ANNCast's Podcast on Moe

[laceblade]

Zac Bertschy had Chris Haughton (owner/runner of Taskforce Moe) on the show. Here's a link. In the beginning, they discuss Zac's habit of basically trolling moe fans when he reviews moe shows at Anime News Network. I don't hang out on the forums much, & was surprised to hear Zac's been compared to being racist because of disliking moe - fucking seriously? That sucks, and that's stupid.
I found a lot of the discussion boring.

I submitted a few questions via Twitter. So did littlebutfierce.
I'm pretty tired, but there's the Q/A of our questions.

76:something
Zac: ribbonknight asks, 'Many women and others find value in non-explicit moe because it focuses on female relationships. Is this a reason why you like it?"
Chris: That's a reason I like some shows. Like K-ON!, or Lucky Star.
Zac: Right.
Chris: But, it's not the entire reason I like moe. There are several reasons.
Zac: I mean it sounds like your basic argument is, 'I am not this one-dimensional stereotype or straw-man. I am multitudes.' It sounds like that's the chief...that's the core of your argument, here.
Chris: Yeah. Yeah, and I think that, to a certain extent, moe fans - the moe fandom at large - is portrayed as shallow fans, only looking for the next big thing with cute girls with huge eyes and they don't appreciate quality anime, and I don't think that's true for really many moe fans.
Zac: Well, you wouldn't argue that there aren't people who are totally like that.
Chris: There certainly are vocal people like that. I don't want to associate nor represent nor pay attention to those people. But there are certainly people like that. But I'd argue that the majority of moe fans are pretty much just like other fans. They like a range of anime, not just moe but a whole lot of other stuff.

82:00
Zac: ribbonknight asks: Dudes perving on characters can devalue the shows for fandom at large. Do you think your site contributes to this?
Chris: Dudes perving on moe fandoms...no, I don't think my site contributes to...dudes perving on moe fandoms.
Zac: In other words, if there's a huge, outspoken bunch of, let's say 4-chan users, totally obsessing over whoever from K-ON!, everyone's like oh man. Like it's a turn-off for some people, like they don't necessarily want to engage with the material because they think it's just about that.
Chris: If a person looks at 4-chan especially...& says, 'I don't want to engage with this work of media because of what 4-chan says about it. I think that person probably wouldn't have engaged with that work of media in the first place.
Zac: Yeah, I think you're probably right. [laughter]

ME ASIDE: I totally disgaree with that. The disgust with which other people describe moe kept me away from it for years. littlebutfierce had to convince me that K-ON! was worth trying.
I am absolutely influenced by other people's taste/etc.


87:00
Zac: janiinedelleen asks, "Do you think moe's focus on friendships is part of why it's so devalued and scorned in large parts of anime fandom?
Chris: I think that, 1) part of it is the emphasis on girls. I think that 2 is the de-emphasis on story. I think those are the two big things for why it's devalued.
Zac: I mean, I guess I would sort of make the argument that it also seems exploitative. I don't buy for a second that I think people are watching K-ON! solely because they really care about these characters. There's a voyeuristic appeal to that show that...I think a lot of people have a voyeuristic appeal to that show, and it's like, "Oh these cute girls, they like each other so much," and it's kinda like you're...sometimes it feels like you're watching from the bushes. [laughter] You know, you've got your binoculars. It's a little creepy.
Chris: I don't see it that way. At all.
Zac: You yourself, you're not putting yourself into the situation.
Chris: No, not at all. A complete removal of the viewer as an agent in what is going on in the show.
Zac: Okay. So, the attraction to those characters, then, in a moe fashion, you are totally removed from it? Like you as a person, you totally/psychologically remove yourself?
Chris: When I'm watching the show, I'm not watching, I'm not there at all. That's just going on in the show. It's not me watching them, it's just them happening within the context of the show. As far as being moe for a particular girl, that's certainly me inserting myself into that fantasy.
Zac: So that's separate like doujinshi culture. The act of watching i separate?
Chris: Yes. The doujinshis for K-ON, it's notorious for having really disgusting doujinshi.
Zac: Most popular shows that feature little girls have hideous doujinshi.
Zac: Okay.

ME ASIDE: I find Zac's take on the voyeurism in K-ON! kind of fascinating, because I didn't feel that way at all watching it. I think that take is entirely related to the male gaze.
I was absolutely invested in the actual characters, their friendship, and the music they made together. That is the only reason I watched the show.
The fact that Zac thinks that there is NO OTHER POSSIBLE REASON a person could watch that show is exactly what my questions are trying to get at - WHY AREN'T NON-SEXUAL FEMALE RELATIONSHIPS VALUED? Which leads to my next question:

94:00
Zac: ribbonknight asks: dudes hanging out in anime considered artistic & moving, moe shows of girls doing the same are called stupid & pointless. Do you think that some fans oversexualizing characters contributes to dismissive fans not examining their own misogyny?
Zac: Wait, these are two unrelated things [me aside: no they're not]. The first one was a statement, the second one was a question. [nope]
Chris: I am not sure where that's coming from.
Zac: Yeah, that's a weird thing. I guess some...no, okay. That is a two-parter. So, he's saying that I guess there's this blanket assumption that critics love shoes where it's just dudes hanging out and doing nothing, but shows where it's girls hanging out & doing nothing are called stupid and pointless, which I don't...I think your premise is flawed, bro? I don't even, like...that's not true? And I guess he's saying that it's misogynistic to hate on "cute girls doing cute things" shows. Which, to answer that myself, it's not misogynistic to be bored by cute girls doing cute things. [laughter]
Chris: Yeah, it's not sexist to have a preference.

