unknow women

Why everyone who calls Karin a Rapist needs to shut up.

I dislike using rude language, and I aim to be respectful when addressing others, including those whose opinions differ from mine. But when you go throwing around terms as serious as ‘rape’, then that little rule goes out the window.

It’s seems that in this fandom you can’’t say anything remotely pro-SasuKarin or pro-Karin without one of the haters accusing her of being a rapist. Even this far into Gaiden, the Anti-Karin’s still attach that word to Karin. The claim is biased and ridiculous.

Here’s the panel that started it all:

When i read this panel, I took it as Karin implying that she would be up to her usual strategy of attempting to seduce Sasuke. The perfume only cemented that for me. Why wear a perfume to attract someone, if they are going to be dead asleep when you take something from them against their will? Many of my acquaintances that are also Naruto fans got the same impression, it seems to me that only the Anti-Karin’s took it so far as to imply rape. Do you really think that Kishi would put something as serious as rape out there so casually, and if he did, not even bother to put emphasis on it? It was a tiny panel, meant to be seen as her usual antics and nothing extreme. Kishi often uses sexual themes as comedic relief, and though it is extremely tasteless Kishi relies on it for crude humor.

At the absolute worst, Kishi was having Karin imply that she was going to grope Sasuke in his sleep till he woke up, then seduce him from there. Even then the Haters scream that this is still non-consensual and therefore makes her a psychotic sexual predator. If you are one of those that believes Karin is a sexual predator, that’s fine, but: you aren’t allowed to be biased here. If you call Karin a rapist, then that means EVERY character who has shown these traits is a sexual predator, including:

Kakashi

Naruto

Jiraya

the Third Hokage

and Sai.

If you think that It doesn’t matter how Kishi intended the above scene to be viewed, then obviously you must agree that this applies to ALL characters, regardless of how much you like them. Oh! But you say there isn’t any reason why the above characters would be sexual predators? THEN LET ME SHOW YOU.

KAKASHI

Remember this? When Kakashi, a grown man, stuck his fingers up a twelve year old’s anus? Does that look consensual to you? Does it look like Naruto’s enjoying it? Does that look acceptable to you? No? Kakashi could’ve used FAR less invasive techniques, ones that would’ve been FAR more appropriate for the situation, and his status. Then you consider that he was reading a porn book prior to this scene…who knows what psychotic things that man could’ve been thinking during this. By your appraisal, that means that Kakashi is a sexual predator  and possibly even a pedophile. And it gets better.

NARUTO

Yes Naruto. Remember this?

When Naruto NON-CONSENSUALLY looked at women and girls bathing naked? Obviously not consensual, and obviously done for Naruto’s personal pleasure. And in case you say, “but wait! that was part one!” YOU ARE RIGHT.

Remember this scene? When Naruto went to peek again? Showing that after 3 years, he hadn’t matured in this respect at all. Naruto still looked at women bathing Naked without their permission, a clear violation of their privacy. To make it even worse, the only reason why he didn’t go through with it was because he was scared of getting attacked. It had nothing to do with consideration of their feelings. He didn’t care at all about the respect of privacy that these women deserved. And so, by your standards, that means…Uzumaki Naruto is a psychotic sexual predator.  It makes you wonder what else he was doing in those three years with Jiraya, and speaking of him…

JIRAYA AND THE THIRD HOKAGE

This is one of the MANY scenes where Jiraya has been seen spying on women and girls bathing. He is a grown man, who has been shown throughout the years doing such an act. Even though many times we see women, mostly Tsunade, telling him to stop. That’s Sexual Harassment right there. Does that seem right or acceptable to you? Especially considering that girls under the age of 18 were almost certainly in that room naked. Obviously not. Remember the chapter were a young Jiraya told the Third Hokage that he even created a invisibility Justsu so that he could watch unknowing women bath nude from inside the room? Do you remember how the Third-friggin-Hokage asked if he could join? By your standards that makes both Jiraya and the Third Hokage Sexual Predators, Pedophiles, and Sexual Harassers. And there’s still more.

SAI

Remember when Sai repeatedly commented and pointed out Naruto’s sexual organs, despite Naruto multiple times telling Sai that it made him uncomfortable? Is that not..sexual Harassment? Actually, IT IS.

