Culture Patreon’s Ban on “Anime” Art - War on Anime Intensifies

Patreon Is Being Asked to Ban Child Rape Animators — 37,000+ Have Signed the Petition

Anime content is being banned on Patreon now too, allegedly..

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Patreon's coming for everyone now.

................................................................


Where should Patreon draw the line?
Patreon is a great platform for creators, especially those with strong, loyal fanbases that want to directly support artists. Musician Jack Conte and developer Sam Yam are the founders of Patreon, and the concept was created because creators were getting stiffed by low-paying platforms like YouTube.

But they’re also getting censored, de-monetized, or de-emphasized if they don’t comply with the rules of YouTube, Facebook, or any other platform. Now, Patreon is being asked to issue its own set of policies around certain kinds of content.

Primis Player Placeholder

Patreon’s creators are extremely varied. YouTube videographers, writers, webcomic artists, podcasters, musicians, and many other creative types connect with targeted audiences through Patreon. And the system is simple: the creators can receive funding directly from their fans, or patrons. They can be paid on a recurring basis or per work of art.

The result? Many artists and creators feel that they are able better express themselves and get paid while doing so. In fact, more than a million active users and 50,000 monthly active creators make Patreon a seriously popular solution for artists. At present, Patreon estimates a staggering $150,000,000 is earned by artists on their platform annually.

Sounds great, except some fringe artists are attracting a lot of negative attention. Journalist Vonny Leclerc first discovered something disturbing: a ‘no pornography’ policy by the company wasn’t being enforced. That started the ball rolling.


+ Sorry, You Can’t Fund Your Fetish Porn Site on Patreon Anymore

Patreon has already clamped down on fetish porn site creators, though shocked onlookers are noticing something far more extreme.

Horrific acts of child rape depicted in animation.
Many of these artists are defending their right to create animations depicting child rape, torture, and other activities. Of course, actually doing these acts is completely illegal, but what about drawing it?

Also Read: Apple Agrees to $500 Million Payout for Old iPhone Throttling Scheme
These artists also say they’re creating works for patrons that are demanding it. And it turns out that patrons have been requesting all sorts of pervasive acts from creators. These now include horrific acts of child rape, personalized abuse fantasies, and acts of violence.

Lecler says it’s gone too far. “There are more and more violent, hyper-realistic animations being uploaded all the time,” he shared. “I wondered who had the time, now I can see people are making a living out of creating animated rape and snuff films.”

Lecler says Patreon is not only ignoring these activities, they are encouraging them.

patreon_care2petition.jpg


More than 37,000 thousand people have signed the petition demanding that Patreon stop people from selling child abuse animations through their platform.
The petition has been gaining steam, with more than 10,000 signatures arriving in the past 24 hours. Care2Petitions is hosting this particular protest.

According to the petition, this actually goes way beyond child rape illustrations. It also includes artwork of brutal killings, eye-gouging, other forms of rape… the list goes on. Lecler says one prominent artist is earning over $20,000 a month depicting extreme violence.

Here’s a quick excerpt of the petition page:

This is so many levels of disturbing: that these men can make it without caring, and that others buy it. Patreon is helping facilitate the creation of personalised abuse fantasies. One person [I found] is making $20,000 plus a month making adult games. Many making serious bucks.

What does it tell us about society, about sex and capitalism, that the most lucrative animation careers can come from made-to-order pornography? If you want to understand the things men wish they could do to us, look at the porn they create when they don’t have to use real women.

Patreon is being used to fund realistic animations of rape, eye-gouging, torture. Home-invasion when young women are shot in the face and then raped. @Patreon know about this. What’s being done? I can find hundreds of accounts making this kind of content.”


So where should Patreon draw the line?
Technically, this artwork isn’t illegal — at least in the United States. A picture depicting extreme violence may be extremely distasteful, but an artist has the right to create it. Once that crosses into depicted child pornography, however, a judge may have to decide.

Also Read: Federal Judge Allows Global Music Rights, Major Radio Stations to Air Their Antitrust Grievances
Another legal counter-argument relates to the actual harm done. If patrons and artists exist in an insular environment, one free of actual crime, it’s possible this group is merely acting out gruesome fantasies without dragging people into them. Some of the artwork in question violates Patreon’s pornography policy, though not all of it does.

