| Response to LucenProject Here is what is really going on here … — Eisegesis (what you two are doing), reads into the text what the interpreter wishes to find or thinks he finds there. It expresses the reader's own subjective ideas, not the meaning which is in the text. — Exegesis (what you two are not doing) is legitimate interpretation which ‘reads out of' the text what the original author or authors meant to convey. Both of you ignored what was actually happening in the show … 1.) then the OP (original poster) claimed there was a sensual/sexual narrative in the show, even saying in his last comment “slave kink” & “he f*cks kids” 2.) now you are claiming there is a Grooming / Stockholm Syndrome narrative based on your psycho analysis of the show … but both of your claims are still only based on your own personal subjective ideas, bias, opinions, assumptions. I can confidently say, that in the current seasons of this anime … 1.) Naofumi Iwatani has not said or done anything sensual or sexual towards Raphtalia or Filo — the OP said these things, making them look perverted and disgusting 2.) Naofumi Iwatani has not groomed anyone, nor has he called or treated Raphtalia & Filo like “properly”, “cows”, “chickens”, “dogs”, “items” (like in a game), or “inanimate objects” — you said these things, making you look arrogant, conceited, cruel, heartless You and the original poster are doing the same exact thing, trying to force false narratives onto the anime, without the support of observable evidence in the show and ignoring everyone responding to you two explaining that your claims are just not found in the show. According to psychology, this means that both of you are suffering from a delusion. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, a delusion is defined as: A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everybody else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. We are the ones actually following the show’s background, plot, archs, storyline, dialogue, characters, interactions and relationships, then trying to help both of you be freed from your delusion. You two are both refusing to look at reality, despite the observable evidence and human testimonies that prove to the contrary, unwilling to be freed from your delusion. |
ejleonFeb 6, 5:49 PM
Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating.  |
Reply to ejleon
@epidemia78 You have clue what this show is about, if you think it’s about “wish fulfillment”, being a “creep loser”, or “pandering” to the audience. If that’s your take, you really didn’t pay attention or follow the story.
| @ejleon it actually caused my stomach to churn, that scene when loli-raphtalia falls in love with Naofumi who up to that point was actually very cruel to her...well Naofumi gave her a fucking bouncy ball and just like that, she fell in love as if she's a dog. Disgusting. |
epidemia78Feb 6, 6:31 PM
 |
epidemia78 said: @ejleon it actually caused my stomach to churn, that scene when loli-raphtalia falls in love with Naofumi who up to that point was actually very cruel to her...well Naofumi gave her a fucking bouncy ball and just like that, she fell in love as if she's a dog. Disgusting. Troll … you are not triggering me You can keep lying all you want about the show Just making yourself look awful |
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
| I don’t need to read your psycho analysis of my comments, that is, you are lying and putting words and in my mouth. I never claimed that they were not slaves, so this is just a another false accusation without any evidence or support. I did purposely make a distinction by using quotes for the word slaves, this was to distinguish between (1) how the author’s using slavery and (2) your modern opinion claiming that “slavery” — despite the situation or circumstances — is wrong in itself, which is not supported by evidence in history. And the point still stands, your claim that there is “Grooming / Stockholm Syndrome” in the anime, is false according to the evidence in the anime. I’m done wasting my time with you and OP, you clearly refuse to listen or think logically. |
ejleonFeb 6, 10:37 PM
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
Reply to ejleon
Nyron said:
shouldn't this loser have enough self esteem by now to let the girls like him without being literally shackled to him?
shouldn't this loser have enough self esteem by now to let the girls like him without being literally shackled to him?
When someone does not pay attention and follow a story, they end up writing comments that just make them look bad, instead of the show/character they are trying to insult.
Anyone actually watching the story knows what’s going on and the good relationship these characters have with each other.
Naofumi Iwatani was betrayed by literally everyone in the country, except a small few, which means he couldn’t trust anyone.
This left him with the only option of getting slaves, as a way to get help and to make sure they didn’t betray him or stab him in the back, like the princess of the nation did.
He did not mistreat Raphtalia, he healed her of her sickness, clothed and fed her, gave her confidence, and taught her to fight.
He did not mistreat Filo either, he took care of her, fed her, got her a wagon, which made her really happy, and helped her with the Queen of Filolias Fitoria.
He provided them with weapons, he saved them, he protected them, and he fought for them many times.
And then later, the girls Raphtalia & Filo, freely chose to remain “slaves” for the power / experience boost they both received, in fact, the girls convinced Rishia to become a slave to get more powerful faster.
