Balthazar Manfredie 226 Report post Posted March 21, 2015 i dont see whats the big idea with this topic anyway i only posted ichirou cause i was reading the manga and he was the culprit no need to get upset over this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
38cutie 1 Report post Posted March 21, 2015 they're A-N-T-I V-I-L-L-A-I-N-S anti-villains, not fuckin' bitches or whatsoever. and i was talking about chiharu shirakawa, hitomi, miki kitagawa and juri himuro, those are my favorite culprits, because they're not mercyless demons, and they garner my sympathy, and they never runaway from the authorities, and i hope they acomplish with the punishment, i see the grief and remorse on their eyes. and sorry for my trash-talking, i'm just nervous to see your answers. and i will keep insisting until you understand me, and justify my replies. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Balthazar Manfredie 226 Report post Posted March 21, 2015 You might get some heat because of your swearing...edit fast Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kenzi 146 Report post Posted March 21, 2015 Reading this topic reminds me of the moronic facebook posts made by some girls who thought the Boston Bomber brothers were innocent because one of them was cute. Yes, that was a thing. Justice is blind for a good reason. I find Shinichi and Ran idealistic when it comes to their principles about murder. One way to look at ethics is to measure how much someone values sticking to good principles versus good outcomes. A principle-driven person would not support bad means even if it led to a very good end, while an outcome-driven person would be upset when good principles prevented good ends. Shinichi and Ran are both very principled, and that works well in places like Japan which is attentive to crime. It is hard to be principled in places that are unfair. For instance, there have been lots of cases in India where repeat rapists and killers who kept getting away because of connections or threats were then killed by mobs. (Akku Yadav was a famous one.) Is it worth standing by your principle not to murder when a rapist will keep attacking the women and children in your community with no hope of justice? That's the sort of decisions some people have to face. Even though I live in a nice country, I can recognize adherence to principles is a luxury rather than universal law that will work well for everyone. That's why I think that Shinichi and Ran are idealistic - they are inexperienced when it comes to struggles others have to face in unfair places. Mostly I hate it when Gosho tries to say one side of the ethics measure I mentioned above is the right one. There was a moment of really strong values dissonance in the fandom when Sera tried to get that hostage taker shot in Mouri agency hostage case but Ran stopped her because she didn't want him to be killed. Gosho made it seem like Sera was worse than Ran for trying to put a good outcome ahead of good principles. I don't like that sort of simplistic thinking about ethics. Both sides have their merits. In those instances, the killing would be done as an act of self-defense, and not necessarily as an act revenge--which differs greatly from the average DC case where someone is murdered for the sake of "getting even" I know this isn't the time to mention linguistics (just wanted to clarify one of my previous posts), but I don't think "murder" would be the right term to use for what happened to Akku Yaday. "Killing" through acts of self-defense is more fitting in my opinion. Most DC cases are clear-cut and formulaic in telling us morals like "you shouldn't murder someone for inheritance" so they fail to address the ethics behind situations such as what happened to the rapist you mentioned. I remember reading a similar article a while ago and I do, in fact, agree with what those women did. Also, you brought up a good point with the Mouri agency hostage case. I've always considered myself as an outcome driven person rather than a principle driven person. In the Mouri agency hostage case, Ran's ideal was "all or nothing". Anything further provoking the hostage taker would have meant putting everyone's lives on the line (or at least more so), versus just one-- the hostage taker. If anything, I thought it made Ran look more rash and naive for not assessing the extra risks that came with her notion. i hope when they're released they will be different persons to regain respect and sympathy. because one day i stoled 50 € from my brother to buy a videogame, but when they noticed that the person who stoled this bill was me, i felled in sorrow and regret and i never did it again so you're saying that you didn't regret taking the money until after you were caught, and you're using this to defend the murderers because they "felt bad" after murdering someone? bias is littered in every response you've posted so far. and from what I've gathered, your argument looks something like this: -they're "cuties" -they're sorry for murdering someone therefore they shouldn't be punished also, these are minor characters. DC isn't focused on the ethics of determining what punishment these people receive. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kyuu Nye 425 Report post Posted March 21, 2015 Gosho has always made it a point to paint the culprits in his manga as something readers could sympathize with. The point of this is to drive home the ideal that no matter the situation, murder [and other crime] is wrong. Even within the Black Org there are lights in the darkness. Gosho is painting with ideals, which isn't bad, but certainly not realistic. I think that is part of the reason why I've slowly drifted from reading DC recently. (though I'm not done with this fandom yet, I will see this series through to the end) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
38cutie 1 Report post Posted March 21, 2015 hobgoblin2012 you are the only one who understand me, so let's be Pals, buddies, friends or whatever. you're the only one who understand my feelings on those four ladies. i do well to have sympathy on them, or not? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
38cutie 1 Report post Posted March 24, 2015 i know those cutíes from my first reply are murderers, but they did it for a noble cause. but they still have a heart with light, regret and grief for their evil dids, for that reason they're not completely evil, neither crazy freaks. because if they were, they'll would kill every eyewitness and got away like some kinda of karma houdini, but they didn't, and that makes them murderers with dignity of defeat, and they are worthy of our sympathy and my friendship. and that makes them to be anti-villains and they'll probably perform a heel-face turn and even better to be redeemed. what do you think? i'm i right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chekhov MacGuffin 1089 Report post Posted March 24, 2015 The general rules of the forum are don't double post unless you have something important to add because a situation has changed. This is to prevent people from bumping pet topics infinitely. Begging people for replies is not appropriate. If you keep spamming your own topic, I'm going to lock it. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
