Sword Art Online and sexual assault as tension(spoilers for SAO II)

[Nurb]

People are under no obligation to use any sort of story or plot device a certain way when it comes to fiction though.

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

edit: Also, I find merit in bashing the mediocre and pointless stuff, the more people know of their flaws, the more likely it won't be repeated

Ah so you know what you're doing...then that's fine, carry on
Also good luck with that "more likely it won't be repeated" thing.

When I actually see an anime that has a scene like that (I heard Elfen Lied and Brynhildr are somewhat exploitative with their scenes) I will complain about it but I can't see every anime with an exploitative sex scene so I will comment as I find it.

Perhaps you're not familiar with what goes on in anime yet. Out of the total library of anime maybe 5-10% is actually worth watching and recommending, and the remaining 90% is pointless/mediocre trash. Anime gets mass-produced (a bit like Bollywood movies) so there's basically an OCEAN of stuff coming out every year.

I'll save you a lot of trouble, just go to myanimelist.net/topanime and start watching the top 100-200. That should keep you busy enough and help you steer clear of garbage. SAO was at least watchable, but criticizing SAOII is just silly.

An anime has to be actually WORTH criticism, otherwise you'll be spending the next 10 years criticizing all the shitty anime. You really want to do that?

Yea, no hint of cultural elitism there at all whatsoever.

The same exact thing has been said of every form of entertainment ever, whether it's TV shows or movies or music etc. The bottom line is what's "worth watching" and what's "pointless/mediocre trash" will vary greatly depending on the viewer's taste, and personally I'd never presume to be arrogant enough to declare what's "trash" to other people, I leave that to the elitists and the fanboys.

Please, there's a difference between "elitism" and common sense. Every now and then a terrible movie/anime/etc comes out and gets widely paddled by critics and audience alike. So when the occasional person comes along saying "but I thought it was awesome!", it's safe to assume that their taste obviously isn't particularly deep or respectable. Again, not elitism - just common sense. If you told me that Transformers 2 had an amazing plot/story, then I would laugh at you. Anyone would.

In the same way, Sword Art Online II is one of those things just not worth bothering thinking too much about or getting worked over. You can enjoy it for the only thing it offers (visuals) and accept that every other aspect is shit. So when someone starts saying "hmm that wasn't a very well thought-out sexual encounter" when it comes to a garbage anime, what is someone supposed to say to that? Sky is blue, cows eat grass, and a LOT of anime have shitty depictions (or terrible choices) regarding sexual encounters, fanservice, rape, etc. That fact is written in stone.

With things like anime and TV shows people mostly have to rely on recommendations from others, unless they enjoy investing a ton of time only to end up getting horribly disappointed (or bored to death) halfway through a season.

Save that "elitism" fluff for someone else.

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

People are under no obligation to use any sort of story or plot device a certain way when it comes to fiction though.

but we have a right to criticize it if it goes wrong

 

[kyp275]

Wait, SAO used rape again? Well, technically they used the threat of rape once already when they replaced the main villain in the first season/series with a guy who kidnaps one of the female leads. That always irked me. They take the one girl who is on par with, if not better than, Kirito and reduce her to a damsel. Sorry, let me get back on topic.

OT: So what you're telling me is that they used the threat of rape again? Sounds tiresome and un-creative *yawn*

This is something that's always amused me. Why is the threat of rape so special as a plot device that it shouldn't be used, much less used multiple times, while threats of deaths or maiming or insert-great-bodily-harm perfectly fine and normal? Can someone actually logically explain that mindset? Yes, rape is terrible, but rest assured that getting shot/hacked/burned to death, blown up, partially or completely, or any of the other myriad ways characters are threatened and actually killed by are no less terrible in real life, but yet seems perfectly acceptable and no one ever bats an eye at in stories?

People are under no obligation to use any sort of story or plot device a certain way when it comes to fiction though.

Shhh, don't burst their bubble!

Please, there's a difference between "elitism" and common sense.

Ah yes, that first step on the staircase to elitism, where one converts his own opinion in a subjective matter into "common sense".

Every now and then a terrible movie/anime/etc comes out and gets widely paddled by critics and audience alike. So when the occasional person comes along saying "but I thought it was awesome!", it's safe to assume that their taste obviously isn't particularly deep or respectable.

No, it's not "safe", just asinine. Just because they may hold the minority opinion doesn't mean theirs is any less valid than yours. How one interprets entertainment medias or just any art for that matter isn't exactly science, to say that there can be a "right" or "wrong" opinion on a movie would mean that there can be a right or wrong opinion on art, feel free to go there if you want, I believe you've been climbing that staircase already anyway.

Again, not elitism - just common sense. If you told me that Transformers 2 had an amazing plot/story, then I would laugh at you. Anyone would.

I'm sure there are people out there who did. And no, while I'd disagree with their view, I wouldn't laugh at them, you know, that whole thing about being arrogant?

That fact is written in stone.

You're progressing well on that stair.

With things like anime and TV shows people mostly have to rely on recommendations from others, unless they enjoy investing a ton of time only to end up getting horribly disappointed (or bored to death) halfway through a season.

Downright terrible mindset. While it's fine to check out reviews and recommendations, especially from those you know aligns closely with your own taste, to rely on them to make a choice for you is just lazy. This goes for just about everything else in life.