| @ejleon Owning another person is morally wrong. Period. Just because the author properly set up the circumstances and reasoning for why the main character opted to enslave a person, doesn't mean that his choice to buy a slave is morally justified. Just because a slave owner treats his slaves nice does not make his continued enslavement of them any less immoral. Just because the slaves say they want to be slaves and convince others to become slaves, doesn't absolve our hero of his moral transgression of making others his property. Naofumi doesn't exhibit any moral strife over buying a slave, nor does he show any remorse in continuing to enslave her. If Naofumi was a good person, he would free his slaves, but he doesn't do that because he doesn't want to. This is an irredeemable character trait for a main character. Main characters with irredeemable character traits can still make for compelling drama, however in Shield Hero the author does not treat Naofumi's use of slavery as the gross immoral character flaw it is. In fact he goes to great lengths to absolve his slave owning protagonist from any moral reckoning by writing his slaves as willful participants. "It's ok reader, the slaves WANT to be slaves!" This is incredibly lazy writing. Imagine this sort of contrived writing working in other contexts. Imagine Naofumi's moral transgression wasn't enslaving anyone but rather having sex with a 12 year old girl in this fantasy world. And let's say that like with slavery, doing so was not illegal in this world, in fact, marrying a child in this world allows you to get a stat boost. As with how the show handled slavery, Naofumi demonstrates no moral quandary about being with a 12 year old and spends the story protecting and caring for her and the author makes his child lover say that it's ok for him to groom her because she wants to be his wife. Would you root for that character? I would hope not. |
| @ejleon I mean putting aside the story of this series for a moment, you are veering dangerously close to the overall idea that owning slaves is permissible, on the idea of "slavery is bad due to cruel slave owners". Well no, owning slaves is bad and should be illegal whether or not the owners are cruel or not cruel. Roman slaves may have been treated nicely as as family, same with slaves in the Americas. That doesn't mean we should reform slavery by introducing anti-cruelty laws, that means no one, kind or not, should be able to own slaves period. The problem is not that there are bad slave owners, the problem is that owning slaves is bad. So going back to the story, I feel as if it doesn't really ask the interesting questions around this system. Despite the benefits such as EXP bonuses, the system still entails entrusting their health and freedom to Naofumi. Even in a romantic or familial sense, this idea of "consensual slavery" just does not work; consent means being able to leave at whatever time one desires. Of course we know Naofumi is a good enough person, but do they know that, should they assume Naofumi would have the good will to do so in the future? I have many people who I care deeply about, but that is all the more reason why I don't have nor require a physical system of restraint that keeps them tethered to me. Even if they consented to this system, (and I imagine one person would), I still would not be in any position to put a shock collar on them. Consent is something that can and should be able to be given or taken away at any one point. These characters willingly placing themselves, consenting, into a position where they would not be able to consent at a later point. I really doubt that anyone would truly consent to not having consent (If the idea of consensually giving up consent were possible, might I add), and in the context of the story it really only makes sense for Raphtalia to be alright with it and to a lesser extent Filo. My issue is not just moral, but that the series kind of ignores it outside of it being a system exploit, rather than exploring how it alters these relationships and what it says about these characters. |
PeripheralVisionFeb 7, 1:19 AM
 |
flylikegoldblum said: @ejleon Owning another person is morally wrong. Period. Just because the author properly set up the circumstances and reasoning for why the main character opted to enslave a person, doesn't mean that his choice to buy a slave is morally justified. Just because a slave owner treats his slaves nice does not make his continued enslavement of them any less immoral. Just because the slaves say they want to be slaves and convince others to become slaves, doesn't absolve our hero of his moral transgression of making others his property. Naofumi doesn't exhibit any moral strife over buying a slave, nor does he show any remorse in continuing to enslave her. If Naofumi was a good person, he would free his slaves, but he doesn't do that because he doesn't want to. This is an irredeemable character trait for a main character. Main characters with irredeemable character traits can still make for compelling drama, however in Shield Hero the author does not treat Naofumi's use of slavery as the gross immoral character flaw it is. In fact he goes to great lengths to absolve his slave owning protagonist from any moral reckoning by writing his slaves as willful participants. "It's ok reader, the slaves WANT to be slaves!" This is incredibly lazy writing. Imagine this sort of contrived writing working in other contexts. Imagine Naofumi's moral transgression wasn't enslaving anyone but rather having sex with a 12 year old girl in this fantasy world. And let's say that like with slavery, doing so was not illegal in this world, in fact, marrying a child in this world allows you to get a stat boost. As with how the show handled slavery, Naofumi demonstrates no moral quandary about being with a 12 year old and spends the story protecting and caring for her and the author makes his child lover say that it's ok for him to groom her because she wants to be his wife. Would you root for that character? I would hope not. “Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.” Ok, you tell me what you would have done to survive in this unfamiliar world, when the King hated you, the Princess tricked you and stabbed you in the back, and the entire nation and the 3 other heroes were against you? I’ll be waiting. |
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
PeripheralVision said: @ejleon I mean putting aside the story of this series for a moment, you are veering dangerously close to the overall idea that owning slaves is permissible, on the idea of "slavery is bad due to cruel slave owners". Well no, owning slaves is bad and should be illegal whether or not the owners are cruel or not cruel. Roman slaves may have been treated nicely as as family, same with slaves in the Americas. That doesn't mean we should reform slavery by introducing anti-cruelty laws, that means no one, kind or not, should be able to own slaves period. The problem is not that there are bad slave owners, the problem is that owning slaves is bad. So going back to the story, I feel as if it doesn't really ask the interesting questions around this system. Despite the benefits such as EXP bonuses, the system still entails entrusting their health and freedom to Naofumi. Even in a romantic or familial sense, this idea of "consensual slavery" just does not work; consent means being able to leave at whatever time one desires. Of course we know Naofumi is a good enough person, but do they know that, should they assume Naofumi would have the good will to do so in the future? I have many people who I care deeply about, but that is all the more reason why I don't have nor require a physical system of restraint that keeps them tethered to me. Even if they consented to this system, (and I imagine one person would), I still would not be in any position to put a shock collar on them. Consent is something that can and should be able to be given or taken away at any one point. These characters willingly placing themselves, consenting, into a position where they would not be able to consent at a later point. I really doubt that anyone would truly consent to not having consent (If the idea of consensually giving up consent were possible, might I add), and in the context of the story it really only makes sense for Raphtalia to be alright with it and to a lesser extent Filo. My issue is not just moral, but that the series kind of ignores it outside of it being a system exploit, rather than exploring how it alters these relationships and what it says about these characters. You are also not paying attention to or following what happened in the anime. But more importantly, I would like to address your modern viewport of … “Slavery is wrong in itself”. Is that historically true? The answer is no. Historically, slavery could be anywhere between just like a modern job today - to - corrupt cruel heartless mindless evil persecution suffering murdering. Slaves were sometimes saved because of who their masters were, meaning they could not be touched or killed by slave haters because of their masters position, which saved their lives, their masters sometimes even came to their defense. Slaves were sometimes held in more regard and respect than people’s own family members, meaning that slaves, instead of family, would inherit their master’s wealth and/or property, because their slaves were more like their family. Slaves sometimes begged their masters to stay by their side until their death, even while they tried to free them, stating that they refused to leave someone they cared about and loved, because their masters were so good to them. And there are more historical events contrary to your modern viewpoint. Your modern absolute morality that something is wrong in itself is dangerous, unfair, and unjust. You would have to condemn both a hungry child that stole food to survive and a wealthy greedy noble/politician who stole from citizens just to gain more money, because they both “stole”. You would have to condemn both a women that killed someone in self-defense for attacking her and a rapist murder, because they both “killed”. It is showing no wisdom in your thinking or decisions. Not all masters were good, but not all masters were bad. Not all slaves were good, but not all slaves were bad. Sometimes both masters and slavers were both good to each other and loved each other. That’s where patience, experience, knowledge, reason, logic, wisdom, discernment, etc come in to help you make informed decisions on each event. So you don’t unfairly misjudge someone unjustly. I can’t agree with your viewpoint because it is not historically or morally true. |
ejleonFeb 7, 3:58 AM
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
| Watch the show...... |
Reply to ejleon
flylikegoldblum said:
@ejleon
Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.
