#bnha crit

[kurokoros]

One thing about BNHA that I find fascinating is the way that heroics and parenthood intersect. There aren't actually many examples of Pro Heroes having families in the series. I can only remember four notable ones, and three of them are actively detrimental towards the child(ren) involved, because the Pro Hero parent(s) prioritizes their career over the wellbeing of the child(ren).

The Iidas are the only hero family that don't really have any issues, based on what little we see of them. Tenya and Tensei both seem happy to be heroes, and the family appears to support each other after Tensei is attacked by Stain. We don't actually know enough about the Iidas (or Tenya tbh) to know exactly how heroics and parenting overlapped or if there was conflict there.

Where we can see that conflict is with the Todorokis, the Shimuras, and the Izumis (Kota and the Water Hose Duo). With all three families, there's a Hero parent (parents, in Kota's case) who, in the bluntest terms possible, really fuck up their kid(s) because their career and "the greater good" were valued more than their own children.

To start, the Water Hose duo continued to work as a team despite having a preschool aged child at home. No staggered schedule, no parent on indefinite leave from their notably dangerous career. And they're both killed by a villain while protecting civilians, leaving their three-year-old an orphan. This was extremely negligent on their part, and completely unfair of them to bring a child into the world and do nothing to ensure he wouldn't end up orphaned because of their jobs. The Water Hose duo were probably very good people, and they were certainly good heroes, but they were not good parents. They sacrificed themselves for the greater good and left their son to suffer the consequences. Ultimately, Kota is left feeling abandoned, angry, and resentful of hero society. Personally, I think this is a completely valid reaction and I never liked the way the narrative pushed for Midoriya to change Kota's mind, because Kota was never entirely wrong. The Water Hose duo may not have intended to leave their son an orphan, but nothing suggests they took precautions against this. As heroes, their deaths were noble; as parents, their deaths were traumatizing and debilitating. These are both truths that can exist.

The relationship between Nana Shimura and her son Kotaro is similar and, again, leaves a child effectively orphaned and with a crippling feeling of abandonment. Like the Water Hose duo, Nana was a very good person and Hero and clearly an excellent mentor to All Might, but, while I certainly have some empathy for Nana's situation and the difficult choices she had to make, not all of her decisions were in the best interest of her child. Obviously, the existence of OFA and AFO makes the situation complicated, and these complications are only made worse by the muddy timeline of when Nana received OFA from En and when Kotaro was born. There are two hypothetical timelines, 1) Nana marries, has a child, becomes a holder of OFA, her husband is killed by a villain, and she leaves Kotaro at a foster home and cuts all contact with him in order to protect him from AFO, or 2) Nana becomes a holder of OFA, THEN marries, has a child, etc. Neither timeline paints the most flattering picture of Nana as a mother. Like with the Water Hose duo, her duties as a Hero and holder of OFA is valued more than her duties as a mother of a young child. I can't say whether or not I think Nana made the wrong decision to cut contact with Kotaro for his own safety, because it's complex situation where none of the characters win, but the story does end with a child alone and a parent who ends up dying in the line of duty as a martyr for peace.

Not much needs to be said about the Todorokis. Endeavor valued his career and public ranking as a Pro Hero so highly that he purchased a wife, dabbled in eugenics, and abused and neglected his wife and children in nearly every way imaginable. Of his four children, three of them actively hate him at the start of the series. Touya becomes a villain with an end goal of murdering his father. Natsuo is basically no-contact with his father. And Shouto is angry and spiteful. Enji is, and always was, a shitty parent.

In conclusion: Heroes in BNHA make really shitty parents because they refuse to place their children over their careers.

[kurokoros]

The most frustrating thing about BNHA is that the villains all bring up interesting discussions about hero society and a world where super powers are the norm, but they're all written to be hypocritical or outright incompetent in order to uphold a black and white view of Heroics. There's zero nuance to any of the conversations in a way that would challenge the protagonists' views of the world.

Stain's ideology argues that hero society is filled with corruption and it was his duty to cleanse it of "false heroes" who care more about fame and money than saving people. And Stain isn't wrong, per se. Contemporary heroics during the time BNHA is set is akin to celebrity influencers who have been given a license to punch people in public. There are people who want to be Heroes for "impure" reasons. Bakugou wants to be rich and famous, per his own words early in the story. Ochako wants money for her family, which is a selfish desire (note: "selfish" isn't inherently a bad thing. Wanting a job purely for the sake of financial stability isn't inherently a bad thing, but it is interesting in the context of choosing a career that's so heavily tied to saving or protecting other people). Enji Todoroki wanted to be the number one hero so badly that he abused and neglected his wife and children in order to reach that goal; it was never about saving innocent people, it was about the glory of being seen as the strongest. Characters like Bakugou, Ochako, and Enji are so interesting because according to Stain they're everything wrong with hero society. Do any of those characters reflect on their motives for being Heroes? No. Do Iida, Shouto, or Midoriya (the characters central to the Stain arc) reflect on their own motives for being Heroes? No. Is Stain's ideology given any real weight in the narrative? Well, no, not really. As far as we know, none of Stain's victims were actually bad people who were corrupt or otherwise morally bankrupt. The only victims we know of are Tensei Iida, who appears to be an all around good person, and Native, whose only crime appears to be being incredibly culturally insensitive (sidenote: I so badly want to know what the hell Native's quirk was to make him think that aesthetic was even remotely okay.) Stain should have been an eye-opener for so many of the characters, but he wasn't because Horikoshi couldn't let him have too valid of a point.

