Forum - View topic"Perverted" premises / stories...
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gon*Gon
 Posts: 679 |
|
|||||||||||
|
I never accused anything of being sexist or oppressed...in fact, I could care less about ANY accusations of racism/sexism/oppression since people always blow those things far out of proportions.
This...is news to me. And it sounds more like rumors...wouldn't be surprised if that were true, though wouldn't be surprised if it were false either. Plus, my question had less to do with female mangakas doing ecchi but rather ecchi with fanservice aimed at a male audience....maybe I should make a separate thread about the possible female audience of such shows....when I feel like it. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
TheSwedishElf
Posts: 300 |
|
|||||||||||
Pfft. Yeah. Sure it isn't. We all must be completely imagining the blatant ongoing fanservice, nudity and sexualization of the main characters. inb4 people come in to bitch at me for not liking KnJ. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
ArsenicSteel
 Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||||||||
Fanservice is perception based. People that like giant mecha will call intricate transformation scene fanservice to them. However people that dislike certain scenes and still dub them as fanservice are just imagining what another person that liked the scenes would call them. You are imaging the blatant ongoing nudity because at best there was on scene of an adult woman nude the rest of the show has no nudity. Except for Rin, Daiske, and the big tits teacher there's very little serialization going on. Rather there's more identifying that girls around that age can start developing physically and mentally through puberty. Tracking the sexual development of a child into a teen is not serialization it is just acknowledgment that all of us are created for sex. I am not bitching that you don't like KnJ, just saying most of your notions about are wrong. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
wcsinn
 Posts: 186 |
|
|||||||||||
Over the past several months I have been involved in several threads where KNJ was discussed - as have you. I have never seen you or any of the series detractors 'bitched at' because they didn't like the series. I seldom saw that courtesy returned in kind though, in fact they were usually attacked, often personally and vehemently, and had their characters impugned. You are entitled to your opinions, and KNJ is certainly not everyone's cup of tea, but frankly most of the criticism is based on statements which are simply incorrect. There is little nudity, and even less implied sexual conduct. Most sexual innuendo comes from Rin's discovery that she can manipulate adults with threats of accusing them of sexual impropriety. Simply having sex as part of the plot does not necessarily imply actual sexual conduct - appropriate or otherwise. Frankly, I often feel that much of the criticism of KNJ (and similar series) stems more from the obsession of the detractors than from the actual content of the targeted series. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
TheSwedishElf
Posts: 300 |
|
|||||||||||
Yyyyyeeeeaaaah, someone clearly hasn't seen the manga or the show's promotional artwork. Or, y'know, the various episodes with shots of the main characters naked. See, I actually DID watch it, because of the fan promise that it gets better, and because I'm all too familiar with the fact that fans will almost always whine "You just don't like it cause you haven't watched enough of it!" if I say I hate something. I've even read the manga for the same reason. So I'm pretty familiar with the fact that, yes, there is an immense amount of sexualization of these girls, and no, it really doesn't get better. For the record, I've found that the show is actually pretty tame compared to the truly depraved nature of the manga. And please, don't try kidding yourself on the fanservice issue. This series is very clearly intended for people who will find such a thing sexy. It's lolicon. Above all else, it is lolicon. Trying to deny this is like denying that Love Hina was indeed intended for lonely losers who can identify with Keitaro. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
wcsinn
Posts: 186 |
|
|||||||||||
With all due respect, what does the manga or promotional artwork have to do with the actually series? This conversation is not, and has not, dealt with those. They are separate entities and should stand, and be judged, individually. Lotte's Toy can suffer the same comparisons - some jerk in marketing wrote some unfortunate crap to hype the series, that has little to do with the actual series content. Not like that doesn't happen all the time - ever seen a misleading promotional advertisement for a live action TV show? Do you then judge the show off the commercial? Let's see some shots of the main characters naked - and I don't mean someone changing out of their swimsuit and shown only from the shoulders up. A character, who is, for story purposes, without clothes, but whose body is not shown is not being "shown" naked. Yea, the teacher is a klutz and stumbles into the classroom on a couple of occasions when the girls are changing - but nothing inappropriate is shown - so what?