Just because the author properly set up the circumstances and reasoning for why the main character opted to enslave a person, doesn't mean that his choice to buy a slave is morally justified. Just because a slave owner treats his slaves nice does not make his continued enslavement of them any less immoral. Just because the slaves say they want to be slaves and convince others to become slaves, doesn't absolve our hero of his moral transgression of making others his property.
Naofumi doesn't exhibit any moral strife over buying a slave, nor does he show any remorse in continuing to enslave her. If Naofumi was a good person, he would free his slaves, but he doesn't do that because he doesn't want to. This is an irredeemable character trait for a main character. Main characters with irredeemable character traits can still make for compelling drama, however in Shield Hero the author does not treat Naofumi's use of slavery as the gross immoral character flaw it is. In fact he goes to great lengths to absolve his slave owning protagonist from any moral reckoning by writing his slaves as willful participants. "It's ok reader, the slaves WANT to be slaves!" This is incredibly lazy writing.
Imagine this sort of contrived writing working in other contexts. Imagine Naofumi's moral transgression wasn't enslaving anyone but rather having sex with a 12 year old girl in this fantasy world. And let's say that like with slavery, doing so was not illegal in this world, in fact, marrying a child in this world allows you to get a stat boost. As with how the show handled slavery, Naofumi demonstrates no moral quandary about being with a 12 year old and spends the story protecting and caring for her and the author makes his child lover say that it's ok for him to groom her because she wants to be his wife. Would you root for that character? I would hope not.
@ejleon
Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.
Just because the author properly set up the circumstances and reasoning for why the main character opted to enslave a person, doesn't mean that his choice to buy a slave is morally justified. Just because a slave owner treats his slaves nice does not make his continued enslavement of them any less immoral. Just because the slaves say they want to be slaves and convince others to become slaves, doesn't absolve our hero of his moral transgression of making others his property.
Naofumi doesn't exhibit any moral strife over buying a slave, nor does he show any remorse in continuing to enslave her. If Naofumi was a good person, he would free his slaves, but he doesn't do that because he doesn't want to. This is an irredeemable character trait for a main character. Main characters with irredeemable character traits can still make for compelling drama, however in Shield Hero the author does not treat Naofumi's use of slavery as the gross immoral character flaw it is. In fact he goes to great lengths to absolve his slave owning protagonist from any moral reckoning by writing his slaves as willful participants. "It's ok reader, the slaves WANT to be slaves!" This is incredibly lazy writing.
Imagine this sort of contrived writing working in other contexts. Imagine Naofumi's moral transgression wasn't enslaving anyone but rather having sex with a 12 year old girl in this fantasy world. And let's say that like with slavery, doing so was not illegal in this world, in fact, marrying a child in this world allows you to get a stat boost. As with how the show handled slavery, Naofumi demonstrates no moral quandary about being with a 12 year old and spends the story protecting and caring for her and the author makes his child lover say that it's ok for him to groom her because she wants to be his wife. Would you root for that character? I would hope not.
“Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.”
Ok, you tell me what you would have done to survive in this unfamiliar world, when the King hated you, the Princess tricked you and stabbed you in the back, and the entire nation and the 3 other heroes were against you?
I’ll be waiting.
