I'm fighting for you... Let's Discuss Ib!

Ana, that was brilliant. Hugs are in order.

From what I've heard, the nuances of his speech have been lost in the translation. But even if he doesn't speak necessarily in the same "lavender" dialect of gay Japanese men, he still comes across as ambiguously gay (although again, he could be bi or have another sexual orientation). And I agree that Garry's sexual orientation might not matter in terms of the gameplay, but that we even have opinions on a game character's sexual identity without the game focusing on that aspect itself has meaning.

Dunno if that's just how I saw Garry, or whether other people had that feeling as well.

To be perfectly honest, I never thought that his speech was unusual in any way.
Maybe it's because I'm not a native speaker, but I never noticed that he was supposed to be more polite than normal or something.

Yeah, that was something my friend pretty heavily emphasized; English just doesn't HAVE the equivalent quirks his manner of speech shows in Japanese, so there's a chunk of characterization lost to that.

That's really interesting - I wonder if there's an analysis of his speech patterns somewhere for English-speakers. I'm really curious as to what those quirks are and the cultural background behind them.

Garry apparently uses "atashi" instead of the more common (for guys) "boku" or "ore"; "atashi" is a very feminine way to refer to yourself in Japanese. That's the only thing I really remember reading about it; I think the translator might have posted something on Tumblr about the way Garry talks and the difficulty in translating it, but I didn't bookmark the post.

Seriously? Whoah. That seems really in-your-face... I don't think you can even call it just "feminine", since he's explicitly using female pronouns to refer to himself, isn't he? And that's how a certain kind of stereotypical gay guy speaks in Japan? I didn't know that, huh. He always came off as just somewhat polite and formal all right, fine, stereotypically British to me, in the English version. Not to be racist.

Does Atashi equate to pronouns such as "she" or the like? I may be mistaken, but I thought Watashi was the feminine pronoun?

Well, I don't know how stereotypical gay men speak in Japan, haha. But I've only ever heard/seen guys use "boku" and "ore" (and sometimes "watashi", I guess). But girls use "ore" and "boku" sometimes, so I would think the other way around would be okay, too? You'd just be seen as very feminine, like how girls that use "boku" and "ore" are seen as more masculine.

Watashi is the neutral/polite form of "I". Guys would use it in formal situations I think, but in everyday conversations "watashi" seems a bit more feminine? I think? I'm not sure. Somebody call somebody who can speak Japanese!

You know, he never sounded British to me either.
He just sounded pretty normal.
Then again, I guess it's because I'm not a native speaker.

I am trying to get a hold of my Japanese friend explicitly for the purposes of figuring out the quirks of Garry's speech pattern to see if that in any way affects people's view of his sexuality. What am I doing with my life.

Yeah, it depends on a lot of things; I can see where she's getting British from because, A) I am a native speaker of English, and B) I know a lot of British people and they do share some similarities. Plus there's a bit of a stereotype in America especially that British English is much more formal than American English.

I don't really have anything to add to the convo, but I just wanted to drop this off.

Aggghhh that thumbnail my heart aggggghhhhhhhhhhh you're murdering me, Flonne, MURDERING ME

So I'm looking through the translator's Tumblr, trying to find more information about the way Garry talks, and oh my god these pictures

If you're curious, here's the translator's Ib tag. (There are Ib dolls!)

Found the translation talk!

"Garry totally talks like a lady. He uses “atashi” to refer to himself and other speech patterns associated with girls, which in turn associates him with gay males. I feel kouri mostly did this to make Garry kind of a “big sister” figure to Ib - as he says, it’s better to be gentle - so I didn’t want to go overboard and make him sound like a stereotypical homosexual or anything. It’s hard to strike the right balance of avoiding that and still having people pick up on it, but, you know. Engliiiiish.

Ib’s question in the safe room is technically not “Why do you talk like a lady?”, but just “Why do you talk that way?” (I changed it because it sounded better and helped bring the fact that Garry’s supposed to sound feminine to people’s attention.) If she were more knowledgeable, she’d probably ask him something like “Why do you use that onee dialect, Gyarii-onee-chan~?” To which he’d reply: “New rule of the gallery: Don’t call me that.”"

Here is where I found it!

When RPing, I turned to formal, "Britishisms" because English just doesn't have the same gendered self-identification terms. I is I, no gender about it. But again, that sounds like feminate homosexuality stereotypes.

And Now I have a mental image of Ib calling Garry onee-chan and playing dress up with him.

I guess this goes into a bigger question: is there even a way to represent homosexual characters that do not rely on stereotypes? Is it inherently wrong and insulting to do so? Or does that represent the "voice" of the GLBTQ community? Is there even a voice? Can you use these dialects or mannerisms to portray a character respectfully?