Save that "elitism" fluff for someone else.

Nope, I simply call them out as I see them.

 

[kyp275]

but we have a right to criticize it if it goes wrong

No, you have the right to criticize it period. However, it doesn't make it right or wrong, just something you disagree with.

 

[Nukekitten]

Tension? No. Squick value, perhaps. Tension relies on uncertainty in outcome.

This sort of stuff makes me feel tired - watching it I just want it to stop. I remember seeing the bit where she logs out and thinking 'Oh, here comes a rape scene.' and when the kid walked in 'And that's the designated rapist, what a shame.'

But I don't think there's much point in complaining about it. She's a main female character in the sort of anime SAO is. She's there for someone to try to do horrible things to her so the main male character has someone to rescue. That's the fundamental premise of that sort of show. Almost everything's there to glorify the main character.

I'd prefer to see anime with strong female characters in - I'd prefer that this didn't teach people to think of women and girls in that sort of way (if indeed it does)... but I don't know there's anything that can be done about it. People are probably always going to produce these sorts of juvenile power/hero fantasies. About the most I can say is that I find it distressing enough that it's not my cup of tea, and I doubt I'd care to be around the people whose cup of tea it is. :/

This is something that's always amused me. Why is the threat of rape so special as a plot device that it shouldn't be used, much less used multiple times, while threats of deaths or maiming or insert-great-bodily-harm perfectly fine and normal? Can someone actually logically explain that mindset? Yes, rape is terrible, but rest assured that getting shot/hacked/burned to death, blown up, partially or completely, or any of the other myriad ways characters are threatened and actually killed by are no less terrible in real life, but yet seems perfectly acceptable and no one ever bats an eye at in stories?

I don't think that's true, many people - myself included - seem to find torture porn pretty horrible too. I think destroying someone's freedom comes close to the core of the issue: smashing someone helpless. Lots of the violence doesn't do that, both sides are fighting and one side loses.

 

[kyp275]

About the most I can say is that I find it distressing enough that it's not my cup of tea, and I doubt I'd care to be around the people whose cup of tea it is. :/

I'd think carefully about that one. Did you mean that since you don't like these type of stories, that you likely won't share the same taste as people who do, or are you insinuating something about the characters of people who do enjoy these type of stories? If it's the first, fair enough. If it's the latter, not so cool.

This is something that's always amused me. Why is the threat of rape so special as a plot device that it shouldn't be used, much less used multiple times, while threats of deaths or maiming or insert-great-bodily-harm perfectly fine and normal? Can someone actually logically explain that mindset? Yes, rape is terrible, but rest assured that getting shot/hacked/burned to death, blown up, partially or completely, or any of the other myriad ways characters are threatened and actually killed by are no less terrible in real life, but yet seems perfectly acceptable and no one ever bats an eye at in stories?

I don't think that's true, many people - myself included - seem to find torture porn pretty horrible too. I think destroying someone's freedom comes close to the core of the issue: smashing someone helpless. Lots of the violence doesn't do that, both sides are fighting and one side loses.

Maybe it's a difference or simply a lack of perspective, but I don't see how death is any less "freedom" destroying. It is a final, complete and utter destruction of one's freedom to do anything and everything. Go to a battlefield, see the deaths and destructions first hand, the burned and mangled bodies, or pieces of bodies of enemies and friends alike; or some inner city slums, where drive-by shooter is as common as morning coffee, where your friends or neighbor or just some random kids sleeping in their bed can be gunned down for seemingly no reason.

Think about that for a bit, and look back to your violence is both sides fighting and one side loses line. You say torture porn is pretty horrible, true. I just don't think you realize how close actual real life violence is to those.

For recent references, just look at those ISIS videos (actually, you probably don't want to, it is not for the faint of heart). That's not some torture porn, that's real life. The threat of being killed, whether through beheading or crucifixion or guns or bombs on a daily basis is the reality of what life is for millions of people right this moment. And just like the threat of sexual violence, has always been present throughout history. So again, I ask, why is one supposed to be reviled as a plot device, yet the other is perfectly acceptable.

My guess? I think it simply boils down to rape being something that people can relate to easier, as it's something that still occurs even in a "peaceful" or advanced society. Violence on the other hand is mostly seen in movies or TV shows for those same people. People can put a face to a rape, people know what happens in a rape, so it's easier to empathize. However, most people don't know what it feels like to get shot, have body parts severed, or be able to wrap their head around what a violent death is really like.

 

[Nukekitten]

I'd think carefully about that one. Did you mean that since you don't like these type of stories, that you likely won't share the same taste as people who do, or are you insinuating something about the characters of people who do enjoy these type of stories? If it's the first, fair enough. If it's the latter, not so cool.

I'd feel uncomfortable around them. When people have expressed interests in things that distressed me roughly as equally in the past, the SAW movies for instance, (had to leave the flat when some old flatmates were watching those - hours of utterly sickening stuff,) that's how I've felt.

I don't know why. There's a level of tired disgust with things that's sufficient that it changes how I feel about people without changing any of the more reasoned out things about them. They just feel less nice to be around. I certainly don't think they're suddenly monsters or anything like that.

