That wasn't her point, it's closer to this: A deep level of intimacy requires romance in general, and that the two are relatively intertwined. Her point is that the whole "sisterhood" thing is a coward's play of romance, which, when you consider Class S as a genre, isn't really off the mark, even if it's a biased stance as a result of her own experience/pain. She was never really wrong as much as she is incredibly in the wrong for what she did to try and go about that point.her flawed ideology of "romantic love being superior and absolute"
I completely disagree. What she fails to understand is that there are several types of intimacy that falls out of the romantic/sexual aspect. There is emotional intimacy of sharing secrets you'll never tell anyone, or changing clothes in front of each other without shame or deeper desire, or showing vulnerability in front of them. All of these can occur platonically. She fails miserably when she denies these concepts, marking them as an impossibility, claiming only romantic intimacy can exist. In other words, putting romantic as an absolute. And that is simply not true.With that, we're hopefully now FINALLY done with Kanoko for a long time. She didn't develop at all from this in any way that actually impacts the status quo, which leaves to question what the point of this all was (ESPECIALLY since it cut Hime's development off right in the middle for no reason), but we're hopefully done now with Kanoko for hopefully a longer term.
While I think both Mai and Youko's juxtaposed views are flawed, I do actually think that Youko, for the most part, was correct in her point, whereas Mai's point is just kinda evasive of romance as a whole, and further off the mark. Solid chapter, but if we don't return to Hime and Yano within the next couple chapters, I might actually implode.
That wasn't her point, it's closer to this: A deep level of intimacy requires romance in general, and that the two are relatively intertwined. Her point is that the whole "sisterhood" thing is a coward's play of romance, which, when you consider Class S as a genre, isn't really off the mark, even if it's a biased stance as a result of her own experience/pain. She was never really wrong as much as she is incredibly in the wrong for what she did to try and go about that point.
Also, welcome back, WataYuri, it's good to have you back. Hopefully Miman-sensei has relaxed plenty in her well earned break from the series and gotten a good refresh, even if the wait for a new chapter was killing me.
That's very, VERY loose on what intimacy is. Yes, those are forms of intimacy, but simply surface level forms of intimacy at best, even with your more loose definition of it, and it's not at all what she refers to. Intimacy beyond the surface level, as in a LOT of what Class S covers (and of course beyond), is what she is referring to, and "Sisterhood" as a whole is more where her point was directed. Romance is absolutely an essential to those deeper, closer forms of Intimacy, and the "Sisterhood" trope that makes use of some of those forms of Intimacy is, as Youko sees it, effectively a coward's form of romance. Of course, her argument is flawed on a fundamental level due to the fact of what she did to go about proving her point, and due to the fact that she fools around with multiple other women, as I recall (which she admitted in Chapter 58, I believe?), which somewhat undermines the fact that it is her providing this point.I completely disagree. What she fails to understand is that there are several types of intimacy that falls out of the romantic/sexual aspect. There is emotional intimacy of sharing secrets you'll never tell anyone, or changing clothes in front of each other without shame or deeper desire, or showing vulnerability in front of them. All of these can occur platonically. She fails miserably when she denies these concepts, marking them as an impossibility, claiming only romantic intimacy can exist. In other words, putting romantic as an absolute. And that is simply not true.
There's also the fact that she's decided that she will at some point confess to Hime, something she never would have even considered before this arc.It's good to be back, i've very much missed this series.
I for one really enjoy Sumika and Kanoko's arc and wholeheartedly disagree that Kanoko hasn't developed during its course and has returned to the status quo. Her outward relationship with Sumika has returned to normal for the time being (much like Yano&Hime's current relationship), but to say they haven't meaningfully developed in the meantime is pretty asburd. Their entire temp-romance was a learning experience for the two of them to learn more about love (and eachother), and seeing them before dating (ch.51) and after, it's a night and day difference. She is still deeply in love and obsessed with Hime, but that's not something that will end so easily. Even if you disregard Kanoko, Nene and Sumika also had major developments this arc so i don't see how you can view it as being pointless
Her definition of intimacy is extremist. Once she denies the existence of every other form of experience others can have(that, without doubt are real) and claim only her own definition of intimacy is the "real one" that becomes an absolute generalization fuelled by nothing but arrogance and ignorance. She can't make any point on that If she can't keep an open mind to other's imput on the subject. And she not only limits her philosofy to the "sisterhood". She made it her way of life as she can't have any kind of relationship that doesn't involves romance as well as trying to push her principles into others whose relationship status can prove her ideals wrong. How many times have I read works that showed intimacy between girls that, in the end never crosses the platonic-to-romantic status? So yeah. Her ideology it is, indeed, fundamentaly wrong down to the core. People have diferent personalities and react differently to the same experiences. There is platonic intimacy, there is casual sex without love and there is also several forms of manipulation. She refuses to see all this in favour of her view of the absolute existence existence of romantic love alone. So, I won't say my definition of intimacy bis "loose". It's open-minded and accurate. While hers is narcissistic and ignorant.That's very, VERY loose on what intimacy is. Yes, those are forms of intimacy, but simply surface level forms of intimacy at best, even with your more loose definition of it, and it's not at all what she refers to. Intimacy beyond the surface level, as in a LOT of what Class S covers (and of course beyond), is what she is referring to, and "Sisterhood" as a whole is more where her point was directed. Romance is absolutely an essential to those deeper, closer forms of Intimacy, and the "Sisterhood" trope that makes use of some of those forms of Intimacy is, as Youko sees it, effectively a coward's form of romance. Of course, her argument is flawed on a fundamental level due to the fact of what she did to go about proving her point, and due to the fact that she fools around with multiple other women, as I recall (which she admitted in Chapter 58, I believe?), which somewhat undermines the fact that it is her providing this point.
However, I'd still argue that she presents the lesser flawed argument, as opposed to at least Mai's, in spite of this, simply because, she's right in a way. While I personally wouldn't say it's a coward's form of romance, I'd certainly say that the "Sisterhood" trope is effectively an aversion to romance while committing to it without committing to it at the same time (as in, it shares a lot of the intimacy present in romance, but averts itself from fully committing to it (which sounds contradictory, but I hope my wording is sound here for it to make sense), for what could be one or multiple of many reasons). Of course, it's not always the case, but from my years of reading Yuri, it's rather common.
And while yes, even the deeper forms of intimacy can certainly occur without the romance/love there, love is still an essential to making the act feel fulfilling. (i.e. Kissing someone without love just does not feel fulfilling in the way that sharing a kiss with a loved one would.) Of course, you can have non-romantic surface level intimacies (which Youko disregards/ignores for the sake of her argument, because that level of "intimacy" is ultimately irrelevant to her argument), but when it reaches a level of say, flirting, or beyond, romance kinda starts becoming an essential for it for it to feel right for both parties. If there's no passion/romance there, it just ain't right (for one or multiple reasons out of many that I don't think need to be elaborated on) and lacks the meaning that would be present in those levels with romance.
Of course though, as much as I agree with Youko's argument, it is ultimately undermined by what she's done to prove it.