+ Less Than 2% of Content Creators on Patreon Earn Monthly Minimum Wage

If that artwork is connected to actual crimes — or worse, if it’s depicting real events — then there’s a much different level of enforcement that’s needed.

Now, Patreon is undoubtedly going to be forced to respond — and make tough decisions that balance the broader interests of the community.

More as this develops.

ES7NTE7UMAENSIW.jpg
 

Archivos adjuntos

  • ES7NTE7UMAENSIW.jpg
    ES7NTE7UMAENSIW.jpg
    75.5 KB · Vistas: 14
Well... while I think these guys are full of it, No Game No Life is pretty damn degenerate. Its very much in the category of "fanservice trash". Lots of underwear shots, etc.
ive watched the anime and as far as "fan service" goes its pretty damn tame compared to others. For the life of me i cant understand why no game no life is being targeted like this as opposed to say, strike witches. Which are all underaged girls with clothing so tight that simply recolouring it turns it into loli porn. I lost count of the crotch shots in ep 1. never watched ep 2.
 

Reading through this thread I get the sense the "anime harming kids" pearl clutching has a different reason. I think over the past few years, the media and corporate centers like Silicon Valley and New York have been pushing on Japan, one of the few largely monoethnic and closed cultures still left in the world. Those "problematic" Japanese with their animes about values like trying your best, studying, working as a team, respecting family, nationalism, monogamy, gender roles. It's probably thrown a wrench into all the hard work they put into American Comics. The Olympics is a good chance to get control of Japan under the guise of "Concerned Social Justice advocate".

tumblr_ogc62a3cEK1qk0gkmo1_1280.jpg

DG7gqwUXUAEilBx.jpg

Mockingbird8.jpg

It really turns out the people complaining about colonialism, were just projecting. Do you think I'm on the money?
 
Reading through this thread I get the sense the "anime harming kids" pearl clutching has a different reason. I think over the past few years, the media and corporate centers like Silicon Valley and New York have been pushing on Japan, one of the few largely monoethnic and closed cultures still left in the world. Those "problematic" Japanese with their animes about values like trying your best, studying, working as a team, respecting family, nationalism, monogamy, gender roles. It's probably thrown a wrench into all the hard work they put into American Comics. The Olympics is a good chance to get control of Japan under the guise of "Concerned Social Justice advocate".

Ver archivo adjunto 1530331

Ver archivo adjunto 1530333

Ver archivo adjunto 1530334

It really turns out the people complaining about colonialism, were just projecting. Do you think I'm on the money?

For the Woke Left true believers, you are dead on the money in this regard.

The corporate bigwigs like Iger or Bezos are usually more likely to be Boomers or Gen X'ers who hate anime and manga because they don't "get it" and more importantly, it poses a dire threat to their gravy trains they have and as they keep pandering to the woke, the threat of competition is more serious in their eyes.

I've noticed the SJW hatred of anime and the mass "weeb shaming" has actually intensified as time went on, and the overall character of it changed completely. Dunking on anime and those who like it went from Kiwi Farms/ED style mockery of the spergier weebs to Jack Chick/Tipper Gore styled "Think of the children!" moralizing, only cloaked in intersectional leftism as opposed to Christian traditionalism.

The first wave of weeb shaming in the late 2000's/early 2010's was really just mocking a lot of the excesses of the late 90's/early-mid 2000's "Anime Boom" and the most autistic and cringe-inducing spergs.

The Great Recession crippling the anime industry in North America by killing most of the old guard companies like Central Park Media and ADV (leaving Funimation and Viz at the top of the stack) and causing staff changes at many networks that aired anime also played a role, which is why Adult Swim only airs anime one day a week while Sci-Fi Channel dropped it completely.

But even when weeb shaming first became a major thing, it was mostly just mocking dumb spergs for being dumb spergs. You didn't have the moralistic pearl clutching over pedophiles and Neo-Nazis until later.

