Forum - View topic

The Rising of The Shield Hero Anime Listed With 25 Episodes

Nordhmmer wrote:

Mad_Scientist wrote: Kaori Makimura wrote: The main character isn't 'misogynistic'. He despises ALL residents of the world that he was called to, so he's reluctant to help or care. This occurs less than three minutes into the show, long before anyone has betrayed or abused him. How about reading,at the very least,the Shield Hero Fandom Wiki.Garner a little in-depth info and then begin your holy crusade.The MC drops a little foreshadowing by calling her a slut.That princess is the main antagonist,or did you not notice?

Is it actually established she's a villain by the time he makes that comment? Since you didn't contradict that this does happen less than three minutes in, I have trouble believing his comment was justified with the knowledge he had at that moment. That's like saying if Obi-Wan had punched Palpatine in the face in Episode 2 randomly and people were all, "but we know he's a Sith so it's okay!" Yeah, but obviously Obi-Wan didn't and the supposed hero just assaulted someone for no reason.

Kaori Makimura wrote:

The main character isn't 'misogynistic'. He despises ALL residents of the world that he was called to, so he's reluctant to help or care.

This occurs less than three minutes into the show, long before anyone has betrayed or abused him.

Not sure to blame the slut shame on the author, the animators, or the translators.

It was not. At that point, in the show, literally the only thing that was established about her was that piece of art in my screenshot. She was a woman who dared to *gasp* wear a dress that exposed her shoulders! OMG. THAT SLUT!

There's a bit of sarcasm there from me, but that's quite literally what happens. The main character quite literally calls a woman a slut for no other reason than that she wears a dress that reveals her shoulders, or maybe it's because it reveals her arms, and later on this woman is revealed to be a villain, and so we're just supposed to ignore this and act like he was somehow justified?

So you did not take the time and learn a little about the material you're harping against.
As often happens,the translators used slut instead of the more correct meaning in this case-> bitch.

prime_pm wrote:

Not sure to blame the slut shame on the author, the animators, or the translators.

The word used (bitch) is a loan word from English that has the connotation of "slut" when translated back. For a similar example of something slightly different in translation, the Japanese word "feminist" has a definition that is not the same as its English counterpart.

EDIT: for clarity.

Man I can’t wait for the discussion to totally die by episode 5 so the fanbase can waste 20 boring weeks on their lonesome trying to convince themselves it’s the next SAO.

It was not. At that point, in the show, literally the only thing that was established about her was that piece of art in my screenshot. She was a woman who dared to *gasp* wear a dress that exposed her shoulders! OMG. THAT SLUT!

There's a bit of sarcasm there from me, but that's quite literally what happens. The main character quite literally calls a woman a slut for no other reason than that she wears a dress that reveals her shoulders, or maybe it's because it reveals her arms, and later on this woman is revealed to be a villain, and so we're just supposed to ignore this and act like he was somehow justified?

Nordhmmer wrote:

So you did not take the time and learn a little about the material you're harping against. As often happens,the translators used slut instead of the more correct meaning in this case-> bitch.

As I mentioned, the word "bitch" does not have the same meaning in English as it does in Japanese. The translators did their job correctly, and you are the one that is wrong. (LOL at the idea of the insult "bitch" supposedly being less gendered than "slut" though.)

It's bitch.The character in question is an outright A-hole/bitch.
No matter the source,the web novel,the light novel,the manga or the anime..she is a bitch an A-hole.

I don't think the reviewers write their opinions with the goal of "tank[ing] a show"? They're just saying what meaning they found (or, more often, didn't) in it. (EDIT: to be clear, this post is a reply to AntiKuro's post above it. Pre-edit, AntiKuro's post originally whinged that it was silly of ANN reviewers to think their reviews would 'tank a show,' hence my choice of words.)

I also don't think it really matters who is the main character (EDIT: again, this was a key point of AntiKuro's original post, which seems to have now edited 'main character' to 'man'), though that was mentioned previously. The issue is whether a character doing diabolical stuff is sympathetically framed. That's what people are complaining about. Not about the appearance of bad things in fiction. Not about the main character being a bad person in fiction. But about the framing and clear suggestion for judgment of the viewer about evil acts in fiction.

I have disputed some of those complaints myself in specific cases, but it does no one any good to constantly mischaracterize them as saying something other than what they are in fact saying.

This isn't to say a character can't be a "good person" but still do "bad things." That contradiction is necessary to much good storytelling. However, a good show's framing generally makes it clear when a fundamentally good person (character) is doing something of questionable (or even awful) ethics. When a show celebrates and frames as sympathetic that choice, you understandably get a lot of angry kickback.