As someone who doesn’t believe Naoto’s arc is inherently transphobic, I find the discourse deeply frustrating.

Naoto’s arc clearly is meant to be a commentary on gendered expectations in japanese society. Naoto as a woman is working in a career that’s generally seen as a male one. As such, she disguises as a man in order for the society to accept her. Naoto’s arc intend to criticize these harsh gender norms, and advocate for gender nonconformity: that Naoto should be able to be a detective and a woman, and doesn’t have to change herself just to fit for what society wants. That isn’t transphobic, and if anything, is a rather positive message.

So, when people dismiss Naoto’s arc and shout “Naoto is transphobic” it can be rather frustrating. The way people argue that Naoto’s arc is intentionally harmful just feels wrong. I don’t think Naoto’s arc is meant to take a malicious stab at trans people. At worst, the writers were ignorant and didn’t understand trans people, but that isn’t same as purposeful hatred. The attitude also implies that the story can’t be appreciated in any way because it’s “problematic” and thus “rotten. Which just doesn’t sit well with me since I’d argue Naoto’s arc can be seen as a positive one, even for trans people. Advocating for Gender Nonconformity is good regardless of one’s gender identity, so just because Naoto isn’t trans doesn’t mean her story can’t be positive for trans people too.

At the same time, I find people who argue the opposite just as frustrating. Yes, many of them do agree with me that Naoto’s arc is a critique on gendered expectations in Japanese society. But the way they argue and outright attack the “Naoto is transphobic” crowd doesn’t really sit well with me. They essentially shout how these people don’t get it, how they cannot read and lack understanding. And I’m just wondering if people know that interpretation is subjective. When a work of art is released to the world, the author cannot control what the audience will take from it. Yes, the writers most likely didn’t intend Naoto’s arc to be seen as transphobic, but they cannot control how people will feel about it. Our readings of media are based on our experiences with not just other stories, but life. So, what experiences people have had in the past will affect how they see the media in front of them. Which is something that isn’t brought up that often.

Honestly, I feel that the “Naoto isn’t transphobic” crowd doesn’t exactly understand what the other side is arguing. When people say “Naoto is transphobic” it isn’t just about Naoto, but rather about trans representation (or rather lack thereof) as a whole. Many of the “Naoto is transphobic” crowd either are trans themselves or are strong advocates for queer rights. So, when they see Naoto they aren’t seeing just one insular case separated from all other fiction and life, but instead another instance of a pattern present in our society. It isn’t just that “Naoto is a GNC character who pretends to be the opposite sex only to realize they are their biological sex”, it is that this kind of story is far more common than one where the character realizes they’re trans. When you hear time and time again that seeing oneself as the opposite sex is just “pretending” or “a phase to grow out of”, it is easy to be discouraged, to see oneself as lesser and not valid. So people want more stories where the message is that being trans is completely valid actually, rather than yet another message of how being the opposite sex is just a phase, even if that isn’t the intended one.

I also feel part of why people see Naoto as transphobic is tied to a sort of personal betrayal. We form deeply parasocial connections with fictional characters that reflect our own experiences or. So, if you’re a trans person who resonated with Naoto, the conclusion to her arc can feel like a slap to the face. The game is telling you that the character who you felt a deeply visceral connection with actually is cool with their sex, so you too, should be comfortable and accept your sex rather than live in this “delusion”. That can be absolutely cruel to hear so even if that isn’t the intended message, it is easy to understand why a trans person who related to Naoto may take that message.

I think what frustrates me the most of all of this is that both sides refuse to listen to each other and instead go all ad-hominem on the other party. The “Naoto is transphobic” crowd refuses to understand that Naoto wasn’t meant to be transphobic and if anything, had a relatively positive message, while the “Naoto isn’t transphobic” crowd refuses to understand that people have valid reasons of seeing Naoto as transphobic, and that they necessarily don’t misunderstand the intended arc, just disagree with them. People are essentially arguing from completely different standpoints and I just wish they could listen to what the other tried to say rather than assume the worst.

But alas this is the internet, and people would rather paint the opposing party as pure evil than actually to listen to them.

Like anything localization related, depends on context, genre and target audience.

For instance, If "oni" or "yokai" refers to general supernatural malice I'd say it's fair to translate them as demon or spirits, as that'd be the english equvalient of the term. Same with titles, like I assume Reans "ogre form" was intiially called oni form, in which case it'd be a fine translation. If it's specifically referring to the japanese folklore creature rather than a more nebulous concept, then it should be kept as is. See for example the netflix stop motion animation Oni: a thunder gods tale, where the characters being japanese based oni is integral to the plot and narrative.

That said I personally think translating Qirin as unicorn is always bad. Those two aren't corralable. Even translating oni as ogre is fine in certain contexts.