warlordgab - Tumblr blog

warlordgab · 3 months

Text

Analysis of shipping: Found family and pseudo-incest?

Last year I was requested this rebuttal to detractors, but it took a long time to make because it was hard to pinpoint where these arguments came from

But, after one perceptive individual nailed it right on the head, I finally had something to work with

So, let's start with the argument: "These characters can't end up together because they're like family/siblings, so that would be incest"

This isn't unique to one single fandom. Antis had used this reasoning against NaLu and similar pairings in the past, based on the fact Natsu and Lucy belonged to the same guild, a community that treated its members as "family"

Needless to say, they stopped using it after seeing how Mashima made pairings like Gajeel and Levy, or Gray and Juvia, pretty much canon. Making it clear that romantic relationships between members of this particular circle or community were perfectly fine (That doesn't mean cheating is fine though!).

But, this argument still persists in other fandoms. One Piece is not the exception, where the anti-LuNa crowd constantly tries to paint all romantic potential between Luffy and Nami as "incest" because they're "siblings."

Let us address something first, what's incest?

"Sexual intercourse between persons so closely related that they are forbidden by law to marry"

- Merriam-Webster, 2024

"Marriage or sexual intercourse with a relative within the prohibited degree of consanguinity. In other words, incest is sexual contact between close blood relatives"

- LII / Legal Information Institute, 2024

After 1000+ chapters worth of story, nothing implies Luffy and Nami as related by blood. So, where does the argument comes from?

In reality, antis are using a concept people don't often hear about: pseudo-incest

It's not a widely known term, in fact, it's not even in the Oxford English Dictionary (OEA), the Cambridge Dictionary, or Merriam-Webster.

However, we can still find some defintions that helps us to understad what do LuNa detractors mean with this?

"Sexual involvement between family members who are not blood relations (e.g., siblings by adoption, stepparents and stepchildren, in-laws)."

- Wiktionary, 2024

Once, again we hit another wall, since Luffy wasn't adopted by Nami's family, nor Nami was adopted into his. So, why do antis claim they're "like" siblings?

Let's go from the minor statement to the big one. The first argument is that "The have a sibling-like dynamic"

This is one is odd, because it can come from actual unawareness about the nature of relationships, or the malicious use of the common traits seen in all sorts of human connections

After all, all healthy relationships, either being with relatives, companions, or potential romantic partners, are defined by affection, shared values, support, and sometimes a little bit of discord and/or conflict

If we were to use these traits to label the connection between two characters as that of "siblings," we could describe a lot of official pairings (and potent relationships) from a huge lot of stories as "siblings" instead of lovers/spouses.

Let's use a potent relationship as example: Sabo and Koala feel affection for one another, share similar values, support each other, and may have an argument from time to time...

...does that make them "siblings"? What about Ace and Isuka? Does the combination of affection, support, and occasional conflict rule out any possibility of a relationship upgrade?

If we apply this "measurement" to official pairings from other series, we're likely to jump to similarly flawed conclusions about their relationships.

However, even if there are similarites, there are several differences. For bonds outside our family circle. we may see chosen affinity, sometimes a greater attachment and/or emotional codependecy, a strong passion, and even a deeper sense of compromise coming from the willing choice of those involved.

Potent relationships have all of this, even if they're yet to become canon. And due to their emotional chemistry, LuNa seems more like a deep companionship with the potential to evolve rather than a sibling-like bond

However, that was just the minor statement from western fans. We may deduce some say this because they can't picture a romantic relationship without one (or both characters) being a total simp; perhaps they're so used to the "loveable perv" trope, that their idea of romance relies how horny the characters act with one another; or maybe they just too enamored with the cool good-looking buff guy to acknowledge anything deep, but I digress...

Still, we're yet to address the elephant in the room, the bigger argument, which is a combination of two things:

Just like some anti-NaLu fans did ages ago, a lot of anti-LuNa fans take their "sibling" argument from the same place every other permutation of this reasoning came from, a misuse of another concept: Family of choice

Family of choice, Chosen Family or Found Family, all refer to a group of people who willingly stick together to provide each other with the sense of community and belonging, as well as a feeling of affection, joy and security inherent to a functional family, without being related by blood.

