UN-GO 04 — Seductive Stuffed Animals

A great episode. This show keeps getting better and better. Although I did feel parts of it were a bit fast.

Internal Discord

I loved the direction they took by involving another faction within the government. In many of these kinds of dystopian stories, the government is some tightly unified force. There’s no dissension within the ranks: everyone is a faceless citizen-soldier. For example, consider No. 6. The government there is a faceless beast. It’s evil because it dumps corpses in a heap for no apparent reason.

As I mentioned before when writing about No. 6, a faceless boogeyman is a cop-out. It is a concept that is at fault and bears the blame, not the people that choose to implement that concept (or choose to look the other way). Government is a human institution, formed and maintained by individuals. To condemn the government is to condemn humanity, or a portion thereof. Defacing the villains serves to absolve the society’s members of their complicity and guilt.

UN-GO, thankfully, avoids this. The government isn’t one monolithic entity. It’s composed of competing factions, with different goals, which often come into conflict. It is a decidedly human institution. This simultaneously serves to make the organization both more believable and more fascinating.

Surprisingly Well-executed Action Sequences

I didn’t expect this show to have any fighting, but color me impressed. The short action segments were tense, exciting and solid. First we have the chase by the Public Security Force. There’s a panic as the people evacuate the tent city. Inga defeats them with his powers. I didn’t know he had other powers as well.

But the part I really liked was when they got to the house. The Public Security Force, when their ruse is uncovered, pulls their guns on the detective and doctor. Kaishou’s daughter blocks the way, but they shoot anyway. Nice save, Mr. Detective. The doctor is shot, but is revealed to be a robot and goes on a rampage. Then Izumi makes the save. Inga’s right. She was pretty cool here. She is way cooler than Saber in a suit. Although she looks even cooler with her cape. I demand more capes.

Questions of Justice

I’m not entirely sure at what they were trying to get at by saying that the AI creator lacked a love of what’s right. I mean, look at everything he went though to prevent his robots from being used in war! Doesn’t that suggest a love of what’s right to you?

I’m not trying to imply that what he did was right. But it seems to me that it certainly wasn’t for lack of trying to do what’s right: perhaps it was an excessive love of what’s right. Let’s compare with Kaishou: he also hides the truth for the sake of the “greater good.” Is what he does wrong? Sure. But does he do it for lack of a sense of justice? Not at all. I’m certain that he does it because of his sense of justice. His idea of righteousness simply values the welfare of the entire society over fairness to individuals.

Really, the reason we know that the scientist is evil is because he’s fat. As everyone knows, all fat people have no self-control. This is why they need to sexually abuse robots to find fulfillment. Hence, they have no sense of justice.

Liked this post? Leave a comment, subscribe to our RSS feed, and follow us on Twitter!

7 thoughts on “UN-GO 04 — Seductive Stuffed Animals

  1. I found the scientist character interesting because he seemed to represent the shade of gray in morality, not completely good nor completely evil. The things that he said weren’t necessarily wrong, but it’s hard to agree when in the same scene he’s he’s obviously indulging some pedophile tendencies. This episode gave me a lot to think about in terms of where I personally draw the line between right and wrong.

    1. This episode definitely did give a lot to think about. 🙂

      It’s kind of a guilt by association, isn’t it? The fact that he’s a pedophile makes his anti-war aims seem questionable. The fact that he’s fat makes everything he does seem questionable. It’s like Andrew Breitbart’s trick: dress up as a pimp, edit videos and make the people you don’t like vaguely associated with prostitution to nationally discredit them.

  2. If we look at our society, our sense of right and wrong is just a collective agreement of a idea; influenced or not. If many people agree on something that it is okay, then it is right, if few agree, then major parties influence over, then it becomes a wrong.

    It reminded me on an argument in pedophillia: where society, not the pedophillia itself is causing all the damage to the “victim”. Because society thinks, pedophiles are bad and they only see kids as sex objects. But that’s not what pedophilia is. Like anime that is percived as cartoons, it has more than what other people see.

    1. Personally, I don’t subscribe to moral relativism. Historically, we could apply this same argument to argue that slavery, child labor and the subjugation of women were morally acceptable: after all, the vast majority of the participants that lived in that time period thought they were acceptable.

      We could go on and on forever listing examples. A majority in many countries believes the death penalty is a good thing. A vast majority in modern China believe that censorship is necessary. Majorities in America support indefinite detention, drone strikes and endless war. A majority of the Aztecs believed human sacrifice was right. A majority of Germans believed Jews were of an inferior race.

      So, sure, society forms some consensus of what right and wrong is. That doesn’t mean that the consensus is correct, and that we shouldn’t apply our own moral values to ourselves and to others.

      I thought that pedophilia was a sexual interest in children though. It’s not?

      Thanks for a thought provoking comment!

      1. Pedophilia is not just about sexual interest. Reading the darknet, where most of them hide anonymously, there are multiple subversions of its kind: Some sees it as a form of love that of a natural best friends, and sees sex if the kid finds it so. There are people who actively stimulate kids toward becoming sexually active. There are also those whom society sees as well. Even worse, those who hurt kids and kill them in the process.

        What brought pedophilia to what it is now, is the spread of Christianity, which sees these kinds of practices, which are common in the Roman era. I think Islam has no problems having any relations toward kids. Japan is under pressure from the western society, which by culture, has no issues with kids being sexually active. Other non-christian culture that I know of doesn’t seem to be this paranoid over kids being pure and innocent image.

        1. Very interesting. Pedophilia might not be purely about sexual interest, but don’t each of these examples include a component of that?

          Personally, the reason I think pedophilia is wrong is due to the likelihood of exploitation. Kids aren’t all that pure and innocent. But they also implicitly trust adults. Engaging in sexual relations is a breach of that trust. If some adult starts making out with them, will they even know what’s going on, much less be able to say no? Sex should require consent between the participants, and children do not have the experience or knowledge to provide that consent. It’s the same idea if a teacher has sex with a student, or a boss (*cough cough* Herman Cain) sexually exploits his employees.

          I don’t see the acceptance of pedophilia in other cultures as justification that it is morally acceptable. (nor do I see it’s rejection as proof that it is wrong) I mean, the Romans had slaves, Islamic groups stoned people to death, and they and the Japanese all treated women terribly. That doesn’t make these things ok.

          1. Two of the components I cited do end up with sex. But the first does not see sex as the end goal. It was more of “if the kid wants it, and surely decided to do it” then that will be the case. I talked to some of them, and if they really “love” the kid. They would be very very explicit on making sure that the kid is surely decided. It’s like an added bonus for the Pedophile, not much of a required component of it.

            About kids trusting adult implicitly, is one of that things I personally disagree with. Influenced, yes, but judgement still relies on the kids. With media being feed at their throats, they should be self aware on the implications of their actions. Kids these days knows about sex more than we were at their age. Even know this, most of them knew control, and doesn’t practice it. Some practice it and went on as normal throughout their lives. Some stumbled along the way; but don’t we all stumble at some parts of our lives? If they implicitly trust adults, pedophiles who influence their way to the kids would have it easy, which it seems they don’t.

            In the argument of looking at other aspects of Islam, Romans, Japanese and non-christian cultures; this proves that a society defines morals by the general agreement of an idea based on their culture. And culture is decidedly upon the general habits, arts, and customs of that society.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.