Maybe it's conditioning. Everyone I've found who does like that sort of stuff, without exception, hasn't been someone I've enjoyed being around much in the first place. I've never really been surprised to find someone likes it. It's been more like another weight on the pile.

Maybe it's just that they're taking part in a transaction that encourage more relative media dominance of something that repels me.

I don't know; can't really justify it to you. It's just how I feel.

Maybe it's a difference or simply a lack of perspective, but I don't see how death is any less "freedom" destroying. It is a final, complete and utter destruction of one's freedom to do anything and everything. Go to a battlefield, see the deaths and destructions first hand, the burned and mangled bodies, or pieces of bodies of enemies and friends alike; or some inner city slums, where drive-by shooter is as common as morning coffee, where your friends or neighbor or just some random kids sleeping in their bed can be gunned down for seemingly no reason.

Think about that for a bit, and look back to your violence is both sides fighting and one side loses line. You say torture porn is pretty horrible, true. I just don't think you realize how close actual real life violence is to those.

For recent references, just look at those ISIS videos (actually, you probably don't want to, it is not for the faint of heart). That's not some torture porn, that's real life. The threat of being killed, whether through beheading or crucifixion or guns or bombs on a daily basis is the reality of what life is for millions of people right this moment. And just like the threat of sexual violence, has always been present throughout history. So again, I ask, why is one supposed to be reviled as a plot device, yet the other is perfectly acceptable.

My guess? I think it simply boils down to rape being something that people can relate to easier, as it's something that still occurs even in a "peaceful" or advanced society. Violence on the other hand is mostly seen in movies or TV shows for those same people. People can put a face to a rape, people know what happens in a rape, so it's easier to empathize. However, most people don't know what it feels like to get shot, have body parts severed, or be able to wrap their head around what a violent death is really like.

I think if people showed the aftermath of shootings and people dying slowly, there'd be a lot more problems with it. As it stands a lot of violence in films does seem to be the way I described. Right up till the point the person gets shot they're free. And afterwards... well, afterwards who knows? They're not a person any more afterwards, there's nothing there to be free or chained. It's sanitised, made a mockery of. Probably intentionally so - it's hard to think of most action movies as being anything other than power-trips; the lone hero, or small group of heroes, against an army.

My point was, basically, that you have to compare like with like. Violence is a terrible thing in real life. However, 'crack bang, situation over, next bad guy,' is a very unrealistic way of portraying events. They're not smashing someone helpless, when they pull the trigger the person's fighting them. Right up until the person, by the magic of cinema, isn't a person any more. The horrors of rape translate better in that respect, I suspect, to screen. When someone's raped their agency is necessarily diminished for the act to take place which is shown on camera.

More extended portrayals of violence against a person, and the suffering involved, tend to cross the line over into torture porn - which many people seem to have more problems with.

And, you're right, there's probably a familiarity aspect to it as well: I don't imagine that if people saw someone they liked bleed out after being shot that they'd be as happy with seeing people shot on film.

 

[VanQ]

Didn't the author in a recent interview basically go "Boy was I young and horny back then!" when talking about his work?

Which was fairly obvious by the tenticle rape attempt in SAO 1, or the other sexual assault scene thats in SAO 1, or the fact a fairly good idea about people trapped in a videogame had to release the second book before it stopped focusing on a terrible romance plot that I swear was only included so he could make the 'mistakenly stripping' joke.

Except the flower beast came closer to eating Silica whole than to raping her. And she even managed to kick it's ass.

Then the "terrible romance plot" which still was a fuckton better than the majority of all anime ever. The fact that there was a confirmed romance between two characters that actually had some god damn closure rather than cock-teasing for 24 episodes with 5 girls all chasing the MC's dick. Funnily enough, SAO's romance was fairly tasteful. If you mean that Asuna "mistakenly stripped" then you'd be dead wrong, she stripped on purpose. Because she wanted to make love with the man who she loved who almost died right in front of her damn eyes. Besides his initial reaction, they do actually do it afterwards. Off screen in the anime, chapter 16.5 in the novels.

There's not liking something and then there's outright bullshitting about it. Or maybe you were genuinely ignorant about chapter 16.5.

 

[Izanagi009_v1legacy]

Didn't the author in a recent interview basically go "Boy was I young and horny back then!" when talking about his work?

Which was fairly obvious by the tenticle rape attempt in SAO 1, or the other sexual assault scene thats in SAO 1, or the fact a fairly good idea about people trapped in a videogame had to release the second book before it stopped focusing on a terrible romance plot that I swear was only included so he could make the 'mistakenly stripping' joke.

Except the flower beast came closer to eating Silica whole than to raping her. And she even managed to kick it's ass.

Then the "terrible romance plot" which still was a fuckton better than the majority of all anime ever. The fact that there was a confirmed romance between two characters that actually had some god damn closure rather than cock-teasing for 24 episodes with 5 girls all chasing the MC's dick. Funnily enough, SAO's romance was fairly tasteful. If you mean that Asuna "mistakenly stripped" then you'd be dead wrong, she stripped on purpose. Because she wanted to make love with the man who she loved who almost died right in front of her damn eyes. Besides his initial reaction, they do actually do it afterwards. Off screen in the anime, chapter 16.5 in the novels.

