Tell me about your favorite feminist show
>>282938550All shojoshit is feminist. Unfortunately, I don't read any of it so I couldn't tell you which would be my favorite.
Bait thread but Blood-crawling Princess definitely touches on those themes.
>oniisama eHahaHahahahahahahahahaha
Boku no Pico and Gravitation
>>282938550all seinenshit
>>282938550It's all usually such bland slop I forget about it afterwards. I barely remember Dorkness, I don't expect to remember PunchMen-sama long after her anime either.
>>282938550
>>282938874equal rights equal fights
Usagi Drop
>>282938550can't beat the masterpiece
>>282938550She's like what, 110lbs? I could pick her up with one hand.
>>282938550It teaches me to be there for women
>>282938550Mahou Shoujo Madoka Magica
Pretty much all anime is feminist
>>282938550Fake. It's bait & switch. Not long after the beginning she gets easily swept away by the first prince anyway.
>>282940248>Pretty much allThere are expectations??
>>282938550I wish slender women were real.
>>282938550Nana, of course
Lots of villainess shit is misandrist, which is pretty much the core component of modern feminism.>>282939491This is incel trolling manga.
Femdom is cringe when the dominant female is a love interest or side character, but for some reason it's super hot when she is the protagonist. Explain this.
>>282944947You self insert when you read.
Cross Ange.
>>282938550Kill yourself.
>>282938550>otome villainess trash>feminism???
I liked the manga of Dahlia, and the one thats airing this season (pass me the monster meat milady)
>>282939203>>282938700Based taste, those are probably it for me. Utena and Nana should probably get a mention too.See picrel for ironic incel answer
>>282938705>and gravitationI don't remember a single woman there
>>282946618whatever is the opposite of anti-feminism must be feminismanti-feminism would never have a woman MC that is stronger than any man who gets away with flaunting social decorum and humiliating her ex-fiancee
>>282938550SnK
>>282948978you are just saying words without meaning, anon
>>282949150which words do you not know the meaning of?
>>282949463You are confused, because you don't know English very well.
>>282949504the english aren't worth knowing. terrible people
>>282949684you need a language course, SEAfriend
>>282949751You need to stop taking yourself so seriously, Johnny boy
>>282949999I accept your concession, thirdie.
>>282949150I don't see what part of that post is wrong or incorrect.
>>282950145the issue that the post is contextless. It has no relation to the post he is replying to, the statement being made is that the otome villainess genre is not feminist in any sense, the reply is incoherent rambling.
>>282946618I mean, it's the story of an angry woman who failed to get married. She is a typical feminist coded character.
They don't exist. In japan they don't have feminism.
>>282938550this will get an anime one day.
>>282950229You should keep watching, if that's what you think is happening.
>>282950185>the statement being made is that the otome villainess genre is not feminist in any senseYes, that's what I gathered from the post he replied to. However, this anon is evidently making a case that it is, hence there's an opposing viewpoint.
>>282950279but he is not making a case, he is rambling
>>282941869Harem isekai, which is why trannies hate it.
>>282938550Pic unrelated btw
>>282950307>but he is not making a caseIdk he makes it pretty clear in his post he doesn't believe a work that depicts a strong willed female protag could ever strive to be "anti-feminist". That's as cut and dry as it gets.
>>282950377but I never made that claim, now did I?So it's incoherent, unrelated rambling.
>>282939165You said its *not* feminist and he refuted you. Its not that confusing.
>>282950525meant for >>282950422
>>282950551No, he did not. This is what we call a strawman argument.He was refuting the idea that it was "anti-feminist", which I didn't say.
>>282950574>No, he did not. This is what we call a strawman argument.This >>282946618is a negation to OP's claim. Not sure what aim you're trying to achieve by denying what you actually meant.
>>282950633anon, the negation of "thing is feminist" is not "thing is anti-feminist", it's "thing is not feminist".This leaves us at "you are either strawmanning or retarded".
You sound like a group of women who just finished to read Pride and Prejudice.Imagine thinking in Japan they have feminism. Lmao
>>282950687I'm tired of arguing with a pig-headed twit like you. Sincerely, stfu.
>>282950820I accept your concession.>>282950770you know nothing about Japan, do you?
>>282950852>ESL retard cannot define what he means clearly>accuses others of strawman
>>282950895But it has been clearly defined in the conversation, maybe you need to reread it?
>>282938550She understands her place in the world too much for it to be a feminist show. Furthermore she isn't pretending to be strong and smart, she is actually strong and smart.
>>282950852Man in Japan is still accepted among women to stay at home and take care of the house ane children and nobody cares.The only reason why women in Japan work is the increasing of the prices (and yen that is toiletpaper).
>>282950993Anon, it is accepted everywhere.But if you think a family can live a decent life on a single salary in Japan, you are living in a fantasy world.
>>282950993East Asian feminism has essentially spread through Japan's Chizuko Ueno, so it is incorrect to say that feminism does not exist in Japan.
>>282950915>But it has been clearly defined in the conversationIt's not. You assume a taxonomy that doesn't offer meaningful distinction. There is no reason to assume one statement necessarily precludes the other, nor that this anime in particular is beholden to your rigid neutralism.
>>282950993>Man in Japan is still accepted among women to stay at home and take care of the house ane children and nobody cares.Nobody is getting married.>The only reason why women in Japan work is the increasing of the prices (and yen that is toiletpaper).Feminism is wage-slavery for women to become better looking men.
>>282939362this
>>282951197>You assume a taxonomy that doesn't offer meaningful distinctionYou make this claim, but you do not substantiate it with anything. You are just babbling.
