- Joined
- Jan 10, 2014
- Messages
- 3,514
- Reaction score
- 6,055
- Age
- 39
- Gender
- Male
- Country
-
I think it's up to us as the reader to transpose what we want into reality and filter what we don't want. It's a hard argument to say that Fishman Island is not straight-up parallel to race-issues we face in real life. I'm just arguing that for me Sanji's actions are not admirable and that objectifying someone is not something to see as cool.OK, I don't want to be rude in any way (and you are more or less agreeing with me to a certain point according to this message) and I don't know if it's really systematic with people coming the U.S but...
I wanted to come to the point where you were realizing that you were imposing your values and your vision of the world to a world which is not ours, with its own code. It's kind of imperialistic in a way. You are defining sexism without and talking about objectification to a world which seems to be very close to ours but which is fundamentally different.
You are classing the behavior of Sanji as sexism without knowing his actual internal thoughts, taking into account the sociological environment or the diegese of OP.
It's not really wrong, I mean according to your definition, all the cases are checked and it could be accurately considered as sexism according to the elements constructed in our world.
However, I don't know if it's really pertinent, fair and totally accurate to impose this vision to another world without taking the fact that it is not built like our.
. In our world, peeping women can be seen as an objectified act, sure. It can harm them because it can be a real intrusion to their intimacy and serious issues could happen following that. Is it the case in OP ? Is peeping in One Piece actually the same thing than peeping in the real world, will it have the same impact ?
. Is it the same for all the following thing ?
We are appreciating this action through our extra-diegetic point of view and assuming that it's working the same, with the same values, the same social constructions, the same reactional behaviours.
You are transposing things into reality without transposing the intra-diegetic rules
My following question was something like : How can somebody which is supposedly more or less one of the nicest person in the series, very perceptive and knowingly smart could not get that he's systematically hurting the thing he loves the most in the world ? I got two answers but maybe you got a third. Mine are:
- He's not that perceptive (it's weird for me because he has been showed multiple time as not.)
- He's not (but it's also weird because real world studies showed that harassing could really hurt women. And he did that an incalculable number of time. He's either really lucky or something is off with our reasoning).
(Sorry for "imperialistic" but I don't know any other terms less agressive designating this type of behaviour)
To be honest, I don't genuinely know the answer of my little tirade. You seems to have yours but I'm not quite convinced by your arguments.
(actually I also think I'm slowly taking this tread in my off-topic reflexion. I don't know if I should keep talking on this matter)
When it comes to physics, I'm not going to quote real life physics in an argument about a world that has Devil Fruits.
When it comes to issues of sex / what's right and wrong? We have a clearly defined line in One Piece that women are seen as less-capable, and weaker overall. I find the treatment of women by Sanji to be incredibly relevant to the world that chewed up and spit Kuina out. That's all.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you want to address that you can always go to their threads or create a new thread to talk about sexism in the One Piece manga so we can talk about every character and compare.