ejleon said: “Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.” Ok, you tell me what you would have done to survive in this unfamiliar world, when the King hated you, the Princess tricked you and stabbed you in the back, and the entire nation and the 3 other heroes were against you? I’ll be waiting. You misunderstood my original point, I was addressing your defense of it as "they consented" and then you said this. He did not mistreat Raphtalia, he healed her of her sickness, clothed and fed her, gave her confidence, and taught her to fight. He did not mistreat Filo either, he took care of her, fed her, got her a wagon, which made her really happy, and helped her with the Queen of Filolias Fitoria. Which seems to indicate that you believe that slavery is permissible only if slave owners were kind in general. That is not a good basis towards arguing for or arguing against slave owners. Hence why I originally said I mean putting aside the story of this series for a moment, you are veering dangerously close to the overall idea that owning slaves is permissible, on the idea of "slavery is bad due to cruel slave owners". Keyword is "putting aside". This is troubling when we move past Raphtalia and Filo to Rishia, who assumingly was enslaved after Naofumi deposed of most of the threats to his person, and has already two companions who supported him. Convincing someone to knowingly give up their right to leave, and to make that contigent on Naofumi's consent is just so...suspicious. You then said this. And then later, the girls Raphtalia & Filo, freely chose to remain “slaves” for the power / experience boost they both received, in fact, the girls convinced Rishia to become a slave to get more powerful faster. Which isn't that strong an argument. The writer is a god, and they can choose to have any number of events occur in a fictional story. The idea then is the idea that people can consent to giving up consent, and to me this is the point where we may say this is just a particularly type of wish fulfillment. I could write a story where a woman marries her rapist (Gosh knows how prolific this is in certain genres like romance), but this happens precisely because I written it so. The first problem here lies in that I potentially believe this sort of "arrangement" is permissible because of how my story depicts it, because it entirely being within my choice on how to depict said thing. I could say she consented "afterwards" no matter how unconsensual the encounter was, but this indicates a radically unhealthy views on very contentious real life issues, or a very active drive to neuter the most interesting parts of the narrative. The second problem is that we are asked to take the story seriously and to cheer for Naofumi. To answer your question, I think Naofumi being a position of dependency despite being the "slave owner" and his burgeoning relationship with Raphtalia does offer some promise, as you said. The issue is that since we are encouraged to relate to Naofumi, it becomes difficult when he does these things in less trying times and in different scenarios. There is a point then where we have to ask if Naofumi should even be a "good" person at this point, because many narrative have bad or morally compromised individuals be the protaganist. One example is Satou Matsuzaka, who is a groomer and a pedophile, from Happy Sugar Life. In short? Without exploring the moral nuances of doing questionable things to survive or even benefit, it really does feel like an effort to retroactively vindicate Naofumi more than anything else, and it feels horribly disappointing and more than a tad immoral that we don't bother to examine the context of this moral action in light of the characters and when it happens. In fact, ignoring it does feel like wish fulfillment rather than acknowledging the icky system for what it is. If it is not clear, I don't actually oppose Naofumi owning slaves from a narrative perspective, but in a serious narrative I sort expect serious things that occur between the main cast to be taken seriously rather than an attempt to narratively justify the inclusion of fetish materials. So it is weird you then said this. ejleon said: But more importantly, I would like to address your modern viewport of … “Slavery is wrong in itself”. Slaves were sometimes saved because of who their masters were, meaning they could not be touched or killed by slave haters because of their masters position, which saved their lives, their masters sometimes even came to their defense. Slaves were sometimes held in more regard and respect than people’s own family members, meaning that slaves, instead of family, would inherit their master’s wealth and/or property, because their slaves were more like their family. It is wrong, just like rape is wrong and murder (Unjustified killing) is wrong. That is not a hot take. It is showing no wisdom in your thinking or decisions. Not all masters were good, but not all masters were bad. Not all slaves were good, but not all slaves were bad. Sometimes both masters and slavers were both good to each other and loved each other. That’s where patience, experience, knowledge, reason, logic, wisdom, discernment, etc come in to help you make informed decisions on each event.  |
PeripheralVisionFeb 7, 8:07 AM
| |
Reply to PeripheralVision
ejleon said:
“Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.”
Ok, you tell me what you would have done to survive in this unfamiliar world, when the King hated you, the Princess tricked you and stabbed you in the back, and the entire nation and the 3 other heroes were against you?
I’ll be waiting.
“Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.”
Ok, you tell me what you would have done to survive in this unfamiliar world, when the King hated you, the Princess tricked you and stabbed you in the back, and the entire nation and the 3 other heroes were against you?
I’ll be waiting.
You misunderstood my original point, I was addressing your defense of it as "they consented" and then you said this.
He did not mistreat Raphtalia, he healed her of her sickness, clothed and fed her, gave her confidence, and taught her to fight.
He did not mistreat Filo either, he took care of her, fed her, got her a wagon, which made her really happy, and helped her with the Queen of Filolias Fitoria.
He did not mistreat Filo either, he took care of her, fed her, got her a wagon, which made her really happy, and helped her with the Queen of Filolias Fitoria.
Which seems to indicate that you believe that slavery is permissible only if slave owners were kind in general. That is not a good basis towards arguing for or arguing against slave owners. Hence why I originally said
I mean putting aside the story of this series for a moment, you are veering dangerously close to the overall idea that owning slaves is permissible, on the idea of "slavery is bad due to cruel slave owners".
Keyword is "putting aside". This is troubling when we move past Raphtalia and Filo to Rishia, who assumingly was enslaved after Naofumi deposed of most of the threats to his person, and has already two companions who supported him. Convincing someone to knowingly give up their right to leave, and to make that contigent on Naofumi's consent is just so...suspicious.
You then said this.
And then later, the girls Raphtalia & Filo, freely chose to remain “slaves” for the power / experience boost they both received, in fact, the girls convinced Rishia to become a slave to get more powerful faster.
Which isn't that strong an argument. The writer is a god, and they can choose to have any number of events occur in a fictional story. The idea then is the idea that people can consent to giving up consent, and to me this is the point where we may say this is just a particularly type of wish fulfillment. I could write a story where a woman marries her rapist (Gosh knows how prolific this is in certain genres like romance), but this happens precisely because I written it so. The first problem here lies in that I potentially believe this sort of "arrangement" is permissible because of how my story depicts it, because it entirely being within my choice on how to depict said thing.
I could say she consented "afterwards" no matter how unconsensual the encounter was, but this indicates a radically unhealthy views on very contentious real life issues, or a very active drive to neuter the most interesting parts of the narrative.
The second problem is that we are asked to take the story seriously and to cheer for Naofumi. To answer your question, I think Naofumi being a position of dependency despite being the "slave owner" and his burgeoning relationship with Raphtalia does offer some promise, as you said. The issue is that since we are encouraged to relate to Naofumi, it becomes difficult when he does these things in less trying times and in different scenarios. There is a point then where we have to ask if Naofumi should even be a "good" person at this point, because many narrative have bad or morally compromised individuals be the protaganist.
