It seems like nary a few months pass before another one of Scott’s entries into his Anime Almanac weblog spawns a multitude of partisan objection. The latest incident involves an challenge between himself and the Reverse Thieves, whom I don’t regularly read but are apparently well-known, to confront each other’s comfort boundaries. For Scott, it was yaoi manga (specifically, the two-volume Gerard & Jacques) and for the not-quite-Robin Hoods, it was Kodomo no Jikan. (I have read neither work involved in the challenge so I have no opinion subjectively on either.)

The back-and-forth between author and readers (not between the two blogs) mainly focused on Scott’s reaction to a rape scene in the second volume of his assignment – he has since written an addendum on the matter – but there remained something in his original final paragraphs which I still felt the need to formally comment on in writing.

Like most manga that is targeted towards women, I found the story to be too dramatic and complicated for my simplistic male brain. In a medium where I seek a harem of easy one-dimensional women ready to serve all my every needs, I found the backstabbing and betrayals of friends and enemies of this comic to be too much to handle. That is what lead to my ultimate dissatisfaction with the story.

When it comes down to it, yaoi is a dirty guilty pleasure only intended for its particular fanbase, but it is that way for a healthy and logical reason. That is why I can appreciate it as much as I can appreciate one of my comics about moé and catgirls. I think every manga fan has their own guilty pleasures in the medium that is based on their own personal tastes and desires, and who is one to judge one fetish from another?

So while Gerard & Jacques didn’t awaken me to the joys of yaoi manga, it has most certainly shown me that even a boy-on-boy story could actually contain some interesting and creative bits of storytelling. Now if you don’t mind, I think I’ll go back to reading some Ken Akamatsu series.

When I first read the above, I thought that Scott had resignedly returned to his regular vices but a few repetitions sparked realization of a decent commonality: guilty pleasures. Some people like to read fictitious versions of homosexual releationships while others derive satisfaction from harem comedies or from gratuitous violence and gore. I acknowledge that forced intercourse is a deeply serious transgression against another but some readers may like to, very credulously, project themselves onto the characters in these situations, not unlike if someone were to project himself/herself onto an action hero/heroine or a nervous lover.

I remain disappointed, though, that he thinks so lowly of his ability to handle complex narratives. Scott, Heroes has many betrayals of friends and enemies within its long multi-threaded storyline and you seem to enjoy watching that, yet a two-volume manga causes problems in comprehension, its sexual content notwithstanding? I don’t want you to limit yourself based on a stereotype that males are incapable of handling intricate webs of relationships. Besides, you shouldn’t feel bad about not liking Gerard & Jacques – ANN said the first volume was “just poor quality” in their Oct. 2006 review. You might have a better experience with some other manga within the genre if you decide delve further into it.

On the other side of the challenge, the Reverse Thieves did a slightly better job of evaluating Kodomo no Jikan volumes 1 & 2 and elaborating on how they felt the actions of the young girls seemed very unnatural for their age and that oversexuality was superimposed on those characters. Just to jog your memory, Seven Seas’s announcement of its North American license of the title in July 2006 – with a retitling to Nymphet, no less – raised concern that I doubt would have been as harsh if they were a European company. The publisher decided they could not risk potential bad press after reading volume three and deciding that it “can not be considered appropriate for the US market by any reasonable standard” so they decided to kill the project in May 2007.

Perhaps a less puritanical society would be a more welcoming environment for its publication. Manga-ka Kaworu Watashiya learned about certain American cultural taboos by reading web translations of North American message boards and said it was unfortunate those cultural differences exist. Not calling Nymphet would have also helped significantly – according to Seven Seas president Jason DeAngelis following its cancellation, they pitched Chibi Lolita and Hot For Teacher but Watashiya demanded they use Nymphet as its English title.

By what must have surely been coincidence, the all-female panelist “Chicks On Anime” column for ANN had yaoi as its focus for Tuesday’s edition and the conversation touched on how many fans of the genre have a skewed and uninformed sense of homosexuality, how there has been a steady change in story construction since earlier in the decade as more of the female writers come to use characters who are actually gay and exist as such in the gay community, and how the behavior of fangirls, in some way, helps to increase the tolerance of such relationships among other things.

