Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2023
- Messages
- 434
Ehhh, fuck it. I’m okay with that.
Even if I wasn’t, the manga was still pretty entertaining. It’s a 7/10 for me.
Even if I wasn’t, the manga was still pretty entertaining. It’s a 7/10 for me.
Nope. They are not related by blood. Rin was adopted by the grandfather. If you read the story where she met her mother, she explained itnot only did he raise her - they are related by blood.
This is despicable.
my mistake, sorryNope. They are not related by blood. Rin was adopted by the grandfather. If you read the story where she met her mother, she explained it
I never understood this argument "Its just a manga" Like can we not talk about how bad something is after being betrayed beautifuly? And especially if it's got such a messed up ending as it is, this dude FUCKED his own daughter after raising her for 10 years. If this is a hentai I would be whatever god knows there are far far worse ones out there and I could rationalize it as guilty pleasure, but this is a manga where the story and characters is whats carrying it.@deadrabbits Ah yes, the typical, annoying, and invalid argument "it's just a manga".
it's still despicable. imagine your sibling finds out you two aren't related and wants to smash youmy mistake, sorry
it's still despicable. imagine your sibling finds out you two aren't related and wants to smash you
> u just explained half of kiss x sis plot XD
the problem here is that it's a modern dogma that sexual power imbalance in the man's favor, with age or with position, is so evil that no woman can ever accept it unless she's mentally damaged or evil herself (just like women who accept domestic violence or who reject women's rights etc). this manga shows the girl as happy, not obviously mentally damaged, not evil. to merely depict this is already heretical. there's no way to explain the dogma without making it sound retarded, which is why one side of the issue makes moralistic angry noises but never arguments.People have terrible media literacy. They can't seems to realize that just because something happens in a work of fiction, it doesn't mean that the author intends for that thing to be positively received
I think that having moralistic arguments makes a lot of sense when talking about real people, but it is totally asinine when discussing fictional characters. With fictional characters, even if something undesirable happens in the story, that serves the important job of becoming a cautionary tale without hurting anyone.the problem here is that it's a modern dogma that sexual power imbalance in the man's favor, with age or with position, is so evil that no woman can ever accept it unless she's mentally damaged or evil herself (just like women who accept domestic violence or who reject women's rights etc). this manga shows the girl as happy, not obviously mentally damaged, not evil. to merely depict this is already heretical. there's no way to explain the dogma without making it sound retarded, which is why one side of the issue makes moralistic angry noises but never arguments.
the production code was right about this - when you depict anything, you must choose between depicting it as evil enough to notice (e.g. those who do it receive punishment, or in some other way the audience can see that it's not supposed to be good) or as not evil enough to notice (e.g. shown as ordinary, or good, or exciting). there is no neutral option that takes no moral position at all. the audience is like a child watching his parents to see what they take for granted and what they react to as abnormal; parents also have no third option.I think that having moralistic arguments makes a lot of sense when talking about real people, but it is totally asinine when discussing fictional characters. With fictional characters, even if something undesirable happens in the story, that serves the important job of becoming a cautionary tale without hurting anyone.
I do think that there is a biological incentive of some kind for both older men and younger women to be accepting of each other when society doesn't intervene to constantly blare moralistic warnings. It is something that became traditional independently in many cultures throughout history because it's something that makes biological sense. Now when someone says something 'makes biological sense', everyone just assumes they are a weirdo who is arguing that it is a good thing, but 'biological sense' just means that it makes more babies when it happens, which is basically the only factor that matters when it comes to effecting long-term biological trends. I say it makes more babies because without modern science, women can only healthily give birth for about a 15 year window, where each baby take sup at least 9 months of their time, but men can continue to creat children until just shy of their deathbed, so the numbers would force younger women and older men to be together in that setting, which would then effect biology.