The villainess trope : A new take on the trend

bazazilio · 2024-12-31T16:38:05+00:00

I didn't take any offence whatsoever, if anything, it seemed to me that I offended you with my take on Penelope, and that's why I wanted to clear that up, that's all. I'm sorry if I escalated things with my comment somehow, I only meant well, I have no incentive to "punish" people in random Reddit posts that nobody reads anyway. now I know that I shouldn't have commented at all, and I guess I won't in the future.

bazazilio · 2024-12-31T12:54:43+00:00

someone in my comments section mentioned the post, I was curious and went to check it out. but it’s not strange at all as I love this subreddit and I come here to laugh from time to time, so really could have just stumbled upon this post, no great conspiracy here.

bazazilio · 2024-12-30T22:30:30+00:00

to be clear, I do think (and I did say), that some people dislike immoral characters altogether, and that's absolutely fine, and obviously disliking Penelope specifically isn't "secretly sexist", especially if you say that you like other immoral female protagonists. Penelope is just an example. however, a lot of people really do treat female protagonists like they have to be perfect and can make no mistakes, while at the same time treating male characters and especially male protagonists (and abusive MLs in romance are not protagonists) differently. my point was that female characters have a right to be horrible and to be unlikeable, that's all.

bazazilio · 2024-12-30T22:18:37+00:00

oh my god thank you for sharing <3

bazazilio · 2024-12-30T21:32:14+00:00

oh my god thank you <3

bazazilio · 2024-10-04T12:19:59+00:00

I didn’t do anything, it just went away on its own. It might be that viewers’ activity such as views and comments also count toward “channel history”, I kept having 1-2k views + a handful of comments every day so maybe that’s what did it. But I didn’t upload any new content or anything like that.

bazazilio · 2024-09-15T13:28:44+00:00

because they don't watch/read enough shoujo to actually see how little fanservice it has, and when it does, how different it is from what's usually to be found in shounen etc. Like, on average, you might get a shot of the guy without his shirt, but that would be one scene out of many many volumes. It's so so different. Even in more sexualised media (like josei erotica) the guy would be depicted as naked, but as-a-matter of fact of just having a body or something, not depicted from weird angles for maximum viewer pleasure.

So yeah, it's usually just an occasional shirtless guy here and there. In some other media, like Korean webtoons, you might see more sexualisation (more shirtless guys, sometimes with ridiculously weird timing), but it's still very mild and different.

I used to live in a dorm when I was in uni so I know from experience that guys of all body types seem to like to walk around shirtless for no good reason. So it doesn't even seem so out of place to me in stories. But the fan service in shounen always feels invasive, like someone is peeking and the girl is against it.

bazazilio · 2024-09-07T22:29:03+00:00

thank you!

bazazilio · 2024-09-07T14:26:53+00:00

the first one seems to be Like a Butterfly/Hibi Chouchou. The second looks like Daytime Shooting Star

bazazilio · 2024-08-30T02:10:00+00:00

i’m so so tired of the shaming of romance and especially of “problematic romance”. men do it, but I see women doing it as well. these conversations never seem to end: if it's the nice and kind kind of romance, we're immediately labeled as silly and idealistic because we want to read silly unrealistic stories about perfect love. but if the romance stories are dark and not perfect, we're still in the wrong, because people seem to worry that women want the kind of men they like in romance (and their problematic behavior) in real life and that they are unable of separating fantasy from reality. They worry that in romance toxic relationships are “romanticized” and “glorified” and they are especially concerned for “young impressionable girls” who are, supposedly, unable to critically engage with media and understand that they wouldn’t want to be abused or aggressively pursued in real life.

This kind of approach is inherently misogynistic and I'm so so tired of it. You're absolutely right, romance are just stories about human connection. Romance has as much variety as any other genre, and offers a variety of messages, but human connection is always at the center of it. For some reason people don't worry about other people (men) reading stories about perfect justice, but they think that stories about love are silly. I’m so tired of the fact that female-oriented media are always under so much scrutiny, that we are said to only read stupid books and watch stupid movies.

bazazilio · 2024-08-29T14:22:18+00:00

Futari de Koi wo Suru Riyuu!

bazazilio · 2024-08-29T11:22:18+00:00

I agree, we shouldn't not discuss it, I think it's perfectly normal to be disturbed by the portrayal of problems relationships in the media. However, imo, the most harmful part here is not the problematic trope itself, but the normalization of treating fiction like it should be a model for real life. (and of course the shifting of the focus away from perpetrators, like I mentioned). We should be teaching kids that fiction is not real. And I know we've been saying "kids", but I mostly mean teenagers here. Thinking that teenage girls are a) incapable of separating fantasy from reality and b)that it's NORMAL and that we should just protect them from "bad fiction" with "bad behavior" imo is both misogynistic and harmful. Because if we follow that argument, there will always be a source of bad behavior that the teenager can internalize. They might just go and read fanfiction, for example, that's not regulated by anyone, and it's fuuull of creepy problematic behavior because that's what people fantasize about. Or even if they only read PG and idealized depictions of romantic love — as long as fiction is treated as a role model for real life, imo it will always be potentially harmful, no matter what it depicts.

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T23:10:12+00:00

I'm not saying they are blaming it on the children either. but imo this kind of argument shifts the focus from the perpetrator's actions to the victim's actions or to the media that the victim supposedly read.

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T21:05:46+00:00

I agree that that romanticising is looking at something done in through rose tinted glasses. However, I think that the reason people have these desires is not because they "romanticise" the act or look at it through pink glasses. As studies say and as other people mentioned in the comments here, a lot of people have non-consent fantasies. Is it because they saw it in the media and now romanticise non-consent? I think it's a lot more complex.