It's seen as an alternative to those who faced rejection from their biological family, or society itself, and even to people who lost their relatives to tragedies or disasters.

It's a useful literary device to develop characters due to how flexible it is, given that members of these groups don't need to fill particular roles for their relationships to work, which provides authors with a lot of freedom in terms of writing.

However, some detractors have been abusing the "family" part of the term to argue against pairings that have enough development and history together for a natural relationship upgrade. How?

By limiting each character to a specific role: Father, Mother, Sibling, etc.

This allows them to claim, that characters within "Found Families" cannot become couple because that would be pseudo-incest.

As some people already noticed, this makes no sense; it replaces the versatility of the trope with a far more rigid, static, and limited form of narrative; and goes against what the idea of "Found Family" was supposed to be, which is an alternative to "family," not a carbon copy of the traditional family structure.

So, how does this argument survives logic and reason?

Well, here's the elephant in the room: in the SBS Volume 48, Oda was asked the question: "If the Straw Hats really were an actual family, who would be the dad, and who would be the mom?"

The following was Oda's answer:

Dad: Franky (Thug)

Mom: Robin

First Son: Zoro

Second Son: Sanji (Punk)

Daughter: Nami

Third Son: Usopp

Fourth Son: Luffy

Youngest: Chopper

In the SBS Volume 50, Oda added Brook would be the "Grandfather" "If you Likened the Crew to Family".

Here we have another example of a quote taken out of context, because the question was 'if they really were an actual family', and Oda later framed his answer as "Position in the crew if they were a family."

It was never about the strawhats being "an actual family," it was merely mindless fun with a "what if." To drive that point home, Sanji still gets horny for both Nami and Robin, yet nobody in their right mind would accuse him of lusting after his "sister" and "mother," because they're not actual relatives.

And this leads us to a couple of plot twists: all of this started because of the song "Family" performed by the strawhats seiyuus which, while invoking the "Found Family" trope, includes the following statement:

"We're not relatives… we're not even siblings!" (親戚じゃなくて　兄弟じゃない)

Which pretty much kills the "they're like siblings" argument used by detractors to liken LuNa to pseudo-incest.

The second plot twist comes from the SBS Volume 99, Oda says that if the cew was an actual family Jinbei would be the "father," replacing Franky who would now be given the position of "pervy granny"

This proves two things. First, that such "positions" are neither "fixed" or "absolute," they're malleable and can be changed or altered at any given moment.

Second, that this "Family" thing amounts to a mere joke, it's just a silly little game with no real impact on the story and characters. Although the idea of Frobin Vs. Jinbin(?) sounds amusing, but I digress.

So, what's the conclusion?

Even if the strawhats are an example of "Family of choice," that doesn't make the greatest potential relationship upgrade within the crew problematic, it all depends on how the author handles the situation. And given Oda is a top tier writer, we got nothing to worry if he decides to pull the trigger

And, despite what huge players within the community said before, Oda never claimed the strawhats were "an actual family." So any accusation of pseudo-incest, whether subtle or direct, is just the result of general ignorance, misinformation, and/or personal agendas

BONUS

There are times in manga/anime when one character refers to another as brother/sister/sibling, despite not being related.

One example would be Winry from Fullmetal Alchemist, who claimed Edward is like a "brother" to her. However, given that they're not related, nothing stopped them from falling in love, ending up together, and having children...

If we rely on the same reasoning used by antis, we could conclude this relationship is problematic. However, even if they have some moments when Winry goes ballistic on Ed...

...nobody in their right mind would dare to say their relationship is akin to pseudo-incest.

Oddly enough, we have a case in One Piece, when one character (Kinemon) made a similar brother/sibling claim to Tsuru, using a similar reasoning to that of Winry's...

