Forum - View topicINTEREST: Wake-Up Girls! Yutaka Yamamoto Criticizes Attacked Idol
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Chester McCool
 Posts: 322 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
He's not wrong. If you talking to a crazy it'd be pretty dumb to do something to set them off. Really hate this 'Victim Blaming' retort people like to use these days. Teaching people proper safety tips and measures shouldn't be taboo. Jaywalk and get hit by a car? Walk down the ghetto in Baltimore at night and get mugged? Accept an open drink from a stranger and get roofied? Of course people are going to call you out on it. Those were all easily preventable if you were taught adequate safety tactics. Doesn't mean the perpetrator isn't at fault, it just means it was easily preventable if someone was using their brain.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Gina Szanboti
Posts: 11340 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
I don't disagree at all that she should've had better security. But he is still victim-blaming, even if obliquely, with his line about, "he takes an attitude where he is ready to fight back at any time." Did the article make that part up, since it wasn't quoted in the post above? If not, then he sounds like Mark Wahlberg (he could've stopped 9/11 if he'd been on the plane), and other such macho Monday morning quarterbacks.
And then there's also that problematic part about, "First up, Idol-ling (or similar activities) require the person to display great tact when refusing/declining things from their fans/supporters. One can't help but getting ideas when their present got returned." Yes, one can help getting ideas. And the insinuation that she lacked tact is victim blaming (your tactlessness set him off), especially since he probably doesn't know the details of how it was returned. I find it hard to believe that they just sent the watch back without any kind of note, like, "We're so sorry, but we can't accept expensive gifts of this nature." That seems uncharacteristically rude for Japan. Even if he didn't come straight out and say, "This is all your fault," he's still talking shit. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
SilverTalon01
Posts: 2402 |
|
|||||||||||||||
No, the ANN article didn't make anything up. They just omitted a line that provides key context while including the lines around it. I agree that 'bring it on' part is stupid. In the majority of cases, the person with a weapon has a large advantage. Does false macho bravado count as victim blaming though? Seems questionable to me that it falls under the same umbrella. It certainly isn't very considerate.
I definitely don't think he was being very considerate, and his macho line certainly qualifies this as talking shit so I'm not disagreeing there. The "require the person to display great tact" isn't exactly wrong, but it was just something FD2Raptor quickly put together (he disclosed this). I read the intent more like this: -An Idol needs to be careful when they block fans. -You can't stop someone from having a twisted interpretation of events (the event being the returning of a gift). -Why didn't her agency properly explain any of this. The difference being 'needing to be careful' combined with 'why didn't these people who should have known let her know of the danger' doesn't imply the same failure on her part as 'tactless' does. Most people aren't going to ever have to deal with stuff like that, but the people that have been around a while in the idol industry should be expected to know. So it is less of a 'she should have known better' and more of a 'why didn't they tell her'. He doesn't need to know how the gift was returned; he just knows there are people with a warped sense of reality. This is a world where people somehow twist a woman saying a firm "no" into 'they really mean yes'. In other words, it isn't your fault for not being clear enough, it is their fault for twisting it into what they wanted to hear. There is a big difference between the fault being hers for being tactless and the fault being his for having a warped sense of reality. Again, her agency should be expected to know there are crazed fans like that out there, and they should be up front about explaining and probably more engaged in handling such things. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Gina Szanboti
Posts: 11340 |
|
|||||||||||||||
Yes, because the implication is that "I would've handled it better, so you could've too." I'm still not getting what you think the agency should've told her to do (that you know they didn't tell her, that would have also made any difference). I would imagine it was the agency that returned the gift (which is why I said he (and we) need to know more about how the gift was returned before passing judgement on either her or the agency). I'd be surprised if she receives gifts directly at her house instead of that sort of thing going through her agency. If so, why is he admonishing her about being tactful? What does "An Idol needs to be careful when they block fans" even mean? She can't block abusive messagers? How do you block someone "carefully"? "I love you, but I'm blocking you now! ^.- Please don't kill me, and buy my next CD!" |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 5915 |
|
|||||||||||||||
If you're not talking to the person does the rule still apply when they show up unannounced and nearly kill you?
Neither should blaming the victim for something they had no control over be considered a legitimate point.