At the earliest, that rhetoric began with GamerGate but the shift didn't become super prominent until after 2016, and I think there's two reasons for that. One was Trump's win and the other was the flop of Ghostbusters 2016, the first major instance of "Get Woke Go Broke"

I've noticed this shit has really intensified as of late with the Patreon bans, the Amazon targeting of a relatively tame PG-13/TV-14 level property and the uproar within the MTG community and I think a lot of this has to do with the massive economic beatings COVID-19 has done across the board, especially for companies like Disney who were previously thought invincible for nearly all of the 2010's.

When it was just the comics divisions of Marvel and DC getting thrashed by manga, which didn't even happen during the original anime boom, Disney and Warner didn't give too much of a shit but were glad to egg on the Woke Left anyway.

But since Disney has faced its first major losses since 2002 and they're still digesting the big Fox buyout from last year, they're panicking. I also think Amazon is getting in on this since they're the only game in town as physical retail continues to die off and they put pressure on payment processors to crush the competition since Jeff Bezos is a megalomaniac only exceeded by Bob Iger in that department.*

These people know that people are probably getting increasingly burned out on capeshit and reboots, and have mainly been coasting on nostalgia and the Chinese market to keep the money flowing, and the nostalgia and capeshit fads are on their last legs running on fumes at this point,

COVID-19 and the trade wars with China this year have likely also complicated this even further since it's hurting their profits harder, makes harsher trade sanctions on China far more likely if Trump wins a second term, and in Disney's case, is derailing their MCU gravy train right after the massive Fox buyout. Everyone kept tuning in to see how Phase 3 would finally end and now it's over and done with, while Phase 4 is a Black Widow prequel, a Doctor Strange sequel, and then a bunch of literal whos leaning on woke shit.

If one of these Phase 4 movies bombs at the box office before they can get the X-Men into the MCU, Marvel is perma-fucked and the MCU franchise will be dead.

If it weren't for COVID-19 this year, I'd say it'd take two or three flops to kill the franchise but given how expensive they are to make, one flop will do it and as long as that flop isn't the Black Widow movie in November, they can't pin the blame on the pandemic.

If Disney and other companies like Warner, Sony, and Amazon can actively keep out the competition, especially from a non-woke country like Japan, then they'll still be the only game in town for a lot of genre entertainment. Warner and Sony are a little more pragmatic given the former's ties to Crunchyroll and Toonami or the latter's ties to Aniplex and Funimation (and the fact they are technically a subsidiary to a Japanese parent company) but are still all in with their disdain for anime and the competitive threat it poses for them in several lucrative markets.

*-I also think this is why we've seen them crack down a lot more on porn in the 2010's and why we're seeing less nudity and overt straight sexuality in even R-rated movies and TV-MA shows as the 2010's went on, going from nudity and sex being so prevalent on HBO and Netflix in the early 2010's that it made Skinemax look tame to being very conservative compared to R-rated movies from the 80's and 90's or even early 2000's. Jeff Bezos does not like porn and is opposed to hardcore porn being sold on his platform.

You can still find softcore DVD's and romance novels on Amazon as well as hentai (for now, at least) but from the get-go, he kept hardcore live-action stuff off Amazon as much as possible and I think he's been helping push the already squeamish payment processors clamp down on porn or even overly "risque" R/TV-MA-rated entertainment over the last decade or so
 
Última edición:
One big reason manga is doing better than comics is availability. Even in small towns, you'll have no problem getting a volume of Naruto at Wal-Mart. This has been the case since the 2000's. Even when the anime boom ended, manga was far easier to find in semi-rural areas than comics were.

If you were a kid in the boonies that liked comics, your choices were limited to Archie and Archie. Want Batman? The comic shop closed last week and your parents don't trust online shopping. This Naruto thing looks pretty interesting, though.

The comic industry failed to get more into graphic novels. They stuck with overpriced 32 page books that rarely deviated from the superhero genre. They had twenty years to clean their house and never did. They wanted to pretend the market hadn't changed.
 
