Kishimoto did that thing again.
And it's probably not the thing you're thinking of.
So Kishimoto keeps doing this thing. And I'm not sure if it's intentional. I'm honestly not sure he's a good enough writer for it to be intentional--hey, I defend the guy's writing a lot, but I'm not delusional. I don't think he's a completely crap writer, but in terms of quality, he's not particularly special. Personally, I'd file him under solid. Not great, but not awful, and occasionally capable of something interesting or well handled to balance the things that... aren't. Because there are a number of things that aren't.
But this thing--this thing is that every so often, often just in a few panels, it seems like he gives a little nod and says, yeah, the world is sexist, it's not fair, and it's not totally invisible. It's like he takes a moment to make sure that it doesn't become invisible. I know for some people, that acknowledgment makes it seem worse (i.e, if you can see the privilege, why not fix it?!), and that's a fair reaction, but not one I share. I prefer for privilege to be visible. Because, seriously, it's always there anyway. When I can see it, at least I don't feel like sexism is being treated as benevolent (girls are better than boys, and therefore need protection, and this is no WAY helps boys out, rly) or a natural state of events (girls and boys are ttly equal, and always ttly equal, and there is no socialization to explain their different outcomes--it's just that boys really are more heroic!), I feel like even though the girls are getting the short end, there's some understanding of the environment that leads to that.
Kishimoto shows us flashbacks to Sakura's childhood, and we see girls being trained differently, held to different standards, and in the case of some of them (particularly Sakura), suffering for it. As an example. Probably as one of the more explicit examples. And then in the context of an author who seems to be deliberately not erasing male privilege, other things can take on a different flavor. You wonder if Kakashi explicitly writing Sakura off when they first meet, her explicitly being left without mentoring while Kakashi trained Sasuke and Jiraiya trained Naruto, and Sakura's resulting poor performances, followed by her drastic improvement once she's mentored by Tsunade wasn't intentional. And if not, it puts it in a light where... well, it's visible.
On the one hand, that's pretty subtle, and it's somewhat hard for me to imagine Kishimoto intentionally set up sexist scenarios for Sakura to struggle with realistically, which realistically undermine her confidence, and realistically lead to Sakura comforting Naruto despite her own need for comfort (another moment, by the way, where Kishimoto seemed to put a flag on the privilege--he didn't have to put it in Sakura's POV like that), while we have Sasuke and Naruto struggling with epicness.
On the other hand, these things have to be intentional to a degree. Whatever he actually intended them to be, they didn't draw themselves and end up in there accidentally. A part of me wonders if he's just doing things in a way that reflects what he sees around him, and stumbled into detailing it in a way that keeps the privilege visible, but that seems unlikely. I mean, seriously, you can't just not manage to erase privilege. It's not something bad writing explains. Erasing the way men benefit from sexism is the default--it's wired into how people deal with gender.
So honestly, I never know what to make of this, when it happens. I don't think it makes Naruto feminist, but for me as a feminist, it can make it interesting.
In the most recent chapter, there was point where Omoi says that he likes Naruto, and says something about how "a man" should/shouldn't blah blah blah. Okay, that's the kind of line that doesn't generally engage my feminist rage. I'm sorry. I don't have that much energy to be offended. So instead, it normally earns what I'll call the Feminist Eyeroll.
And I was about mid-roll when I remembered Mizukage last week, and her reaction to that "be a man" business.
As close as they are together, it's really hard for me to write it off as just a coincidence. Last week, that sort of attitude was offensive to a powerful woman, and this week, we get some mansplaining about what's important for men too. Hell, even if it is a coincidence, it's still right there, waiting to be the most recent association.
I just don't know.
On a third, totally unrelated hand, after all this time, Sai is finally starting to grow on me.
So Kishimoto keeps doing this thing. And I'm not sure if it's intentional. I'm honestly not sure he's a good enough writer for it to be intentional--hey, I defend the guy's writing a lot, but I'm not delusional. I don't think he's a completely crap writer, but in terms of quality, he's not particularly special. Personally, I'd file him under solid. Not great, but not awful, and occasionally capable of something interesting or well handled to balance the things that... aren't. Because there are a number of things that aren't.
But this thing--this thing is that every so often, often just in a few panels, it seems like he gives a little nod and says, yeah, the world is sexist, it's not fair, and it's not totally invisible. It's like he takes a moment to make sure that it doesn't become invisible. I know for some people, that acknowledgment makes it seem worse (i.e, if you can see the privilege, why not fix it?!), and that's a fair reaction, but not one I share. I prefer for privilege to be visible. Because, seriously, it's always there anyway. When I can see it, at least I don't feel like sexism is being treated as benevolent (girls are better than boys, and therefore need protection, and this is no WAY helps boys out, rly) or a natural state of events (girls and boys are ttly equal, and always ttly equal, and there is no socialization to explain their different outcomes--it's just that boys really are more heroic!), I feel like even though the girls are getting the short end, there's some understanding of the environment that leads to that.
Kishimoto shows us flashbacks to Sakura's childhood, and we see girls being trained differently, held to different standards, and in the case of some of them (particularly Sakura), suffering for it. As an example. Probably as one of the more explicit examples. And then in the context of an author who seems to be deliberately not erasing male privilege, other things can take on a different flavor. You wonder if Kakashi explicitly writing Sakura off when they first meet, her explicitly being left without mentoring while Kakashi trained Sasuke and Jiraiya trained Naruto, and Sakura's resulting poor performances, followed by her drastic improvement once she's mentored by Tsunade wasn't intentional. And if not, it puts it in a light where... well, it's visible.
On the one hand, that's pretty subtle, and it's somewhat hard for me to imagine Kishimoto intentionally set up sexist scenarios for Sakura to struggle with realistically, which realistically undermine her confidence, and realistically lead to Sakura comforting Naruto despite her own need for comfort (another moment, by the way, where Kishimoto seemed to put a flag on the privilege--he didn't have to put it in Sakura's POV like that), while we have Sasuke and Naruto struggling with epicness.
On the other hand, these things have to be intentional to a degree. Whatever he actually intended them to be, they didn't draw themselves and end up in there accidentally. A part of me wonders if he's just doing things in a way that reflects what he sees around him, and stumbled into detailing it in a way that keeps the privilege visible, but that seems unlikely. I mean, seriously, you can't just not manage to erase privilege. It's not something bad writing explains. Erasing the way men benefit from sexism is the default--it's wired into how people deal with gender.
So honestly, I never know what to make of this, when it happens. I don't think it makes Naruto feminist, but for me as a feminist, it can make it interesting.
In the most recent chapter, there was point where Omoi says that he likes Naruto, and says something about how "a man" should/shouldn't blah blah blah. Okay, that's the kind of line that doesn't generally engage my feminist rage. I'm sorry. I don't have that much energy to be offended. So instead, it normally earns what I'll call the Feminist Eyeroll.
And I was about mid-roll when I remembered Mizukage last week, and her reaction to that "be a man" business.
As close as they are together, it's really hard for me to write it off as just a coincidence. Last week, that sort of attitude was offensive to a powerful woman, and this week, we get some mansplaining about what's important for men too. Hell, even if it is a coincidence, it's still right there, waiting to be the most recent association.
I just don't know.
On a third, totally unrelated hand, after all this time, Sai is finally starting to grow on me.