One example is Satou Matsuzaka, who is a groomer and a pedophile, from Happy Sugar Life. In short? Without exploring the moral nuances of doing questionable things to survive or even benefit, it really does feel like an effort to retroactively vindicate Naofumi more than anything else, and it feels horribly disappointing and more than a tad immoral that we don't bother to examine the context of this moral action in light of the characters and when it happens.
In fact, ignoring it does feel like wish fulfillment rather than acknowledging the icky system for what it is. If it is not clear, I don't actually oppose Naofumi owning slaves from a narrative perspective, but in a serious narrative I sort expect serious things that occur between the main cast to be taken seriously rather than an attempt to narratively justify the inclusion of fetish materials.
So it is weird you then said this.
ejleon said:
But more importantly, I would like to address your modern viewport of … “Slavery is wrong in itself”.
Slaves were sometimes saved because of who their masters were, meaning they could not be touched or killed by slave haters because of their masters position, which saved their lives, their masters sometimes even came to their defense.
Slaves were sometimes held in more regard and respect than people’s own family members, meaning that slaves, instead of family, would inherit their master’s wealth and/or property, because their slaves were more like their family.
But more importantly, I would like to address your modern viewport of … “Slavery is wrong in itself”.
Slaves were sometimes saved because of who their masters were, meaning they could not be touched or killed by slave haters because of their masters position, which saved their lives, their masters sometimes even came to their defense.
Slaves were sometimes held in more regard and respect than people’s own family members, meaning that slaves, instead of family, would inherit their master’s wealth and/or property, because their slaves were more like their family.
It is wrong, just like rape is wrong and murder (Unjustified killing) is wrong. That is not a hot take.
It is showing no wisdom in your thinking or decisions.
Not all masters were good, but not all masters were bad.
Not all slaves were good, but not all slaves were bad.
Sometimes both masters and slavers were both good to each other and loved each other.
That’s where patience, experience, knowledge, reason, logic, wisdom, discernment, etc come in to help you make informed decisions on each event.
Not all masters were good, but not all masters were bad.
Not all slaves were good, but not all slaves were bad.
Sometimes both masters and slavers were both good to each other and loved each other.
That’s where patience, experience, knowledge, reason, logic, wisdom, discernment, etc come in to help you make informed decisions on each event.
| @PeripheralVision Hold on, why are you responding to something sent to a completely different user? “flylikegoldblum” is a person I sent one message to. Then I sent another message to a different person named “PeripheralVision”. You are responding as if you are both people, having two accounts. I don’t think I can trust talking to you any more. Besides, you completely misinterpreted everything I said and are not listen to reason. |
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
Reply to ejleon
@PeripheralVision Hold on, why are you responding to something sent to a completely different user?
“flylikegoldblum” is a person I sent one message to.
Then I sent another message to a different person named “PeripheralVision”.
You are responding as if you are both people, having two accounts.
I don’t think I can trust talking to you any more.
Besides, you completely misinterpreted everything I said and are not listen to reason.
“flylikegoldblum” is a person I sent one message to.
Then I sent another message to a different person named “PeripheralVision”.
You are responding as if you are both people, having two accounts.
I don’t think I can trust talking to you any more.
Besides, you completely misinterpreted everything I said and are not listen to reason.
| @ejleon I mean, I was responding to one of the defenses you have regarding slavery as used in this narrative, which is the most common defense fans of this series. Although looking at it, I realize how odd it is to address what you said addressing someone else in the initial manner that I did. So yeah, I may have fucked up? Question mark because I do not think it is a big idea if I did. I do not have multiple accounts because there is no point to it, especially in this context. ejleon said: I don’t think I can trust talking to you any more. Even if this is true (And it is not, because both of our accounts are over 10 years old at this point and have varying differences from our cadence to what we watched), what exactly would be the big deal anyway? I still made salient points instead of one-worded, inflammatory troll remarks with the gamer word added in for emphasis. Opposing pro-slavery arguments is a pretty common position, as is Kantian/Deontological ethics which most people argue against any system of slavery. ejleon said: Besides, you completely misinterpreted everything I said and are not listen to reason. It is difficult then to discern your decision as anything other than "slavery may be permissible in real life" when you say shit like this. ejleon said: But more importantly, I would like to address your modern viewport of … “Slavery is wrong in itself”. Is that historically true? The answer is no. Historically, slavery could be anywhere between just like a modern job today - to - corrupt cruel heartless mindless evil persecution suffering murdering. ejleon said: Slaves were sometimes saved because of who their masters were, meaning they could not be touched or killed by slave haters because of their masters position, which saved their lives, their masters sometimes even came to their defense. ejleon said: Slaves were sometimes held in more regard and respect than people’s own family members, meaning that slaves, instead of family, would inherit their master’s wealth and/or property, because their slaves were more like their family. ejleon said: Slaves sometimes begged their masters to stay by their side until their death, even while they tried to free them, stating that they refused to leave someone they cared about and loved, because their masters were so good to them What exactly am I getting wrong here regarding your beliefs? They seem pretty damn "well, a system of slavery is not bad if slaves consented". Which no, is not how it works. |
| |
| Because every high-testosterone anime watcher (like me) wants to live out the fantasy of having female slaves that love him unconditionally. |