I'll give you three guesses on how these two ended up, the first two don't count

#one piece #fairy tail #fullmetal alchemist #analysis of shipping #analysis #found family #family of choice #debunking myths #ルナミ

51 notes · View notes

warlordgab · 1 year

Text

Analysis of shipping: One Piece anti-romance arguments

Years before Oda was asked to write Strong World, years before the Summit War saga, even years before many of us joined the fandom, a significant portion of fans shared an anti-romance sentiment.

This perspective was so widespread that it seemed as if the One Piece community in general was convinced no pairing would ever become canon. Sure, there were some exceptions:

Some people dispalyed indifference toward the anti-romance trend, but also towards the emotional narrative of the story. So, they would likely support shallow premises anyway

Others shipped characters by relying on inter-series comparisons that no longer hold up nowadays. (it didn't take long for perceptive individuals to find out how unlikely those "theories" truly were)

Some of these people were editors on other wiki sites, that pointed out how filler provided shipping fuel for stuff that never gets actual development in the manga. And yet, the same editors also promoted a non-existent "sexual tension" as many shallow shippers would, but I digress.

Still, since that era, a lot of arguments had been made for this position regarding romantic love; some were forgotten, and some stuck but in pretty unexpected ways.

So, here we’re going to consider those arguments, how bad they aged, and what possibly led to the anti-romance idea losing its initially strong foothold in the fandom.

The anti-romance idea through time

Firts, let us consider that one of the most important elements that helped the anti-romance idea to grow was how Oda talked about the subject. When the mangaka was asked about if someone from strawhats (except Sanji) was in love, he replied in a SBS they were all "in love with adventure."

While that was a pretty creative answer, it seems some readers weren't satisfied with Oda’s reply. But, it wasn’t like fans couldn’t agree that the statement was technically a correct.

Not to mention that fans back then didn’t have the Hancock character westerners simp so hard for. Instead, they had Alvida as the first woman calling dibs on Luffy...

... But, this was easy to dismiss given how they never became allies or friends.

Still, that doesn’t mean the anti-romance idea didn’t have its weak spots. In fact, Oda gave us an interesting “insight” on one scene, that LuNa fans loved, in the SBS Volume 32:

This was long before Summit War saga. It's interesting how the only girl that managed to make Luffy a “little horny" was Nami.

It’s true that the Oda’s answer would later change to what basically amounts to “bad influence,” when he was confroted with the fact Hancock’s beauty couldn’t get the same response from Luffy. But, the fact, still remains that it was Luffy’s response, unless people want to argue Luffy’s companions have a greater influence on his libido than Hancock’s beauty ever could. Doesn’t sound so good when you think about it, does it?

Of course, a lot of perceptive readers and even some anti-shippers know that being as “horny” as a “healthy boy” is not something inherently romantic. So, even if this moment left a crack on the anti-romance argument by displaying Luffy’s “healthy” reponse to Nami’s sex appeal, that still wasn’t enough to debunk it.

Needless to say, some anti-shippers may claim being “horny” is a must for a relationship to grow, but that myopic perspective completely disregards how emotional connections can develop by sharing meaningful moments instead of lusting after a potential partner.

Moving on, Oda’s vagueness back then just encouraged readers to keep discussing the subject of potential romance by relying on the manga material they had so far. Still, the anti-romance crowd would shortly get another argument, when Oda stated the following:

“One Piece is basically a shonen manga, manga for boys, so romance isn’t depcited“

Ironically, this is where the another crack in the anti-romance idea starts to show. As many chapters later, we got something subtle about Usopp and Kaya at the end of the Ennies Lobby arc.

But, the fact the story focused more on its plot, themes, and other characters, probably made it easier for everyone to miss how this relationship could contradict the 'no romance depcited' argument.

Later, the fandom got introduced to Boa Hancock. While Alvida’s interest in Luffy got scratched as “not romantic enough,” Hancock’s infatuation for the hero couldn’t be ignored due to how over-the-top it was. But, it still wasn’t enough, why?

Because the relationship between Luffy and Hancock never develops into something deep or truly impactful, as Hancock’s crush remains as one-sided as it can get.

Luffy’s rejection to Hancock’s proposal just made it a lot easier for the anti-romance argument to stay strong despite the few cracks it had at that time.

