Sharpedon said:The most preposterous episode yet, and I mean in a bad way. The panty thief bits were funny but treating freaking
land mines as harmless toys / gags that will affect noone (for more than a few minutes) was, quite frankly, offending to every single land mine victim, both the maimed survivors and the ones who died.
There was nothing funny about characters "being-blown-up-but-not-really" from all these land mines. Just imagine having lost your leg from a land mine and watching this episode treat them like toys. I wonder... would the writers expect you to laugh, be offended and perhaps get angry, or would they just not give a rat's ass about how you'd react? I kind of feel it's the last one..
Germs_N_Spices said:
People who find it unfunny aside, seems like you're about the only one who gets upset about this around here. By your logic, GTO makes fun of gang violence and bully victims; NGNL makes fun of agoraphobic people; Kaguya-sama lampoons people with communication problems, bully victims, people with parents issues in real life, and people suffering from severe academic pressures; heck, how DARE One Piece glorify pirates when modern pirates raid commercial ships, capture sailors, torture and kill dozens of people every year? What CAN you even make a comedy skit about when any form of literature bases itself on a tiny bit of reality, which is always relevant to some sort of real-life issue with serious consequences?
Enjoying ANY fiction requires you to take plot out of real-life context. Obviously One Piece pirates are not representative of pirates in real life. Battle shonen can't care about every victim of violent crime out there and detective mystery can't care about every murder victim. In the same way, nothing about this episode remotely resembles how landmines are used in real life. They even called it "something like landmines"-so why would anybody do the mental gynmastics to equate it to real life and take offence from absurdist humor?
I understand your points but I still think using land mines as gags was a step too far. After all, I have taken no offence with any of the examples you mentioned or any of the humor of the previous episodes of Gintama. By and large I
do not take offence, with almost anything. Well, regarding this particular one it might just be me, who knows. Perhaps it hit rather close to home.. If I'm indeed "the only one" then it must mean I'm wrong right (I'm jesting, of course, since that would be the majority fallacy)?
By the way, your analogies are not quite on the level of land mines either. They are not even in the same neighborhood. I could give you gang violence (grudgingly, since there is no single cause or weapon that drives it, unlike land mines; furthermore, covering gang violence provides a lot of opportunities for social commentary etc, again unlike ridiculing land mines), but did you seriously compare people with communication issues / agoraphobia / parental issues / academic pressures & bullying victims with people being killed and maimed from land mines? These have nothing to do with "my logic", they are your own analogies.
To be frank I could sense the reluctance of the writers in using land mines as a gag. They had Shinpachi act as the voice of reason (as usual), mentioning that they are (indeed) outlawed by the Geneva Convention and had Toushiro (or was it Sougo?) say that they are "something like" land mines, as you mentioned. Reluctant or not they still used them though. In retrospect the above comments felt more like lampshading (pointing out the issue to reduce its severity) than reluctance.
Anyway, after having very belatedly just started Gintama, I suppose in 50, 200 or 500 episodes that I might again take offence with one of their crude jokes I will be back here to whine ^.^