いい番組だったと思います。ちょとベタだけどね。
女性に都合のいい男性ばかり出てきます。(^_^;)
男性は、自分の欲望を表に出さない。そこは『鬼滅の刃』と同じですね。女性は気持ちを表すけど、主人公の美々子は自分の気持ちにも気づいていない風。ずるいです。気づいていないわけがない。それを気づいていないことで許しちゃう女性がずるいです。💦
『#性的意図』というハッシュタグがトレンド入りしていました。性的意図（影響）が「ない」ものってなんだろう（「性的意図」とは「異性的意図」ということではありません）。あったとしても、面白くないんじゃないかな。意図がない行為というものもよくわからないです。服を選ぶときも、化粧をするときも性的意図がないと思うのは、そう思いたくない美々子さんのような人だけだと思います。性的意図（視線）を汚らわしいとか思っている時点で、その人は自分の行為の意図、影響についてわかっているということです。好きで化粧しているわけじゃないって？だとしたら、あなたは事の本質がわかっています。女性も男性も性的であることを強制されているのです。まさしく『ジェンダー』の問題ですね。それはまず「性的であることの強制」です。その事と、それが片方の性に有利に、片方の性に不利に働くというのは別の問題です。その上、前者の問題は後者の問題と深く関わっています（ある意味で同じかもしれない）。そのレベルの違う問題を一緒に扱おうとしてフーコーは困ったんじゃないかな。それとも、前者の問題を明らかにすれば、後者の問題が明らかになると思ったのかな（『性の歴史』第4巻を早く読みたい）。
「公然猥褻」とか「意図しても表に出さなければいい」「本人が提供しているつもりのないエロ」「性的搾取」・・・。いろんな言葉が飛び交っていますが、要は「女性」が性的な意図で「見られるのはイヤ」だということですね。そう思う、あるいは感じる女性がいるということ。それによって「被害を受けた女性」がいるということ。それは女性でること自体が性的であることが嫌だということです（自分を被害者にすることは弱者の当然の権利です）。でも、もし自分が好きな人が自分に性的魅力を感じなかったらどうするのかな。好きじゃない人には性的意図を持ってもらいたくないというのならそれは自己矛盾、単なるワガママです。好きな人にも性的に見られたくないというのなら、それこそ性的であることを強制される社会という問題に目を向けるべきです。
強制されるということは「意図」は関係ないということです。お金のためだとか自己満足のためとかいう意図、目的、主体性とは関係ないのです（詳しくはフーコー参照）。
そして、問題となっているのが言葉ではなくて写真、あるいは動画（あるいはメディア、インターネット）であるということです。写真、動画、ディスプレイは現物ではありません。写真は事実を写すのではなく、事実の一部を写し、かつ真実以上のものを表現します。映画のVFX（CGなどの視覚効果）はご存知のことでしょう。デマもいくばくかの事実と多くのフィクション、創作で成り立っています。デマの肝心なところはそれが発せられた時に、瞬時に話者（創作者）から独立して話者との関係を断ち切ることです。言葉そのものに、抽象化・ウソの可能性がありますが、話者から独立していない限りはデマにはなりません。言葉が話者から、そして話された状況から独立（自立）するのは、それが対象化（外化）されたとき、つまり「文字になった」ときです。写真や映画は文字文化が基礎にあります（文字のない文化で写真や映画が可能なのかどうか想像してみてください）。ディープフェイクの基礎はデマと同じように（言葉ではなくて）文字に根拠を持つのです。写真や動画によって、「性的なもの」は「性的実体」から離れ、自立します。その事によって、対象としての、客体としての性的存在、支配・所有するものとしての性的対象、とその反射（反省）としての支配者・所有者、そして主体（としての個人）が成立するわけです。
「性の強制の本質」は、主体としての意識の成立とその意図の否定にあります。フーコーはそれに気づいていた、あるいは気づきつつ有ったと思います。それが、『性の歴史』第1巻と第2巻の間の溝であり、古代まで遡る必要性だったのではないかと思っています。
#性的意図の投稿は、主体（自由）の問題と意図の問題に大別できますが、その解決は主体の否定でもないし、意図の回復でもありません。その矛盾する事柄を別の次元から同時に認めること。それは、例えば時間をかけてその駆け引きを笑いながら楽しむことかもしれません。(^_^;)
そういう運動として、運動（活動、実践）の中でしか、その解決はないと思います。
⟨impressions⟩
I think it was a good show. It's a little solid, though.
