If you had asked me to clarify my argument instead of arguing against a position I never took, I would have been more than happy to explain it.
My argument is that it is nonsensical to think that Tokiko is completely innocent because it is heavily implied that she groomed Nemuro/had involvement in him being groomed or otherwise exhibits very weird behaviour to him as a child. Even if you completely disagree with that, she directly contributed to what happened to Mikage. I believe that most people agree shes not 100% innocent even if they disagree with these interpretations of her. It is also implied she has an incestuous relationship with Mamiya (whether emotional or physical.) All of these interpretations are pretty common amongst fans, yes? The exact details of these implications are up for debate, some people have argued that it is Akios reconstruction of memories, but nevertheless the show is deliberately entangling Tokiko as the adult in all of these dynamics and it is something you have to confront when watching this arc.
I’ll address these points first:
• acting like because there's parallels that can be drawn between characters, that means they're exactly the same”
• “making up grooming that there's no textual evidence of, then feeling smug and superior for it”
• “not paying attention to how Tokiko is actually framed, drawing from no evidence other than "the implications are all throughout the show”
So, nowhere did I say that these parallels mean they're exactly the same. A very primary theme of RGU is the grooming of vulnerable queer children into heteronormative systems that are sustained through abuse (especially incestuous abuse.) The clearest example of this is Akio grooming Utena into believing she is “special” and “chosen,” which furthers his manipulation of her and the bastardization of her memory of her genuine desire to help Anthy. I'm not at all claiming that Akio and Tokiko are the same character, or that Utena and Mikage are for that matter. My point is that Tokiko is the adult figure aligned with Akio within Nemuro's arc and her words to Nemuro directly mirror the same grooming tactics and rhetoric that Akio later uses on Utena. The fact that they are paralleled does not mean they are identical, it means the series is specifically drawing on these similar dynamics. As seen below, Tokiko's conversation with Nemuro closely resembles the tactics Akio later uses with Utena.
RGU specifically utilizes these parallels to show that what is happening to Nemuro/Mikage is what will happen to Utena later on. Both of them are isolated, emotionally vulnerable children who are told they are exceptional and uniquely capable of saving someone they care about by this adult figure. Both become consumed by that role, subordinating their own needs and desires to an ideal that is ultimately impossible to achieve and end up hurting the one they love because of it. Tokiko's relationship with Nemuro foreshadows the dynamic Akio later establishes with Utena, allowing the audience to recognize the pattern before it fully unfolds.
In another post, I explained my interpretation further:
“In RGU, we are given memories from Utena that show her as a child believing that nothing is eternal, until she decides to become a prince because she was “shown something eternal” and was saved by Dios. We are also given memories from Mikage that show us him not being able to love or care about eternity until he meets Tokiko. Both of their memories are intentionally warped. The “eternity” that was actually shown to Utena was Anthy's eternal suffering. Utena responds by deciding she must become a prince to save her, yet forgets Anthy herself. She remembers only the prince and convinces herself that her devotion was always meant for him, when in reality it was Anthy she was devoted to all along.
Nemuro’s memories operate in a similar way. He sees Mamiya’s suffering and comes to believe that the only way to save him is through attaining eternity. When his memories are examined more closely, their contradictions reveal that his desire for eternity does not originate in his attachment to Tokiko as it is presented to us, but in his love for Mamiya. Eternity is a displaced solution to a love he is not allowed to recognize directly.
Both are expressions of queer love, but neither Nemuro or Utena are free to imagine this love on their own terms and their responses remain structured by the dominant ideology that produces them. Utena’s love is constrained by the patriarchal illusion of the prince. Nemuro’s attachment is constrained by his self-understanding as a living computer and the want of disembodied rationality. Both are violent and patriarchal systems that enforce heteronormativity and it is only when both Utena and Anthy break free can they achieve actual love and happiness.”
I also wrote about my interpretation of Tokiko and Nemuro's relationship. I absolutely believe that much of her behaviour toward him is inappropriate and deeply uncomfortable, but I think the extent to which she is consciously aware of what she is doing is less clear. Many people have interpreted their relationship as grooming, and I think that is a completely reasonable reading based on their interactions and the themes the series is exploring. Personally, I think the evidence supports the conclusion that Tokiko was involved in it in some way, even if the exact nature of that involvement remains open to interpretation.
“Prior to putting on the ring, Nemuro explicitly distances himself from the concept of eternity, and in a conversation with Tokiko he insists that people should be grateful for the life God has given them. He notes that eternity would not heal Mamiya and understands that Mamiya himself resists the idea of eternity, as implied by his reflections on the flowers lack of agency. Tokiko overrides this by questioning whether eternity can nonetheless be attained. The wish to make Mamiya eternal is not his own, but with Tokiko, who articulates this desire on his behalf and as she says this she cries.
This is where I feel like a lot of people forget that Nemuro is 16-17 here and Tokiko is an adult. Not only is he a child, he is clearly incredibly isolated and objectified by his peers as a “living computer” which I elaborate on here. Tokiko is subtly breaking a boundary here. Nemuro previously said he is working on the project just for business reasons, but now she is attaching eternity to humanness/what it means love, etc to a boy who is consistently dehumanized. To love somebody is to want them to be eternal. She is placing the burden onto Nemuro and is suggesting he take responsibility. There is nothing inherently wrong about Tokiko crying in front of Nemuro, but she is crying at a very convenient time. His feelings for Mamiya, feelings he has never felt until now, is being exploited. She apologizes, but she does not take back her expectation. He is being made to feel as if the feelings are actually for Tokiko. Her apology functions as a removal of adult responsibility and a transfer of decision-making onto a child. Now Nemuro must choose eternity and believe it is his own choice, his own feelings being deliberately muddled.
Nemuro saying this is the first time he has seen a person cry exemplifies this because instead of being told what she means, or that it isn’t his fault, etc, he is left to infer this alone and he, the child, becomes the emotional stabilizer for the adult, a reversal of care roles. This is one instance among many where Nemuro tries to assert and correct that he is a child just like the other students (When referred to as Professor Nemuro, he says “we’re the same age” to the other student, for example) but it doesn’t change how anyone sees him.
Based off of his reaction, Tokiko further dehumanizes him and implicitly suggests that because he is uninterested in eternity, it is not possible for him to love. This is reaffirmed by Tokiko calling Nemuro a genius despite his refusal of the label just a few moments ago. By suggesting Nemuro cannot love, Tokiko removes the possibility of him loving Mamiya and positions herself as the sole meaningful emotional reference point. This is an adult authoritatively narrowing Nemuros conception of who he can even be.Tokiko tells him he may be incapable of love at all and Nemuro believes her. This leaves him of course incredibly confused and eventually leads to him putting on the ring.
It is unclear if Tokiko is intentionally doing this to him or not. One other moment we’ve seen an adult cry to manipulate a child is when Akio sheds tears telling Utena there was never a prince in this world to begin with. In that moment, he is manipulating Anthy into thinking those are tears of compassion for her suffering. We also know Tokiko aligned herself with Akio in the project for attaining eternity. However, there is a good chance she was just ignorant in her actions and did not know the damage it would do to Nemuro and was just under the influence of Akio. She does tell Akio what he is doing is wrong. After all, Akio IS the one reconstructing his memories, and could be doing so in a way that makes it seem this way. But even if so, that does not absolve her of her very weird manipulative behaviour towards him as a child.
As Mikage, he projects Tokiko onto Utena. What is very interesting here is what he delusionally remembers of Tokiko outside of the Nemuro memories. He says that she doesn’t have to regret abandoning him. This is the same emotional logic Tokiko taught Nemuro, where he already expects himself to do the emotional labour. Mikage repeats this pattern even after Tokiko is gone, which tells us the manipulation has fully been internalized and he really does think of himself as a disembodied living (dead) computer, genius, etc. This of course foreshadows Akios manipulation and grooming of Utena later on.”
“acting like not wanting your brother to die of a terminal illness is an unforgiveable sin”
Once again, you are mischaracterizing my point. Not wanting your brother to die is completely normal, yes, but given the context of the show and the specific parallels that are established between Tokiko and Akio, and Mamiya and Anthy, the desire to preserve a sibling forever regardless of what that sibling wants / specifically against their will directly mirrors one of the central dynamics that Akio subjects Anthy to. RGU repeatedly returns to the idea of people claiming to love someone while simultaneously denying that person's agency in order to preserve a relationship/ ideal/role that they themselves cannot let go of even if it means making that person suffer. Tokiko's desire to preserve Mamiya forever is within the same pattern of an incestuous sibling relationship in which one person's need to maintain a particular role or attachment ultimately overrides the agency and autonomy of the other. That does not make Tokiko equivalent to Akio but it is why the series establishes these parallels in the first place.
There is also this scene.
On its own, this exchange could potentially be read in multiple ways. The issue is that it appears within a narrative already saturated with themes of incestuous abuse and Tokiko wanting Mamiya to quite literally be preserved and lived forever despite his clear insistence against it. Mamiya directly associates what should be just a medical procedure with pleasure, and Tokiko responds by calling him a "naughty boy," which frames the exchange in explicitly sexualized terms, also seen by his shirt. Some have argued that because Nemuro's memories have been altered by Akio, the sexualization of these dynamics came with that alteration. I do think this is an interesting interpretation but even then, I personally find it difficult to believe that the intended reading is that Akio completely rewrote Nemuro's otherwise normal memories so that he would make up himself being groomed and witnessing Tokiko make inappropriate comments toward her brother. Given everything else within the show, that interpretation seems far less convincing to me than the possibility that these elements are present deliberately and are meant to communicate something about the nature of these relationships.
“ignoring the fact that Tokiko and Akio are purposefully contrasted in that she FUCKING LEFT OHTORI”
I don't think Tokiko leaving Ohtori actually undermines my argument. Yes, she leaves, whereas Akio remains embedded within the system. That is an important difference between them. But she also returns, and she returns specifically to resume her relationship with Akio. That is why I find it strange to imply that her departure is evidence that she escaped the dynamics the series is critiquing. If anything, her return reinforces how difficult those dynamics are to break away from. RGU repeatedly depicts people attempting to leave the system only to find themselves drawn back into them like Shiori who also left Ohtori but ended up coming right back.
I also believe this dialogue alludes to Tokiko's acceptance of the sacrifices required by the project of eternity and, by extension, Ohtori itself. I am aware of other interpretations of these lines but this is mine personally. When Tokiko tells Akio this she is presenting sacrifice as both natural and necessary, once again very similar things to what Akio says later on. If the point was simply that Tokiko had fully rejected everything Akio represented, there would be little reason for the narrative to have her return and continue the relationship, given that people who actually reject the system and leave are forgotten forever.
I really enjoy RGU because of how thoughtfully and carefully it handles themes of abuse. My interpretation comes from engaging seriously with these themes. If you'd like me to elaborate on any of these points further, I'm happy to do so.
