Is this apology consistent?(please give reasoning)
| Just so there's no misunderstandings from the get-go, this isn't flaming or anything, just trying to debate :). People seem to be really touchy sometimes about this, so it's easier to just clear that up now. It's so much easier to hate Makoto because he is relateable, you're right about that. I've never been cheated on, luckily (That I know of... O.o) but I've seen how it effects people and how it ruins trust and relationships. It can end things very bitterly between two people. After all, how can you trust someone wholy, only to know they are going behind their back? You talk about how people are egotistic because they want their partners to themselves. I think that if you truly love someone, you will at least put an effort into devoting yourself to them and trying to make them happy. This, of course, works both ways in a relationship. A girl who cheats on a guy is just as much of a scumbag as the reverse. So it seems to me that if you express affection for someone, you shouldn't abuse it for your own gain. Yes, it is egotistic, but is it unfair to ask this one little thing of them? For them to support you and to be there for you when you do the exact same thing for them? You can be happy and now banging every girl you see. I know a lot of girls that think lowly of guys because they aren't able to control themselves in simple ways. I'm quite honestly not one of those people, but it just goes to show how such actions actually change some peoples views on a gender. It is irrational, it is egotistic but it is also reality. That is how some people feel. I, personally, never understood the whole "cheating" thing. Is sex really so important that people are willing to just backstab each other, someone who could be extremely devoted to them, for momentary pleasure? I think that's the big issue that makes me hate Makoto here. He expresses, not love exactly, but great affection for the two main girls. He talks to them, makes them feel special, he knows how they feel about him and he exploits it, taking complete and utter advantage of them. He does this repeatedly, again and again, and when it's time to take responsibility, he turns his back and goes to self pity. Well, Geez, sex can lead to babies? Who knew? Oh, right, that's the FREAKING REASON FOR SEX. There is no way someone is that freaking stupid. Makoto is just... Basically every girls enemy. That's just it. He's an enemy to women. There's really no better way to put it. He uses them to the fullest extent he can, then tosses them aside. Now, it is also the girls fault for being idiots, but only scumbags take advantage of the feeble minded like that. By the way, blaming it on society... Anytime someone says something like that, I find it utter bull. You do something, it's your fault. It's got nothing to do with bloody "society". |
| @MattMedik: Didn't you read the warning? Or perhaps you weren't able to understand it? - Please refrain from posting useless comments, like this one, in the future. @Kipcha: I'm really glad that you took your time to write a structured and logical reply *cough* unlike some other people *cough*. Let's begin with the first thing that caught myattention - as I understand it, you don't seem to disagree with most of my ideas. eg: "It's so much easier to hate Makoto because he is relateable, you're right about that." ; "Yes, it is egotistic, but is it unfair to ask this one little thing of them?" Now to the main part! That's your thought: "I think that if you truly love someone, you will at least put an effort into devoting yourself to them and trying to make them happy." and I would like to comment on it in the context of our discussion, of course. - Your idea's totally fine and true, but devoting doesn't mean becoming his/her possesion, am I right? It is not like your love's limited, is it? Or do you imply that the human being couldn't love more than one person(I really don't think we are that limited)? - This is the egoistical part - the idea that you should be "devoted" to only one person (are people really some emotional invalids that are restricted to loving one person?). In my opinion, such pretensions are fueled mostly by jealousy and egoism. Next we have: "A girl who cheats on a guy is just as much of a scumbag as the reverse. So it seems to me that if you express affection for someone, you shouldn't abuse it for your own gain." - all is fine and dandy with the logic in my previous idea (I think) - so I could easily say that people shouldn't really care about their partner "cheating" on them - because it just shows them as irrational egoists...but I suspect that the issue at hand isn't so simplistic, is it? - Why? - In my view it is mostly because the person cheating on his partner and is aware at the same time that his partner "doesn't approve" of such a thing, knows pretty well that he'll hurt his "beloved one", or least of all his partner feel bad about it. Now THAT is the problem - that means that the person in question wants "to play sneaky" - he doesn't want to lose the one he "loves", but he is ready to disregard this same person's desires and opinions. The whole thing just doesn't match, does it? It's like saying: "I love you, but I don't really care about your happiness." - quite dishonest and hypocritical, isn't it? But, (yeah there's always another "but" in life - because there isn't only one truth - there are many truths) let's look at the whole problem from the "cheating" person's perspective. Let's say he loves two people, but due to society's norms and the mentality of people (in fact this mentality's peculiarities are also a product of society's norms - and it's kind like a vicious circle - a mentality with such an egoistical view of love is created by society's norms and at the same time this type of mentality supports the norms that created it) this person can't achieve happiness with both of them, even if the objects of his affection have the same feelings towards him - of course there's comes the question - Why? The answer's pretty simple - the egoism of people and their possessive (and maybe even obsessive - check out Fritz Riemann "depressed people" - from his personality typology present in his book "Anxiety. Using Depth Psychology to Find a Balance in Your Life" ) character traits leads to the absurdity of a person destroying awarely his own happiness, with his own hands. It's totally illogical/irrational doing such a thing (somebody could argue that love is an emotion and so it is highly irrational, but the problem here is that this reluctancy to let your beloved "have eyes for other people" isn't a natural consequence of love - it's a more artificial complex created by our society's "morals"). Then, it's logical for the person in question not to heed his partner's illogical and detrimental ideas, and try to "take care of things in a more 'delicate' manner" ( basically going out with another person without informing his foremost partner). That of course doesn't really excuse this person - because he'll still be "doing something behind his partner's back". In my opinion, the best way is to persuade the partner in the