Reflecting on the Handling of Post-Publication Feedback
One of the first things I noticed after I entering the University of California system four years ago was the prevelance of groups centered around personal attributes, be the unifying characteristic religion, race, gender, political alignment, or gender orientation. I initially and still regard all of those groups as “special interests” because each has clear intentions and goals they wish to achieve. I do not hold anything personal against any of those groups as use of the term is meant to remind me that many of those groups lobby the student government in attempts to benefit their organization through the establishment of a week of certain events (e.g. La Raza Culture Week) or funding for their own projects. I enjoy the diverse voices that they collectively contribute to the campus community but within that multitude are self-righteous people that are bound to exist within any decently-sized organization.

I credit Scott for clarifying any misunderstandings involving what he meant by calling rape “a horrible plot device” but I also call him on furthering of his increasing conversational isolationism, a position that intensifies the divisiveness between opposing sides (with him vs. against him) with each new incident. Some of you may recall that he removed comments on August 28th after bad experiences following the implemention of Disqus. During a conversation on Twitter (or ‘the backchannel’, as I like to call it) Thursday afternoon, he touted “[a] growing ‘returning visitor’ readership, mentions on some larger sites I greatly admire, and an easy press badge at every con” as to why his blog is “just fine without comments”. How could that be interpreted as anything other than self-serving?

Scott, at the moment, I do not regard your blog on the same level as Sankaku Complex, which I harbor a distaste for due to its sensationalism, nor do I forsee myself doing so in the next year, but if you are going to become temperamental each time a group of readers expresses dissent to your writing and figuratively shut yourself in a room until the rancor dies down, it will become harder for me to return each week to peer objectively at what you have written. Cooler heads seem to have prevailed for now, thanks to people like Caitlin asking you to clear thing up and reminding you that “stonewalling dissention of any kind isn’t mature, it’s pretentious” and that “not being concerned over feedback is to commit blogging suicide”. (TheBigN reminded me in the comments that he also tried to give him advice. Sorry I forgot you, dude.)

Over the past six months, I feel that you have become increasingly perceived as part of the “establishment” for your stances on fansubs, legal content, and other issues. That is not a bad thing in itself as it should allow you to feel more comfortable when conducting interviews and “cosplaying” as press at conventions, if you indeed choose to accept that perception, and I am in no way asking you to stray away from subjects that you truly want to write about. But gaining such a reputation may make you more prone to harsh criticism from certain factions and if you continue turn away from negative feedback too easily, I am confident that future bickerfests will have worse results so I reiterate my tenative satisfaction at the addendum I previously mentioned.

Earlier that same afternoon, you complained that “no one read” the piece you wrote five weeks ago about a Bang Zoom workshop in Manhattan. I remember skimming through it when you initially posted it and thought about coming back later to read it more thoroughly. Sadly, I forgot about it so I got around to reading the entire essay. Though it is a solid fly-on-the-wall account of what happened at the workshop that gives hope to those who tire of hearing the same old actors and actresses that new voices are beginning to emerge, it is not particularly interesting to those who don’t give a damn about Western voice acting. You can only do so much to influence how readers will react to your content and perhaps you should concede that you are not going to win over certain groups of readers if they continue to cause you distress. Maybe you already have done so.

Same as in an editorial I wrote in July, I do not intend to unduly besmirch Scott’s reputation when composing this (something nearly impossible to manage when voicing criticism), so I based the comments voiced above on what he has publicly written. (I regard someone’s writings on Twitter as public and fit to be referenced unless that entity has marked their account as “private”.) I do not condone the goading conducted by his adversaries who enjoy creating “lulz” at his expense, although I must confess that some of their antics made me smirk, as well as the bungled attempts carry out said antics. Since high school, I have tried to abide by the Buddhist practice of “the middle way” and resist succumbing to blind extremism, one core exception being my libertarian position on censorship and personal freedoms. (Even my support of free-market capitalism is anchored with a moral belief in conducting business respectfully and taking into consideration how proposed projects may impact the health and viability of land and citizens.) So I delayed this post by a day to let my immediate emotions mitigate to allow me to write something more coherent.