Only men who are convenient for women come out. (^ _ ^;)
Men do not reveal their desires. That is the same as "Kimetsu no Yaiba". Women express their feelings, but Mimiko, the main character, doesn't even notice her feelings. It's sly. There is no reason not to notice it. A woman who forgives her for not being aware of it is sly. 💦
The hashtag "#sexual intention" was trending. What is "no" sexual intention (influence) ("sexual intention" does not mean "heterosexual intention"). Even if there is, I think it's not interesting. I don't really understand unintentional acts. I think that only people like Mimiko who don't want to think that they have no sexual intentions when choosing clothes or putting on makeup. When you think that your sexual intention (line of sight) is dirty, that person knows the intention and influence of your actions. Don't you like it and make up? If so, you know the essence of the matter. Both women and men are forced to be sexual. It's just a "gender" issue. The first is "coercion to be sexual." That and that it works in favor of one sex and against one sex is another matter. Moreover, the former problem is deeply related to the latter problem (which may be the same in a sense). I think Foucault was in trouble trying to deal with problems of different levels together. Or did you think that clarifying the former problem would reveal the latter problem (I want to read Volume 4 of "History of Sex" soon).
"Openly obscene", "You don't have to show it even if you intend", "Erotic that you don't intend to provide", "Sexual exploitation" ... There are many words in the air, but the point is that "women" have sexual intentions and "I don't want to be seen." There are women who think or feel that way. That there are "women who have been damaged" by it. It means that I don't like being a woman in itself being sexual (making myself a victim is a natural right of the weak). But what if someone you like doesn't find you sexually attractive? If you don't want people you don't like to have sexual intent, it's self-contradiction, just selfishness. If you don't want to be seen sexually by your loved ones, you should look at the problem of a society that forces you to be sexual.
Being forced means that "intention" is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the intent, purpose, or independence of money or complacency (see Foucault for details).
And the problem is not words, but photos or videos (or media, the internet). Photos, videos and displays are not in-kind. A photograph does not show the facts, but a part of the facts and expresses more than the truth. You know movie VFX (visual effects such as CG). Hoaxes also consist of some facts and a lot of fiction and creation. The point of hoax is to instantly break the relationship with the speaker, independent of the speaker (creator), when it is issued. The word itself may be an abstraction or a lie, but it will not be a hoax unless it is independent of the speaker. A word becomes independent (independent) from the speaker and from the situation in which it is spoken when it is targeted (externalized), that is, when it "becomes a letter." Photography and movies are based on text culture (imagine if photography and movies are possible in a culture without text). The basis of deepfake is based on letters (not words), just like hoaxes. Through photos and videos, the "sexual thing" separates from the "sexual entity" and becomes independent. By doing so, the sexual existence as an object, the sexual object as a ruler / possessor, the ruler / owner as a reflection (reflection), and the subject (individual as) are established. That's why.
The "essence of sexual coercion" lies in the establishment of consciousness as a subject and the denial of its intention. I think Foucault was or was aware of it. I think that was the gap between Volumes 1 and 2 of "History of Sex" and the need to go back to ancient times.
#Posting of sexual intention can be roughly divided into the problem of subject (freedom) and the problem of intention, but the solution is neither denial of subject nor restoration of intention. Recognize the contradictions from another dimension at the same time. It may be, for example, taking the time to laugh and enjoy the bargain. (^ _ ^;)
As such an exercise, I think that the solution can only be achieved within the exercise (activity, practice).
I think it was a good show. It's a little solid, though.
Only men who are convenient for women come out. (^ _ ^;)
Men do not reveal their desires. That is the same as "Kimetsu no Yaiba". Women express their feelings, but Mimiko, the main character, doesn't even notice her feelings. It's sly. There is no reason not to notice it. A woman who forgives her for not being aware of it is sly. 💦
The hashtag "#sexual intention" was trending. What is "no" sexual intention (influence) ("sexual intention" does not mean "heterosexual intention"). Even if there is, I think it's not interesting. I don't really understand unintentional acts. I think that only people like Mimiko who don't want to think that they have no sexual intentions when choosing clothes or putting on makeup. When you think that your sexual intention (line of sight) is dirty, that person knows the intention and influence of your actions. Don't you like it and make up? If so, you know the essence of the matter. Both women and men are forced to be sexual. It's just a "gender" issue. The first is "coercion to be sexual." That and that it works in favor of one sex and against one sex is another matter. Moreover, the former problem is deeply related to the latter problem (which may be the same in a sense). I think Foucault was in trouble trying to deal with problems of different levels together. Or did you think that clarifying the former problem would reveal the latter problem (I want to read Volume 4 of "History of Sex" soon).