inconsistencies of his ideas on that matter - and then even a "happy ending" isn't out of the picture! So, continuing : "Yes, it is egotistic, but is it unfair to ask this one little thing of them?" - it is not that it is unfair, it just isn't necessary - and we should consider the fact that by "possessing" your partner, you're destroying quite a bit of his possible happiness. What's more, it's like saying: "I love you, but I don't really care about your happiness." (deja vu, ou plutot - deja entendu? lol - is it that we see that the "non-cheating" partner and the "cheating" partner have the same attitudes? - I guess not because I already proved the logic behind "the partner playing sneaky" - while there is no logic here - it's just plain hypocrisy). So such attitude should be regarded as detrimental to both parties. Next one: "For them to support you and to be there for you when you do the exact same thing for them?" - you could be devoted to a person and be there "to support" him when he needs, without being a "mere possession" for that person. I'll continue with:"You can be happy and now banging every girl you see. I know a lot of girls that think lowly of guys because they aren't able to control themselves in simple ways. I'm quite honestly not one of those people, but it just goes to show how such actions actually change some peoples views on a gender." - I don't see the point you want to make here - this is not really realted to the whole of your argumentation (and what's more important, it is not strongly related to the theme we're discussing - the issue at hand's not "why girls think low of guys") and could be viewed as just a digression, as it doesn't really add something new to the whole logical structure of the text. And one more thing - refrain giving personal examples in a debate, most of the times it can't be used as a valid argument for one's thesis (as in this case). (I could really explain you why it is bad to give personal examples if you insist) "I, personally, never understood the whole "cheating" thing. Is sex really so important that people are willing to just backstab each other, someone who could be extremely devoted to them, for momentary pleasure?" - why don't you look the other way around - is sex so important that people are willing to think that they were "backstabbed" just because their partner had a little fun without them. Here we see more explicitly the whole idea of "possessing" somebody - people can't seem to approve of their partner not depending on them for his happiness and pleasure, so we could conclude that they just want to be in control of the situation - they want to infantilize their partner to the point where he would depend only on them and will seek pleasure and happiness only from them (I tell you jealousy is a gross thing). The other way to "glue" a partner to yourself is to seemingly give him control over you, while in fact you are again in control by becoming infantilized like a baby clinging to his mother for survival - so he won't abondon you, because you depend on him and he'll feel really guilty if he abandons you (imagine abondoning a baby - the feeling will be something like that - of course they can't compare). I would like to give a more intuitive representation on the matter, so i'll use Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs  If I use this hierarchy to describe the place of the "different types of love" we are discussing,1) the so called "love" of Makoto would be strongly expressed in the physiological level because it's not love what he feels, but his libido, and also on the love/belonging level - sexual intimacy; 2) the "love" of a person wanting to "possess" the partner would include more strongly the safety level - because he wants to have control over the person in order to feel safe (for example he could want to think that he'll always be loved); 3)"true love" shouldn't be strongly expressed only at one or two levels - for "true love" there's a need of self-actualization, esteem, love/belonging etc. - there shouldn't be only one "level" that more strongly expressed than the others. "He expresses, not love exactly, but great affection for the two main girls. He talks to them, makes them feel special, he knows how they feel about him and he exploits it, taking complete and utter advantage of them." - yeah right, "he talks to them" - just look at the way he's "talking" huh lol xD (most of the time he's staying silent just like a stone, and in fact his reactions also are like a stone's xD). In addition, I don't think he has any intention to make them feel special - did you ever see him treating them as if he really loved them? (come on, he almost treats them like a sex-crazed animal would do - not really his best point, wouldn't you agree? lol). And I'm not sure either, that he really can imagine how a person in love could feel - so no, he doesn't understand how they feel (it's not love what he discovers in highschool, it is his... sex drive!!! xD "Congratulations mister Makoto, you've come of age to feel the strength of your libido!!! *clap clap clap*" lol). He doesn't realize he exploits anyone or that he takes advantage of somebody - he feels it is pretty nice and dandy if they agree to his every desire, his logic being - "they don't have anything against it and in fact maybe they even want to do it with me, so where's the problem if I fulfill their desires" - he doesn't really realise what love is, he doesn't think that they are ready to have sex with him because they love him, and not because they are like him (people tend to assess others' reactions and thoghts/ideas based on oneself) - pretty pathetic logic, but that's the logic of most guys during their teenager years (in fact I'm really sorry to admit that). Well, all of this is just a simple conjecture and maybe Makoto really knows how to manipulate the girls and how to take advantage of their love towards him - the problem here is that all of this is pretty unlikely compared to my version - Why? - Do you see Makoto as being a laid-back & honed playboy in the beginning of the anime? - not really...we see him just as a the guy who I described...