Dumb narcissistic perverts is supposed to be funny?

Anyone can give some examples of characters who possess all of these traits? (dumb, narcissistic and perverted)

I can only think of Rance the goat.

@Zarutaku https://myanimelist.net/character/111245/Rudeus_Greyrat

@passtur Stop your slander, don't blame this guy's acts on the greatness that is sonny boy, that's not even a sonny boy profile picture, it's from an anime called The heike monogatari.

I've heard good things about it.... but it's not sonny boy. It literally has nothing to do with it.

@APolygons2 I think they are on mobile. Mobile app version has the Profile pic instead of the forum pic displayed.

Yea, I think Kazuma's pretty funny.

I don't find the perverted characters "funny", but I also don't mind them. They just "exist".

Like everything else in the world, there are exceptions of course. I think kazuma is fucking hilarious, and issei has some funny ass moments.

You are thinking too hard about it, if it bothers you in any specific show just stop watching it. Obviously not everyone feels the same way, and not everything is for everyone.

@APolygons2

For the record, I do tolerate these characters. And I did intend to bait people who will be offended and knee-jerk respond "Stop watching anime then". And yes, Konosuba S3 Kazuma is like 60% of the motivation behind this thread. I did like him a lot as a straight man, but without the 3 girls, he is mostly just a stupid, narcissistic pervert.

And the reason why I care so much is how repetitive, cheap, and lazy this character trope feels, and how it distracts me in an otherwise good show.

... or (rare case) the writer simply doesn't want righteousness and punishment to be part of the story, unfortunately they almost never get popular enough to hear about them.

... or (rare case) the writer simply doesn't want righteousness and punishment to be part of the story, unfortunately they almost never get popular enough to hear about them.

@Zarutaku

It depends. Consequences are a fairly common way to communicate the author's beliefs, more than an any adherence to realism. There is a reason why the Gang from It Is Always Sunny in Philadelphia rarely wins in any of their episodes. They are assholes suffering from the consequences of their own actions. Consequences are one of a few ways the authors can indirectly communicate their beliefs and say "hey, I do not endorse rape".

It is by far from the only way (Lighting is a huge thing), but it is common, and many stories that do not explicitly include this are either irreverent comedies like American Dad or Futurama, or when dramatic self-insert fanfiction. It would fundamentally be harder to argue Gate is not jingoistic if Itami and the JSDF were not successful in every engagement.

This is a common feature of propaganda; depicting your side as either martyrs or as more talented than.

@PostMahouShoujo

IQ tests should at least be questioned for their validity, whether or not they are measure what they are purported to measure. The very definition of intelligence is rendered murkier when we cannot even define who is intelligent. I believe in the efficacy of IQ tests when it comes to being a diagnostic tool, but quantifying "intelligence" was always an impossible tasks and arguably besides the point.

IQ tests were made to measure children and adults to their peers on the most basic and fundamental cognitive parameters, rather than determining who is more intelligent. You can make a test for anything and say it "measures intelligence". Art I argue is as subjective as who we consider intelligent, and what we define intelligence as.

It is akin to arguing science can determine what morality is. Are there cross cultural attitudes? Yes, but is that morality? I would argue no, that is merely human nature.

@PeripheralVision

You are an uneducated and uninformed person and your inane opinion is at odds with scholarly findings.

@PostMahouShoujo

I do not necessarily doubt the study you are quoting however much I like the source, but look at it from this way. How would you go about trying to numerically define intelligence, to quantify it? It is a question that as I see it cannot solely be a matter of an objective reality, but what we would consider important or relevant to our definitions of intelligence.

For example, do we include vocabulary (Which last I checked, was for some reason a component of the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children). If we include a mathematical portion and a logical thinking portion, how much weight do we place on this relative to say, verbal comprehension? What about other components, say being able to correctly assess emotional states of another person based off of facial expressions?

The very definition of "intelligent" to me seems more than a bit subjective. For example, many people would argue that I am not an uneducated and uninformed person, but how could they prove that? How could you prove that I am an uneducated and uninformed person?

My main point is that if the study exists, I would be surprised if those who conducted the study would say without a doubt that "X band is dumb" or "Y band is smart". Science is not, or should not, be interested in determining if the Beetles were definitively better than the Rolling Stones, if that Taylor Swift is better than Beyonce or vice versa. IQ is not some "objective" measure of quality or artistic merit, and very few of my peers would agree with you.

There is a key difference between talking about popular reception or positive reception from several organizations and what if any relationship this has between this and IQ (And why such a relationship is observed), and using that study of said phenomenon to definitively say "Beyonce is better than Taylor Swift because she sold more records".

@PostMahouShoujo

I actually read most of those books, and my position is still relatively the same. It is not that I doubt the usefulness of IQ examinations (A point I have a made earlier), but that often our definition of intelligence goes beyond whatever we scored on an IQ test. This is the truth as I see it with politics, with people with wildly differing ideas having markedly different worldviews and beliefs.

My best friend, who I consider intelligent (PhD for Physics at Johns Hopkins) is a devout Christian, while myself (PhD student, hopefully candidate) is an agnostic, and other people whom I consider intelligent are atheist. Various politicians on both sides of the political aisle have attended Harvard, Yale, Oxford, Princeton, you name it. Yet, they all have different ideas and beliefs. Now, why is that? If I scored well on my IQ exam, does that mean you would think of me as intelligent all of a sudden? Or is it more relevant to your definition that I agreed with you?

Perhaps we can attribute some of this to moral failings, but that is too easy a solution. I think it is more likely that our definitions are quite different, because what we see as reasonable and rational and right are very different. Could you say someone who believes something you disagree with is intelligent solely because of what IQ score they received on a test, or would you dig further and say "well, someone who believes that the world is flat is being dumb"?

I have met very few people who would judge my intelligence or anyone else's on IQ, at the exclusion of everything else. You simply cannot quantify politics anymore than morality, because politics is morality, and morality is ultimately beyond the scope of science. Hume's Law, one could call it. Ergo, intelligence and IQ are not completely exchangeable, especially in our daily interactions, especially one such as this. Ergo, using IQ to decisively determine artistic merit was always a losing battle, especially when equating merit then with perception (Either to the individual, specific groups, or overall)

Maybe I misunderstood your point? Should we pull out our IQ scores then?

@PeripheralVision

Apparently your use of anecdotal evidence suggests that you do not understand statistics and are either lying that you read most of these books or was not clever enough to understand them. I don't want to talk to you.

I can tolerate perverts better than violent tsundere girls. I want to punch them so bad.

@Zarutaku https://myanimelist.net/character/111245/Rudeus_Greyrat

@Phosphophyllita

Rudeus Greyrat is the goat.

Easily one of the best anime characters of all time.

@GoatPieceLuffy Yes, sure thing, mister GoatPieceLuffy

@Phosphophyllita Arguably better than your favorites lol.

@GoatPieceLuffy Yes, sure thing, mister GoatPieceLuffy

@animegamer245

Just getting away because it is how the world works pretty much counts as a just reason for a fictional character to be left unpunished for their wrongdoings.

This forum is starting to become increasingly boring and pointless tbh...