"Openly obscene", "You don't have to show it even if you intend", "Erotic that you don't intend to provide", "Sexual exploitation" ... There are many words in the air, but the point is that "women" have sexual intentions and "I don't want to be seen." There are women who think or feel that way. That there are "women who have been damaged" by it. It means that I don't like being a woman in itself being sexual (making myself a victim is a natural right of the weak). But what if someone you like doesn't find you sexually attractive? If you don't want people you don't like to have sexual intent, it's self-contradiction, just selfishness. If you don't want to be seen sexually by your loved ones, you should look at the problem of a society that forces you to be sexual.
Being forced means that "intention" is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the intent, purpose, or independence of money or complacency (see Foucault for details).
And the problem is not words, but photos or videos (or media, the internet). Photos, videos and displays are not in-kind. A photograph does not show the facts, but a part of the facts and expresses more than the truth. You know movie VFX (visual effects such as CG). Hoaxes also consist of some facts and a lot of fiction and creation. The point of hoax is to instantly break the relationship with the speaker, independent of the speaker (creator), when it is issued. The word itself may be an abstraction or a lie, but it will not be a hoax unless it is independent of the speaker. A word becomes independent (independent) from the speaker and from the situation in which it is spoken when it is targeted (externalized), that is, when it "becomes a letter." Photography and movies are based on text culture (imagine if photography and movies are possible in a culture without text). The basis of deepfake is based on letters (not words), just like hoaxes. Through photos and videos, the "sexual thing" separates from the "sexual entity" and becomes independent. By doing so, the sexual existence as an object, the sexual object as a ruler / possessor, the ruler / owner as a reflection (reflection), and the subject (individual as) are established. That's why.
The "essence of sexual coercion" lies in the establishment of consciousness as a subject and the denial of its intention. I think Foucault was or was aware of it. I think that was the gap between Volumes 1 and 2 of "History of Sex" and the need to go back to ancient times.
#Posting of sexual intention can be roughly divided into the problem of subject (freedom) and the problem of intention, but the solution is neither denial of subject nor restoration of intention. Recognize the contradictions from another dimension at the same time. It may be, for example, taking the time to laugh and enjoy the bargain. (^ _ ^;)
As such an exercise, I think that the solution can only be achieved within the exercise (activity, practice).
[出演者(プロフィール)]
監督：古厩智之 二宮崇
企画・プロデュース：KADOKAWA NTTぷらら
原作：らくだ 「マイ ベイカー」（MFCジーンLINEシリーズ／KADOKAWA刊）
脚本：阿相クミコ 波多野都 吉田ウーロン太
音楽：仲西匡
主題歌：尾崎由香 「オトメゴコロ」（ワーナーミュージック・ジャパン） エンディングテーマ CHIHIRO 「冷たくしないでよ」（テイチクエンタテインメント） 制作プロダクション オフィスクレッシェンド
＜出演＞
本仮屋ユイカ：小岩美々子
飯島寛騎：北薫
信川清順：佐藤ハル
鳴海唯：水野結衣
竹財輝之助：柏木広
小宮有紗：立花彩乃
先代から継いだベーカリーミミィを切り盛りする店長・小岩美々子(本仮屋ユイカ)は、人手不足を持ち前のパワフルさで乗り切っていた。
そんなある日、美々子より6歳年下の青年・北薫(飯島寛騎)が、新人バイトとして店に入ってくる。
彼は仕上げ担当として、また貴重な男手として、美々子をフォローし、店に欠かせない存在になる。
だが、三ツ星フレンチレストランの元シェフだった北には、何か秘密があるようで…。
パン屋を舞台に、恋愛ベタな男女と二人を取り巻く人々を描いた、“ムズキュン"ラブストーリー。
そんなある日、美々子より6歳年下の青年・北薫(飯島寛騎)が、新人バイトとして店に入ってくる。
彼は仕上げ担当として、また貴重な男手として、美々子をフォローし、店に欠かせない存在になる。
だが、三ツ星フレンチレストランの元シェフだった北には、何か秘密があるようで…。
パン屋を舞台に、恋愛ベタな男女と二人を取り巻く人々を描いた、“ムズキュン"ラブストーリー。
TV
ロマンス
日本
2020/07/10 ～ | 金曜日 | 23:00～ | ひかりTV / メ～テレ / テレビ神奈川 / カンテレ
[拡大] [ EAN : 4988111255648 ]