And then there's the LOV. I'm not going to say much about the LOV because I'll just make myself sad over how poorly they were written, but! The main LOV trio does raise a lot of questions about hero society and quirks. Let's ignore AFO's involvement here for a second. Shigaraki, Toga, and Touya all have quirks that are either dangerous or otherwise seen as unsavory. Shigaraki decays anything he touches with all five fingers and he discovers this in a traumatic series of events that leave his entire family dead. Okay, so what systems are in place to either prevent things like this from happening or to help children after they've unintentionally killed someone with their quirk? None that we know of. Eri did something similar by outright rewinding her father from existence, but she's no longer traumatized so everything is fine, I guess. Toga's quirk allows her to transform into anyone so long as she's consumed their blood. She's compelled to consume blood. Okay, so how does society at large handle quirks like Toga's in a way that's safe without demonizing the people with those quirks? Well, we don't really know because Horikoshi doesn't actually want to talk about quirk discrimination as a systemic flaw, instead it's relegated to a personal flaw. [As a sidenote: it's really interesting that there are at least three characters with blood related quirks (Stain, Toga, and Vlad King) and the the two that have to consume blood to use their quirk are villains, while the one that can only control their own blood is a Pro Hero.] And then there's Touya. Now, I'll just be blunt and say that I'm of the opinion that Horikoshi sacrificed Touya and Shouto's writing in order to prop up Enji and make him look better, but that's a different discussion. Anyway, Touya's quirk hurts him. Like with Shigaraki and Toga, there doesn't appear to be any system in place for people who's quirks hurt them. Midoriya has the same issue at first, but learns to control his quirk in like three months which is, again, equating an incompatible or uncontrollable quirk with a personal flaw, rather than something that requires professional or medical support (quirks are a part of someone's DNA. The solution to a harmful or undesirable quirk shouldn't just be "don't use it", that's a bandaid, not a real solution). Could Touya's quirk have been managed with support gear? Maybe. Could Touya have lived a fulfilling life if his Pro Hero father hadn't groomed him to be his successor only to then stop, begin emotionally neglecting him, and not bother to help him control his powerful quirk? Most definitely. And this draws us right back to Stain's ideology, but we already know that Horikoshi doesn't actually want to challenge the societal status quo, so instead the villains are just "bad" or "crazy" and no one actually has to think that hard about the inherent flaws of hero society.

[w1lmutt]

Thing is, it doesn't matter if Tomura isn't dead and will be brought back in the future or not. To me, the way his character had been utilized for the story since the end of the first war arc is goddamn awful

[ironwoodatl01]

Mineta Minoru Haters

I'm not sure if they have read some older Manga which are extremely sexualized.

Mineta's shenanigans are extremely tame by comparison.

Secondly: why are people so hard up on the 'sexualization' of the girls in BNHA?

Shouldn't girls be allowed to wear what they want?

[peenalize]

either the bnha fandom is smart as hell or horikoshi is predictable as hell and sucks at writing plot twists

[peenalize]

i am. mad now so listen to my angry ranting

someone said monoma was worse than bakugou ??? because he learned how to "grow and change" and that has gotta be the STUPIDEST THING IVE EVER READ ???

point to me. one singular instance monomas done something worse than bakugou. one singular instance hes been abusive. oh whats that? you cant? exactly.

like monoma only really crosses the line once, when he was taunting iida about his run-in with stain. anything other than that he doesnt target anyone specifically, just tries to boost his class's confidence and encourage a rivalry between classes 1a and 1b.

NEED I MENTION HES 100% JUSTIFIED IN NOT LIKING CLASS 1A? like its natural hed be upset if he worked just as hard (if not harder which i think class 1b canonically has but correct me if im wrong) only for the other class to gain more recognition just because of a villain attack. id be pretty damn upset too. PLUS!! shinso hated 1a at first too (again correct me if im wrong) but no one hated him.

bakugou on the other hand has attacked others, repeatedly goes out of his way to yell and scream at them, calls others worthless, tells them to die, and has even told izuku to kill himself. not to mention hes canonically bullied izuku for about 10 years.