112:00 question also worth listening to: about whether women's reasons for watching are different than men?


I found it a little hilarious that Zac assumed I am a guy, especially given the questions I was asking.

Regardless, my question about internalized misogyny shifted to one about sexism. Both Zac and Chris agreed that, "It's not sexist to have a perference" [between watching plotless shows about girls hanging out vs boys hanging out].
I'd challenge that. If you as a media consumer ONLY enjoy stories about boys/men, and are only capable of identifying with men? Then yeah, I think you have some internalized misogyny going on there.

I started joining in the discussion on the forums, but that was before I heard reading of my last question, and their answer/non-answer. I don't know if I'll check back.

Anyway, I'm pretty disappointed. I've been a fan of Zac Bertschy's commentary for years. :(

Comments

[littlebutfierce]

Fuck all of these shitbags, for srs.

[laceblade]

I just...cannot. Their assumption that I was male while answering questions I submitted to force them to address non-male viewers just kills me.

[kaberett]

Ugh. Wow.

... congrats on being a bro I guess?

[also hello! littlebutfierce keeps mentioning you so you must be amazingly cool. I have subscribed! I do not expect reciprocity etc etc etc.]

[laceblade]

Hi!

[coffeeandink]

I don't know why you're so interested in sexism and misogyny, bro! I can't see what that has to do with anime at all.

ETA: Also, um, wow, there is a lot going on with the idea that a viewer is "not present" while watching a show.

Zac isn't the first person I've heard the voyeurism angle from concerning K-ON!, in particular. In this type of anime, the viewer's presence is completely irrelevant. If K-ON! was an anime with pantyshots all over the place and the camera focusing in on them (I.E. "Male Gaze"), that would be voyeuristic, but K-ON! isn't that kind of show. The characters aren't girls you're looking at through a keyhole. It's more like you are the room that Yui, Mio, Ritsu, Mugi, and Azusa are eating cake and drinking tea in. Nobody's trying to arouse or please the room. Things are happening, but the room is just there, existing, but irrelevant to the events.

Your options are to be a male viewer or the room. There's no way a viewer could possibly take the point of view of the girls.

[laceblade]

That's the post I started replying to last night, & then kept deleting my text. First offense being that I introduced myself as having watched that show (among others), and then he proceeded to explain the show to me.

[coffeeandink]

I just skimmed through the rest of the thread. I'm sure you will be unsurprised to learn that after you identified yourself as a female moe fan, all the posters went right back to assuming all anime and moe fans were male.

The foundations of the discussion are so fucked it exhausts me just to think about trying to participate. (I wouldn't anyway, because the only moe show I've seen is Puella Madoka Magica, but even if it were a show I watched ...)

[laceblade]

Yeah, I'm about to reply anyway. *lowers expectations to almost nothing*

[oyceter]

I also love how he proceeds to tell you about identifying with the room after you've already said that you are fully invested in the characters and their relationships. Because being voyeuristic or watching "at a remove" (ha!) are the only options.

[sasha_feather]

Wow. I just... these dudes KNOW NOTHING. I think that you and littlebutfierce should be doing the pod cast.

[laceblade]

I mean, they do know SOME things. As oyceter says below, they had a pretty good analysis about every issue under the sun for male viewers.
Zac's understanding of the anime industry might be unparalleled.

It just sucks that we tried to force a conversation about other points of view, they literally read & tried to answer our questions, and the conversation still couldn't shift there. :(

ETA: Rereading my comment, I'm not sure I'm saying what I mean. OVERALL, I've found this to be a pretty analytical podcast, which I think is why I'm so disappointed.

[oyceter]

It is so telling how in no point in the conversation do they think there might be non-male viewers and/or viewers unattracted to women and girls watching moe OR anime in general.

I do think some of their analysis may be good re: male moe fans, but um, wow re: unsaid male gaze-y assumptions.

[sparkthatbled]

This post is really interesting, and actually seems to get at something that's pissed me off about mainstream Western anime fandom. Specifically, the blanket dismissal or hate towards any anime that might be construed as Moe.

These people are supposed to be intelligent and respected, but they don't seem to think that there are female viewers who might like K-On!. K-On is practically placid compared to something like Kanokon or Asa Made Jugyou Chu, but K-On! would get dismissed all the same because it has cute teenage girls in the lead roles.

Stuff like that is why I've practically left the mainstream anime fandom. That, and I've had clashes with some of the big names there, too.

Oh yeah, I was also brought here through littlebutfierce, too.

[bibliofile]

How old are these guys, and don't they have any female friends? It's both funny and sad that they assume you're a guy, yeah especially (as you say) considering the questions you had. Go you two for persisting, though.