The corporate bigwigs like Iger or Bezos are usually more likely to be Boomers or Gen X'ers who hate anime and manga because they don't "get it" and more importantly, it poses a dire threat to their gravy trains they have and as they keep pandering to the woke, the threat of competition is more serious in their eyes.
At the earliest, that rhetoric began with GamerGate but the shift didn't become super prominent until after 2016, and I think there's two reasons for that. One was Trump's win and the other was the flop of Ghostbusters 2016, the first major instance of "Get Woke Go Broke"

I don't think the big companies ever have to worry about "woke go broke" look at CNN, they are losing viewers and Fox News is gaining record viewers just because they tell the truth and admit their biases. Yet CNN still parrot lies on the regular. In a real free market competition their buildings would be empty. So I don't believe it's simply about money.

Sure, some true believers will try it with their small startup and crash and burn and blame "The trolls and misogynists, that hamstrung their company" But for people with trillions of dollars, I think it's more about altering culture, altering politics. Power. Having someone respect family, tradition, and nationalism is really a stumbling block when you want corporate power over people.
 
I don't think the big companies ever have to worry about "woke go broke" look at CNN, they are losing viewers and Fox News is gaining record viewers just because they tell the truth and admit their biases. Yet CNN still parrot lies on the regular. In a real free market competition their buildings would be empty. So I don't believe it's simply about money.

Sure, some true believers will try it with their small startup and crash and burn and blame "The trolls and misogynists, that hamstrung their company" But for people with trillions of dollars, I think it's more about altering culture, altering politics. Power. Having someone respect family, tradition, and nationalism is really a stumbling block when you want corporate power over people.

To a certain extent, you're correct but money talks and business walks even in Current Year with the mega-corporations. The middle management and the diversity hire HR personnel and the jannies are all true believers in woke leftism thanks to academia, which probably helps reinforce the echo chamber effect it has on pop culture.

Their billions and trillions may be a big deal but at the same time, I think a lot of the true bigwigs are still mainly about the money and go woke because social media acts as both a bullhorn and an echo chamber for a very loud vocal minority (especially Twitter) and I also think they pander to the Woke not only because they're convinced they are the majority and the wave of the future but also because a lot of SJW's tend to live in large coastal cities that are known for their wealth and affluence historically speaking, even if they're rapidly turning into shitholes now.

The only ones that I can see actively trying to alter culture and politics for reasons beyond profit are Jeff Bezos, Bob Iger, and maybe Jack Dorsey. Bezos and Iger are literal megalomaniacs and I think Dorsey really is just a wide-eyed college bro who got lucky and launched Twitter at the right place and the right time. IIRC, Dorsey is also a lot younger than Bezos and Iger.

I think Dorsey is also more young and lucky than even Zuckerberg (could be wrong on that though) which is part of why Zuckerberg has been trying to toe a fine line in cozying up a bit to Donald Trump in 2020 while paradoxically also continuing the hate speech policies and bowing to the SPLC to keep the cancel mob away. Zuck knows which way the wind is blowing and what could happen if the Woke Left's cancel revolution goes fully pear-shaped before they can nail down the pendulum for good.

Bob Iger's such a megalomaniac that he meticulously planned his golden parachute exit strategy years in advance because he knew the Fox buyout would be so expensive that it could severely hurt the company in the long run and he did not want to go down like Eisner did. But he was so obsessed with ensuring Disney owned as much IP's and networks as possible. This was before the pandemic happened, I might add. He only stayed on for an extra year because of Plan IX's under-performance at the box office (not quite a flop but it would've been one were it not for the opening weekend and lack of competition) and the complications caused by Corona.

Bezos is a megalomaniac but I think he's smarter and more pragmatic than Iger and Amazon is in a much more ironclad position than Disney is solely by the nature of its primary business so he can more easily get away with shaping the culture since it's far less likely for Amazon to be undercut and crippled by COVID-19 or severe trade sanctions on China in the 2020's than it is for Disney.
 
The only ones that I can see actively trying to alter culture and politics for reasons beyond profit are Jeff Bezos, Bob Iger, and maybe Jack Dorsey. Bezos and Iger are literal megalomaniacs and I think Dorsey really is just a wide-eyed college bro who got lucky and launched Twitter at the right place and the right time. IIRC, Dorsey is also a lot younger than Bezos and Iger.

