so... you just deliberately didn’t reblog the explanation behind the chosen images in a desperate attempt to debunk the matter at hand by clinging solely onto that trivial element? oh, wait, of course you didn’t reblog that addition – which challenges your frail, ridiculous argument – because you stalked the ‘anti hinata’ tags, hence your reblog directly from me and my original post. i mean, come on, it isn’t even a case of idiocy that hinata fans haven’t figured out simple blacklisting; they purposely choose not to in weak attempts at harassment and a chance at throwing their toys over a two-and-a-half-year-old post.
here’s the response from the update you either [ a ] purposely chose not to reblog from so that your argument could actually appear to hold any strength and fit the confirmation bias of the sheep who follow you, or [ b ] did not necessarily ignore but simply rather missed due to becoming instantly offended and enraged enough to reply (to an appropriately tagged post) when stalking ‘anti’ tags of your own volition:
“one is official art and the other is just a sketch!”
it isn’t a comparison of the level of detail in kishimoto’s depictions, obviously they’re different… the chosen images are mere examples showcasing the severe bias that s/p have in arrogantly defying canon, solely because of their partiality. these pictures highlight how they undermine sakura and (/to) emphasise hinata, despite their given source material, which they’re supposed to directly and accurately reference.
the chosen images [of hinata] are actually on consecutive pages of damn official guidebook, directly showing the two designs in relation to one another; highlighting their differences.
it isn’t a direct comparison of the girls themselves, fgs. it’s exposing s/p’s favouritism and sexism; knowing that exploiting conventionally attractive traits – such as large breasts and “feminine” qualities – are features more likely desired. as such, an audience – especially a young male demographic (shonen’s target market) – would evidently be much more inclined to like that character.
[in relation to your comment reducing this issue merely to chest size:] whilst i do have an issue with her wardrobe [in s/p’s rendition, which particularly accents her chest] essentially acting as exploitation of her character through sexist marketing strategy (particularly due to defying the previous databook entries regarding her style), her clothes [moreover, her accentuated chest size, in this argument particularly since you want to focus on that] aren’t exactly the issue i’m stressing here – rather it’s s/p’s modification of kishi’s design to sexualise her.
↳ see a further explanation here!
as stated many times previously, the issue goes deeper than chest size – especially such in shonen – and you know that, so do not patronise the issue.
this isn’t about tit measuring* and you’re much more aware of that than you let on. don’t act oblivious to strengthen an argument based in sexism.
* alike to ‘dick measuring’: in which these fictional women are forced to compete over a superficial characteristic that a male-dominated society (and, as such, industry) has deemed important, in order to demonstrate their supposed worthiness, power and overall superiority status.
“funnily enough, sakura looks better in sp versions.”
don’t do that. you don’t care about sakura... a quick look at your blog showcases that. you don’t think she looks conventionally – i.e. genuinely – “better” in s/p’s version because you wouldn’t argue over the comparison in the first place if you did. you think that she looks better because she looks worse; which you personally prefer, as that is your bias since you dislike her and/or like hinata more, therefore – due to patriarchal brainwashing out of your control regarding comparisons deemed preferable by straight men – you want her to appear superior by said superficial means of conventional attractiveness. contrary to that subconscious and man-made belief, that is not a female character’s only worth. and highlighting studio pierrot’s bias in perpetuating that ideology is the exact point of this original post.
again from the explanatory addition:
[it doesn’t matter if you personally like sakura’s animated rendition, it doesn’t matter because:] sakura’s animated rendition is plain disrespectful. it is not what the mangaka had in mind and is not true to the character, especially when it is only done/purposely deteriorated with intent to ridicule her; all to make her less appealing than hinata. they intentionally reduce her chest size, and have done so since part two began.
now please pay attention here, as this is the only reason why an argument regarding chest size actually matters:
( a ) they then they make fillers body-shaming her, mocking her – brainwashing viewers with the ideology that this is to be undesired, which goes without saying is a very backward and damaging mindset. ( b ) they consistently compare her “undesirable” attributes negatively with hinata, glorifying her with filler (through contrasting “desirable” ones).
it is only worth bringing up said argument to dismantle the misogynistic discourse and wider social issue attached, not to further it by supporting it (/those responsible by arguing for their end product).
i personally don’t know how someone can relate to a male-written, entirely one-dimensional female character who featured in canon less than 1% of the manga (since ‘naruto’ has about 12,500 pages on average and hinata was depicted on something as low as 100 of them). but if you mean fanon hinata – the studio pierrot version you’re so familiar with – wait, no, i still don’t understand relating to a character void of her great potential by blatant misogyny in the form of objectification.
“the bias is there, and s/p’s sexist discourse attached to such is the issue… along with them just, you know, being terrible animators not doing their damn job.”
turnnoffyourmind
vaporwave
jacobvanloon
tangentwithtanner
dailybridgerton
kianamaiart
yousharknotpass
