1. notleia says:

    Fairy Tail does offer quite a bit of opportunity to get on my “sexism is bad” soapbox. Juvia’s stalker-creeping is supposed to be funny rather than 100% NOPE because the cultural view (in Japan as well as the US) is that women are not a threat to men and/or “real” men aren’t threatened by women even if they are stalker-creepy. I’m also really super tired of the BS “will they, won’t they” junk. That horse is dead, quit beating it. I’d rather ship Juvia and Lyon ’cause he’s actually into her.
    There are entire dissertations on the role of fanservice (male gaze, objectification, etc) in media, but there’s no easy answer because so much of it is contextual. Owning your sexuality can and does feel empowering, but that doesn’t mean entitled jerks won’t try to exploit it. But the overriding consideration seems to be that cheesecake poses sell more posters and figurines (and body pillows), because capitalism.

    • Not only is it bad, it doesn’t make sense in the story’s own view of the world. As you pointed out, If it’s wrong for a man to stalk a woman, why is it funny for a woman to stalk a man? And furthermore, as I mentioned if it’s in-universe okay to objectify and exploit one’s self, why then do we feel such sympathy for those frequent “accidental exploitation” moments? Why is public nudity presented as an occasion for natural humiliation? It cannot be both at the same time — just as Juvia could not (in reality) be such a person in real life without being rightly decried as, at best, psychologically unstable and dangerous. (Which is funny of me to say, because I actually really like Juvia — the Loyal Friend and Powerful Water Mage Useful in a Battle version.)

      • notleia says:

        Like I said, the nudity stuff revolves around context. And, more importantly, consent. Displaying your sexuality isn’t objectifying or exploiting yourself. You don’t actually objectify or exploit yourself: that’s something others do to you. It can literally be illustrated by grammar: the actor does the exploitation, the object is the passive thing being acted upon.
        Ideally a woman should be able to waltz around naked without having to deal with unwanted sexual attention, but do I really have to counter a sentence that begins with “ideally”? The reality is that women are sexualized no matter what they do or wear. Guess why the Victorians were titillated by ankles.

        • That depends on whether one accepts “Thou shalt not have sex without consent” as the only minimalist Rule regarding sexuality. (And why should we assume that rule is valid if all the other rules were not?) But if sex has a Creator, then He has the right to define other terms for the gift.

        • Paul Lee says:

          I’m quite certain that the two of you have much more ideology in common than you think. You’re focused on the external rules, but internally you’re both being lead toward nearly the same conclusions.

          I guess I won’t explain it for you because that would be tedious and would seem one-sided even though I would sincerely mean it to apply in both conservative and liberal directions. We’re far too close to the election for that kind of talk. 😉

  2. Audie says:

    I think you pointed out the big problem I had with Gajeel and Levy. At least as far as I can remember, or up to the last I really watched much of the series, I can’t recall Gajeel giving any kind of apology to her or her teammates for his seemingly very vicious attack on them during the Phantom Lord conflict. True, many of his later actions showed a change of mind, but some kind of acknowledgement seemed necessary, too.

    • Exactly. This is especially significant given the contrast with, say, an American “anime,” “Avatar: The Last Airbender.” In season 3 a significant villain repents of his evil ways, after spending two season on this journey. But then we need several stories/episodes more to hear about him specifically confessing his sin to his former enemies, and working to demonstrate proof of his repentance as they, one by one, forgive him. They use the term “wrong” and “forgive” often. And that is exactly what you need in a situation like this.

      It may be that the creators’ “balance” of Eastern and Western themes led to this emphasis. Meanwhile, Japan seems to have more of an honor and shame mindset. So Master Makarov and others can say things are “unforgivable,” and perhaps this is a translation issue. If some things are unforgivable, what things are “forgivable”? Who decides? In the world of “Fairy Tail” and other anime that I have seen, it looks like the only “unpardonable sin” is sincerely betraying your own nakama. But who has not committed this sin, even in little ways? What if Laxus was actually sincere in his betrayal of his nakama? Would he have gotten off the hook? Perhaps this is why they made it clear that, despite his actively trying to kill people, his attempt at the Fairy Law spell backfired. Because, again, the story-world rule is that you have to be really very committed to magic (and to your nakama) in order to get stronger and reach your goals/dreams.

What do you think?