Specially, when you factor context. Luffy’s reply was framed as a negative response to Hancock’s promotion of herself as a potential wife. Add Luffy’s personality to this setup, and no matter how you try to put it, he sunk that ship before it had a chance to sail.

Debunking the “no romance” myth?

So far, we’ve seen things that could a best put a dent on the anti-romance argument. But, what actually destroyed this myth?

We have to flashforward to the Dressrosa arc. Two pairings with tragic backstories were introduced: Kyros and Scarlett & Señor Pink and Russian

Kyros' relationship Scarlett story serves as part of the compelling drama of his background. And we can tell how Pink’s relationship with Russian made his character and current state and struggle emotionally impactful.

This obviously destroyed the argument of “no romance in One Piece” and contradicts Oda’s own “romance isn’t depcited”

It became easy to see that romantic love was not only playing a part in the story, but it was doing so in a way that didn’t negatively impact the author’s work. Instead, Oda used romantic love to enhance both character and story.

And this wasn’t going to be the last time, as One Piece Film: Gold gaves us something we’re about to consider in the following section, as Tesoro and Stella were depicted as lovers.

However, the greatest blow to this argument was delivered by something that not many people saw coming: SanPu's tragic love story

We already know that Pudding’s initial affection was just an act to fool Sanji and carry out Big Mom’s plot against the Vinsmoke family. But, as soon as she has her first genuine moment with Sanji, she develops actual feelings for him as the chef shattered the image she had of her own self for years.

Needless to say, due to their respective crews being enemies, this relationship couldn’t become official, as Pudding gives Sanji a pretty romantic farewell... before removing it from his memory.

Here, romantic love plays a important role in the emotional narrative of the final scenes.

I could mention Kinemon and O-Tsuru, as well as Oden and Toki, but I think that would be overkill at this point.

Still, while the “no romance” myth got destroyed, the anti-shippers didn’t give up, those who saw how this approach became ineffective in promoting anti-romance just made their arguments undergo a microevolution. And this is where we get to the final stage:

“They’re in love... with adventure”

Given that the statment of “romance isn’t depcited” became completely useless, one would think that’s the end. But, instead of trying to encompass the entirety of One Piece, the idea came back to its origin.

All strawhats are “in love with adventure,” so accordig to self-aware anti-shippers, there will be no romantic relationships between members of the strawhat crew, because adventure is their only “love.” But, as the philosopher George Santayana once said:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”

And even the old version of this argument started to shows some cracks at the Zou arc:

Nami was both happy and eager to receive Luffy and the rest, and as pointed out by perceptive readers, she could've ran to someone else, like Zoro, something some westerners in high positions clearly wanted, but I digress.

Instead, she went straight to Luffy and only then she let out how she felt about their current predicament with Sanji...

...people try to downplay it by saying the moment was all about the chef. But, the thing is, not only she could’ve ran to someone else's arms, she ran straight to Luffy, but also poured her heart out only when she was with him.

This scene was truly remarkable as it was not only impactful, but also consistent with previous developments between Luffy and Nami as seen in Oda's works.

As we already already analyzed multiple times in this blog, this matches the trend of Nami seeking (and finding) hope, comfort, and strength in Luffy.

While this isn't something explicitly romantic, this consistent bonding could likely lead to a potential growth and an eventual relationship upgrade if the author keeps working on it.

After Dressrosa damaged the credibility of their arguments, and the possibility of more development from characters so important to the story, anti-shippers had seen better days. But, that wasn’t the only thing that left another crack on the last anti-romance argument.

Let’s talk about One Piece Film: Gold

At this point, a lot of LuNa fans, and many people who read my post already how Oda changed the climax of One Piece Film: Gold, and his work speaks for itself...

...as explained in the special Volume 777, Tesoro was in a romantic relationship with a slave: Stella. Their romance ended up in tragedy when he failed to save her from getting bought by a noble.

If we see the climax of the movie, as well as Oda’s draft of the scene, we can see that the intent was for Luffy’s situation with Tesoro holding Nami in his grasp to mirror Tesoro’s own tragedy back when he lost Stella. And thus Oda drew a parallel between Luffy/Nami, and a romantic pair: Tesoro/Stella.