So, by the logic of EVERYONE who calls Karin a rapist, then here are the profiles of the various Naruto Characters:

Karin: Rapist
Naruto: Sexual Predator
Jiraya: Sexual Predator, Pedophile, Sexual Harasser
Third Hokage: Sexual Predator, Pedophile
Sai: Sexual Harasser
Kakashi: Sexual Predator, Pedophile.

Looks very stark, doesn’t it?

Now here’s the thing, I don’t believe that any of the people above truly are sexual predators. I think that Kishi was trying to put in quick, cheap humor and he thought that this method would work. AND it does, when you have tons of immature kids reading this thing, there are almost guaranteed to find the thousand years of pain funny. Jiraya’s peeking was always portrayed in a very light-hearted manor, so it became a running joke with his character. Karin was always very physical in her seduction, so her line was meant to be a comedic relief to lighten the tensions in the chapter. Sometimes people say that Karin is extremely creepy, but she is no more creepy than any of the other Naruto characters.

That’s not to say i actually found any of these things funny, if anything these panels annoy me. ALL of them, And If you honestly can’t accept these actions as ‘funny’, and they genuinely disgust you, and you can’t find them humorous regardless of whose doing it, I can completely respect you. But here’s the thing: you can’t just pick and choose.

You can’t find it funny when everyone but Sai does it, because that’s BIASED. For the same reason, Karin can’t be a rapist and everyone else totally cool. Karin isn’t the only character who has shown this trait, so you can’t accuse only her. You can’t say she’s insane for trying to rape Sasuke, then immediately turn around and proclaim Naruto or Kakashi a saint. IT DOESN’T WORK LIKE THAT. That’s why I said that everyone who calls her a rapist needs to shut up. If you don’t hold EVERYONE ELSE the the same standards as Karin, then it’s biased to be that overly critical of her. Especially when it’s over one panel that was meant to be nothing but harmless comic relief.

-358memories [(Aka, ME) is the one who wrote this post. If you don’t like this post, don’t spam this blog with hate. There is more than one person running this blog. If you disagree with me so much that you need to vent at someone in a negative fashion, do it herehttp://358memories.tumblr.com/ at my main blog so that you wont end up bothering the other people on this blog who had nothing to do with this post.]

The major difference between the way Tangled and Frozen approached emotional issues and mental/inner struggles experienced by it’s leading ladies is the fact that Tangled didn’t sugarcoat the aftereffects, drastic/damaging impacts and toxic influences abuse and isolation leave on person’s psyche.

Whereas Frozen reduced severe and incredibly serious psychological issues to a simplistic, safe, “feminist grandmother”-friendly and pretentious family tale about a “strong independent heroine who needs no man”. Because HEAVENS forbid a mentally imbalanced female character being framed as romantically desirable in “progressive” Western media.

Frozen conveyed a primitive moralistic message about how biological family ties imposed on us since birth are supposedly more valuable, important, favorable and significant than natural platonic and romantic bonds formed by choice and on free will.

Tangled was about a young, alienated, sheltered, perpetually conflicted, immensely insecure woman with a vast assortment of phenomenal artistic skills she didn’t have a legitimate opportunity to unleash due to being distanced from the society by her abusive, exploitative guardian. It was about her gradually working through abrupt mood swings, incurable vulnerabilities, complete lack of self worth and monumental trust issues induced by the years of abuse.

The story primarily revolves around Rapunzel learning to establish connections with people, share her aspirations and ambitions with those who - like herself - were caged and restrained by external obstacles and superior forces. Bonding with the thugs from a local pub because regardless of the labels and stereotypes the society might place on people every individual is unique and has a multi-layered, distinguishing, overwhelming history of battling personal demons and being burdened by unfulfilled goals. Letting herself get to know a socially marginalized orphan who got off track and converted into thievery when denied support and acceptance on part of others. Forming a powerful and profound connection with this reluctant ally of hers, a virtual stranger who also had a baggage of issues and insecurities just as heavy as her own behind his shoulders.

Allowing herself to “do something crazy” and pursue an experience of learning up on this complex, struggling, uncomfortable person. With the two of them - naturally but methodically - altering each other’s initial worldview by exposing the least convenient facets of their lives and personalities to one another and learning to embrace those facets.

