The sort of material where underage characters (though the age of consent is lower in japan) are sexualized doesn't make up all of japanese fiction, the same way material featuring attractive white 20 somethings who can't get a date doesn't make up all of American fiction.
So this is why I wanted a working definition at the start of the thread, among other reasons.
I've been arguing with too many anime fans recently, and apparently adopted their language. I can see how it's a problematic framing. ...
In general I feel like you're misreading my post to assign attitudes to me that just aren't there. I think I'm actually more bothered by that stuff than most in the anime watching community. I've dropped well regarded series like FLCL, Gurren Lagann, and Madoka Magica for sexualizing teenagers.
Yeah, I wasn't trying to argue against enjoying entertainment featuring children. I'm just super weirded out by the language used.
I watched Little Miss Sunshine, and that features weird sexualization of a child (for comic purposes). But, when watching it, I never once formulated her character as "underaged". She's just a girl. Just a child. The framing is so far removed from any line that I wasn't even aware a line existed.
If you're watching shows where you're worried about that line... why would you even seek out more of the same? I can't get my head around it.
Luke - are you referring to any depiction of underage characters or just sexualized underage characters?
Azumamga Daioh is about teenagers but the sexualizations are usually framed around that one weird teacher. I watched that with my kid a few years ago and I enjoyed it. They had a beach episode (maybe more than one?) But the characters never went 'out of character' in that episode.
Madoka is about underage girls, am I weird for enjoying that?
Just trying to understand your post because a ton of anime involves 'underage' characters.
Actually Madoka's characters were above the Japanese age of sexual consent, though I agree that it's better to refer to them as 'children' and 'teenagers'.
OK, so your objection is based on the term 'underage' when discussing the anime and not the actual age of the characters?
While I do see the implied sexualization of the characters by using that term now I didn't see it before. I guess my 'perve antenna' is not as sensitive as yours.
Now I understand where you are coming from. Personally anyone ten years or younger than myself I consider to be 'underage'. In large part because I think it would be really weird to be closer in age to the person you are datings parents than to the person you are dating.
I don't understand what part of Madoka was sexualized. If there was anything, it was characters of the same age in the same school being in love with each other. There were no panty shots, beach episodes, or other such nonsense.
"Underage" holds relevance in movies like Leon the Professional, L.I.E., or Happiness; but yeah those are all the sort of "fucked up" movies you mentioned before (though they're all good movies IMO). But yeah, it's a sort of creepy term to throw around some times.
I generally think of it like HTMKSteve is sayin here though, like as a legal demarcation. Underage for cigarettes, booze, voting, driving, etc. I work w/ teens though, so these meanings hold a lot more relevance in my mind than the sexual stuff.
I have to say that this discussion just set off a lightbulb in my head. I have been with some women in the past who thought my enjoyment of anime was really weird. I couldn't understand their feelings because I wasn't watching weird shit or hentai but normal stuff like Sket Dance, Nana, Madoka, etc...
The crazy woman I just got rid of gave me some nasty looks when I was watching Madoka. Now I think that when she saw the characters on screen she was seeing them in a pervy underage way while I was just seeing them as the characters in a story.
If you're watching shows where you're worried about that line... why would you even seek out more of the same? I can't get my head around it.
Personally, right now I'm just trying to watch all of the anime series that get talked about as classics, both so I can experience them and so I can discuss them knowledgeably. I'm not going to throw out my Cowboy Bebops and Baccanos just because Japan produces a lot of creepy shit. Especially since there are few other venues to support animation that isn't kid-targeted at present (other than the handful of adult-targeted comedies on Fox and FX, and I guess Adult Swim). I'm going to keep showing up and trying to support good stuff. I'm really hoping the next 5 years sees a bunch of fan-funded shows, produced in either Japan or the US.
And you don't always know what you're getting. Yes you can throw out 90% of stuff based on the cover/title/synopsis. But sometimes there are going to be unpleasant surprises.
I generally think of it like HTMKSteve is sayin here though, like as a legal demarcation. Underage for cigarettes, booze, voting, driving, etc. I work w/ teens though, so these meanings hold a lot more relevance in my mind than the sexual stuff.
Generally how I think of it. Probably not how many fans think of it, unfortunately.
I don't understand what part of Madoka was sexualized. If there was anything, it was characters of the same age in the same school being in love with each other. There were no panty shots, beach episodes, or other such nonsense.
At the end of the day you've still got teenagers wearing incredibly short skirts and stockings. Yes those are magical girl costumes, but the whole genre pretty much bothers me.
At the end of the day you've still got teenagers wearing incredibly short skirts and stockings. Yes those are magical girl costumes, but the whole genre pretty much bothers me.
Obviously the clothes aren't realistic, they are magical girl costumes, but I don't see in what way they are incredibly revealing or sexualized. Real teenagers in the real world wear less clothes than that. Azumanga Daioh is more sexualized than Madoka.
I also strongly oppose awful sexualized character designs. I just think you just might be a bit oversensitive seeing it where it doesn't exist. Then again, not that long ago people would be shocked by some ankle showing. Crazy religious nuts would probably be upset by it today. Everyone's got a line in a different place.