PeripheralVision said: @ejleon I mean, I was responding to one of the defenses you have regarding slavery as used in this narrative, which is the most common defense fans of this series. Although looking at it, I realize how odd it is to address what you said addressing someone else in the initial manner that I did. So yeah, I may have fucked up? Question mark because I do not think it is a big idea if I did. I do not have multiple accounts because there is no point to it, especially in this context. ejleon said: I don’t think I can trust talking to you any more. Even if this is true (And it is not, because both of our accounts are over 10 years old at this point and have varying differences from our cadence to what we watched), what exactly would be the big deal anyway? I still made salient points instead of one-worded, inflammatory troll remarks with the gamer word added in for emphasis. Opposing pro-slavery arguments is a pretty common position, as is Kantian/Deontological ethics which most people argue against any system of slavery. ejleon said: Besides, you completely misinterpreted everything I said and are not listen to reason. It is difficult then to discern your decision as anything other than "slavery may be permissible in real life" when you say shit like this. ejleon said: But more importantly, I would like to address your modern viewport of … “Slavery is wrong in itself”. Is that historically true? The answer is no. Historically, slavery could be anywhere between just like a modern job today - to - corrupt cruel heartless mindless evil persecution suffering murdering. ejleon said: Slaves were sometimes saved because of who their masters were, meaning they could not be touched or killed by slave haters because of their masters position, which saved their lives, their masters sometimes even came to their defense. ejleon said: Slaves were sometimes held in more regard and respect than people’s own family members, meaning that slaves, instead of family, would inherit their master’s wealth and/or property, because their slaves were more like their family. ejleon said: Slaves sometimes begged their masters to stay by their side until their death, even while they tried to free them, stating that they refused to leave someone they cared about and loved, because their masters were so good to them What exactly am I getting wrong here regarding your beliefs? They seem pretty damn "well, a system of slavery is not bad if slaves consented". Which no, is not how it works. What if it is the same person using all these accounts, and I’m just wasting my time thinking I’m addressing multiple people, but really I’m just talking to the same person using different accounts to support their own argument? That would cause me a lot of frustration. Plus it has happened to me before, so from experience, I don’t trust people when this happens. And yes, how you addressed the comment I made to the other account, not making any distinctions between you two, was the problem. If it is not the case, then I apologize. ——— You completely missed my point and that’s because you don’t think about what I’m trying to explain. I never said “Slavery is permissible if …” I am explaining “If slavery exists, it doesn’t mean everyone is automatically evil” Slavery has existed for all of know human history, even today, at least 5000 years according to human records, it is only relatively recently that things have changed, within about the last 500 years. Your position just condemns and judges anyone and everyone that existed during these 5,000 years as evil, just because slavery existed, it is absolute and unforgiving, no mercy or patience. My position looks at each situation to determine who was evil and who was not over 5,000 years, understanding that no one thought slavery was wrong/evil until the Western Tradition really started to influence people and change their thinking, within the last 500 years. This is why I can’t agree with your modern “absolute morality”, it is just too unjust. It is naive to think that you’d be against slavery if you existed thousands of years ago and even worse if you arrogantly look down to believe you are better than those peoples of the past. Cultures changed over history, and this is why you think it’s wrong now, it’s not something you came to yourself, you only think slavery is wrong/evil because cultures have changed and taught you that it wrong / evil now. It is better to understand that people’s ideas of right and wrong have shifted over history, and since slavery existed as a normal part of life for so long, it better to look justly at each situation to determine who is evil and who is not evil. ——— If other worlds exist (like this anime suggests), it is logical to assume that slavery also could exists in their cultures as well, and it could be for as long or longer. ( I don’t judge the author for thinking this is also possible ) Yes, Naofumi came from our world, so it is good to look at his situation and how he acted. I rewatched the first season parts, none of what everyone has been telling me is true. Naofumi doesn’t even think of the idea himself, the slave trader approached him because he saw an opportunity. But after the sell, the Slave Trader makes a comment like he could tell Naofumi would try to help the weak sickly girl, especially after hearing about her background, to save her from being sold to another awful person. It is obvious that Naofumi is putting on an act like he doesn’t care in front of the slave trader and weapon shop owner (people of this world), even talking sternly at times to Raphtalia, but it comes out when something happens, like with the slave crest hurting the girl, he asks about it immediately, and when she is hungry he takes her to get a meal with him, which she never had as a slave, and he heals her of her sickness, which no one else cared to do for her, and more things happen during their time together. Raphtalia picks up on these instances that differ from his “I don’t care” attitude, and this causes her to realize that Naofumi is different from other people in the world, so she begins to trust him, and decides to help him. Yes, he does teach her to fight because he can’t gain experience points, but pushing her as he did actually helps her overcome her internal struggles about her past, and she thanks him for his help and training. The spear Hero even gets angry at Naofumi with your type of thinking of absolute morality and fights him to free Raphtalia, but she knows he is a good man being mistreated by them, so she decides not to leave his side, but to stay with him. There is no “sensual / sexual motive” like the OP said, no “grooming / Stockholm syndrome” LucenProject said, and no mistreating the girls because they are demihumans / slaves / or people of a different world. So I don’t just judge him because he had slaves, I judge him on how he spoke and acted with his slaves, but there is nothing wrong with Naofumi and his relationship with the girls. ——— This is my last message on this forum post. |
ejleonFeb 7, 3:58 PM
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
| I find the leveling mechanic they had here more weird. Like Raphtalia is like 5 but looks 18 cuz she leveled up fast. |