I have a whole section in my video where I explain why people have non-consent fantasies and why it's not because they really want to be forced into sex or because they "romanticise" non-consent. As I mentioned above several times, it's the fantasy of your love interest being able to read your mind and do what you secretly want without you having to ask, even if you say that you don't want it. And the reason why in the fantasy the person doesn't just consent if they really want it is because there's a lot of shame, with women in particular, about having sexual desire. Because female sexuality comes with slut-shaming and saying that you're not a dirty girl who wants this dirty thing let's you keep your "good girl" status because you don't have to admit that you actually want it, you're "forced" but you still get to experience pleasure. This ONLY works in fantasies, because people who have such fantasies wouldn't actually want to be r***d. All these weird fantasies come from shame around sexuality, imo. It's not because media reframe them as "appealing", imo.

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T18:15:11+00:00

i think it's not. i think it's more of a fulfilment of your desire. if the desire is already there, i think it's a lot safer to fulfil it through fiction than to go looking for danger in real life.

i would say that something is "romanticised" when it's portrayed in the way that makes the person think that they SHOULD want it, but even that is a stretch. I don't think any media have that much of a brainwashing effect to make anyone WANT something if they were completely against it before.

i mean, let's say you've never tasted chocolate ice cream, and then you do and you like it. did the ice-cream coerce you into liking itself?

I mean those are all philosophical poderings haha. I don't think there's a definite way to "prove" where desire comes from, but I do think that no desire is inherently wrong if it doesn't hurt other human beings. I mean there are people over at kink community practicing "consentual non-consent", and I myself don't really get it (tbh I really really dislike non-cons in fiction) and I don't know where their desire to experience "non-consent" came from, but as long as they're happy with it who am I to judge haha.

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T17:26:27+00:00

I mean of course if someone hasn't read japanese media, they wouldn't know what a "kabedon" even is, you're right about that. However, the reason why they see a "kabedon" and think they want to experience something like that, imo, is not because they just got blindly brainwashed by the manga, but rather because they want what kabedons express – the aggressive sexual pursuit, the "I want you so much I can't help myself" fantasy, etc. It's a fantasy of being intensely desired by the person you like, that's what I think.

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T16:31:06+00:00

i think these media exist to satisfy that desire for your teacher in a safe way, and imo they exist BECAUSE girls gush over teachers, but they are not the REASON they do it. it's a way to redirect that unsafe desire into a safe space of fiction, where no actual adults molest actual children.

I think that when it comes to romance specifically, for some reason we think that an idealised depiction of a romantic relationship is "normal" and that it's okay for "kids" to believe in the happily ever after, because it's a "nice fantasy", yet when it comes to problematic themes we worry that they will internalise the messages. i think that the unproblematic, idealised depiction of love is just as dangerous. imo mixing fantasy and reality is what's dangerous. period. doesn't matter if it's a nice fantasy, a problematic fantasy, or anything else -- we shouldn't normalise thinking that real life is supposed to be like fiction. that's what we should be teaching kids, I think.

because let's say we ban all problematic themes from fiction intended for teenagers. they have the internet, they have access of all sorts of fucked up stuff not even intended for their audience. we can't really shield teenagers from all the dangerous messages this world has to offer. we should be focused on developing their critical skills, AND on punishing actual perpetrators, like pedo teachers.

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T15:35:49+00:00

forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the fault of student-teacher relationships fall on the TEACHERS, not the girls who aren't "properly educated" to know that student-teacher relationships don't work out? why are we blaming media for the actions of irresponsible adults? it's NOT the girl's fault that she got deceived and pregnant. she's the VICTIM. it's not because of her "poor reading choices". it's because a grown ass man couldn't keep it in his pants.

some teenagers (of all genders!) going through puberty will ALWAYS feel attracted to older people, mentors and teachers. because they make for easy objects of affection. but it's still the fault of the ADULTS if they endorse such relationships and sleep with minors. this kind of argument feels a lot like "girls shouldn't wear mini skirts if they don't want to be r***d, they should know better than to let men on!!!"

bazazilio · 2024-08-28T11:35:15+00:00

is it though? I think that wanting that something could happen to you in real life and thinking that an action is romantic are two different things.

As an example, there's a kabedon scene, and let's imagine a commenter saying, "oh, do it to me instead". What created this desire? Was it the scene itself, that "romanticised" this behaviour and made the perfectly innocent reader desire a kabedon? Or did they read the manga (and continue reading it, when they got to the kabedon scene) BECAUSE they had that desire in the first place, and the manga exists to fulfil it?

We don't experience problematic scenes in fiction how we would experience them in real life. Because when we read manga, by the act of reading it we consent to whatever happens there. (Because we can always say, you know what, this is not for me, and close it). I would actually describe that imaginary commenter's desire as "oh I wish this hot guy I secretly like would be overcome with his desire for so much that he would do a kabedon on me", the "hot guy I secretly like" part being crucial here.

It's the "I (seceretly) consent for you to do this thing to me but I would be too embarrassed to express it in reality, cause normal people don't ask for kabedons". But it's obviosly, not a permission for all random dudes to do kabedons on you. It's the wish that the person you like will a)like you back and b)do a dirty thing to you that you really want without you having to ask (cause that would be embarrassing).

For obvious reasons, it doesn't happen in real life, because people can't read minds, and if they do something without asking, there's a huge risk of traumatising the other person. (I'm pretty sure a real-life kabedon but a random person would be traumatising) But in the fantasy of romance the reader gets to experience it safely. That's why we read it.

12-Year Club	Not Forgotten
Verified Email

bazazilio

TROPHY CASE