The issue I have with that is that how do I know Bezos, Iger, and Dorsey are actually at the top? You'd think if I had a trillion dollars I would want that on wikipedia? Hell no. It's like painting a target on my back. And I would have the money to make that report go away, or change.
 
The issue I have with that is that how do I know Bezos, Iger, and Dorsey are actually at the top? You'd think if I had a trillion dollars I would want that on wikipedia? Hell no. It's like painting a target on my back. And I would have the money to make that report go away, or change.

Possibly, but I'm pretty sure Iger and Bezos are still at their top given their behavior indicates they are both megalomaniac control freaks. Bezos founded Amazon and is still in charge twenty years later, and Iger took over Disney spearheading a corporate ouster of Michael Eisner and those he saw as loyal to Eisner.

I think you're onto something about Dorsey being beholden to some other people within his company, but not so much Iger or Bezos.

You know the dumb QAnon memes about Trump playing 4D Chess to outsmart and undercut his opponents?

Bob Iger and Jeff Bezos got to where they were by playing Twenty-One Dimensional Vampire: The Masquerade with some of the most cutthroat motherfuckers outside of a Martin Scorsese movie or a Game of Thrones season.

Except unlike Trump who's mainly going against people who fall for the most obvious bait and are extremely transparent at their intentions, Bezos and Iger are actually well-versed in political backstabbing, especially within the corporate world.

Getting back to the topic of media corporations trying to curb potential competition because the products they sell are going to shit and losing money in the domestic market, keep in mind that profit is still a major component even if they're ideologically motivated.

As wealthy as AT&T/Warner Brothers are, they still had to divest from CNN because it's a total money sink and CNN is what made Turner Broadcasting the giant it is (and what allowed them to successfully merge with Time Warner)
 
As wealthy as AT&T/Warner Brothers are, they still had to divest from CNN because it's a total money sink and CNN is what made Turner Broadcasting the giant it is (and what allowed them to successfully merge with Time Warner)

That's what makes me think. Whos paying for CNN? Surely advertisers see their numbers. Surely investors would see their numbers. And yet for all intents and purposes they are still going as if they are the NYT of TV news. They don't act as if they are a competitive TV network in a competitive market. Otherwise they would change, improve. Think of older Fox when they were simply the cardboard cutout counterpart to MSNBC. Now they have a guy from the Daily Wire, doing record numbers.
 
That's what makes me think. Whos paying for CNN? Surely advertisers see their numbers. Surely investors would see their numbers. And yet for all intents and purposes they are still going as if they are the NYT of TV news. They don't act as if they are a competitive TV network in a competitive market. Otherwise they would change, improve. Think of older Fox when they were simply the cardboard cutout counterpart to MSNBC. Now they have a guy from the Daily Wire, doing record numbers.

Occam's Razor is probably in full effect for this one. CNN was only recently divested from Warner less than a year ago and all the major basic cable and satellite TV providers carry it, so they're still likely on TV because of contractual obligations with the cable companies and inertia from their heyday. As long as they're still carried by all the cable networks and get the advertiser revenue, they can scrape by until an investor is willing to take a chance on them (my money's on Bezos)

If Trump is savvy enough, he'll use that warchest of his and lean on CNN's severe financial woes to buy lots of ad space on their network as well as on Fox since they'll need the revenue and the ratings boost from a debate to help attract a new investor for when their current contracts with the cable and satellite providers expire
 
Just gonna ask what the hell is up with the monogamy talk considering the recent rise in harem animes.

In almost every harem anime. The girls are competing to be the winner; ie the girlfriend, which is what drives most of the drama and comedy. I rarely recall any harem animes where the guy is just banging everyone, and everyones fine with it.
 
In almost every harem anime. The girls are competing to be the winner; ie the girlfriend, which is what drives most of the drama and comedy. I rarely recall any harem animes where the guy is just banging everyone, and everyones fine with it.
Tenchi Muyo, which is actually a very compelling argument for why a harem would actually not be worth the sex.
 