Tangled was about ADVOCATING for acquirement of experience. About reassuring abuse survivors that it’s okay and completely acceptable and not even remotely shameful to need to be helped out of a desperate situation when you end up in a position of emotional & physical disadvantage. Because MANY women are confronted with such horrific circumstances and are denied support. As well as continually victim blamed by either their surrounding/society or condescending feminist media which deems them as “pathetic and incapable damsels in distress” for not being able to defeat their oppressors/abusers as if it’s victim’s responsibility to begin with.

On the other hand, Frozen, as fascinatingly sublime of a musical as it can be (and to be objective, in lyrical & score department it surpasses Tangled, Princess and the Frog and about every other soundtrack from animated films pertaining to Disney Revival by miles and landslides), deliberately constructed Elsa’s characterization as two dimensional and universally comprehensible. To prompt more variable groups of people to identify with her while actually representing none of said groups.

Elsa’s character was specifically designed as vague, as a stereotype/construct rather than a PERSON like Rapunzel. A flawed, insufferable, aggravatingly noisy, unpredictably inconsistent, mood swings undergoing, self-doubting individual who is directly and considerably affected by her traumatic experience with isolation and inconsideration. On the contrary, Elsa is bold, reserved and guarded because that’s how depressed women are commonly perceived (and as a person who has been struggling with depression and anxiety - diseases Elsa’s powers and experiences were supposed to represent according to overt statements on part of the movie crew - for years I find it devastatingly tiresome to have those stigmas and stereotypes attached to me and having no other representation in media).

She is only allowed a day to revel in her formerly repressed creativity and explore her artistic potential before her biological sister she hasn’t been consistently interacting or communicating with for years saves the day. Miraculously fixing Elsa’s complicated, agony inducing, decades long mental issues by performing a ridiculously contrived and victorious defeat of a rapidly antagonized, cliche riddled charming backstabber straightly from Jane Austen novels. Who was out for their family’s wealth and privilege all along (because what else can a conventionally attractive and romantically assertive man be after? It’s just unimaginable that a young, ambitious and visually appealing man can have any goals OTHER than cunningly wronging and taking advantage of inexperienced and unknowing young women, at least according to contemporary US media which is prone to imposing irrational fears on girls).

Elsa establishes no bonds - romantic or friendly ones - outside of her sister whom she only shares two substantial and relevant scenes with. Both indicating visible misunderstanding between the two women which the movie never deals with properly. In concept, Anna and Elsa’s bond is spectacular and outstandingly powerful whereas the execution of this arc and their reconciliation doesn’t allow it to develop beyond a blood tie. Making them sisters by blood rather than a family by heart, like Rapunzel and Flynn, Rapunzel and the Thugs and Rapunzel and her parents ended up being. The King and Queen become a PART of Rapunzel’s already extended family consisting of Flynn and her new friends because they have been unwaveringly devoted to her for years and would always prioritize her happiness, emotional well being and safety - as opposed to Gothel -  not because they are biologically related to her.

Elsa’s lack of romantic interest does not stem from her blatant and unambiguous unwillingness to engage in a relationship as in case with Merida. Her stance on romantic commitments is not specified, it’s just left indefinite and undetermined. Hence the movie conveniently getting an excuse to present a yet another psychologically struggling female protagonist who is not depicted as an attractive and favorable romantic material - because that would be too challenging. The narrative is framed as a “story about two siblings” while actually not expanding on their relationship sufficiently and meaningfully.

In a nutshell, the reason why Tangled will always strike me as a more competent, mindful, respectful and constructive representation of emotional struggles is because the movie took a very specific issue - mental abuse and it’s impacts - and comprehensively elaborated on it. Highlighted it’s mechanics, emphasized how prolonged and systematic manipulation, demeaning, self esteem reduction and self worth destruction affect a person. How those issues often render a person helpless in some respects. And how important it is that people who genuinely care about said person and have built an effective, genuine and EQUAL relationship with them interfere with the abuse this person is undergoing.

Frozen, on the other hand, strove to mix all the existing issues in blender, combine and compile them by means of Elsa’s arc and attempted to make her represent all of said issues without giving a consistent insight into any of them. Nor allowing Elsa to evolve beyond a marvelous and sympathetic but, unfortunately, terribly cliched image.

Note: this is a personal opinion I’m in no way forcing on anyone. Pardon me for my rambling as well as for the fact that English isn’t my mother tongue.