However, many people would find such things too subtle or simply insufficient. But, even if we ignore emotional narrative and trends, the real weak spot in this “no romance in the crew” argument, is the basis itself: “They’re in love with adventure”

This isn’t only a clever response, and a way to avoid the subjet. It is a reminder of what One Piece is at its very core.

You probably don’t hear this one pretty often, but One Piece story is “romance.” In fact, here are some definitions that show how that statement is far more accurate than more people would imagine:

Romance:

“A mysterious or fascinating quality or appeal, as of something adventurous, heroic, or strangely beautiful”

“A long fictitious tale of heroes and extraordinary or mysterious events, usually set in a distant time or place”

“A narrative in verse or prose, written in a vernacular language in the Middle Ages, dealing with strange and exciting adventures of chivalrous heroes”

– thefreedictionary.com, 2016

“A prose narrative treating imaginary characters involved in events remote in time or place and usually heroic, adventurous, or mysterious”

– Merriam Webster, 2016

Romantic:

“Marked by the imaginative or emotional appeal of what is heroic, adventurous, remote, mysterious, or idealized”

“Having an inclination for romance: responsive to the appeal of what is idealized, heroic, or adventurous”

– Merriam Webster, 2016

Remember what’s the title of the first chapter of the manga? “Romance Dawn.”

The claim of the strawhats being in love with adventure fits the definition of “romance” in the framework of the series. But, does this concept exclude romantic love?

No, this narrative style can easily include romantic love if the author wishes to. In fact, as far as we seen, One Piece featured this kind of relationships multple times in the story.

So, trying to uphold this anti-romance phylosophy is ultimately pointless as the only argument left is not enough anymore, and the story already debunks most, if not all of the arguments.

Shippers take the anti-romance approach?

While anti-shippers don’t have a solid ground to stand on, some of their arguments are still used nowadays. Ironically, they’re used by shippers in an attempt to discredit rival pairings

This why the “no romance in the crew” lives on. More often than not, shallow shippers don’t even try to quote the author, instead they repeat what they hear or read in YouTube or Reddit.

This applies to many newcomers that lack the time and patience to stomach a long-running series, as well as people who let their bias for certain characters dicatate their view on the story, something akin to the mindset that feeds the endless squabble of Zoro Vs. Sanji.

Still. the point is that the anti-romance arguments are now the greatest assets for pretty loud individuals to wage shipping wars out of ignorance and hate.

However, this doesn’t mean that there aren’t any active anti-shippers using these arguments. It’s just that LuNa seem to be their favorite target

But, that leads to the question: Why LuNa? Why are pairings like LuHan, SaNa or ZoNa seemingly getting ignored by anti-shippers for the most part?

Well, you guys probably realize I haven’t mentioned Sanji at all in the “Debunking” section. That’s wasn’t something incidental

By the time, the community rebuffed the idea of romantic love in the series, Sanji with all his corny flirting and pervy gags never made a dent in the anti-romance arguments because most people knew back then that being horny is not something romantic. Even when Hancock appeared, fans knew a well-written pairing could only happen if the feelings between the characters become mutual.

So, what makes Luna the favorite target of these people? What makes the pairing stand out to anti-shippers?

Is it because their consistent bonding is the perfect setup for a relationship upgrade? Is it because their moments are far more meaningful and impactful from a narrative standpoint? Or is it because the alternatives to LuNa lack the potential to grow? I’m not sure about it

Still, those who had seen all of this, know better. At this point, anti-romance arguments mean little to nothing in the story. And Oda will keep writing characters and human relationships regardless of what fans do or say.

So, instead of going around making noise about how “there shouldn’t be a romantic relationship in the crew” or trying to start senseless war between fandoms, we should enjoy the ride and see what Oda has in store for us in the final saga.

#one piece #Analysis of shipping #analysis #anti-romance #eiichiro oda #anti-shippers #ルナミ #sanpu

156 notes · View notes