Ask 10 people what fan service is and you'll get 10 different answers, so I'll give you the fan service point. But the lolicon, can't agree with you there. Yes, the series uses sex, usually for humor, and Rin tries to manipulate people with threats of accusations. An adult oriented series - definitely, but I find nothing sexually arousing or aimed at being arousing in this show (and please don't bring up the manga again - haven't seen and frankly it doesn't apply). Most people I know who have seen the series, all adults and a mix of male and female, don't see it either. One of the detractors from one of the previous threads I mentioned stated that the show's pedopilic references were so blatant that they even included a "PedoBear". Having never heard of a Pedo Bear before I did a little research and found that basically its a Teddy Bear with name "Pedo Bear" emblazoned above or beneath the Teddy. Apparently it used on some forums as a notice that things are getting a bit risque - similar to how "Do not feed the Trolls" image might be used. The point here is that without the name the image would be, a Teddy Bear - obviously a heinous object never seen in proximity to young girls. This guy saw a girl and her Teddy and some how managed to project pedophilic references on to the scene - is that an indictment of the scene or the observer? |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Dorcas_Aurelia
 Posts: 5344 Location: Philly |
|
|||||||||||
You haven't been reading the manga, have you? Chapter 28: A full page dedicated to Rin sucking on Mimi's breasts. Mimi is wearing only panties. Chapter 32: Rin flashes her panties at Aoki and says because she hasn't had her first period yet they can do it bareback. Chapter 38: Rin, Kuro, and Mimi go to a bathouse. Lots of nudity. Chapter 39: Rin fellates a cow's udder then teases Aoki when he tells her to stop. Chapter 53: Rin attempts to give Aoki a blowjob. Chapter 60: Full color shower scene for Rin. Chapter 64: Rin and Kuro naked. Chapter 69: Rin tells Aoki he can do her up the butt while bending over and sticking her butt out (clothed). Chapter 71: Kuro topless, Rin topless, Kuro molesting Rin while both are topless, Rin exposing her breasts to Aoki. A couple of these events have context that mitigates the shock value (and I specifically didn't list a couple incidents because they do pertain to normal sexual development of the characters), but when that context is removed it is clear the images are intended for titillation.
The show is based off the manga, obviously. The story and premise are the same, the anime simply toned down the fanservice slightly because it tends to be more closely scrutinized by censors than manga.
Pretty sure it's the original manga artist who makes the promo art, and while it may have nothing to do with the plot content, it demonstrates the intended appeal of the characters; in KnJ's case, sexualized.
You see nothing intended as arousing in a little girl pretending to perform oral sex on a drinking fountain? There's oblivious, and then there's trying too hard to deny something. As for the manga not applying, it's essentially the same thing, but there's more available. It's also an indicator that the people you're arguing against are not just the haters, but people who are reading the manga and think you're undermining reasonable discourse by exaggerating the series innocence.
But it's not just a teddy bear. It has a distinct enough appearance that the creator and audience both know what it represents. It's not the particular scenes with the pedobear that are pedophilic, but it is an open acknowledgment that there are pedophilic elements in the series. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
TheSwedishElf
Posts: 300 |
|
|||||||||||
Well considering its all part of a single franchise of sorts, I tend to talk about all elements of it together.
Except that it turns out that is in fact what's expected of her, as Judit liked reminding the audience more than once.
Except there are moments where we see plenty more than the shoulders up. What, did you only watch the censored version?
Y'know, it's one thing to like it, it's another thing to deny the intended purpose of it because you personally are neither aroused or disgusted by the content.
When a teddy bear bearing suspicious resemblance to Pedobear is used in various random shots and artwork related to a lolicon anime {including a quick bit in the opening with his face emblazoned on Rin's panties and official artwork with the same teddy peeking on the girls and Houin-sensei in a hot spring}, it's pretty hard not to make the comparison.