I will be interested in reading his take on lesbianism in anime and manga next week not solely as a counter to dipping a toe into yaoi, but primarily because its primary audience is more mixed across gender lines than boys’ love is. I am not sure how much of it will include his experiences at MangaNEXT such as yuri artist Rica Takashima or Media Blasters’ different brand lines but I promise I will read it all the way through.

Oh, and Scott, I have linked to four different articles of yours so far so don’t complain about not getting enough attention.

Final Comment
This post was not written with high-handed motivations – I concede that I still exhibit some naivety and life inexperience as a person in my early 20s and I would be dishonest if I claimed to hold much influence within the anime and manga blogging community. I grew up Catholic and still practice some related traditions while maintaining an agnostic viewpoint but was repeatedly reminded in high school (also Catholic) that slurs and discrimination against homosexuality or calling someone “gay” or “fag” as an insult was immoral and unacceptable. As a result, affecting one’s voice or appearance to play on a stereotype isn’t particularly humorous to me.

In the general election earlier this month, I voted against Proposition 8 more so on the grounds of not wanting to write a definition of marriage into the state constitution than on the view that gay marriage was an essential right but I would be fine if a pro-gay marriage initiative passes in a later election. I still hold that persons should be not treated unfairly based on their sexual orientation, just as other cultural or biological aspects should not be utilized in a discriminatory fashion, and I personally don’t care whether someone is gay, not gay, or transgender because that doesn’t (and shouldn’t) personally impact my everyday life.

In writing about my experiences at Yaoi-Con 2007, I said I didn’t mind the art I saw around the convention and perhaps that was due to the combination of being accustomed to hearing my club co-members talk about it and being generally desensitized to things many people may find to be offensive. There was frankly not that much lurid content out in the open anyway. I would have liked to go this past September but was unable to coordinate a ride with someone and I wasn’t going to drive myself down to South San Francisco, having learned my lesson from AOD and Anime Expo earlier this year. 2009 is a possibility depending what I am doing at the time.

Related posts based on tags:

Tags: , , , ,
8 Responses to “It Began About Yaoi and Ended In Another Blogger Bickerfest”
  1. IcyStorm says:

    Post needs moar trolling.

    In all seriousness, I’m glad that you and Caitlin are at least talking to him rationally and appropriately. It’s not necessarily childish of any of us to try to get lulz out of the situation; we’ve tried to talk to him calmly before, but he just didn’t have any of it. So most of us probably don’t take him seriously if he’s not willing to even listen to what the rest of us has to say. It is the Internet after all. It’s not like we’re DDoSing his blog (if you want to call it that, since the conversation just isn’t there) or making it unavailable or anything. We’re just joking amongst us bloggers because he’s always so pretentious and “always right.”

    Besides, even his favorite person doesn’t care about him anymore. Scott just seems so intent on bringing up past things, like Hinano when she had NOTHING to do with the recent hellfire of shit about his yaoi post. Then we have the news on Dattebayo ceasing their fansubbing of Naruto, but yet he talks shit about them without appreciating their move of actually stopping fansubs of a show that has actually eliminated the need of fansubbers. Isn’t this his goal? The industry’s goal? To get rid of the need for fansubbers so that we may all go legit someday without feeling left out or pushed aside by Japanese companies?

    Overall, he’s just a big cocky douchebag that simply blocks people and insults them whenever he is losing the argument or disagrees with them. This is something no one can deny. Zero tolerance for trolling or flaming? What, the Internet is srs bsns? It’s almost like he actually enjoys getting us worked up. He’s simply the person that will scream and yell until he gets things EXACTLY as he wants it to be.

  2. TheBigN says:

    If you read my Twitters, I told Scott that he needs to respect viewpoints of others if they’re stated reasonably well. Of course, what’s reasonable is subjective in itself, but when it does get to the point of excommunicating someone just because their views are opposite yours (and it doesn’t help if they do it “rudely” as well), that’s not being respectful.

    And in terms of increasing respect, I’m alright with what his goals are (though they’re not my goals and some of them aren’t what I agree with in general), but how he achieves those goals helps with his reputation. And I get a little whiff of elitism on his part (though there’s some on either side, to be honest. Hell, what am I doing here right now? :P), which also doesn’t help improve relations with fellow bloggers (if he sees them as such).