There's not liking something and then there's outright bullshitting about it. Or maybe you were genuinely ignorant about chapter 16.5.

I can say having read 16.5, it was completely stupid and really feels like a horrible attempt at porn

the fact that one of the lines is "two years of semen", I really want to smack the author again and again for how stupid it is and how self-gratifying it is

 

[Schadrach]

You're really not helping eliminate the "gamers are sexist" stereotype. Seriously don't talk about this kind of thing unless you're 100% sure you know what you're talking about. Placing rape in quotation marks and saying that it's not a problem is a really fucked up thing to say.

He didn't say it wasn't a problem, he said it wasn't an epidemic, and was in fact less frequent than any time in recent history. Crime statistics back that pretty well. Notwithstanding the trick where you ask someone about things that can possibly be rape and then declare them to be rape even if the supposed victim doesn't agree with you, do that to self-selected volunteers at two college campuses, and then declare that to be representative.

To me, using rape as a narrative device is almost always a one-use item because doing it again may seem exploitative.

Law and Order : SVU

Being formulaic isn't usually a problem for me, the episode that really turned me off SVU was the one where the perp had broken into two apartments, raped the residents, and carved words into them, was caught going after her third planned victim and at the end of the episode the SVU team apologized to the rapist because the rapist was going to be stuck with a single trespassing charge, but at least her victims were going to jail for a decent while.

The microwave helmet, how the hell did that thing would pass safety regulation inspections in beyond me.

I don't know how that happened but you now have microwaves aimed directly at someone's brain; designed to go off when tampered with. Again how the hell did that pass both safety regulations and invasive tampering from tech enthusiasts/hackers?

Supposedly the premise is that the microwave emitters are the output side of the neural interface -- that is, the microwave emitters are how it "writes" to the sensory portions of the brain and thus how full dive VR works in universe. Presumably it would logically also need a tamper sensor for normal usage so that it could safely log you out if someone tried to remove the helmet, rather than sending output to wholly the wrong parts of the brain. It's explicitly explained in SAO that the designer of SAO is the designer of the VR helmet, and that he had put a backdoor in it that allowed overriding the safety mechanism, to the point of going from "shut off if tampered" to "all emitters at higher than safe power if tampered." I'll get to the whole thing about the Designer later.

No log out? Seriously? Just because the Game Designer wished it so?

The first thing that would happen in a matter of hours is this: The police raiding the servers, government employed hackers connecting to it, see how the damn code works and re-implement the fucking log out button.

But a deranged, lone wolf, genius is better than the police.

How the fuck did he hide all that from his employees at the first place?

I don't even want to remember how many times I face palmed myself at the first episode alone.

I totally agree with you regarding this, though depending on what kind of anti-tampering he might have put in place, they may have been concerned that trying to modify the code might just kill everyone connected. The potential consequences are much higher for tripping the DRM than just removing a few gems from Spyro so the game cannot be completed. For all we know they may have been working on exactly that, but it may have taken more than 3 years before they were willing to risk it, and at that point it was over anyways.

Kirito, the stupid OP character that shouldn't exist...

First rule in MMOs: You level up far faster with a group. What was the one thing Kirito didn't do? Enter a fucking clan because of 'reasons'. So why the fuck is he OP at the first place? Because he knows the damn spawns? Bullshit, raids and group quests are where the XP and epic loot are at and every MMO player knows it.

Don't know enough about the games' systems to know if that's how it worked in SAO. You make a big assumption there that seems inappropriate, because that doesn't apply in every MMO.

For example in EVE you are completely and utterly wrong, and generally join a corp because it's more profitable and improves your safety from other players, but has absolutely no effect on character advancement.

In original EQ, the first two 50s on my server (the Rathe) mostly solo'd. The first got banned for exploiting a safe zone in the underwater dungeon, the second was a RL friend of mine who played a cleric and solo'd most of the way (he grouped a bit in the low teens, but for the latter half of the level scale there was literally no one appropriate to group with on the server, and no one was really catching up). It was also possible in original EQ for group members to actually lower the amount of XP you got per kill disproportionately -- specifically each race and class had their own XP modifiers and in a group XP wasn't split evenly it was instead adjusted by those numbers so people who grouped would level at approximately the same time (meaning that people with higher XP requirements would get a larger cut of a fixed amount of XP from each kill -- literally grouping with the wrong folks would cost you XP, just like my pickpocket ability would remove coin from the mobs normal drops and give it directly to me without telling anyone).

When he entered a clan for the first what's the one thing that he didn't do? Tell them how the game fucking works in order to keep them alive!

Kirito you are a fucking idiotic asshole and nothing that you have done after that point has redeemed you.

Agreed, he was an idiot.

Next is Asuna:

Started out strong and brave, turned into a housewife (barely passable because 'Japan') but then a stupid damsel in distress because of 'reasons'.

Way to kill the only interesting character in the anime...

Disagree. Yes, she got damselled for basically a season. She also tried to escape and as someone else put it she held on to her pride as much as possible. I'm hoping they do better with her later (I haven't read much of the manga so I don't know where they go with her).

She and hundreds of others were still alive and connected to an other game? Are you fucking kidding me, couldn't someone trace where the fucking microwave helmet was connecting to? Or are IPs a thing of the past in SAO?

