The fetishization of representation

[_Izzy_]

but i agree that not all sexualization is bad, but actively fetishizing a group of people is just dehumanizing and ruins representation.

[BritishUnity]

@Ⴑohnny.ƧƧ nah I just don't hate the ppl that do it and don't believe they should be shamed for it

[BritishUnity]

@_Izzy_ yeah true but depending on the context most side characters if they get fetishized chances are no one cares for there plot because there's side character side characters even out of this are just forgotten/ignored so this is the only way they actually get noticed lmao besides the few that think they're amazing so that you can't stop mc tho they usually have a huge range of normality and other side when they don't have normality at all then that's the point it gets annoying lol

[Yanderemenhera]

This post is deleted!

[_Izzy_]

@BritishUnity sexualizing and FETISHIZING are different, my fualt for using the world sexualizing

i dont mind sexualization as long as its done tastfully and is appropriate for the character (the character isnt rlly young or smth)

but fetishization of minorities is fucking disgusting
as a girl afro-hispanic person its actually very annoying when the only time people want to see or appreciate people like you is when they think you're hot and want to fantasize about you

i understand why yall dont care bc you probably cant relate and it doesnt seem like a big deal but it actually does make some people upset and is just dehumanizing once again

i think women in general are easily the most common victim of this but alot of female characters are WAYYY better now

anyway thats just my opinion, i obviously get why yall dont see the big deal or dont care but there is a valid reason as to why some ppl do care and want to talk abt it

anyway this is just my opinion:P

[_Izzy_]

@Ⴑohnny.ƧƧ i think ppl are misunderstanding the point of this post, it seems they think we mean sexualizing characters in general, i want to kinda remind them of the point but i feel like you would be able to articulate it better then me, like the difference between sexualization and fetishizing

[Johnny.SS]

@_Izzy_ yeah I agree with your first point completely. I think a lot of people in the replies misunderstood what we meant and assumed we were saying sexualization itself is bad, which isn’t really the argument.

Sexualization and fetishization are two different things.

Sexualization just means a character is portrayed as attractive or sensual. That can exist in media and still leave room for the character to be respected as an actual person in the story. If it fits the character and isn’t the only thing people see in them, most people don’t really mind it.

Fetishization is different because the character’s identity becomes the fantasy. Instead of people appreciating their writing, themes, or role in the story, their race, sexuality, or minority status becomes the thing people fixate on. That’s when it stops being appreciation and starts feeling objectifying.

That’s more what I was talking about in my post. You’ll see characters or interpretations get ignored, mocked, or rejected at first, but the moment sexualized fanart or edits start circulating, suddenly people start “liking” them. When the acceptance only comes once the character can be fantasized about, it kind of reveals what the attention is really about.

And like you said, racial minorities like black women tend to experience this the most. When the only time people loudly support or hype something is when it can be turned into a fantasy, it can feel less like representation and more like being reduced to a trope.

So yeah, the point wasn’t “characters can’t be attractive or sexualized.” It was just pointing out that there’s a difference between appreciating a character and only valuing them once they become something people can fetishize.

[_Izzy_]

i feel like our convo abt the fetishization of the kimono is a good example of how fetishization ruins representation, because it often just leads to completely watering down a culture and it feels more like appropriation then appreciation or actually representation when a culture is fetishized in media if that makes sense,

like the kimono is not supposed to be a sexual garmet and is actually designed to look very modest, with the 'sexy' part being how much the back of the neck is showing, and it's meant to actually hide curves, but some representation of the kimono in art or media would potray it in a more sexualized way, to the point were some Japanese people feel embarrassed to wear kimono bc of how much theyve been fetishized by media

srry yall if im not articulating this well TvT

[_Izzy_]

@Yanderemenhera once again thats not quite the point of the post

[Johnny.SS]