    As someone else who read his article about learning to be a Western voice actor (and I enjoyed it as well), it’s a little sad that he feels he has to run counter to the grain to get really noticed. Because when he does do that (on fansubbing especially, on this current article though it isn’t really that bad), he becomes an anime pundit to me, segmenting people into groups, taking a hard-line stance on issues that are too complex to do that for, and doing it in a way to offend whoever disagrees with him. And I don’t like that at all.

  3. Narutaki says:

    Thank you for the kind words about our article! And you get 10-points to awesomeness for calling us not-quite Robin Hoods! Robin Hood happens to be my all time favorite fictional character.

    As for dealing with trolling, I think everyone has their own way of doing it. Though I’ll admit that we don’t go the path that Scott does. I get his thinking of trolls want attention so he will just ignore them, but I think they want NEGATIVE attention. So if you answer someone with humor or very politely and they persist in verbally attacking you, atleast you can say you tried. Then there is no doubt that they were being a jerk and you were being level-headed. That is how we deal atleast, though to be honest our site doesn’t attract great numbers.

    Narutaki

  4. CalAggie says:

    IcyStorm:
    I suppose I overcharacterized the actions of some of his dissenters (yourself included) for greater effect. I agree that the group I was referring to doesn’t have to power to force his site offline and that creative disagreement is more enjoyable than juvenile bitching.

    TheBigN:
    Sorry I forgot about what you had also told him. I quoted Caitlin because she had better quotes about managing readers’ sentiments and her status updates were more immediate in my mind than yours during the composition process but now that I look back, yours were also good so I made an edit in the original post saying that.

    Narutaki:
    Thank you for your kind words! I believe that writers should respond directly to dissenters the best they can and be able to defend their position when they are engaging in opinion, unless they somehow believe they are not accountable to what they write.

    The formal e-mailed responses that Scott received are, in my mind, similar to letters an editor at a large newspaper might receive and I think he did the right thing by addressing some of the concerns that were sent to him. A main impetus behind the post was to express my feelings on something has been slowly growing and could worsen if he doesn’t address similar problems in the future after some introspection.

  5. Scott says:

    Wow, where do I begin?

    “I don’t want you to limit yourself based on a stereotype that males are incapable of handling intricate webs of relationships.”

    But I am a male incapable of handling intricate webs of relationships… at least when it comes to reading manga. When I need a break from dealing the with complexity of real life women, I turn to the simplified easy-to-understand characters of the medium. Is it that hard to notice that romance stories targeted towards women are very different from stories targeted towards men? Coincidentally, I prefer the latter for the reasons I stated in the article.

    “Scott, Heroes has many betrayals of friends and enemies within its long multi-threaded storyline and you seem to enjoy watching that, yet a two-volume manga causes problems in comprehension, its sexual content notwithstanding?”

    As sappy at it sounds, I guess heartbreak is the key element to why I can’t stand the betrayals and backstabbing in women’s romance story over something like Heroes. It’s ok to turn your back to your best friend team up with the bad guys in Heroes, just don’t you dare tell him you’ll love him then sleep with another man.

    “Besides, you shouldn’t feel bad about not liking Gerard & Jacques – ANN said the first volume was “just poor quality” in their Oct. 2006 review.”

    I read that ANN review right after I posted this week, and I felt they were a little too harsh. But then again, that reviewer probably had more experience reading yaoi, so the things I found unique about it might have been cliched in the genre.

    “How could that be interpreted as anything other than self-serving?”

    It is self-serving. It’s my blog. I paid for the domain name and bandwidth, and since I don’t profit from it, that’s all coming out of my pocket. Not to mention all the time I take to write every week.

    I write for my own personal discovery into the medium I love and the fandom I’m surrounded with, and that is it. I don’t write to impress anyone, so I don’t care for any feedback of any kind, either positive or negative. The thing is I can easily brush off positive feedback with a simple “thanks.” If I try to easily brush off negative feedback that way, I get the bickerfest.

    So I’d be more than happy if people read my stuff and then move on to the next thing. But if people want to give me feedback, fine, there’s my email, go nuts. If you’re nice, I’ll say a simple “thanks” and then move on. If you’re an asshole, then I’ll say a simple “no thanks” and block you to prevent a bickerfest from starting, because it always does.