| @ejleon I never said “Slavery is permissible if …” I am explaining “If slavery exists, it doesn’t mean everyone is automatically evil” There is a difference between condemning the actions and condemning the person, a "hate the sin but love the sinner" approach. You can and should condemn actions as being wrong and immoral and therefore not something one should should do or in specific cases, not something a society should condone. Genocide is wrong. Rape is wrong. Wanton killing is wrong. Having sex with a child or a profoundly intellectually disabled individual is wrong. Slavery is wrong. This is why I can’t agree with your modern “absolute morality”, it is just too unjust. It is naive to think that you’d be against slavery if you existed thousands of years ago and even worse if you arrogantly look down to believe you are better than those peoples of the past. Your point is certainly valid regarding that if we were born into these systems that we too may have been proponents of slavery, but this is irrelevant to whether not said action is wrong. We have the gift of hindsight, and your position boils down to a sort of relativism, that one ought to accept injustice if it is ingrained in a culture or system. You could not tell a man not to rape his wife if domestic rape is largely seen as permissible within a certain culture, or that child abuse in the forms of say, applied behavior analysis/behavioral engineering is permissible by the very nature of it enforcing the majority ideals on a vulnerable minority. You can condemn systems and the outcomes they produce as immoral, as wrong. To no do so is to simply encourage these systems to continue unabated or to be brought back. Evil, as Elie Wiesel has stated, needs only "good" men to stay silent to win. So look back at your previous replies and realize how they came across as a defense of slavery, that your responses make no sense when people are merely claiming slavery IS wrong. You are responding on the assumption that people are condemning the people who lived in these systems, but this is not a fair assumption for you to make. Do you think having sex with a child is permissible simply because others culture practice it or that we should mutilate the genitals of infants, both male and female? That women should be continued to be subjugated as they were throughout a majority of history? Jesus fucking Christ. Here is the thing about Shield Hero in particular, and goes well as a response to this. Naofumi doesn’t even think of the idea himself, the slave trader approached him because he saw an opportunity. But after the sell, the Slave Trader makes a comment like he could tell Naofumi would try to help the weak sickly girl, especially after hearing about her background, to save her from being sold to another awful person. It is obvious that Naofumi is putting on an act like he doesn’t care in front of the slave trader and weapon shop owner (people of this world), even talking sternly at times to Raphtalia, but it comes out when something happens, like with the slave crest hurting the girl, he asks about it immediately, and when she is hungry he takes her to get a meal with him, which she never had as a slave, and he heals her of her sickness, which no one else cared to do for her, and more things happen during their time together. What they did to Naofumi in terms of his ostracization is intended to be seen as wrong, and is definitely the sort of systemic evil reflected in their usage of slaves in the series, which you apparently did not read. The enslavement and subjugation of Demihumans is the great sin of the Melromarc kingdom and which previous shield heroes have gone against. The very series we are discussing condemns this as immoral for any society to have, especially those at the top who have the power to change it. That Naofumi being forced to use slaves is an incredibly fucked up position to put himself in. Slavery has existed for all of know human history, even today, at least 5000 years according to human records, it is only relatively recently that things have changed, within about the last 500 years. Your position just condemns and judges anyone and everyone that existed during these 5,000 years as evil, just because slavery existed, it is absolute and unforgiving, no mercy or patience. My position looks at each situation to determine who was evil and who was not over 5,000 years, understanding that no one thought slavery was wrong/evil until the Western Tradition really started to influence people and change their thinking, within the last 500 years. Therefore, your position is that we should not condemn those leading the Melromarc kingdom or those facilitating the oppression and enslavement of Demihumans because...it is their culture? Their era? Some people were born into the Melromarc Kingdom? That they believe what they have been told as youth instead of recognizing the very real demihuman suffering in front of them? You are quite literally disagreeing with the series you are actually defending if you take up this position of moral relativism. Yes, we should recognize we are products of our upbringing, both on a cultural and familial level. That doesn't mean we do not lack the free will to make up our own minds and disagree with certain aspects of the world that we are brought into. Again, recognizing the benefits of hindsight does not mean we should disregard it and not condemn certain aspects of of how our ancestors may have lived. I for one think women should vote. How about you? I myself am putting forth pretty typical positions that definitely arise from my upbringing and chosen to keep or not change into adulthood. Yet, by your own logic I should assume your are condemning my person rather than disagreeing with my ideals, is that it? Your position just condemns and judges anyone and everyone that existed during these 5,000 years as evil, just because slavery existed, it is absolute and unforgiving, no mercy or patience. No, it does not. This is why I can’t agree with your modern “absolute morality”, it is just too unjust. My position is essentially just basic Kantian/Deontological ethics, which existed for Iunno...a couple hundred years, if not millennia. The concept that some things are just on a "universal" level has existed for millennia. Slavery is an interesting thing to consider, as one could argue that our morality did not so much change in terms of "what is wrong", but rather "who is it done to". We may not enslave our neighbors, people like ourselves, but we may be permitted to enslave the neighbors of others. So on and so forth, that sort of thing. Putting all that aside, if having an "absolute morality" is what allows me to say that having sex with children is wrong, including say infants, or that religious strife that seeks to subjugate those of a different faith are wrong, then I am an absolute believer of absolute morality. Somehow, condemning certain sexual attitudes about 12 year old girls is somehow impermissible by your logic. That to condemn genocidal belief is wrong. I am not too concerned with whether or not I am a good person so much that I am concerned that your morality permits and justified immoral actions. That to me is evil. The spear Hero even gets angry at Naofumi with your type of thinking of absolute morality and fights him to free Raphtalia, but she knows he is a good man being mistreated by them, so she decides not to leave his side, but to stay with him. There is no “sensual / sexual motive” like the OP said, no “grooming / Stockholm syndrome” LucenProject said, and no mistreating the girls because they are demihumans / slaves / or people of a different world. So I don’t just judge him because he had slaves, I judge him on how he spoke and acted with his slaves, but there is nothing wrong with Naofumi and his relationship with the girls. First and foremost, Spear Hero is an idiot who more or