@_Izzy_ I think Thats a really god example bc now some of the more conservative Japanese population (obv Japan is just conservative in general I DONT want nobody dick riding in my replies) is embarrassed to have kimonos be a cultural thing now so I feel like it shows that sexualization can ruin pride in indentity

[Johnny.SS]

@Yanderemenhera disrespectfully your comment misses the point and the “I’m ace so I don’t look at this stuff” doesn’t change the argument whatsoever

Being asexual is honestly completely irrelevant to the point being Made—You don’t have to personally consume sexualized content or straight pornography to recognize when something crosses the line into fetishization bc anyone with basic media literacy and tbh common sense can see the difference between a character being portrayed attractively and in an alluring and desirable and a character being reduced to a stereotype or sexual fantasy about their identity.

No one here said drawing characters in revealing clothing is automatically wrong(which would be obv if you read through a bit closer before replying ) That’s not the issue. The issue is when the only time people start caring about a character or interpretation is when it becomes sexualized in a way that plays into fantasies about race, sexuality, or minority identity. That’s what blind fetishization looks like,only finding a character appealing in a sexual context.

Your example about fanservice in shows is a completely different conversation. Fanservice can be annoying or excessive, sure, but that’s not the same discussion as minority identities being turned into aesthetic fantasies in fandom spaces because can servicey character can still be well written and appreciated

And the representation point you brought up is also kind of beside the argument. Nobody said representation has to perfectly match every individual person because thats completely off and also dumb to say bc of course it won’t and shouldn’t be expected to, The discussion is about how fandoms sometimes only validate certain characters or headcanons once they become sexualized, which undermines the actual appreciation of those identities or themes.

So yeah dude this isn’t about policing attraction or saying characters can’t be drawn attractively. It’s about pointing out a pattern where identities get reduced to something people want to fantasize about. That’s the distinction people keep glossing over.

Not even to be that person but I hate how asexual its portrayed bc asexuals will act like they can’t comment on sexual matters to look more valid when it just waters issues down to “you only have a problem bc you experience sexual attraction” when that's obv not the case and I find a problem with it bc it objectively is a problem

[_Izzy_]

This post is deleted!

[_Izzy_]

This post is deleted!

[Johnny.SS]

This post is deleted!

[Yanderemenhera]

@Ⴑohnny.ƧƧ thank you for correcting me on this, i obviously dont know what im talking about but i do appreciate you not being super mean about it or anything, i shouldn't have spoken about something i didn't know about let alone read all the replys and such

[Yanderemenhera]

i'll go delete my post

[_Izzy_]

@Yanderemenhera its totally ok! you dont even have to delete the post, this is a conversation and our ultimate goal is to spread awareness on this topic! its ok if you misunderstood, its great, bc it gave us a opportunity to discuss it more and clear up any misunderstandings. like i said, we arent here to argue but to encourage conversation and educate ppl on the topic!

[Yanderemenhera]

i think kekeguri is still relivent, i mentioned it bc the ''fanservece'' i was mentioning was yuri, now you wouldn't think that, i thought it was supposed to be a mix of saw with gambling, that show was beyond odd, i think it had a good plot, but the constant ''tension'' if you like of the girls in freakishly short skirts between the ages of 14-18... it was hard to wach and it really did not need to cater to creapy ass old guys.

[Yanderemenhera]

@_Izzy_ yeah, old video game's female characters might be a prime example of this tbh

[_Izzy_]

@Yanderemenhera i watched this show and the fact that its fetishizing young women/girls (which is a problem in most media, not just anime, and is vry problematic actually) as well as lesbians is actually vry relevant

i feel like the classic school girl uniform is actually rlly fetishized which is weird bc like actual young girls wear it to school in japan and i feel like its just strange to sexualize a outfit thats meant for young girls... obviously japan is a vry different culture (not that that justifies anything) but i feel like this trope must have some sort of negative effect on these young girls, its just plain creepy in my opinion

i actually liked that show alot thought it definitely had....issues.