This was actually explained. When some people didn't wake up after SAO ended, but remained connected to the servers, the coapny that bought the SAO tech and released Alfheim was keeping the old SAO servers up, because apparently they were never properly logged out and the whole "tamper and they'll die" thing was still in effect (truthfully the company that bought the tech was using them as guinea pigs for what was essentially experimentation into mind control and didn't want them to log out). This is why the S2 villain wasn't too worried about the whole marriage thing going south when Asuna woke up, because she wasn't going to wake up until she had been made more...amenable to the idea. So other than the whole incompetent government bit mentioned previously, they were connected exactly where they were expected to be connected while the private entity given charge of trying to get them out was "hard at work" on it.

What there is even more?

She was getting married while comatosed in bed?

WTF?

Are you fucking kidding me?

Let me get this straight, where in the fucking world is it fucking legal to marry a comatose minor to an adult?

That adult is also the CEO of a big fucking company and no one picked up on it...

And the parents where ok with marrying their comatose minor girl to an adult because of 'reasons' and the state didn't just take custody away from them because of 'reasons'.

He wasn't the CEO. Asuna's father was the CEO. The guy who was going to marry her was his subordinate, planned successor, and the guy doing all the shady human experimentation behind the CEO's back.

Age of marriage in Japan is 18 for men, 16 for women (with parental consent). At the end of the Eincrad arc, Asuna is 17. So, from a legal standpoint, not a minor in this context.

So ignoring the state bizarrely not taking doing something to protect her, her father (who had legal standing to make whatever decisions on her behalf and whose consent was necessary for her to marry) agreed to marry her to his subordinate whom he planned to be his successor, thus keeping the company "in the family." She could have put an end to it when she woke up, but see above regarding mind control experiments and there being no plans of letting her wake up until she was OK with the idea too (and they could sell the mind control tech to governments).

Sword Art Online: The more you think of it the less sense it makes.

I try not to look to hard in too great deatil at fictional worlds, because no one ever thinks things completely through. Which is why things like Time Turners and Felix Felicis are generally ignored after playing a major part once in the Harry Potter series.

She did fight back but you can't always save yourself from rape or whatever bad thing may happen.

But from a narrative perspective it seems silly that Kirito is the one that comes rushing in to save the day.

1. His punk as was lucky the perp was a younger & scrawnier teen, could have been a dangerous criminal waiting for him there
2. Why wouldn't you send the police first? Now typically you would say that the police would be slow to respond to this sort of thing, but he's working directly for some special task force right now.
3. Maybe she pops in next episode but where's Asuna? She was there in the hospital with him before, I find it hard to believe that she'd suddenly turn on docile little wife mode and let him run off on his own.

Regardless though with this SJW stuff being all the rage these days it's funny watching kids react to these things sometimes.

1. Agreed, but he's not likely to think that through, being Kirito.

2. I'm just going to assume that he's close enough that he gets there first (because that's the only thing that makes sense). He's working for that task force, but his setup is in the hospital the SAO victims were kept at, not in a police station so that's a possibility.

3. I'll be disappointed if she didn't come with him. It's entirely possible given when they ended the episode that she's literally right outside, just a bit behind -- which would make sense if she was following him there.

 

[kyp275]

I'd feel uncomfortable around them. When people have expressed interests in things that distressed me roughly as equally in the past, the SAW movies for instance, (had to leave the flat when some old flatmates were watching those - hours of utterly sickening stuff,) that's how I've felt.

I don't know why. There's a level of tired disgust with things that's sufficient that it changes how I feel about people without changing any of the more reasoned out things about them. They just feel less nice to be around. I certainly don't think they're suddenly monsters or anything like that.

Those are the important bits I think. Ultimately it's really your prerogative how you want to perceive those things, but personally I think it's important to be cognizant of the reason why. What you described to me isn't really any different than if someone had said that they don't like rap music because of the explicit and derogatory languages that are often present, and therefore they begin to dislike people who like rap, because you know, if they're truly good people, why would they listen to rap?

Personal experience is going to shape people's perception of things, that's just how the human mind works, but it's important not to fall into the trap of generalizing people.

I think if people showed the aftermath of shootings and people dying slowly, there'd be a lot more problems with it. As it stands a lot of violence in films does seem to be the way I described. Right up till the point the person gets shot they're free. And afterwards... well, afterwards who knows? They're not a person any more afterwards, there's nothing there to be free or chained. It's sanitised, made a mockery of. Probably intentionally so - it's hard to think of most action movies as being anything other than power-trips; the lone hero, or small group of heroes, against an army.

My point was, basically, that you have to compare like with like. Violence is a terrible thing in real life. However, 'crack bang, situation over, next bad guy,' is a very unrealistic way of portraying events. They're not smashing someone helpless, when they pull the trigger the person's fighting them. Right up until the person, by the magic of cinema, isn't a person any more. The horrors of rape translate better in that respect, I suspect, to screen. When someone's raped their agency is necessarily diminished for the act to take place which is shown on camera.