Honestly, and I've discovered this is a really unpopular opinion please don't eat me alive for it, I don't find the concept of stereotypes to be that offensive. It's generalization, sure, but when you're trying to talk about an entire group of people there are going to be traits that are going to be more prevalent, and those are usually what get stereotyped. I don't really understand why people think stereotypes are so offensive unless they're wildly negative; and I don't really think 'speaks and/or acts in a more traditionally feminine manner' is that negative. Though thinking it is opens a whole new bucket of worms. No person is going to be completely stereotypical, it just doesn't happen, but having some of those 'stereotypical' traits doesn't necessarily ruin a character. Ib isn't very deep in character development, but it's well-written enough that I have no doubt that if we'd seen more of Garry's character, he wouldn't just be one big 'gay Japanese male' stereotype.

tl;dr: If your character is entirely a stereotype, you're probably doing it wrong. But I don't think 'stereotypical' elements will ruin a character.

I've always thought that Garry was Garry. I didn't think too much into his sexuality.

In any case, Garry's character was well done, in the bad end especially, and I got attatched to him. It wouldn't matter if Garry was gay, exhibiting stereotypical gay traits, or any other node on the spectrum. Garry's effeminite-ness and his ambiguous sexuality didn't detract from his character, nor did it define his character.

It all comes down to the issue of representation.

If you look at the representation of straight cis-men in fiction, for example, you're going to get a wide variety of vastly different kinds of straight cis-men. This is despite the fact that gender stereotypes can just be as pervasive as sexual orientation stereotypes. There are male characters who are horrible caricatures of masculinity, but there are just as many male characters who are well-rounded individuals of their own that are treated with respect by both creators and consumers. Why do we have a problem portraying, say, gay males, in contrast? Part of the problem is just that there's not enough representation. Because there's a tendency for the majority to view minorities as a homogenized mass of the same stereotypical quirks. Sure, some gay guys may lisp, some gay guys may be feminine. But not all of them are, and it's disrespectful to portray them as such in the same way that it would be disrespectful if all straight cis-men were portrayed as, I don't know, aggressive sex-obsessed womanizers.

In the same way, it isn't necessarily inherently disrespectful to make your gay male character feminine. But it's a problem when society as a whole systematically portrays gay males as feminine. Though going too far the other way and saying all feminine gay guys are bad stereotypes is being dismissive of individual gay guys who, guess what, ARE feminine and who like fashion and girly things and the whole host of stereotypes that surround them. There is nothing wrong with being feminine, or liking fashion. The fact that it's so often portrayed in a negative light is the problem, not the traits themselves.

Really, there isn't any one single "correct" way to represent minority characters, and part of the problem is assuming that there is. What we really need is a wider variety of LGBTQ characters in media, portraying the vastly different experiences that LGBTQ people go through in real life, I mean, just think of the intersection of sexuality with class, with culture, with race, with nationality, with gender. A gay guy is different from a gay girl is different from a working class lesbian is different from a wealthy gay urban professional. The problem is people so often lump us all into a single homogenized mass that's safe for heteronormative consumption.

There's a problem in assuming there's a 'correct' way to represent any character, regardless of whether they're a minority or not. They should just be a person (or robot or demon or humanoid abomination or whatever they are), plain and simple. At least to me.

But stereotypes do not have to be negative to be detrimental to the group being stereotyped. Steteotypes help reinforce othet steteotypes (if gays are effeminate, then they must also like fashion!). Stereotypes limit how meaningfully others interact with the group in question: the stereotyped can only be judged in terms of the stereotypes. Act outside of these expectations,and people get bewildered: why don't you like fashion if you're gay? People even get angry for running contrary to their expectations. You can even get advice of how to be more "gay" or whichever group being discussed.

It's horribly insulting: you do not determine your own identity. You are appraised with respect to this false societal (and a very limited one at that as depicted by the mainstream "norm") and if you do not fit, then you are wrong. You are the pronlem, not the stereotype. You just aren't gay, feminine, ethnic enough. You cannot interact with others without them assuming they already have you down like a handbook. You are not your own person.

True. Even positive stereotypes can be just as insulting because it assumes that the group in question is all the same. It's natural to view an out-group as homogeneous and the people in an in-group as differentiated individuals, but the problem comes when the "in-group" (majority) has the power (through greater numbers/societal power/influence over media) to enforce their views of the out-group (tailored to fit the majority's tastes and desires) as the objective truth. (This isn't a conscious process, of course; implicit prejudices shape the fictions we create, that's all.) That's why minorities can be prejudiced against themselves. That's why minorities can feel the pressure to perform when they feel like they're being judged by the majority, to be a good "representative" of their group, which leads to ugly things like performance anxiety and low self-esteem which then just helps to perpetuates those stereotypes. Generalizations, of course, not saying that that's necessarily true for everyone, just that problems like that do exist. And that's why we should pay special attention to how we represent minorities or oppressed social groups in fiction, because whatever we put down on the page, however insignificant it might seem, contributes to the very real issue of how people actually view and stereotype and behave towards these groups in real life. It's only responsible.