less goes along with the systemic evils of Melromarc at first, because he is a fucking idiot, and part of that is persecuting Naofumi based on lies and for actions that the kingdom knowingly has. To be fair to spear hero, he literally believes Naofumi is a rapist. Now I don't know about you, but a rapist owning a slave? Seems suspicious, but that is just me. The issue is that as I have repeated in this reply, this series tries to take a moral absolutionist stance in itself, and so does Naofumi. Keyword, tries. Again, read it. What they did to Naofumi in terms of his ostracization is intended to be seen as wrong, and is definitely the sort of systemic evil reflected in their usage of slaves in the series, which you apparently did not read. The enslavement and subjugation of Demihumans is the great sin of the Melromarc kingdom and which previous Shield Heroes have gone against. The very series we are discussing condemns this as immoral for any society to have, especially those at the top who have the power to change it. That Naofumi being forced to use slaves is an incredibly fucked up position to put himself in. Did you not know the purpose of the character of Idol Ranbier? You might wonder than why I dislike the series, and it is because it is not really interested in the fact that Naofumi did some really screwed up things to survive, which no amount of moralizing should make him forget, and that the slavery system imposes a power-imbalance between two traumatized individuals. This system of subjugation being permissible relies solely on Naofumi's kindness. There is an interesting set of questions about how this power-imbalance and how it affects their relationship, but the narrative is clearly interested in trying to retroactively justified Naofumi's continued use of slaves instead of examining his continued use of slaves. To me, the experience bonus is simply a retroactive justification, and one that doesn't justify urging someone like Riisha into that position in the first place. Something the author written to excuse Naofumi. It is fetishized, it is a power fantasy that puts our infallible and justified hero against a corrupt system, without having to have him ask all those pesky questions or morality and condemnation that you are accusing me of lacking. Not that this fantasy is "wrong", per se. Many people want to be a superhero fighting against injustice, yet many superhero stories straddle the line between political relevance and apolitical acceptance. The issue is that Shield Hero is a very simple story whose initial premise suggests a greater interest in its own darkness and moral nuance than what has been given. Rather, Shield Hero tries it darnest not to be a morally nuance show, and it shows. Any attempt to backpedal this nuance by "justifying" what actions would otherwise be morally questionable if not outright wrong only proves my point in the disinterest this series has in its own moral dilemmas. |
| |
| I was not going to respond, but for the record, I wanted to clear up some things, so people reading this have my perspective represented as well. PeripheralVision claimed about me … ”Somehow, condemning certain sexual attitudes about 12 year old girls is somehow impermissible by your logic. That to condemn genocidal belief is wrong … that I am concerned that your morality permits and justifies immoral actions. This is just a few of the lies that they and others have said about me in this forum. I never approved of, permitted, or justified any immoral word or action, that much is clear in my messages. Slavery is wrong, but the fact that slavery exists in a world, does not make everyone automatically evil. How people speak and act with each other in such a situation is what makes the difference, meaning humans that do not think in “master” and “slave” mentalities, but while being in such a situation, act and treat each other like fellow humans, hence in a world of slavery, these people are not evil. But it is obvious that this is far too complex a topic to discuss with them and the others, hence why I quit, especially when they don’t care to listen or pay attention to what a person says. |
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
Joel_Barnes said: ejleon said: It’s not trashy and the fact that it is normal in the other world, it doesn’t need to “justify” it Dudes list is restricted, that’s as good as saying your taste is so shit you’re ashamed of it. You’re a fan of trashy isekai that can’t even see it as trashy, I can see why people might say shield hero is a guilty pleasure however you’re so delusional you think it’s actually good storytelling, I’d love to see what a shit show your list is. Once again my list has nothing to do with the topic, so you are just making yourself look bad by attacking me personally Your personal bias against isekai doesn’t mean they are bad, it’s just your personal opinion |
ejleonFeb 8, 7:36 PM
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
Joel_Barnes said: ejleon said: “Owning another person is morally wrong. Period.” Ok, you tell me what you would have done to survive in this unfamiliar world, when the King hated you, the Princess tricked you and stabbed you in the back, and the entire nation and the 3 other heroes were against you? I’ll be waiting. You literally just said if you’re down on your luck you’ll resort to slavery and you see that as the only option. To entertain your bullshit why not leave the country, he owed them nothing. The author is clearly an incel that feels his entitled to relationships and therefore is justifying slavery though the story and your eating it up because you agree, why else is the story this way? I’ll wait. No I did not, I was saying his options were limited and he was influenced by the world. Ok, yes, I agree he could have tried to leave the county instead, but that was also being stopped by the king and princess. But your comments about the author do not make sense, incels hate women, so your claim is contradictory. |
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
| and the illogical claims and lies continue I’m done … bye |
| Note: I don’t lazily watch 3-5 episodes, biasedly compare to other anime, or unfairly judge by surface level similarities. With every anime I start, I watch the entire series and judge each based on what they present, to give an honest and fair rating. |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Tate no Yuusha no Nariagari Episode 24 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Stark700 - Jun 19, 2019 |
242 |
by SanessyAdversary
»»
6 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Tate no Yuusha no Nariagari Episode 16 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - Apr 24, 2019 |
271 |
by Der_Body
»»
Yesterday, 9:56 AM |
|
Poll: » Tate no Yuusha no Nariagari Episode 23 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 )Stark700 - Jun 12, 2019 |
169 |
by SanessyAdversary
»»
Yesterday, 8:10 AM |
|
Poll: » Tate no Yuusha no Nariagari Episode 22 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 )Stark700 - Jun 5, 2019 |
195 |
by SanessyAdversary
»»
Yesterday, 7:56 AM |
|
Poll: » Tate no Yuusha no Nariagari Episode 21 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Stark700 - May 29, 2019 |
428 |
by SanessyAdversary
»»
Yesterday, 1:56 AM |