"oh well hes changed!!!"

when? sure, he may have apologized but heres something yall dont seem to understand. an apology is not proof of change.

plus bakugous has inconsistent character development, any good moments he does have are drowned out by him being violent or abusive. typically these scenes are played off as humorous which is a problem on its own that i can address as well,

also, if you need to have other characters tell us that a character has changed then maybe you need to re-think the way you're writing them.

bakugou has never had any genuine or meaningful character development. he HAS changed but not in the way yall think. hes changed in the way his character has been handled and written. he as a person has not changed much, if at all.

so yeah. no, monoma is not worse than bakugou. its fine to dislike monoma and enjoy bakugou since they have their own differences, its just often people hate monoma for made-up or nonsensical reasons, or the same reasons they like bakugou. its fine to just.. i dunno.. not like a character without having a good reason to? you can just not like them, theres no real reason to make up reasons to justify how you feel about a character.

[ice-cream-nekogirl]

Your recent mha take was really good. As much as I like the manga/anime, I feel like a lot of these important and impactfull moments are shallow and flawed…

Oh really? Why thank you I'm really glad that you think so! And I agree, that's honestly the sad part because I myself like the series but some of the important moments that are meant to be impactful end up falling flat because of how terribly flawed they are and because we can see it, it just feels so... shallow and hard to even grasp or get into.

What pathos the author is trying to project just isn't working for me, or others who feel the same way. So thank you so much :)

[ice-cream-nekogirl]

Civilians in a world of superheroes

My point might not make any sense and I'm pretty much just rambling but as I've seen the recent BNHA chapters I must say, I'm disappointed. Aside from my personal feelings for Uraraka, just gonna point out she's one of my least favorite characters, but her speech was clearly meant to be an emotional, moving moment but here's the truth:

It doesn't work.

Remember Captain America: Civil War? Where Tony meets an angry grieving mother whose son died in what ended up being a warzone between the Avengers and Ultron? And then Zemo later mentions that after Ultron was defeated the Avengers just went home?

Here's the thing, it truly is messed up that the very young teenagers are being forced to fight in a war that they didn't start, and the civilians shouldn't be blaming them in particular and should be mad more so at the adult pro-heroes and the entire hero organization but the truth is, I don't blame them for being wary.

Deku is a victim in these circumstances for certain, but bringing him back to UA wasn't a very bright idea? Someplace might have been better instead of where there's a bunch angry civilians.

Yet these angry civilians are being portrayed as irrational and like the worst bunch of human beings, and while they DID want to hurt Deku as his Danger Sense went off, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth that they're portrayed so badly. Think about it. One of those civilians could be just like that mother in Civil War. Who knows what these people went through during all of the damage? And yet the overall point is that they're the bad guys for being understandably wary of heroes who haven't really done much to better the situation?

It didn't look like they cleaned up any damage they did, or what the villains did either. This is why Civil War began, because civilians were justifiably upset with how much the heroes didn't do their part to patch up the damage caused. Sure I get the point in BNHA is that being a bystander IS bad because it really is and it drives in the idea that it only breeds the ugliness that creates villains but I honest to god can't fault the civilians for being upset. Especially since overall the blame still lies within the heroes, just like the blame lies within the Avengers.

The young heroes such as Deku as well as Spider-Man himself now that I think about it, are pretty blameless in this, but the sad part is that they're still indoctrinated, they still can't comprehend why maybe the heroes are responsible for most of everything that's occurred and why they're so wary. Everything has a very black and white view in BNHA, because the MCU actually does it's part to explore the grey aspects of everything, including the way civilians view these 'heroes'. I don't see BNHA taking the time to do such a thing since we get little to no real insight from civilians, and then Uraraka appealed to the good graces of the civilians and it's why they even agreed to help Deku get into UA. I get that it was ultimately for his sake but that's arguably even worse.

Before you burn me to the stake, here's the thing. Deku isn't at fault here, I know that, and he's been through enough and needs to rest but when he's the literal target of the baddest man on the planet, would you feel safe with him? And when you dial it down, Uraraka might be a nice person who cares about other people, but she pretty much asked a group of traumatized people to put aside their anger just to let a boy she likes in, that's it. Even if she does care about how they feel, I didn't get much of that.

In the end she wanted the civilians to allow Deku to 'just go home' much like the Avengers did after Ultron was defeated. To just go home and ultimately not do anything about the damage left behind. Deku maybe gets that privilege, but let's not forget that she also asked for the civlians to also extend that same privilege to the pro-heroes to 'just go home' and deal with the damage later.

That's not empathetic. Think about it, she asked a group of traumatized and angry civilians that could very much be just like Civil War's Angry mother to put aside their justified dubiousness to put some very shaky faith in a group of literal children and pro-heroes who have repeatedly failed them.

How many of those civilians lost people? How many of them are possibly grieving like that mother from Civil War?

I'm sorry but I wouldn't put my faith into them? I love those children, I love maybe 3 pro-heroes but after the repeated failures combined with the fact that Deku is the exact target of the most dangerous villain in the world, I just can't put my faith in them. Not only is it ethically wrong, but it'd be asking to just ignore any trauma suffered as an innocent civilian and help out the people responsible for the entire mess.