I think I'm sort of chagrined-- or ashamed-- or something, that I really let this sort of thing get to me:
The manga isn't really "yaoi," as other reviewers have mentioned; it focuses more on the characters' feelings and struggles rather than sex. So if you're looking for mindless sex, look elsewhere.
Le sigh. See, I don't even care what the person's opinion is or whatever, and I'm not that invested that particular manga, either, but just-- well, they're incorrect about the definition of yaoi (ie, it having to be 'mindless sex'), and even so it's not like they said 'well, it's shounen ai rather than yaoi' or whatever. Arg. It's like, what, is it not too gay for you?? I know, I know I'm overreacting but I hate having that knee-jerk desire to 're-educate' people. I think it's like, well, not important how well-versed they are in the jargon of the genre if they're not too into it and/or aren't really big fans, but at the same time it's so offensive when someone doesn't know what they're talking about and comes off like a total ass because they think they do. -.- I mean, not that you have to always know (I certainly don't), but at least don't spread misinformation -.-
What bothers me even more is my immediate suspicion that the only reason a person would -have- such a misconception is that they just don't -care- to know any better, so if I or someone else ever bothered correcting them they would either a) ignore it or b) insist they're right.
Of course, I could write a whole essay about what bothers me about that small little statement, like the implication that sex is bad, like the implication that too much -gay- sex is 'mindless' as well as bad, like the implication that yaoi sucks (because of sex? or gayness? or both?) and because of the general moronic ignorance being on display. And yet, I mean, I really shouldn't bother with this or the million things like it I come across-- there's too many offenders to waste my time & energy on, but. I think it's just hard to reconcile myself with the sheer futility of expecting people to care enough to research the things they get interested in and to get the 'real facts' before they spew bullshit.
Maybe the bottom line is that I always need something to be bitter and/or excited about, and. I really need to get a life. That's what it all comes down to, right :> That said, I can't resist the fantasies of smacking people every time someone utters the words 'mindless' and 'sex' as if they were born to go together. I'm really hopeless -.-
Actually, to make myself feel better, I found a link for different types of generalization fallacies, here. Yes Reena, escape into utter academic bullshit rhetoric, escape! Escape! ^^;;;
The manga isn't really "yaoi," as other reviewers have mentioned; it focuses more on the characters' feelings and struggles rather than sex. So if you're looking for mindless sex, look elsewhere.
Le sigh. See, I don't even care what the person's opinion is or whatever, and I'm not that invested that particular manga, either, but just-- well, they're incorrect about the definition of yaoi (ie, it having to be 'mindless sex'), and even so it's not like they said 'well, it's shounen ai rather than yaoi' or whatever. Arg. It's like, what, is it not too gay for you?? I know, I know I'm overreacting but I hate having that knee-jerk desire to 're-educate' people. I think it's like, well, not important how well-versed they are in the jargon of the genre if they're not too into it and/or aren't really big fans, but at the same time it's so offensive when someone doesn't know what they're talking about and comes off like a total ass because they think they do. -.- I mean, not that you have to always know (I certainly don't), but at least don't spread misinformation -.-
What bothers me even more is my immediate suspicion that the only reason a person would -have- such a misconception is that they just don't -care- to know any better, so if I or someone else ever bothered correcting them they would either a) ignore it or b) insist they're right.
Of course, I could write a whole essay about what bothers me about that small little statement, like the implication that sex is bad, like the implication that too much -gay- sex is 'mindless' as well as bad, like the implication that yaoi sucks (because of sex? or gayness? or both?) and because of the general moronic ignorance being on display. And yet, I mean, I really shouldn't bother with this or the million things like it I come across-- there's too many offenders to waste my time & energy on, but. I think it's just hard to reconcile myself with the sheer futility of expecting people to care enough to research the things they get interested in and to get the 'real facts' before they spew bullshit.
Maybe the bottom line is that I always need something to be bitter and/or excited about, and. I really need to get a life. That's what it all comes down to, right :> That said, I can't resist the fantasies of smacking people every time someone utters the words 'mindless' and 'sex' as if they were born to go together. I'm really hopeless -.-
Actually, to make myself feel better, I found a link for different types of generalization fallacies, here. Yes Reena, escape into utter academic bullshit rhetoric, escape! Escape! ^^;;;
no subject
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 03:57 am (UTC)no subject
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:28 am (UTC)'course, the definitions can get fuzzy -- you can have explicit sex with character exploration all in one manga (or the complete opposite, too..... but who wants to read that? XD) in which case, I'm not sure what people would categorize it as? I still call Viewfinder and its like BL manga, but I think I've gotten too used to that term, and maybe I just use it for everything.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:36 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 04:34 am (UTC)And yeah, the major one being that you can't have in-depth character exploration if you have sex-- basically, the juxtaposition in the first place. It seems like people were justifying liking Ring Finger by saying it's not like those other, 'dirty' yaoi mangas or something ^^;; I think stuff like Under Grand Hotel and Sex Pistols and Junjou Romantica and Koi Ga Bokura-- all of that is explicit yaoi, and very dependent on character exploration, y'know, not at all PWPs. You -can- have PWPs in yaoi, but there's been more and more hardcore titles with plots, though I realize 10 years ago this wasn't the case. Now it's rare to find a title with no sex-scenes and a decent storyline that isn't some sort of mindless fluff, ahahaha :D
no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 05:07 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-08 06:22 am (UTC)Of course, if you're not reading the things I'm reading or don't like the things I like about them, fine-- but that doesn't make the generalization correct in that if you -are- looking for the sort of character development you have in Ring Finger except with porn, there's basically tons of that.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-09 12:01 am (UTC)I dunno. One could argue that the explicitness and number of them is superfluous, if one wanted to.
but rather that the qualities for which it was praised-- character exploration, feelings, context, etc-- are also easily found in yaoi
True that. But yaoi is still basically porn, yannow?
no subject
Date: 2005-12-09 12:42 am (UTC)Depends on the manga in my experience-- and I have quite a bit of experience ^^;; The explicitness and hardcore level varies greatly, as does the function sex serves (like, when Touko Kawai draws it, it seems not intended to titilate at all. I don't think that anything that contains sexual content is automatically porn, or Romeo & Juliet would be 'basically porn', and while you could argue that, most people wouldn't buy that argument, I daresay that reviewer included.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-09 12:45 am (UTC)So have I :P And I do think Kawai's stuff titilates, just more on an emotional level, which is why I always get into trouble calling a lot oa yaoi "emotional porn". I don't mean anything that contains sex is porn, but anything designed to titilate (and, for me, that includes emotionally) is porn.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-09 12:49 am (UTC)being anal
Date: 2005-12-08 05:30 am (UTC)Aestheticism glossary and prob-needs-to-be-updated-again boys love terms
Then again, terms change and muddy all the time, not even counting when another country steals it. No one remembers that a drabble is supposedly exactly 100 words etc etc...
Re: being anal
Date: 2005-12-08 07:43 am (UTC)Anyway, er, there's no way I'd be that bothered by terminology in itself. I'm not -that- anal, ahahah ^^;;;