(we even see "his heart flutter" from a so called "love") "He does this repeatedly, again and again, and when it's time to take responsibility, he turns his back and goes to self pity." - yeah, he really is an irresponsible brat - I really can't argue with that. I could say that most guys his age are like that (you can't say that every teenager guy dreams of having a baby at this age lol), but that really doesn't excuse him - the fact that reality is like this doesn't mean that he'll be proven innocent because "most guys would do so". And by the way I'll prove one of your "arguments" inconsistent with this logic - "It is irrational, it is egotistic but it is also reality. That is how some people feel." - you see, it doesn't matter if it is reality or not, if something's detrimental it ought to be changed. "Well, Geez, sex can lead to babies? Who knew? Oh, right, that's the FREAKING REASON FOR SEX. There is no way someone is that freaking stupid.' - why of course, then why do you think goverments spend so much money for sexual education - I'm sure it is because people are born knowing that you should use contraceptives if you don't want to have babies. Antoher advice, don't judge everything based on yourself in a debate - it's wrong - you should search for as much as possible and various perspectives on the matter. "Makoto is just... Basically every girls enemy. That's just it. He's an enemy to women. There's really no better way to put it." - and that's of course why "half of the school's girls" are ready to fuck him. It is pretty illogical to "play" with your ennemies isn't it. Your "argument" looks like a strong foundation for a statement of the sort - "Makoto deserved to die" - the only problem being that your 'argument" isn't a valid argument - it is a postulate. It sounds totally like discrimination - eg. you have such skin color -> you are an ennemy -> you should die a slow and painful death; another example (more classical and connected with many prejudices helping wars): you are from another nationality -> so, I'll overlook your individuality and regard you only as a part of the mass (everything's simplified this way, so I won't have problems with morality) and you're part of a mass of "bad" people (somebody telled me you these people are "bad" so I just believe him) -> so you're the bad guys and I won't have any remorse for killing you! Eureka lol <- that's the idiotic logic of discrimination - it sounds like your statement don't you think? - "He's an ennemy to women". I don't know what more to write about this statement to prove you how hollow & baseless it is. "He uses them to the fullest extent he can, then tosses them aside. Now, it is also the girls fault for being idiots, but only scumbags take advantage of the feeble minded like that." - no, he doesn't "uses them to the fullest extent he can" - he isn't a manipulative honed playboy, as I already mentioned - your depiction of him just contradicts the anime...what's more, why do you say "he uses them", with the same success rate I could say "they use him" - or is it that he rapes them, so their sex with him is only a one-sided thing? You want to put all the blame onto him - I agree that he is stupid indeed, but he is not the only stupid one, and he's even lesser the only responsible for the whole mess... "By the way, blaming it on society... Anytime someone says something like that, I find it utter bull. You do something, it's your fault. It's got nothing to do with bloody "society"." - but of course it is not society's fault *cough* maybe except the part that all the influences you got come from society *cough* did I say something?...never mind. I don't want to say he isn't responsible, but the fact is that he isn't the only one responsible (and the most responsible for this mess is society - I assure you - you should just read the part where I wrote about the effects of some society norms on the well-being of the human being). I really appreciate your comment on this topic - for its logical structure - it is obvious you put some time and efforts into writing that, and I look forward to your reply on this matter. :-) Peace |
criverJan 1, 2011 12:07 PM
KRKodama said: When you want to defend a point you have to use your own words only, for it to be valid. |
criver said: @Kipcha: I'm really glad that you took your time to write a structured and logical reply *cough* unlike some other people *cough*. Why, thank you :) criver said: Now to the main part! That's your thought: "I think that if you truly love someone, you will at least put an effort into devoting yourself to them and trying to make them happy." and I would like to comment on it in the context of our discussion, of course. - Your idea's totally fine and true, but devoting doesn't mean becoming his/her possesion, am I right? It is not like your love's limited, is it? Or do you imply that the human being couldn't love more than one person(I really don't think we are that limited)? - This is the egoistical part - the idea that you should be "devoted" to only one person (are people really some emotional invalids that are restricted to loving one person?). In my opinion, such pretensions are fueled mostly by jealousy and egoism. Correct, being devoted to someone does not mean you belong to the person, persay. To me, it isn't because the other person is demanding you to stay loyal to them that a person in a relationship should remain loyal. It should be because you want to. How could you look a person in the eye and tell them you love them, then go to another and tell them the exact same thing? I have never been in love with more then one person at once so I really can't imagine how difficult that must be. I can understand and empathise for these people who truly love more then one person in a romantic sense. However, this isn't a valid arguement for Makoto. It is very clear to the viewer that the only one he truly ever could have felt something for was Kotohona and possibly Sekai, but definitely not the others. They are fueled by jealousy and such, but I personally believe that the word "love" is not something to be thrown about easily. I don't remember Makoto ever saying the words outright, but I do remember him implying such things and knowing what both Sekai and Kotohona thought of him and using that. It's pretty common sense that you shouldn't cheat on someone you are together with, unless they are alright with it, in which both these girls were most definitely not. Honestly, I just think it's common sense that this isn't something someone should do. Would it really have been so hard for him to just say "no" since he "liked" Kotonoha so much? I would think this a lot more complicated if he hadn't done it with the other women as well. He could have been confused about his choice and unsure on who he loved. Instead, he just looked like a jerk. In that next paragraph, there really isn't an argument to be made. It makes total sense. criver said: So, continuing : "Yes, it is egotistic, but is it unfair to ask this one little thing of them?" - it is not that it is unfair, it just isn't necessary - and we should consider the fact that by "possessing" your partner, you're destroying quite a bit of his possible happiness. What's more, it's like saying: "I love you, but I don't really care about your happiness." (deja vu, ou plutot - deja entendu? lol - is it that we see that the "non-cheating" partner and the "cheating" partner have the same attitudes? - I guess not because I already proved the logic behind "the partner playing sneaky" - while there is no logic here - it's just plain hypocrisy). So such attitude should be regarded as detrimental to both parties. But if the person is turning down "potential happiness", doesn't that just mean that they are most likely unhappy with the relationship themselves? It seems to me that if someone is happy in a relationship then they don't need to seek out "other potential happiness" because they don't want to ruin what they already have. If a person is unhappy in a relationship, then they should just end it, cheating is only going to make the situation worse and most likely, things will get ugly. I don't think that it means "I love you but I don't care about your happiness" as much as "If they look at other men/women and get intimate, they might be better and he/she will leave me!" sort of thing. I think it mostly veins from insecurity. If they have someone else, that person must be better because they are betraying me and going for someone else. So when someone loves someone, it may be irrational but they want that person to continue loving them, so they try to keep other romantic interests out of the picture. Love is already irrational. So adding insecurity in the mix, that's probably where all this stems from. criver said: Next one: "For them to support you and to be there for you when you do the exact same thing for them?" - you could be devoted to a person and be there "to support" him when he needs, without being a "mere possession" for that person. I don't think there is a "possesion" issue. You can have a significant other and not think of them as a possesion just because you don't want them sleeping around. Take, for example, if you have a kid. That kid is going to have some ground rules, some boundaries. This kid is not going to be allowed to do certain things, but does this make that kid a possesion? Of course not. Normally, a spouse only has to abide by one rule (Unless the other is particularily controlling, in which it is a whole other issue) and that is, don't get affections with members of the other gender except for myself. Normally, this is pretty simple and it is a rule that goes both ways. A possesion is normally kept under your thumb at all times. Normally, a partner is free to do just about anything they wish, as long as they abide by that one single rule. criver said: I'll continue with:"You can be happy and now banging every girl you see. I know a lot of girls that think lowly of guys because they aren't able to control themselves in simple ways. I'm quite honestly not one of those people, but it just goes to show how such actions actually change some peoples views on a gender." - I don't see the point you want to make here - this is not really realted to the whole of your argumentation (and what's more important, it is not strongly related to the theme we're discussing - the issue at hand's not "why girls think low of guys") and could be viewed as just a digression, as it doesn't really add something new to the whole logical structure of the text. And one more thing - refrain giving personal examples in a debate, most of the times it can't be used as a valid argument for one's thesis (as in this case). (I could really explain you why it is bad to give personal examples if you insist) I can see why you were confused here, that typo is kinda confuddling XD I think it is rather partial, because this is something that makes Makoto so unliked by many. Because a lot of girls expect this from men. It doesn't mean they will do, it just means it's easy to believe when the issue comes forth. Makoto is the exact vision of the type of man women hate, and women are the majority of people who hate Makoto. Or are we not on the topic of why people dislike Makoto so much anymore? criver said: "I, personally, never understood the whole "cheating" thing. Is sex really so important that people are willing to just backstab each other, someone who could be extremely devoted to them, for momentary pleasure?" - why don't you look the other way around - is sex so important that people are willing to think that they were "backstabbed" just because their partner had a little fun without them. Here we see more explicitly the whole idea of "possessing" somebody - people can't seem to approve of their partner not depending on them for his happiness and pleasure, so we could conclude that they just want to be in control of the situation - they want to infantilize their partner to the point where he would depend only on them and will seek pleasure and happiness only from them (I tell you jealousy is a gross thing). The other way to "glue" a partner to yourself is to seemingly give him control over you, while in fact you are again in control by becoming infantilized like a baby clinging to his mother for survival - so he won't abondon you, because you depend on him and he'll feel really guilty if he abandons you (imagine abondoning a baby - the feeling will be something like that - of course they can't compare). I would like to give a more intuitive representation on the matter, so i'll use Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs But sex can lead to children. Children could lead to abandonment by the guy who was once your partner because he now feels responsibility towards the new "family". It isn't so much the sex, it is what it can imply. That he's ready to leave you at the first chance he gets. Once again, it's isn't a possesion issue. It's perfectly natural for a social animal such as a human to fear being alone. criver said: "He expresses, not love exactly, but great affection for the two main girls. He talks to them, makes them feel special, he knows how they feel about him and he exploits it, taking complete and utter advantage of them." - yeah right, "he talks to them" - just look at the way he's "talking" huh lol xD (most of the time he's staying silent just like a stone, and in fact his reactions also are like a stone's xD). In addition, I don't think he has any intention to make them feel special - did you ever see him treating them as if he really loved them? (come on, he almost treats them like a sex-crazed animal would do - not really his best point, wouldn't you agree? lol). And I'm not sure either, that he really can imagine how a person in love could feel - so no, he doesn't understand how they feel (it's not love what he discovers in highschool, it is his... sex drive!!! xD "Congratulations mister Makoto, you've come of age to feel the strength of your libido!!! *clap clap clap*" lol). He doesn't realize he exploits anyone or that he takes advantage of somebody - he feels it is pretty nice and dandy if they agree to his every desire, his logic being - "they don't have anything against it and in fact maybe they even want to do it with me, so where's the problem if I fulfill their desires" - he doesn't really realise what love is, he doesn't think that they are ready to have sex with him because they love him, and not because they are like him (people tend to assess others' reactions and thoghts/ideas based on oneself) - pretty pathetic logic, but that's the logic of most guys during their teenager years (in fact I'm really sorry to admit that). Well, all of this is just a simple conjecture and maybe Makoto really knows how to manipulate the girls and how to take advantage of their love towards him - the problem here is that all of this is pretty unlikely compared to my version - Why? - Do you see Makoto as being a laid-back & honed playboy in the beginning of the anime? - not really...we see him just as a the guy who I described...