    It’s not your typical way of blogging, but I don’t try to be your typical blog.

    “Over the past six months, I feel that you have become increasingly perceived as part of the “establishment” for your stances on fansubs, legal content, and other issues. That is not a bad thing in itself as it should allow you to feel more comfortable when conducting interviews and “cosplaying” as press at conventions, if you indeed choose to accept that perception, and I am in no way asking you to stray away from subjects that you truly want to write about.”

    I try to be professional, and the “establishment” is filled with professional people. But I still maintain an independence from any establishment to be able to ask the hard hitting questions that “real professionals” cannot ask for fear of losing their jobs. I’ve got nothing to lose, so I don’t hold back.

    “But gaining such a reputation may make you more prone to harsh criticism from certain factions and if you continue turn away from negative feedback too easily, I am confident that future bickerfests will have worse results so I reiterate my tenative satisfaction at the addendum I previously mentioned.”

    The bickerfests haven’t changed in the past three years. No matter how “established” I become, they all still say – and will continue to say – the exact same thing.

    “not being concerned over feedback is to commit blogging suicide”

    If that’s the case, then I should have been dead by now. I’ve kept the feedback off since I relaunched the site almost a year ago, and I only opened it for only a few weeks in the summer. People have continued to read my blog that entire time, with or without comments.

    “it is not particularly interesting to those who don’t give a damn about Western voice acting. ”

    But it was interesting to the folks at Bang Zoom, to the kids doing a google search for voice acting tips, and the VA message board gushing over how cool it would be to be there. Hell, even IcyStorm gushed a little over it on Twitter.

    Posts like that get a very small but enthusiastic response. It’s nice not having any flaming or bickerfests over something like that. That’s the stuff I want to write about, but the “blogging community” doesn’t give a danm about it. The only thing they’ll give a damn about is if I make a controversial negative piece that involves them doing something they shouldn’t be doing.

    That is the main reason why I wish to separate myself from that community. If the blogging community only cares about the fansub episode of the day, then clearly we do not have the same interests.

    “I will be interested in reading his take on lesbianism in anime and manga next week not solely as a counter to dipping a toe into yaoi, but primarily because its primary audience is more mixed across gender lines than boys’ love is.”

    Don’t give your hopes up. Because I do take homosexuality and gay rights very seriously, I’m not going to be funny or controversial with this one. That means that my regular readers (like you all) are going to read it to a lukewarm response, the “blogging community” is going to ignore it completely, and a very small audience outside of my target area (I’m guessing maybe the Lesbian community this time) will pick up on it and gush about how wonderful it is, to which I’ll just simply reply “thanks, glad you liked it” when I get their emails.

    And no one will care until my next controversial post, when we’ll be at this point all over again. It’s been the same routine for the past year, and I don’t think it’s going to change anytime soon.

    I think I’ve answered everything that needed answering. If you need more clarification, shoot me an email and I’ll get back to you. As you can see, I don’t like comments and I rarely “recheck” a page to see if anyone replied to what I had to say.

  6. CalAggie says:

    Scott:
    Thank you very much for arguing your side and countering what I wrote. I’ve been reconsidering (and in some ways, regretting) select lines since the comments started coming in and I was in a bit of a rush to publish it even though I held off for a day’s time. I will take your response and the insights contained within into consideration when reading your blog in the future and composing any future e-mails or off-site commentary.

  7. Caitlin says:

    Thanks for writing up something clear and level-headed. In truth, I probably should have emailed Scott over that, rather than Twitter it but I’m just really fed up. Not just with the way Scott degenerates in his replies to criticism (compared to his writing style) but also with the trolls who seem fixated on trouncing Scott’s writing.

    I should clear something up, which I hope Scott will read but I somehow doubt it. “Feedback” isn’t limited to comments. I don’t know why he’s stuck on that but in this case, feedback was response posts, emails, and tweets about a misunderstanding of one of Scott’s points. Looking at what happened, it was not handled well.

  8. [...] be remiss not to mention this blurb about Disqus, although it’s really to do with someone more interested in issuing decrees than [...]

  9.  
Leave a Reply