Which would be the police, the talent agency, and the perp, not the victim. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Renasviel
Posts: 143 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
While he isn't wrong in that PR is important, and Idols in particular are expected to be extremely good with PR, to the point where returning a gift would probably be the "wrong" thing to do for an Idol (no, I don't like the Idol industry either, but we all know this is what goes on in there), I am really struggling to see the need to make this comment. It's not about hurt feelings or whatever, but someone has been stabbed and in all likelihood their career (and if returning a gift would ruin that career for her anyway, this also includes many other potential careers) is over, completely, which also may be how they put food on the table. When you factor that in, not being a perfect Idol suddenly seems to matter less for some reason.
The fact of the matter is that regardless of whether it looks bad or not (and I agree that it does, not because of personal morals but given the Idol industry), it does not justify or even really explain the attack. There is no way to justify it, but if someone would stab another for the crime of returning a gift, then I can only assume there are mental health issues going on there, and therefore the reason for the attack ins't the act of returning the gift, but rather the mental health issues themselves. So to specifically mention returning the gift seems pretty silly to me. Blaming the attack on an action made by the victim that provoked the attacker due to their mental health issues, rather than blaming the actual cause, just feels like an attempt to make a controversial comment to get some free press. Well, it worked, I suppose. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Vent
 Posts: 318 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
A human being was stabbed by someone over essentially nothing. She did nothing wrong, period, and trying to play otherwise like Yamakan is at best inconsiderate. You can blame literally anyone else in this situation, like maybe starting with the Japanese police's general incompetence and inability to do anything that requires actual effort.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Razor/Edge
Posts: 607 |
|
|||||||||||||||
I think that's going a little too far. It's important to separate the creator the creator's work. Haruhi is a great anime and Fractale isn't half bad either. He's just one part of these anime that is made up of the work of dozens of people. As an example: I think Tom Cruise is completely crazy and off his rocker. However, I actually like most of his movies. He's a great actor even if he is crazy. I can separate the man from the role when I watch his movies. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
leafy sea dragon
 Posts: 7163 Location: Another Kingdom |
|
|||||||||||||||
Are you serious? This sounds pretty repulsive. (Of course, if he was fired from Kyoto Animation, I can see why he'd be so critical of the anime industry.)
You know, I was going to compare this guy to Milo, but I'm glad someone else beat me to it.
He has a wife? I feel sorry for her, having to deal with him and his misogynistic attitudes every day.
I would not consider her returning the gift a mistake. She shouldn't be obligated to act in particular ways just to please fans--if such a fan becomes that distraught just because of a perceived act of rejection, perhaps it's best not have those kind of fans in the first place. With your zoo example, you can't possibly know the lion had escaped, so your visiting the zoo would not be a mistake either. The mistake would lie with whoever designed or built the security to prevent the lion from escaping.
Worst-case scenario, the gift could've been something worse than inappropriate or offensive, which is something harmful. For all we know, it could've been a bomb in that box. Idols shouldn't have to accept every gift that comes their way because it sets themselves up to be exploited. (Though it seems it was confirmed to be a watch. But still, the point stands that an idol should not have to accept every gift, especially when off-work and alone.)
Problem is that this landmine kind of fan could potentially be triggered by anything, including a celebrity's normal day-to-day activities or a typical day at work. I mean, to my knowledge, John Lennon didn't do anything out of the ordinary to provoke getting shot. The Beatles were going through some rough times though, so I'm not sure if the fan was enraged or was just hyper-excited in the worst possible way.
Seems to be a facet of Japanese police, for some reason. The author of Kuroko's Basketball received a lot of death threats from an individual, as well as following him around and causing problems for him. By all means, the police in any North American or European country would've taken those actions seriously and make some attempt to identify and locate whoever's sending those death threats, but the author was on his own. Since the police wouldn't help him, it makes sense (in whatever weird way it is) that they wouldn't help her either. I really don't understand the Japanese police. It seems like all they do is put up cute signs telling people not to do things. I mean, they couldn't catch a naked man who jumped into a castle moat.
Also, if anything, it was the fan who lacked tact. Stabbing someone whom you feel has emotionally wronged you is about the most tactless thing you could do. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
Renasviel
Posts: 143 |
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Anyone comparing this guy to Milo is almost as stupid as he is. Almost. There is a difference between being controversial for the sake of creating controversy and only being known for being controversial. This guy is the former, Milo is the latter.
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 5915 |
|
|||||||||||||||
You can separate a creator's words or actions from their work doesn't mean it won't be awkward for some partaking into the work of someone who may have problematic views on certain subjects. |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group