No need to thank me; you supplied me with excellent entertainment with your argumentation in the Women thread, so it seemed only fair.
I'll be elaborating, about paradigm used by You (and some other people) to express opinion in thread used, because it's too damn worrying. It was actually far from satisfying for analyzing equality any media, let alone media for children. Only it'll be wall of text, and I have catch up with my compulsory readings on university firs, so it may take a while till I submit. However there was nothing wrong with your method, just paradigm following certain meta-narration, and you actually followed it because you are not aware what this is.
The problem is I'm also a trickster, I sometimes just won't tell people things straight, I'll ask then tons of questions, construct some models, point them in directions so that they can come to those things for themselves. Problem is, people, who lack training in humanistic won't even understand the meaning of my expressions, and I constantly forget that not all people posses knowledge to deal with me. I think it's very commendable for you to tackle the issues of inequality genders, because even in 21'th century it's still the problem, but you've chosen very inappropriate meta-narration to follow while dealing with the problem. In fact it's probably worst possible one for that purpose. Another problem was that you've chosen to understand equality rather as sameness, than fairness. Those two problems may be even connected. Of course, you are not aware of using that meta-narration. You'd be horrified. That was one of the reasons of my strong polemic.
I just thought you were younger researcher and was trying to point you towards things that would make your researcher more effective, then each responses was more and more... disappointing. Sorry.
I'm interpreting discourse and narration in media and opinion stated by others was and is part of my academic training... including issues of gender in media and public opinion so well... I really know, what I'm taking about. I'm also very careful reader.
(from ceramic pots, elements of architecture, paintings to stories be it manga or novel) in it's context and for modern humanistic it's also important to understand context of subject who does research, so the fact that you refused to do any of those things have put me in utter puzzlement.
ah, yeah, that explains many things. You've mentioned something about college, so I have initially thought you study something from human science field than I started to doubt this initial assuptiones. That's also explains why you divided portrayal in the manga so strongly from real world and from your perception - it's all part of one system: how things work in fictional world and what is cultural influence on the manga, there is no way of understanding how former how the formers actually works without understanding the latter. It's most basing thing for human sciences to analyze every work
hello, just dropped to thank you for discussion, it was very informative for me, I can't say it fulfilled my expectations, but I got to certain resolves that satisfy me for now and it seems I can't get more of your thinking now. I'd like to ask you what field of humanistic do you study, because you presented approach I've never seen from a researcher.
My favorite is Kaiji though I haven't seen past part 2. Kurosawa is another great work of his. My second or third favorite Fukumoto work. Akagi is pretty good if you can swallow the mahjong. Gai is short and sweet, Zero is a ton of fun. Every Fukumoto work is pretty good and far better than most manga. Really need to update my tumblr one of these days. Haven't had the chance due to exams -_- I'll be writing about Ten next which is Fukumoto's first work whenever I get the chance.
I didn't even know we had a user with that name!!
I'm way more happy about this than I should be XD
Thanks, man! I have a lot of fun writing it, and it's good to know other people have fun reading it, too!
Send an Instant Message to Hattori Using...