

Nakamura have her right to have her own meaningless sense of original sin. It's her freedom of belief. There are people in this world who feel morally guilty in consuming meat. It's ok to have people who feel guilty in consuming otaku contents. This is diversity.

However, "discrimination" and "violence" are extremely serious words.

Those are universally considered in society as injustice, injury and something that must be purged. Nakamura says don't want censorship but this must not be overlook even if it is just a criticism.

In reality, contents like Kizuna Ai and Uzaki chan got labeled as discriminatory and suffered a lot of pressure. There are even contents that was removed.

(※ These tweets are highlighted part of Sumomo list's tweet.)

セリエマ🔞 @seri3ma

Period: 2019/01 Case: Weelky SPA! "Top 5 universities with female college students that you can have sex." Result: Apology pic.twitter.com/BIojI7aXV0

2020-03-22 09:06:17
拡大
セリエマ🔞 @seri3ma

Period: 2019/03 Case: Japanese self defense force recruiting poster. Something looking like panties is a bit visible. Result: Pulled out. Deleted from the homepage. pic.twitter.com/n358TbsDql

2020-03-22 09:49:58
拡大
セリエマ🔞 @seri3ma

Period: 2019/10 Case: Japanese red cross collab with Uzaki chan. Criticism about the size of the boobs. Result: Japanese red cross created a guideline. pic.twitter.com/np9zFAP7Ww

2020-03-22 10:55:20
拡大
セリエマ🔞 @seri3ma

Period: 2020/02 Case: Job searching site called ChangeJob hired Akane Saya for the ad. Feminists argue that It's putting emphasis on boobs. Result: Ad (this pic) deleted. pic.twitter.com/WQMmhz2ff2

2020-03-22 11:00:37
拡大
セリエマ🔞 @seri3ma

Period: 2020/03 Case: The AI of Takanawa Gateway train station "Sakura-san". Criticism toward the form she responds to sexual harassment kind of questions. Result: The content of the answer were edited. pic.twitter.com/dfE2ZhOaNo

2020-03-22 11:16:09
拡大
拡大
セリエマ🔞 @seri3ma

From what I know she can respond "A lover*? No I have to concentrate on my work so I'm not interested". *It could be boyfriend but 恋人(koibito) is unisex word that can be used for both boyfriend and girlfriend. So I maintained the ambiguity.

2020-03-22 11:16:10

In reality, look at America, the country at another side of pacific ocean, we have statues of Lincoln, the leader actor of abolition of slavery, and Thomas Jefferson, the founding father of USA, close to be destroyed after being labeled as "discriminatory" .

リンク NewSphere コロンブス、リンカーン、ガンディー像も……黒人差別の象徴破壊、世界で相次ぐ BLM(Black Lives Matter、黒人の命は大切)の抗議活動が続いているが、これに伴い、各地で奴隷制度や黒人差別に加担したとされる歴史上の人物の銅像や記念碑が破壊されている。倒される前に急いで撤去する動きもあるが、物議を醸す過去の遺物として再評価が求められている。アメリカで標的となっているのは、おもに奴隷制度廃止に抵抗していた南部連合時代の英雄像だ。 6 users 153

Sexism, racism against black, unjust discrimination must be ended.

But one's consciousness about the problem got so high that begun to label work that have nothing to do to discrimination as discriminatory. As if one must feel morally guilty about something. This argumentation of guilt itself is "violence", isn't it?

I think she wrote this article with the desire and intention to solve the structure of "otakus vs feminists". I feel that from her article.

But if she really desires it she should have cast a light on the violence internalized in feminist's repeated "complaints".

At the moment she is having a lot of criticism so I do not think to ask her for a answer.

But I want to debate face to face in a way to solve the conflict between otakus and feminists. Because I also believe this conflict can be solved.

Done.