(we even see "his heart flutter" from a so called "love") It may not have been his intention to make them feel special, but by having sex with them, he did. Now, we have to remember that Sekai and Kotohona are, for lack of a better term, mentally unstable. They figure because he did it with them, he was making them special instead of the "You're good enough for now" message he was really giving. Hmm, well, I can't argue that he did lack some insight and such in the situation... I guess I way maybe giving him too much credit? XD criver said: "Well, Geez, sex can lead to babies? Who knew? Oh, right, that's the FREAKING REASON FOR SEX. There is no way someone is that freaking stupid.' - why of course, then why do you think goverments spend so much money for sexual education - I'm sure it is because people are born knowing that you should use contraceptives if you don't want to have babies. Antoher advice, don't judge everything based on yourself in a debate - it's wrong - you should search for as much as possible and various perspectives on the matter. I apologise. Once again, I am assuming in common sense :P That part of this series just really got under my skin. criver said: "Makoto is just... Basically every girls enemy. That's just it. He's an enemy to women. There's really no better way to put it." - and that's of course why "half of the school's girls" are ready to fuck him. It is pretty illogical to "play" with your ennemies isn't it. Your "argument" looks like a strong foundation for a statement of the sort - "Makoto deserved to die" - the only problem being that your 'argument" isn't a valid argument - it is a postulate. It sounds totally like discrimination - eg. you have such skin color -> you are an ennemy -> you should die a slow and painful death; another example (more classical and connected with many prejudices helping wars): you are from another nationality -> so, I'll overlook your individuality and regard you only as a part of the mass (everything's simplified this way, so I won't have problems with morality) and you're part of a mass of "bad" people (somebody telled me you these people are "bad" so I just believe him) -> so you're the bad guys and I won't have any remorse for killing you! Eureka lol <- that's the idiotic logic of discrimination - it sounds like your statement don't you think? - "He's an ennemy to women". I don't know what more to write about this statement to prove you how hollow & baseless it is. No, no, no. I do not believe he deserved to die. No, that is a tad strong. I think he deserved to be exposed for what he did, at least to the girls around him, and not be able to find another lay, but he should not have been killed. That was assuming a tad too much. We were originally discussing why people disliked him so much, yes? I was giving a reason. Because he is what almost every single woman fears. Someone who gets what they want and leaves, leaving any resposibility behind with them. That was the only point I was trying to make. criver said: "He uses them to the fullest extent he can, then tosses them aside. Now, it is also the girls fault for being idiots, but only scumbags take advantage of the feeble minded like that." - no, he doesn't "uses them to the fullest extent he can" - he isn't a manipulative honed playboy, as I already mentioned - your depiction of him just contradicts the anime...what's more, why do you say "he uses them", with the same success rate I could say "they use him" - or is it that he rapes them, so their sex with him is only a one-sided thing? You want to put all the blame onto him - I agree that he is stupid indeed, but he is not the only stupid one, and he's even lesser the only responsible for the whole mess... I wasn't talking about the other girls, because they really are using him too. However, I do not believe Sekai and Kotohona were. I don't think he was just a sex toy to them... I think they wanted him to be more. I would never imply that any of the characters in this series are particularily intelligent. That would be ludacrous. :p |
| Wow, I'm liking the discussion I'm seeing here! Good old TL;DR arguments… Anyways, none of this is intended to come across as angry or disrespectful. Also, beware my links to TV Tropes, which will ruin your life. I’ve gotten in the habit of adding them whenever I think of it, because TV Tropes are awesome. Grossly oversimplified, my view is that Makoto is hated because he A) is a sort of villain protagonist, B) is utterly unlikable, C) is realistic enough to not be immediately dismissible as fiction, D) is not fun to watch, E) is an idiot, and F) almost gets away with it scot-free by simply abandoning those who care about and/or rely on him. These factors have not, to my knowledge, been combined elsewhere. 1. criver said: Well, I should tell you that many women that were raped don't make a fuss about it, not because they think that the guy was right in his actions, but particularly because they were raped (makes rape even more detestable, eh? - not that it is not enough) - I guess they feel "soiled" (and who wouldn't) and they'll feel bad if other people knew (what's bound to happen if they make a fuss about it) - what I mean is that you "wouldn't brag about something like this" - you'll be so embarassed that you wouldn't be able to say a word...probably, I wouldn't know for sure because I've never been raped. criver, that's a fairly accurate description of rape. If anything, it's an understatement. It often drives victims to depression and/or suicide, and most rapes go unreported due to the shame and fear. 2. criver said: Why is it that we can tolerate some crazy bast*rd and not somebody that you could find easily in society (I'm sure you know such "playboys") and is surely not such a "great threat"? I think that it is because, people are more inclined to "hate" something more than it needs to be "hated" if they can relate to it, rather than somthing that could be a lot "worse" objectively(something like a compensation system - but not really). Back to a point made way up at the top, you suggest that Makoto is hated because he's relatable. I see it a little differently. It's because he's a relatively believable character in a believable, realistic setting. Unlike the complete monsters that can be found in some anime, people like Makoto actually exist with fair frequency in real life. With him, you can't say, at the end of the show, "ah, well that's that, and I'm glad I won't have to tolerate that guy anymore" and send it to the back of your mind along with the rest of the show. School Days is conducive to filing him under a big “this is reality” marker. After all, he could be the next man you meet. This taps into a more tangible fear, a more tangible disgust, and a more tangible anger. It also doesn’t help that he is clearly the protagonist, whom we are usually supposed to root for. He is supposed to be the good guy, and yet he lacks ANY redeeming qualities (go on; just try to name one). This disappointment and disgust is hard to shake, even if one happens to know he’s not designed to be rooted for. Furthermore, Makoto lives in a world of tragic consequences, unlike many of the more vile characters (even outright villains) in other anime. His bad behavior is all the more poignant because we, the viewers, understand this contrast viscerally. 3. Along these lines, another part of it lies in the show he's in. We watch the train wreck happen, and we can see every time that he could have fixed things. As he fails, time and again, to repair the damage and cut his losses, we get more and more aggravated. Makoto. Is. An. Idiot. And we have to watch Every. Single. Moment. This frustration is a breeding ground for hatred. Granted, the other characters are all idiots too, but Makoto fails at interpersonal relationships more often (he has more screentime) with more people (many other cast members don't interact all that often) breaking more intuitive values (e.g. don't cheat). 4. Speaking of cheating, criver, you suggest that Makoto is no more of a jerk for cheating than the female leads are for wanting him to not sleep with others, in that they’re both just strangling the other person's happiness. You imply that Makoto is hated more than the girls because the society in which we live approves of monogamy (the girls) and disapproves of polyamory (Makoto), disproportionately vindicating the girls and vilifying Makoto. This is likely true, at least to some degree; if we lived in a society where open relationships were encouraged, it would probably be easier to understand Makoto and harder to understand the girls. However, I should mention that there could be another source other than society; evolutionary psychology points towards “hard-wired,” evolved mechanisms driving sexual jealousy and detection of cheaters. So keep in mind that society and culture are not necessarily be-all-end-all factors. Causal conclusions are hard to draw. In the end, though, humans are endowed with the processing power to defy their upbringing and their nature (we are active, adaptive problem-solvers). No matter what was "programmed" into Makoto by his environment and his genes, what he does is still his fault. By this same logic, of course, Sekai and Kotonoha are guilty of not considering polyamory as a solution. It is generally agreed, though, that you shouldn't force an unwilling partner into such a relationship (such as by threatening to abandon them if they do not acquiesce). 5. criver said: It is not like your love's limited, is it? Or do you imply that the human being couldn't love more than one person(I really don't think we are that limited)? - This is the egoistical part - the idea that you should be "devoted" to only one person (are people really some emotional invalids that are restricted to loving one person?). In my opinion, such pretensions are fueled mostly by jealousy and egoism. Also speaking of cheating, you mention that there is no theoretical limit to the amount of love one person can feel for others. In the same way, one could love any number of people. I have come to the same conclusion, but with a caveat: love is unlimited, but resources are. Time and attention are both resources. No matter how much (or how equally) you love multiple people, you will, at some point, be forced to divide your time and attention among them. This can reasonably drive jealousy. And, of course, division of (physical) resources is one of the driving factors behind the evolutionary psychological theory of sexual jealousy. And let’s not kid ourselves: Makoto doesn’t even have enough love for a single person. 6. criver said: Now THAT is the problem - that means that the person in question wants "to play sneaky" - he doesn't want to lose the one he "loves", but he is ready to disregard this same person's desires and opinions. The whole thing just doesn't match, does it? It's like saying: "I love you, but I don't really care about your happiness." - quite dishonest and hypocritical, isn't it? But let's look at the whole problem from the "cheating" person's perspective. Let's say he loves two people, but due to society's norms and the mentality of people this person can't achieve happiness with both of them, even if the objects of his affection have the same feelings towards him - of course there's comes the question - Why? The answer's pretty simple - the egoism of people and their possessive character traits leads to the absurdity of a person destroying awarely his own happiness, with his own hands. It's totally illogical/irrational doing such a thing (somebody could argue that love is an emotion and so it is highly irrational, but the problem here is that this reluctancy to let your beloved "have eyes for other people" isn't a natural consequence of love - it's a more artificial complex created by our society's "morals"). Then, it's logical for the person in question not to heed his partner's illogical and detrimental ideas, and try to "take care of things in a more 'delicate' manner" ( basically going out with another person without informing his foremost partner). That of course doesn't really excuse this person - because he'll still be "doing something behind his partner's back". In my opinion, the best way is to persuade the partner in the inconsistencies of his ideas on that matter - and then even a "happy ending" isn't out of the picture! So, let me get this straight: as a partial justification for Makoto’s sneaky behavior, you’ve provided a hypothetical example about a man who loves two people but is not able to achieve happiness because of their possessiveness. If I’m not mistaken, the idea is that the man realizes that caving into these unreasonable, possessive demands is destroying his own happiness, and so he rationally decides to solve the problem by seeing each love-interest behind the other’s back. The reluctance to let your beloved “have eyes for other people” is not created by our society’s morals. The reason for this reluctance is because “having eyes for other people” is a possible indicator that you are not good enough for your beloved or that you are no longer loved or wanted. This is not a particularly unlikely scenario, either, considering the instability of many relationships. Possessiveness, then, is a desperate attempt to hold onto something you love when you fear it might desert you. That being the source, if you are utterly secure in your relationship (i.e. you know and feel in your heart that your beloved loves you), then you will not feel that reluctance. Therefore, I am not convinced that the two love-interests involved in your example would necessarily be prohibitively possessive, assuming the man truly loves them. And remember, we’re discussing School Days, and Makoto clearly doesn’t love the two heroines enough for this example to apply. And furthermore, as you say, this doesn’t excuse his actions; it really is best to try to talk it out. 7. criver said: So, continuing : "Yes, it is egotistic, but is it unfair to ask this one little thing of them?" - it is not that it is unfair, it just isn't necessary - and we should consider the fact that by "possessing" your partner, you're destroying quite a bit of his possible happiness. What's more, it's like saying: "I love you, but I don't really care about your happiness." (deja vu, ou plutot - deja entendu? lol - is it that we see that the "non-cheating" partner and the "cheating" partner have the same attitudes? - I guess not because I already proved the logic behind "the partner playing sneaky" - while there is no logic here - it's just plain hypocrisy). So such attitude should be regarded as detrimental to both parties. I don’t follow your argument to establish that the “cheating” and “non-cheating” parties have the same attitude. The concept you say is unnecessary (that one little thing you ask of your beloved) is that your loved one will support you and be there for you so long as you do the exact same thing for your loved one. Here’s the problem: that one little thing is a) necessary and b) not descriptive of possessiveness. As far as I can tell, possessiveness, as used in this discussion, is being completely unopen to the idea that your partner can love you and another person at the same time. If your lover fails to fulfill that one little thing you ask, it’s a pretty good indicator that your lover can’t love you and another person at the same time. Since Makoto consistently fails to do this, the “possessive” behaviors of Sekai and Kotonoha are partially justified. 8. criver said: "I, personally, never understood the whole "cheating" thing. Is sex really so important that people are willing to just backstab each other, someone who could be extremely devoted to them, for momentary pleasure?" - why don't you look the other way around - is sex so important that people are willing to think that they were "backstabbed" just because their partner had a little fun without them. Here we see more explicitly the whole idea of "possessing" somebody - people can't seem to approve of their partner not depending on them for his happiness and pleasure, so we could conclude that they just want to be in control of the situation - they want to infantilize their partner to the point where he would depend only on them and will seek pleasure and happiness only from them (I tell you jealousy is a gross thing). The other way to "glue" a partner to yourself is to seemingly give him control over you, while in fact you are again in control by becoming infantilized like a baby clinging to his mother for survival - so he won't abondon you, because you depend on him and he'll feel really guilty if he abandons you (imagine abondoning a baby - the feeling will be something like that - of course they can't compare). criver, I think you vastly overstate the amount of control these “possessive” people desire. The desire to be your beloved’s sole provider of happiness has a similar basis as the reluctance to let your beloved “have eyes for anyone else,” since to be otherwise is to literally be unsatisfactory to or inadequate for your partner. Also, the cheating thing doesn’t quite reverse evenly because of what sex signifies and what it is often thought to indicate (love). In the context of School Days, Makoto sleeping around so much is a hint that he is really only interested in sex, which is an understandably big deal to Sekai and Kotonoha, especially since he never really acts as if he has any deeper feelings for them. Love is a two-way street, and Makoto’s failure to reciprocate is obviously distressing. 9. criver said: "He expresses, not love exactly, but great affection for the two main girls. He talks to them, makes them feel special, he knows how they feel about him and he exploits it, taking complete and utter advantage of them." - yeah right, "he talks to them" - just look at the way he's "talking" huh lol xD (most of the time he's staying silent just like a stone, and in fact his reactions also are like a stone's xD). In addition, I don't think he has any intention to make them feel special - did you ever see him treating them as if he really loved them? (come on, he almost treats them like a sex-crazed animal would do - not really his best point, wouldn't you agree? lol). And I'm not sure either, that he really can imagine how a person in love could feel - so no, he doesn't understand how they feel (it's not love what he discovers in highschool, it is his... sex drive!!! xD I agree that it is quite clear from just watching School Days that Makoto does not love anyone. He is uncaring, insensitive, and feels no attachment to anybody beyond what will get him sex. He is not devoted to anyone’s happiness but his own, and his willingness to abandon both Kotonoha and Sekai instead of taking any sort of responsibility is sufficient evidence of that. No matter how much they may want to monopolize him, the lead girls never show Makoto this much emotional coldness (well, perhaps until Sekai kills him). In some (often distorted) way, they do care about him, pay attention to him, and feel attachment to him. 10. criver said: Also, the whole issue includes some additional "more delicate" questions... I don't think Makoto has anything against multiple realtionships, but that's only because it is comfortable for him, while the girls he has as "girlfriends" do have much against him having multiple relationships - they want that Makoto "has place only for them in his heart" (on a side note, he doesn't really love them - but that's another issue that I'll discuss if necessary - that is if you insist on this). The problem there is that humans are quite egoistical (and society has a lot to do with this) - they want to be the only ones that are loved by their beloved - why, well because...they are just plain egoists (I know that a lot of people think otherwise, but could you give a logical explanation of destroying the freedom of your partner, for whom you wish only happiness? - that's another issue, that I'm ready to discuss if you insist). You’re nominally correct in arguing that the girls are as guilty of denying him happiness (by “destroying his freedom”) as he is of denying them happiness (by being unfaithful). The catch is that the magnitude of these denials differ greatly. Makoto is denied sexual pleasure with a wider variety of women, whereas Sekai and Kotonoha are subjected to emotional pain. The girls do not feel loved and fear abandonment. These feelings may be selfish, but they are genuine, powerful, and strongly evocative of sympathy. In light of this, it is difficult to imagine that what the girls wish to deny Makoto is anywhere near as painful as what he denies them. In earnest, Makoto never, ever provides the girls with any reason why he’ll do so much as glance at them if he could find his fill of sex elsewhere. If he genuinely cared about them and made it clear, I really doubt either would have much of a problem with him continuing his escapades. They try to assert control because they (justifiably) feel he’ll disappear if they let him wander freely, and they think he might fully embrace them if they can draw him just a bit closer. When it comes to Makoto being comfortable with an open relationship while his girlfriends are not, Makoto’s actions would be less despicable were it the case that he simply does not see what the big deal is. The problem is that he pretty clearly sees what the big deal is, and just doesn’t care. That is certainly the impression I get. 11. criver said: He doesn't realize he exploits anyone or that he takes advantage of somebody - he feels it is pretty nice and dandy if they agree to his every desire, his logic being - "they don't have anything against it and in fact maybe they even want to do it with me, so where's the problem if I fulfill their desires" - he doesn't really realise what love is, he doesn't think that they are ready to have sex with him because they love him, and not because they are like him (people tend to assess others' reactions and thoghts/ideas based on oneself) - pretty pathetic logic, but that's the logic of most guys during their teenager years (in fact I'm really sorry to admit that). Well, all of this is just a simple conjecture and maybe Makoto really knows how to manipulate the girls and how to take advantage of their love towards him - the problem here is that all of this is pretty unlikely compared to my version - Why? - Do you see Makoto as being a laid-back & honed playboy in the beginning of the anime? - not really...we see him just as a the guy who I described...(we even see "his heart flutter" from a so called "love") criver, you have a point that he doesn’t actively choose to believe that the women he sleeps with are sex objects and not people, and that he is not deliberately deceiving and manipulating their feelings for his own gain. However, this is actually a misrepresentation of the issue. He does not think about and plan what he does; he doesn’t need to. By being around these emotionally dependent women, he has learned what responses get him the reward he wants, and he proceeds to do so in the same way that a pigeon might peck a particular key in a Skinner Box because it knows pecking that key will result in it receiving food. Over and over again he says things without meaning them. He hardly even thinks about it, making him even less likable. He has only his own interests at heart. This is not to say that the other characters are not similarly selfish, but Makoto’s blind selfishness tends to affect more people in harsher ways. 12. criver said: "Well, Geez, sex can lead to babies? Who knew? Oh, right, that's the FREAKING REASON FOR SEX. There is no way someone is that freaking stupid.' - why of course, then why do you think goverments spend so much money for sexual education - I'm sure it is because people are born knowing that you should use contraceptives if you don't want to have babies. Sexual education is a joke, especially in Japan. Furthermore, it is very difficult to access contraceptives and condoms in Japan. Makoto’s actually got a workable excuse on this one, but it doesn’t extend to not taking responsibility for a pregnancy. Regardless of poor education, not understanding that sex makes babies seems phenomenally dumb. 13. criver said: and that's of course why "half of the school's girls" are ready to fuck him. It is pretty illogical to "play" with your ennemies isn't it. criver, you dismiss the claim that Makoto is basically an “enemy to women” by saying that in School Days – a show populated almost entirely by morons - half the girls at his school are trying to get in his pants? Did I fail to recognize sarcasm in there somewhere? Not only are those girls idiots (meaning that generalizing from their decisions is a bad idea), but you’re also trying to use an anecdote to argue a broader point. The claim is that real-life people who hold attitudes and behave in ways similar to Makoto are the “enemies of women.” The only problem with this is that it’s a bit of a hyperbole. That slippery slope argument you make afterwards is totally uncalled-for and inappropriate. Kipcha hit it right on the head: he is what almost every single woman fears. Someone who gets what they want and leaves, leaving any responsibility behind with them. Evidence from evolutionary psychology supports this viewpoint.14. criver said: You want to put all the blame onto him - I agree that he is stupid indeed, but he is not the only stupid one, and he's even lesser the only responsible for the whole mess... I agree that everyone shares at least some part of the blame. But Makoto probably deserves most of it. He is the biggest jerk of them all for the pettiest reasons of them all. I hope I managed to establish that already. 15. Kipcha said: (A) But if the person is turning down "potential happiness", doesn't that just mean that they are most likely unhappy with the relationship themselves? (B) It seems to me that if someone is happy in a relationship then they don't need to seek out "other potential happiness" because they don't want to ruin what they already have. (C) If a person is unhappy in a relationship, then they should just end it, cheating is only going to make the situation worse and most likely, things will get ugly. (A) They are not necessarily unhappy with every aspect of the relationship… (B) There’s something to be said for always striving to reach a higher level of happiness. Also, what if they don’t so much seek it out as they simply encounter it? Do they risk ruining what they have to take advantage of the opportunity? This is more-or-less what happens to Makoto; Sekai falls right into his lap when he’s already in a relationship with Kotonoha. He, of course, takes advantage of the opportunity. (C) I agree that it’s better to just end it if it’s not working. And, of course, this is something Makoto does not really like to do. 16. Kipcha said: Normally, a partner is free to do just about anything they wish, as long as they abide by that one single rule. I think this is because violating that one single rule is a source of danger to (what I now consider to be) the primary rule of romantic relationships: that your loved one will support you and be there for you so long as you do the exact same thing for your loved one. Anyways, cool discussion guys, and sorry for picking on you, criver. I just happen to disagree with you more. :P |
ZetaAspectJan 10, 2011 11:17 PM
 Graph provided to verify that I am a CERTIFIED pretentious jerk. |
| Nice Boat. |
 Why do people trust each other? In the end, you're on your own. |
| wow,what a long comment.I just read for 30 minute and my eye feel dizzy I don't really understand what is the hate for Makoto here, but my hate is pointed mostly on Sekai .Since Sekai started the whole mess.She made Makoto to date with Kotonoha.Since Kotonoha is well manner and she is a type of a girl that a guy is very hard to get closed to.After when Kotonoha and Mokoto date together.All the girl and boys had rumor of them and the girl start to challenge themselves wanting to have sex with him(not date) including Sekai herself...oh gosh. ....and then the brutal harem start >.>" |
More topics from this board
» Is School Days a misunderstood masterpiece?SkyEatsOcean - Jan 30, 2015 |
49 |
by Archean-Return
»»
Apr 25, 5:32 PM |
|
Poll: » School Days Episode 12 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Ranivus - Sep 20, 2007 |
1286 |
by Archean-Return
»»
Apr 25, 5:23 PM |
|
Poll: » School Days Episode 11 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )OriginalName - Sep 12, 2007 |
207 |
by Archean-Return
»»
Apr 25, 4:11 PM |
|
Poll: » School Days Episode 10 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )cyruz - Sep 5, 2007 |
204 |
by Archean-Return
»»
Apr 25, 3:35 PM |
|
Poll: » School Days Episode 9 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 )DeleteMe3409 - Aug 29, 2007 |
177 |
by Archean-Return
»»
Apr 25, 2:37 PM |