Don't forget Chapter 74, featuring a full shot of Rin showering while staying at a sex motel that she tricked Aoki into joining her at, and her almost getting a chance to fellate him in the same chapter. And a few chapters before that, Mimi topless and looking out at the audience all doe-eyed and sparkly in a scene that you absolutely cannot claim isn't meant to be arousing to the intended audience. In the Chapter 71 Kuro-on-Rin molestation scene, Rin also has a very prominent cameltoe showing. Oh, and how about the semi-graphic, blatantly sexualized tampon insertion scene and Rin's full-frontal nudity in the first OVA and Chapter 55? And let's not leave out the first page of the very next chapter showing Rin posing in lingerie with the Pedobear expy. And countless other instances of this same BS in both the anime and the manga. But hey, I guess we're totally wrong about these girls being sexualized, right? It's all in our closed-minded hater imaginations. 
Last edited by TheSwedishElf on Wed Oct 05, 2011 11:16 pm; edited 3 times in total |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
ArsenicSteel
Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||||||||
Nope, I generally assumed we were talking about anime and I am not able to find artwork of nude characters for the anime. I'm a bit pressed for time and will be back later. But do continue stretching sexually stimulating words...fellating a cow's udder. Yeah that word works there. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Gon*Gon
Posts: 679 |
|
|||||||||||
|
@wcsinn: Anything can be fanservice. And anything can be sexually arousing to the right person. Kodomo No Jikan definately can arouse a number of the audience even if not all is aroused.
@TheSwedishElf: There are different ways you can get your message across. There's a non-confrontational and gentlemanly way. And then there's the confrontationally trollish way.
This...is the latter. In general, people like the former a lot more unless you're in SomethingAwful. Atleast end with something regarding the actual topic... @Dorcas_Aurelia: You forgot about the part where Aoki's sister rapes Houin. 
With that said...I guess it does make a bit of sense that Kodomo No Jikan is written by a woman I guess. Since a big part of the series is the girls going through puberty.... Doesn't exactly explain the other series though. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
TheSwedishElf
Posts: 300 |
|
|||||||||||
http://www.mangareader.net/544-30600-9/kodomo-no-jikan/chapter-39.html http://www.mangareader.net/544-30600-10/kodomo-no-jikan/chapter-39.html http://www.mangareader.net/544-30600-11/kodomo-no-jikan/chapter-39.html O hai very obvious blowjob imagery. What was that about stretching words? |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Zalis116
Moderator
 Posts: 6883 Location: Kazune City |
|
|||||||||||
Generally, I find that statements like these are made by lazy critics who run out of coherent things to say about the shows themselves, and turn to fanbase-bashing as a way to insulate their criticism from dissent. "You dare disagree with me, the absolute arbiter of truth and taste? Clearly, you're a loser/lolicon/virgin/basement-dweller/neckbeard/(insert some other AcceptableTarget insult here)!" I wouldn't pay them much heed. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
Gon*Gon
Posts: 679 |
|
|||||||||||
|
Actually, that quote was meant to point out how often people assume the writers are males when in fact quite a few of the creators of such series/doujins/fan arts turns out to be female.
My original question was why so many female artists are doing ecchi series that appears to be mostly aimed at a male audience. The answers to that question are roughly "there are female oriented fanservices in those series that I'm not seeing" and...that's about it. And for KnJ's specific case, because it dealt with going through puberty for a girl, so it would make sense to be written by a woman since she can just write from experience. This last one only applies to KnJ though. I'm already well aware that people will always criticize one another for enjoying a series the other doesn't like, especially in the internet. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
ArsenicSteel
Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||||||||
So where's the fellatio? |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
jl07045
 Posts: 1527 Location: Riga, Latvia |
|
|||||||||||
An imitation of fellatio with the obvious aim to get a reaction out of the guy. You're free to express your opinion about the scene now. |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group