In almost every harem anime. The girls are competing to be the winner; ie the girlfriend, which is what drives most of the drama and comedy. I rarely recall any harem animes where the guy is just banging everyone, and everyones fine with it.

There's those new ones called 100 Girlfriends that Really Really Love You and Kanojo mo Kanojo but they're basically satire.
 
Última edición:
Tenchi Muyo, which is actually a very compelling argument for why a harem would actually not be worth the sex.
Depends on the continuity, I think. I didn't follow the conclusion of the OVAs, which I understand to have been a wise choice, but TM:IL2 ends on a very strong suggestion that in the TV continuity he ends up with the Correct Choice, Ryoko, and not a harem.

Legit harems are more of a power-fantasy isekai thing. Even galge adaptations very rarely go there.
 
Just gonna ask what the hell is up with the monogamy talk considering the recent rise in harem animes.
I wouldn't say there's been that much of a rise in harem anime recently. Remember harem anime have been around for decades. Some consist of one guy who ends up with multiple wives. Most consist of a bunch of girls competing for the same guy, and the guy eventually picking one winner or possibly an open end where the decision is left yet to be made. The isekai trend may have boosted the harem end count a bit, but not by that much in the grand scheme of things.

More generally, monogamous relationships are still pretty valued in manga as compared to western comics.

For manga/anime/light novels, It's quite normal for the hero to fall in love with the heroine, them to get together, get married, settle down, and have kids. Occasionally occurs during the series, mostly occurs as an "they all lived happily ever after" type ending, though plenty stop at the "they get together" bit and call it a day rather than go to the effort of depicting a relationship. Even when a pairing involves a long distance relationship, fidelity is usually implied even when characters would have plenty of opportunity and temptation to cheat, or to break up or get a divorce. You can have characters not get together, meet again after a long separation, then finally hook up; and neither will have gotten with anyone in between.

That's a far cry from western comics, which tend to be unable to settle on a pairing and stick with it. To say nothing of how much they'll have the heroes and heroines sleep around. Even in their main worlds, once you start looking around, it's not unusual to find fairly prominent characters who have slept around a bunch, gotten married and divorced over the course of their franchise, or at least cheated in some form or another on their boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse. That's not considering various elseworlds set in parallel universes where the writers have a much freer hand to have characters hooked up with different characters than usual. Or editorial mandates like that debacle with Spider-man back in 2007 where Marvel's then editor in chief insisted that Peter and Mary Jane's marriage end 'to preserve the longevity of the character for the next 20 or 30 years' while claiming 'he and other previous editors-in-chief had long been seeking an opportunity to begin a new methodology in which to tell Spider-Man stories, but had not found a reasonable way to do so', and the storyline that resulted was loathed by fans and critics alike for ending the marriage. I believe DC is a bit better than Marvel in this regard, but both of them tend to desire a certain general status quo, with the result that they're highly resistant to characters aging, settling down and having kids. When they do end up having kids, it usually ends up highly convoluted as another result of that desire for status quo, or relegated to a what if story or some parallel universe story.

Compare that to Dragon Ball. Goku marries Chichi, they have a couple of kids, stay faithful even for stretches where Goku is gone or even dead. Their eldest son Gohan grows up, gets married, and has a kid of his own. Vegeta knocks up Bulma during a fling. Eventually settles down with her and they have another kid. Krillin marries Android 18, and they have a kid. Or Bleach. Ichigo marries Orihime and they have a kid, while Rukia marries Renji and they have a kid. Or Naruto. Naruto only ever has a crush on Sakura, marries Hinata, and they have a couple kids. Sakura never gives up on Sasuke, they get married, have a kid, and don't cheat or get divorced even though Sasuke spends a decade away. Some of the minor characters get married and have kids as well, and the ones that don't aren't sleeping around, they're simply not in a relationship. And that's just a few of the more popular examples.

So to put it another way, manga in general when it addresses romance tends to value and favor settling on one person, getting married and having kids. While western comics tend to favor fucking around, not settling down or having kids, and is much more open to characters getting divorced. Though I'm skeptical this would factor in much to the people complaining about anime, other than the occasional person complaining about girls ending up as housewives staying at home and taking care of the kids.
 