Agreed, though I don't necessary agree with the emphasize placed on the duration of the act. Often times the violence reaches the end instantly, but that in no way lessens the result. To me this again demonstrates the lack of understanding the general populace have with the kind of... "action movie" violence if you will. If you put out a video/movie that's primarily filled with rape scenes, it's very likely that the vast majority of people will quickly become uncomfortable and disgusted. Change that to generic violence? It becomes just another typical "action-filled" movie. Even when depicted more realistically, say in films like Saving Private Ryan, most people are still incapable of empathizing beyond "Ouch... that looks bad". To be frank, sex is not exactly something rare, people do it all the time, so it's not hard to put yourself in the victim's position and imagine how terrible if it had happened to yourself. Wanton destruction, death, and violence? Not so much, even though it can be just as damaging both mentally and physically, and often times more so, than rape.

Which brings me back to the original point of this thread and what you said about compare like with like. Here people are not complaining about some grotesque or realistic portrayal of rape, they're complaining about the mere presence of threat of rape being in the story. Yet I get the funny feeling that none of them ever raised a stink about the massive numbers of characters that are slaughtered on and off-screen whether in anime or TV or movies etc.

And I just want to clarify that my point isn't that people should start being repulsed by the presence of violence in fictional work, but rather to point out the double standard that I see happen quite often.

 

[kyp275]

I can say having read 16.5, it was completely stupid and really feels like a horrible attempt at porn

the fact that one of the lines is "two years of semen", I really want to smack the author again and again for how stupid it is and how self-gratifying it is

Because it's literally a doujin. Seriously, there's a reason why it's not present in the actual published work, or are you going to start saying that non-published drafts or discarded/joke materials should also count against the official work? Because I'd totally love to see you trying to bash Star Wars based on the Christmas Special.

Also, just want to address this:

To me, using rape as a narrative device is almost always a one-use item because doing it again may seem exploitative.

And violence is not?

2. I'm just going to assume that he's close enough that he gets there first (because that's the only thing that makes sense). He's working for that task force, but his setup is in the hospital the SAO victims were kept at, not in a police station so that's a possibility.

Not sure if this was included in the anime, but when they were exchanging their personal information before Sinon gave Kirito the gift grenade, he initially was going to notify his govt. agency pal and have him send the police to Shinon's place just to be safe, but decided to head over there himself as well when they realized that her house is just right down the block from the hospital he was at.

 

[Shadowalker]

I'd think carefully about that one. Did you mean that since you don't like these type of stories, that you likely won't share the same taste as people who do, or are you insinuating something about the characters of people who do enjoy these type of stories? If it's the first, fair enough. If it's the latter, not so cool.

I'd feel uncomfortable around them. When people have expressed interests in things that distressed me roughly as equally in the past, the SAW movies for instance, (had to leave the flat when some old flatmates were watching those - hours of utterly sickening stuff,) that's how I've felt.

One thing that might be good to keep in mind here, though - People can like an anime, or a show, or a game, on the whole, while still disliking or not caring for the same parts that you dislike/don't care for.

SAO II was one of my favorite anime shows of the Summer, and so there's a lot about the anime I like (I think SAO's world, its new GGO VRMMO setting, its major characters, have all been fleshed out very well). However, I found the attempted rape scene in the latest episode a bit unsettling, and I definitely can see why someone would dislike SAO going back to this same sort of plot element.

Most of the anime shows I like have at least some elements to them I'm not that fond of. I'm not a perfectionist when it comes to entertainment, and will tend to let a couple things I dislike slide as long as I like the product overall. I think there's at least some other people like me in this regard, so I'd caution against thinking "SAO fan = Someone who likes heavy use of 'rescue from rape'".

 

[Kwame Digital]

HHmm... this doesn't matter because of a lot of reasons. The first is obvious, SAO is a horrible anime in every way. Its the type of crap that passes as good anime because younger anime fans just don't know any better and eat up anything that comes out of japan. Combine that with tumblr culture and you get a group of people who get offended not because they are being pandered to but because their using rape (or anything offensive) to do it. Seriously check out the most "popular" anime now and compare them to their analogs in the 90's and early 2,000's, and you should see a serious quality drop.

Now, I am not opposed to using rape as a narrative device but you better use it well.

Second, it sounds like you are opposed to rape being used as a narrative device. Which is good, its great to have your own opinion but its even better that your opinion means nothing. Because if yours did creative expression would be sterilized. We would never get another Cowboy Bebop, Ghost in the Shell and so-on. Rape, Murder, Genocide, is just crap bad guys do, some bad guys are more ambitious (world domination) but it doesn't mean that they can't do it.

Last, you clearly liked it. Not the rape scene of course. Think of it this way, anyone can watch a horrible deed be done and feel nothing. The fact that SAO made you give a crap to the point you created a thread about it means the show is doing its job. Enjoying anything is more than just having fun. A good show allows you to feel a range of emotions including discomfort. Celebrate that a show you love made you feel anything don't crap on it.

 

[generals3]

Yes, it's one of these threads again. No, I get no enjoyment from these threads because I ultimately want to smack my head on a desk or I feel like I need a whole lot of pills and alcohol to wash the pain away.

Anyway, I was prompted to write this thread after reading a post here [https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/bbs/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2881191&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=91] on the anime news network about SAO II episode 13.

Oh joy, that one "reviewer" who figuratively raped Akame Ga Kill by going full "SJW on Hallucinogens" at it. Really, stop reading what she writes.

Also this made me laugh: "Because her "purity" is more important to a male viewership than her life is. Because she's a woman. If she were a man, she'd just be threatened with death," ... yes that's why females tend to get raped more often for the sake of dramatization. It sure isn't because when you go read the comment section of articles about men being raped by women you can read gems like: "I wish I was raped by her" or "Why does that never happen to me?". (or in other words; men being raped doesn't provide drama because few take it seriously)

Now, I am not opposed to using rape as a narrative device but you better use it well. People on the forums have talked about it some saying that it fits since the attempted rapist is very broken mentally while other argue that it feels too much like a hero fantasy and the fact that Kirito was the one to save Sinon not Sinon herself was what condemned the scene for them.

Well Kirito is pretty much the hero fantasy. Nothing new about that. If they didn't like that why did they even bother with SOA II? And while Sinon saving herself might have been seen a great character development leap let's not forget she's broken in RL and going from that to a self saving hero is quite a big leap. (And also very sudden since it's clear that shortly before that she was still quite broken)

 

[lucky_sharm]

Except the flower beast came closer to eating Silica whole than to raping her. And she even managed to kick it's ass.

Then the "terrible romance plot" which still was a fuckton better than the majority of all anime ever. The fact that there was a confirmed romance between two characters that actually had some god damn closure rather than cock-teasing for 24 episodes with 5 girls all chasing the MC's dick. Funnily enough, SAO's romance was fairly tasteful. If you mean that Asuna "mistakenly stripped" then you'd be dead wrong, she stripped on purpose. Because she wanted to make love with the man who she loved who almost died right in front of her damn eyes. Besides his initial reaction, they do actually do it afterwards. Off screen in the anime, chapter 16.5 in the novels.

There's not liking something and then there's outright bullshitting about it. Or maybe you were genuinely ignorant about chapter 16.5.

By "kicking its ass", you mean pitifully flailing about while calling out for Kirito, then sure.

Also, comparing trash to even worse trash is still trash. Their relationship is void of chemistry, dynamic, equality, or genuine personal conflict between them. Kirito's ambition is in technology while Asuna's is "being with him". Fucking. Floored.

Which brings me back to the original point of this thread and what you said about compare like with like. Here people are not complaining about some grotesque or realistic portrayal of rape, they're complaining about the mere presence of threat of rape being in the story. Yet I get the funny feeling that none of them ever raised a stink about the massive numbers of characters that are slaughtered on and off-screen whether in anime or TV or movies etc.

And I just want to clarify that my point isn't that people should start being repulsed by the presence of violence in fictional work, but rather to point out the double standard that I see happen quite often.

The problem isn't in that rape is depicted in fiction, but the way SAO in particular portrays is completely and utterly insulting, both to the characters involved and the audience. Now tell me, is SAO a story about sexual obsession? Because all that there's been in that regard is girls moistening themselves over Kirito, angsting over Kirito, or almost getting raped by completely forgettable and disposable villains as a last minute climactic event where Kirito inevitably throttles the perpetrator before the rape can happen. SAO has never been a show that possesses the subtlety or intelligence to actually deal with an idea like sexual assault in a meaningful way, so when it's used so blatantly and cynically like this, watching it becomes physically unpleasant.

Contrast this to A Song of Ice and Fire, where sex and sexuality are heavily reoccurring and significant themes in the story, in addition to being a meaningful aspect to several major characters, and never as a means to glorify male characters. So whenever a sexual scene does occur, it never feels jarring or out of place.

Furthermore, you keep comparing rape and killing in media as if they're the same when they really aren't. You can justify killing, at least within the context of fiction. Paying death unto death, kill or be killed, fight for a greater cause, etc etc. Violence can be symbolic or used as a metaphor, like with the lightsaber battles in the original Star Wars trilogy where the characters are clashing as much as their weapons are. Beyond that, the reason why we're usually more okay with rampant glorified murder is because it's easy to understand and draw a line on, as most of us would never actually kill anyone in real life. The point is that there can be gray area in killing, and most of all is an act that doesn't discriminate and can be be inflicted or suffered by everyone equally.

Rape on the other hand requires a victim and is impossible to put a moral spin on, and is primarily something women have a high risk of happening to them. This isn't to say that men can't get raped, because obviously they do, but do men really fear being raped when around other women, as opposed to women around other men? More than that, rape is far muddier in real life where the victim is unreasonably expected to take as much responsibility as the rapist himself. The reason why people are more conscious of rape in fiction is because it's a device typically used to create cheap drama with no effort involved, either to generate emotional baggage that is neither explored or given context beyond big "FEEL SORRY" flag or as aforementioned last minute climax where generic male fantasy avatar whoops the rapist and saves the damsel and no other questions have to be asked because rape. Speaking purely in terms of entertainment value, in exploitative violence it can be fun and cathartic at the very least, whereas in cheap exploitative rape its just tiresome and disrespectful in its execution.

 

[RandV80]

She did fight back but you can't always save yourself from rape or whatever bad thing may happen.

But from a narrative perspective it seems silly that Kirito is the one that comes rushing in to save the day.

1. His punk as was lucky the perp was a younger & scrawnier teen, could have been a dangerous criminal waiting for him there
2. Why wouldn't you send the police first? Now typically you would say that the police would be slow to respond to this sort of thing, but he's working directly for some special task force right now.
3. Maybe she pops in next episode but where's Asuna? She was there in the hospital with him before, I find it hard to believe that she'd suddenly turn on docile little wife mode and let him run off on his own.

Regardless though with this SJW stuff being all the rage these days it's funny watching kids react to these things sometimes.

1. Agreed, but he's not likely to think that through, being Kirito.

2. I'm just going to assume that he's close enough that he gets there first (because that's the only thing that makes sense). He's working for that task force, but his setup is in the hospital the SAO victims were kept at, not in a police station so that's a possibility.

3. I'll be disappointed if she didn't come with him. It's entirely possible given when they ended the episode that she's literally right outside, just a bit behind -- which would make sense if she was following him there.

Yikes that's a lot of text to get down to my little quote!

But what makes this last point even worse if it doesn't happen is when you consider that they weren't expecting the 'killer' to still be there. In the game they thought with Death Gun defeated the killer would imply leave and she'd be alone in the room, not that her supposed friend turned out to be both a creepy stalker and one of the killers.

So if Asuna didn't come how did that conversion go at the hospital? 'So yeah you saw that girl I was getting cuddly with with in the game? Someone was planning on kiling her but they're gone now, and she lives by herself all alone in her own apartment. Do you mind staying here while I go over there on my own to... comfort her?'

Yeah I'd like to see any guy pull that one over his gal!

 

[kyp275]

For starters, you may want to quote the right person.

Now tell me, is SAO a story about sexual obsession? Because all that there's been in that regard is girls moistening themselves over Kirito, angsting over Kirito, or almost getting raped by completely forgettable and disposable villains as a last minute climactic event where Kirito inevitably throttles the perpetrator before the rape can happen.

Really? You're literally cutting away everything else in SAO and pretend like there's nothing else to the story other than the relationship or the sexual assault incidents to it. Obviously the 3 incidents of that in what, 18 volumes? is really what the story is all about, and everything else is really just girls jumping all over Kirito right?

I'm pretty sure nobody here is arguing that SAO is some literary masterpiece, but there's an ocean of difference between using cliched tropes and unimaginative use of plot device that is frankly rather minor in the grand scheme of the story, and ?omg there's nothing but girls ogling over the dude who keeps saving them from being raped lolololol?.

SAO has never been a show that possesses the subtlety or intelligence to actually deal with an idea like sexual assault in a meaningful way, so when it's used so blatantly and cynically like this, watching it becomes physically unpleasant.

Contrast this to A Song of Ice and Fire, where sex and sexuality are heavily reoccurring and significant themes in the story, in addition to being a meaningful aspect to several major characters, and never as a means to glorify male characters. So whenever a sexual scene does occur, it never feels jarring or out of place.

Since when are every fictional work required to deal with sexual assaults, or for that matter any subject matter, in a meaningful way? and really? Are you suggesting that the only time ?sexual? plot devices should be allowed are stories like game of throne?

Furthermore, you keep comparing rape and killing in media as if they're the same when they really aren't. You can justify killing, at least within the context of fiction. Paying death unto death, kill or be killed, fight for a greater cause, etc etc. Beyond that, the reason why we're usually more okay with rampant glorified murder is because it's easy to understand and draw a line on, as most of us would never actually kill anyone in real life. Rape on the other hand requires a victim and is impossible to put a moral spin on

No, the basis of Izanagi's argument was that rape shouldn't be used or be limited in its use as a plot device is because of how terrible it is in real life. Guess what, mass murder and genocides are pretty terrible things in real life too.

Frankly, this goes right back to what I said about most people have no clue what killing and mass violence are actually like. Easy to understand and draw a line on? How can you say that when you don't have the faintest idea of what the real thing is like?

Also, I'd like to see you put a moral spin on killing innocent civilians and children, I believe Assad and ISIS would be interested in your idea.

and is primarily something women have a high risk of happening to them. This isn't to say that men can't get raped, because obviously they do, but do men really fear being raped when around other women, as opposed to women around other men?

I got a funny feeling that if Kirito and Shinon's gender were swapped, this wouldn't even be an issue to you.

The reason why people are more conscious of rape in fiction is because it's a device typically used to create cheap drama with no effort involved

I can say the same thing about the 34897573057483th story about having to save the world because of whatever reason. Why doesn't the antagonist ever want to do something other than destroy the world?

Speaking purely in terms of entertainment value, in exploitative violence it can be fun and cathartic at the very least, whereas in cheap exploitative rape its just tiresome and disrespectful in its execution.

For you perhaps, but that's all that is, the opinion of someone who likely lives in a first-world country that is blissfully ignorant of just how bad things are in other parts of the world. Tell me, how ?cathartic? are exploitative violence to war veterans? or perhaps those who's living in the slums of Detroit? or maybe those living the good life right now in Syria/Iraq/Somalia? If I were to think like you, I would be able to count the number of shows where the exploitative violence isn't tiresome and disrespectful with one hand.

Really, the bottom line is, IMO not only are you guys employing a blatant double standard, you're also blowing this way out of proportion.