You know, the term "trap", for example? The archetypal idea that a boy who looks exactly like a girl is somehow a "trap" to lure in unsuspecting heterosexual men into the icky world of gayness? It's a funny idea, isn't it? You know that transwomen actually get killed and abused in real life by homophobic/transphobic male partners who believe they are "really men" and thus that they were "tricked" into a gay relationship somehow? Yeah. Not to say that we shouldn't endeavour to treat ALL characters with respect and try to portray them as real human beings; just that it's a worthy cause to try to suss out the problems and pitfalls with representing certain oppressed minorities in fiction because that can have lead to repercussions in real life for them that might not necessarily happen in the same way or to the same extent with more privileged social groups.

Anyway what I was mainly trying to say is that that's why we need a wide variety of representations in media - so we don't just get the same set of stereotypes over and over again. We are individuals. Treat us as such.

Baskets of hugs, Ana.

One aspect I'd have to contest, though, is whether the "in-group" must necessarily be the majority. That certainly promotes it, but the main influence (I would argue) comes from who has the power to put themselves at the center of the universe, as an objective viewer by marginalizing everyone else. Being the majority does not have to be a necessary requirement for this process to occur.

I think, rather than the majority, the negative aspects of certain individuals seem to speak louder and stick with the psyche of person much more than the positive aspects of the majority.
For example, not all fangirls are crazed and defiantly defensive.
However, the certain few that are tend to get more attention.

Yup! All social groups treat themselves as the "in-group", that's part and parcel of having a group identity, after all. (Individuals may be part of multiple social groups and identify with each to differing extents, of course.) It's just that certain groups have more influence over others, as you said. I should've specified that I didn't necessarily mean "majority" in terms of population numbers, but in terms of social/political/economical power.

I can see everyone's eyes glazed over: I came here for Garry and Ib and roses, why are they talking about stereotypes and sociopolitical power?

Because settling these issues lets us all rest a little easier for the 'morrow.

I can't believe I didn't even know about the existence of this thread.

Please accept my most humble apology. My friend made it.

Send your friend our love. And our laughter. :D

That's cool! Does your friend have a gallery or site where they put other art? I would like to see more of it, if it's possible.

Done! 8Db

Yes, here's his DeviantArt~

I leave for a few months and this thread turns into a debate about the representation of minorities and sociopolitical power.
I love you guys so much.

Back to the point. I think, and this is my personal opinion, the big issue with stereotypes (even with the more 'harmless' ones) is that they're all a product of the patriarchy that has ruled over our lives for centuries. To this day, things that are considered 'girly' (fashion, jewelry, etc) are seen as inherently bad; even if you are a cis-woman. It's everywhere - that pretty, fashionable girl in highschool? She's probably a bitch. The media tell us that! So it must be true, right? So when men, any kind of men, are seen having 'feminine' traits, it's instantly a bad thing. They're being mocked, or stereotyped, or whatever. There's not a single chance that a 'normal' man would like that sort of thing!
It's ridiculous, really, but unfortunately is also a reality. As people, we are expected to fit a particular label with its particular set of traits - it's been forgotten that labels fit us, not the other way around. Personal experience: my brother often jokes about me being a lesbian because I am rather 'unfeminine'. It won't get into his head that not all lesbians behave as your stereotypical guy.
But the idea that feminity or metrosexuality are bad is, I believe, the root of the problem. Why is it bad? If you ask a cis-person, there's a high probability that they'll answer "because those things are for girls/are not for boys". Why? Who decided that? The concept that an entire part of the population has to miss on something harmless and enjoyable only because 'it's not for them' is bogus, to say the least. And on the flipside, the concept of somebody having to behave in a certain way to fit someone else's idea of a 'correct' representation of their persona is, simply put, selfish.
tl;dr, some people like stuff, some other people like other stuff, and sometimes they like the same things. It's really not such a difficult concept when one thinks about it.

That may be worded weirdly. I love debating and learning things from you guys, you are all wonderful.

Back to Garry/the game! Now that you mention it, maybe his use of 'watashi' is similar to the use of 'ore' by Haruhi from OuranHC. I dunno, it just popped in my head. And derailing some more, I think Haruhi was a very well made character - in a world were everyone was basically a caricature of a stereotype, Haruhi was the more realistic in-between, and honestly, that was probably the whole point of the show; she herself went meta sometimes and wondered aloud why everyone else acted in such and such ways.

You are now imagining Ouran Host Garry offering you macarons and a lovely rose after he settles you into the most comfortable seat.

Ozzo, stop making me want things I can't have.

I died. You just killed me with that mental image, Ozzo. Thank you.


(I also cannot recognize any of you guys with these new avatars, I mean BANANA WHY AREN'T YOU A BANANA ANYMORE???)

Now I'm imagining Tamaki's soul inside Garry's body. Ozzo, this is your fauuuulllttt /blush max/

As soon as Machinations of Light's Glory (a mafiaesque game hosted in the January subforum) finishes, I'll probably return to Garry.

Why, poreperuke? Why do you associate Garry with that "I'm your daddy!" Tamaki? D:

Because... because... They have the same wavy hair and they're similar in the way they act and they have roses /../

You could have imagined Garry's soul inside Tamaki's body.
Why, I think we need more Garrys in this world, don't you agree?

I dunno, I like the whole purple-haired business Garry's got going on.