I wouldn't say there's been that much of a rise in harem anime recently. Remember harem anime have been around for decades. Some consist of one guy who ends up with multiple wives. Most consist of a bunch of girls competing for the same guy, and the guy eventually picking one winner or possibly an open end where the decision is left yet to be made. The isekai trend may have boosted the harem end count a bit, but not by that much in the grand scheme of things.

More generally, monogamous relationships are still pretty valued in manga as compared to western comics.

For manga/anime/light novels, It's quite normal for the hero to fall in love with the heroine, them to get together, get married, settle down, and have kids. Occasionally occurs during the series, mostly occurs as an "they all lived happily ever after" type ending, though plenty stop at the "they get together" bit and call it a day rather than go to the effort of depicting a relationship. Even when a pairing involves a long distance relationship, fidelity is usually implied even when characters would have plenty of opportunity and temptation to cheat, or to break up or get a divorce. You can have characters not get together, meet again after a long separation, then finally hook up; and neither will have gotten with anyone in between.

That's a far cry from western comics, which tend to be unable to settle on a pairing and stick with it. To say nothing of how much they'll have the heroes and heroines sleep around. Even in their main worlds, once you start looking around, it's not unusual to find fairly prominent characters who have slept around a bunch, gotten married and divorced over the course of their franchise, or at least cheated in some form or another on their boyfriend/girlfriend/spouse. That's not considering various elseworlds set in parallel universes where the writers have a much freer hand to have characters hooked up with different characters than usual. Or editorial mandates like that debacle with Spider-man back in 2007 where Marvel's then editor in chief insisted that Peter and Mary Jane's marriage end 'to preserve the longevity of the character for the next 20 or 30 years' while claiming 'he and other previous editors-in-chief had long been seeking an opportunity to begin a new methodology in which to tell Spider-Man stories, but had not found a reasonable way to do so', and the storyline that resulted was loathed by fans and critics alike for ending the marriage. I believe DC is a bit better than Marvel in this regard, but both of them tend to desire a certain general status quo, with the result that they're highly resistant to characters aging, settling down and having kids. When they do end up having kids, it usually ends up highly convoluted as another result of that desire for status quo, or relegated to a what if story or some parallel universe story.

Compare that to Dragon Ball. Goku marries Chichi, they have a couple of kids, stay faithful even for stretches where Goku is gone or even dead. Their eldest son Gohan grows up, gets married, and has a kid of his own. Vegeta knocks up Bulma during a fling. Eventually settles down with her and they have another kid. Krillin marries Android 18, and they have a kid. Or Bleach. Ichigo marries Orihime and they have a kid, while Rukia marries Renji and they have a kid. Or Naruto. Naruto only ever has a crush on Sakura, marries Hinata, and they have a couple kids. Sakura never gives up on Sasuke, they get married, have a kid, and don't cheat or get divorced even though Sasuke spends a decade away. Some of the minor characters get married and have kids as well, and the ones that don't aren't sleeping around, they're simply not in a relationship. And that's just a few of the more popular examples.

So to put it another way, manga in general when it addresses romance tends to value and favor settling on one person, getting married and having kids. While western comics tend to favor fucking around, not settling down or having kids, and is much more open to characters getting divorced. Though I'm skeptical this would factor in much to the people complaining about anime, other than the occasional person complaining about girls ending up as housewives staying at home and taking care of the kids.

Tbf how much is that is intentional and how much of it is just consequence of the western comic industry being either a complete clustercuck due to their inability to let characters die or pozzed indie shit.
 
The reason American comics treat romance the way they do is because of their long running nature. Manga has an eventual ending in most cases. If the creators want to continue after that, they just make a sequel.

American comics rarely have an ending planned. Everything is part of a universe written by multiple people. Rven miniseries end up having some connection to ongoing books.

Manga usually doesn't change writers. American comics do it constantly. That inability to settle down is because the story can't settle down. The entire sexuality of a character is also at the mercy of the revolving door of writers. One minute Iceman's straight, the next he's a flaming Moltres flying out the closet.

Imagine Fullmetal Alchemist if it had to be written in such an unstable environment.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo