the logic behind "the perfect male" for japan?

incisorr said:

Another example of forced "human values" is FMA where Edward doesn't wanna use the already created philosopher stone just because its made out of other people, ,lmao what is this bullshit crap because of his idiotism people suffer , he could use the already created philosopher stone to help others if he had any brains whatsoever

incisorr said:

The question is, is this the perfect male for japanese people? A guy thats usually a shy loser (like im sure most of the people in here, including myself probably) and sacrifices himself to help others? Whats the good in that? A person like that is unreliable because hes usually dumb and will do the things he thinks are good but wont think about the conscequences(e.g back to FateSN example), a person with no personality and just a bot that is there to serve your every need >seriously if you ask me that is quite pathetic because its almost as if you want your own slave with which you can fuck with and have romances, i really hope some japanese chick will come here telling me > no its just fiction (but there are no japanese girls on the internet, for some strange reason)

Tachii said:
There's a lot of varieties though. Even among harems.

And if all those harems had dudes like Makoto from School Days, ohshiat the orgies will run rampant assuming the girls are still lusting after the weak guy and don't mind to share (which several them say they won't even though they can be jealous as hell).

Tachii said:
I'm just saying there's always minor differences that separate them apart. it's not like they have to be complete opposites. Or else we'd have people complain that everybody is Makoto in School Days.

Truth is I also haven't been watching harem for the longest time. Closest one is probably high school dxd and he isn't exactly the shy/indecisive/weak type. Then there was that dude in high school of the dead which doesn't exactly fit that trope either.

Tachii said:
I have gotten that message in the anime too but I don't think it was terrible mostly because he have a rather ironic attitude when it come to girls that separate him apart from that guy in Rosario + vampire or sekirei or whatever generic harem main you can think of. Like, the dude outwardly express his need for tits but when it come to it he can't do it. Which is unlike the next generic guy who is just shy in general and doesn't even show he have such dirty thoughts. This dude whose name I cannot remember is pretty much in the mid point between indecisive and decisive. He wants it, but when push comes to shove he fails to deliver. Whereas the decisive guy would just be doing his shit like in School Days and the indecisive guy wouldn't even think about doing such things.

Baman said:
Yep, those harem main characters are definitely made for self insertion purposes, and in no way represent any sort of idealism in themselves. If the main characters were suave and perfect in every way, no one would be able to relate to them, and doubly so for the majority of the intended audience. Thus they're made with some good traits hidden beneath a incompetent, stupid or otherwise pathetic or generic exterior.

Stuff like kindness and moronic persistence might be some sort of ideal though, the latter especially if it's the hot blooded, never give up kind of thing. And moronic self sacrifice should make more sense to a more collectivistic culture like they have in Japan

miereneronaile said:

For that FMA example, yep. I would have used it. Probably without much hesitation. It would not take me long to realize the benefits and costs and such(I have not actually watched what you are talking about specifically here, but using the dead to save the living seems acceptable to me) However, I would not blame someone else for finding the idea repulsive. In fact, I actually feel it is somewhat repulsive myself. I would not let that stop me, but I could never blame another person for choosing their morals over practical value. To some people, their morals are of more practical value than actual practical results, as little sense as that seems to make.

incisorr said:
> for the Shirou part, i was merely giving an example to make my point easier to see

He "Sacrifices" himself (I totally agree with the part where humans are not selfless and always do things for themself, ive been saying this for years) to protect Saber even tho hes not suited for it, the problems with that are that it is dumb and counter productive, which is just implying that the character is quite stupid cause he can't think for everything but just some very very short-term gain(because without him Saber would suffer much more than 1 blow from berserker on her armor, not to mention she had to give him her healing ability cuz hes such a kamikadze)

Basically what this implies is that the character is stupid, humans are a species that uses their brain to survive therefore being stupid is bad and against evolution and even a lesser form of life. Sure being strong is good and stuff but lions and monkeys can't wipe out humanity while humans can easily do so because of intelligent team work and things that require brain, i didn't create the universe but this is how life works like, its pathetic and on its own its much worse than in team. Point: being stupid is bad, but just because he appears to do the "right thing/humanitarian" he gets all the hot chicks? that is a messed up logic

for my FMA example, i see your point but i think in my example it hardly applies, there aren't any more philosopher stones made and i didnt think id have to argue about this, he doesnt wanna use dead people to save alive people and that makes him humanitarian? rofl what the hell , its counter-productive and against logic , almost started sounding like religion, lets waste or time and resources for the dead and ignore the living and make them go thru all the suffer



p.s. variety in harems? tell me an anime where the main char is a badass guy who likes girls and wants to do perfectly normal "Ecchi" things with them and has his own harem, id love to watch it (no hentais/porns obviously)

Lauriet said:
And the rest is my usual hating.

Baman said:

The problem with Johan though is that the author doesn't even try to make him relatable or even human at all, he's simply a one dimensional Monster. Sure, that was probably the whole point as the title not so subtly hints at, but this does mean he'll naturally tend to be less likeable than even a poorly written character as Lelouch, since the latter actually portray some human emotions, hamfisted and silly as though they may be.

Anime_Name said:
Imagine that, protagonists tend to be more likable than antagonists, regardless of the level writing used. That's a remarkable find you made there.

Anime_Name said:
What conversation? The topic is 2 pages and the part I quoted was just you playing your favorite chew toy again.
Protagonists, regardless of how well they are written tend to be innately more likeable than antagonists. It's not a strawman, it's pointing out the obvious with the vitriol and pomp.

Baman said:
Oh man. Look at the post above me, in the spoiler. I was comparing them since Lauriet brought them up in terms of atrocities committed.. .

Anime_Name said:
Being well or poorly written have little to do with the basic intent of those two roles.

Baman said:
Sure, but it can have everything to do with the actual result. Shoddy writing and character inconsistencies can very well make the viewer perceive a character as something he isn't supposed to be. Our dear Lelouch was also supposed to be smart, but anyone that paid attention to all his nonsensical blunders would see that he wasn't quite a genius after all. And unless the writing convince you that his goals and ideals are legitimate causes, you'll probably see him as a complete twat instead of a relatable antihero.

Sure, but it can have everything to do with the actual result.

Anime_Name said:
He was still smart. Oh sure he wasn't perfect and didn't make the right decisions all the time but the anime never made the viewers question Lelouche's intellect. Being a genious was a single trait but it's not his only trait. Pointing out his mistakes(or stuff you didn't like) can be attribtued to another trait the character has that in the context of any given scene happened to dominate the character instead of his genius.

I'm talking about a general understanding about the use of the roles and how roles are used to effect the viewer. Good writing will make a gooder character is completely unrelated, subjective hogwash that only serves to put the pomp in pompous.

The anime never question it, no, but the numerous blunders that he did time and again, that was made clearly for the convenience of the plot and never excused in any way, breaks the illusion that the story tries to present.

What are you even trying to argue here? You obviously don't understand a single thing I'm saying.

Apparently for japanese people/anime creators and *especially* harem animes, the male protagonist is usually always the same and its safe and logical to assume that for japanese people this is the perfect guy

Antanaru said:
I don't think or rather I hope, it's not safe to make assumptions about Japanese society based on anime alone. Otherwise Japan is one hell of a scary and insane place... I think looser, too-good-to-be-sane etc. male leads are designed to carter to specific anime demographics. Not every Japanese watch cartoons but small and... often 'unique' group...

miereneronaile said:
In regards to the Shirou part.. Yes, his decisions are stupid. The thing is, his decisions are not stupid because he himself is a dumb human being. His upbringing has molded him into this person, through personal tragedy and poorly thought out words from an adoptive father who was a broken man. I do see why you would say this would not get the girls and such.

Still, Rin largely feels responsible for him and Sakura.. well, to understand Sakura you HAVE to read the visual novel. I attribute sabers affection for him largely to the effect wartime has on people, as well as the fact he quite clearly proved he valued her life above anything. They all admit his ideals are wrong and not achievable, btw. My point here being I do not think THIS is why they like him. He gets the hot chicks for other reasons, NOT because he is humanitarian/cute.

For that FMA example, yep. I would have used it. Probably without much hesitation. It would not take me long to realize the benefits and costs and such(I have not actually watched what you are talking about specifically here, but using the dead to save the living seems acceptable to me) However, I would not blame someone else for finding the idea repulsive. In fact, I actually feel it is somewhat repulsive myself. I would not let that stop me, but I could never blame another person for choosing their morals over practical value. To some people, their morals are of more practical value than actual practical results, as little sense as that seems to make.

Baman said:
True enough. I'd question the attractiveness of someone with such noodly limbs and a chin that can double as a breadknife though.
Either way, I guess it is a case of girls preferring assholes. Or in this case, overly theatrical and mentally impaired assholes with the power of the plot writers at his back, heh.

The problem with Johan though is that the author doesn't even try to make him relatable or even human at all, he's simply a one dimensional Monster. Sure, that was probably the whole point as the title not so subtly hints at, but this does mean he'll naturally tend to be less likeable than even a poorly written character as Lelouch, since the latter actually portray some human emotions, hamfisted and silly as though they may be.

Anime_Name said:
That's how fictional stories go. Writers intentionally plan the mistakes of their characters in order to facilitate various happenings in their story. There's no illusion being broken because people understand a fictional story will be a tale of manufactured successes and failures that are convenient to the plot.

I'm arguing framework and accepted structure while you're arguing personal opinion about you perceive to be well written or not.

miereneronaile said:
@Baman
Not that I particularly disagree with most of that post, but a character doing a 'totally illogical action' should not pull us out of the story. Actually, a character NEVER doing an illogical action would be more likely to pull me out of a story. Humans are illogical creatures. Characters are human.(normally)

That does not always excuse it, but I think it is a much more case by case thing than they way you were talking about it 0o.

Illogical does not = breaking the flow of the story.

Baman said:
Thus, when a character does a completely illogical action that breaks the suspension of disbelief, it is obviously identified as a poorly written plot device, jutting out of the plot in a unorganic and intrusive way, much like a deus ex machina or plot hole otherwise would.
The viewer is supposed to buy into the actions of the characters and percieve them as realistic in their context, not go "I see what you did there" and perceive the character as nothing but a automaton built to serve the whims of the writer. That's just bad writing, end of story.

Tachii said:
To be honest I thought Death Note suffered more with this than Code Geass. I didn't see his illogical action as plot holes nor did I see his luck or intelligence plot armour as obvious as Light.

miereneronaile said:
I dont think a character always has to clearly follow their morals or ideologies either. I know I have done things I later thought were mistakes, and I imagine everyone else here has done so as well.

Baman said:
Well, with Light he just gradually got worse, and especially seeing how he completely snapped in the end, I just naturally interpreted that as him gradually losing his way to the DN's power and becoming a megalomaniac. A lot of the more insane gambles clearly shone through as plot devices though.
Now, the problem with Lelouch's actions is that the plot kept telling you that he was a genius even though he did elementary mistakes no genius would ever do, whether it was continuously failing to account for or remove Suzaku, using the same old surprise tactics over and over or relying on cheap zerg rushing or picking completely pointless battles that served no purpose. But of course, if you didn't notice or didn't care about these inconsistencies then all the more fun for you I guess.