What matters to me more is how the characters are portrayed in the show. You can have a character design that is not sexual visually, but is portrayed in a very bad way in the show. (No example comes to mind immediately.) You can also have a character with a really bad design that is portrayed in a very good way to give the design context and make it non-offensive (Faye Valentine).
I am starting to wonder what is going on in Luke's mind that he immediately associates the term 'underage' with 'I would have sex with them'. Same goes for the ex girlfriends that thought the same way.
I don't understand what part of Madoka was sexualized. If there was anything, it was characters of the same age in the same school being in love with each other. There were no panty shots, beach episodes, or other such nonsense.
Something like Love Hina on the other hand...
I know. I was just throwing it out there. I'm sorry; I think I made a bit of a mess by not being narrower in the way I defined it. But fanservice really can apply to a lot of 'rewards' bestowed upon the audience. I was primarily thinking of sexuality utilized as a reward for the audience, but I was also thinking about how many variations it can have (such as Optimus Prime being utilized for fanservice in Michael Bay's transformers franchise), so I decided to go broad with the definition.
At the end of the day you've still got teenagers wearing incredibly short skirts and stockings. Yes those are magical girl costumes, but the whole genre pretty much bothers me.
The whole genre bothers you? What about it bothers you? Are you not a fan of young girls having magically enabled adventures or fighting evil? Need I remind you, the genre's paved the way for masterpieces like Madoka Magica, Princess Tutu, and Revolutionary Girl Utena?
Obviously the clothes aren't realistic, they are magical girl costumes, but I don't see in what way they are incredibly revealing or sexualized. Real teenagers in the real world wear less clothes than that. Azumanga Daioh is more sexualized than Madoka.
I also strongly oppose awful sexualized character designs. I just think you just might be a bit oversensitive seeing it where it doesn't exist. Then again, not that long ago people would be shocked by some ankle showing. Crazy religious nuts would probably be upset by it today. Everyone's got a line in a different place.
That's fanart, no? Here's promo art. These skirts, they are too short. No girl in my... ugh... middle school dressed like that. Just to be clear, I'm all for people of both genders wearing what they want, and American culture in general becoming less prudish, but these characters are drawn by adults.
Real Japanese school uniforms in the real world. Not some pervy pic or cosplay.
It's hard to get Google results that are not cosplays (or pervy shots) but I see real outfits with skirts cut middle of the knee (like how you where a kilt) to as high as midway between bellybutton and knees. Some are cut higher but I can't be sure if those are legit.
Real Japanese school uniforms in the real world. Not some pervy pic or cosplay.
Those are maybe 3-4 inches longer, which is the difference between a short skirt and "probably failing to even cover underpants when sitting." Once they moved at all away from a direct representation of the Japanese school uniform, they went over a line in my book.
The whole genre bothers you? What about it bothers you? Are you not a fan of young girls having magically enabled adventures or fighting evil? Need I remind you, the genre's paved the way for masterpieces like Madoka Magica, Princess Tutu, and Revolutionary Girl Utena?
Just the issue I'm talking about. The amount of skin in Sailor Moon bothered me decades ago even as I appreciated the adventure elements.
Real Japanese school uniforms in the real world. Not some pervy pic or cosplay.
Those are a few inches longer, which is the difference between a short skirt and "probably failing to even cover underpants when sitting." Once they moved at all away from a direct representation of the Japanese school uniform, they went over a line in my book.
The Madoka ones look like they're about an inch away from drastically changing the section of the shop they're selling the DVDs in.
Real Japanese school uniforms in the real world. Not some pervy pic or cosplay.
Those are maybe 3-4 inches longer, which is the difference between a short skirt and "probably failing to even cover underpants when sitting." Once they moved at all away from a direct representation of the Japanese school uniform, they went over a line in my book.
The whole genre bothers you? What about it bothers you? Are you not a fan of young girls having magically enabled adventures or fighting evil? Need I remind you, the genre's paved the way for masterpieces like Madoka Magica, Princess Tutu, and Revolutionary Girl Utena?
Just the issue I'm talking about. The amount of skin in Sailor Moon bothered me decades ago even as I appreciated the adventure elements.
Wait, why did it bother you? Naoko Takeuchi was going for sex appeal. There's even a skirt-lifting joke in Codename Sailor V. Clearly short skirts bother you more than her.
I am starting to wonder what is going on in Luke's mind that he immediately associates the term 'underage' with 'I would have sex with them'. Same goes for the ex girlfriends that thought the same way.
I didn't actually say that. Here's what I said: "Seriously, you are describing a character in an anime purely by the fact that IF THEY WERE REAL YOU COULDN'T LEGALLY HAVE SEX WITH THEM."
I'm not saying anyone in this thread has any kinds of desires towards any anime character. I'm saying I find it weird that the way people describe what kind of character is in a show is by their legal status in relation to sex (or if they would technically class as child pornography).
In a thread about the titillization (sp?) of anime characters, I think my fine to be weirded out by the casual use of such terms, rather than terms I've heard and read among any non-anime type people (namely: kids, teenagers, children).
Real Japanese school uniforms in the real world. Not some pervy pic or cosplay.
Those are a few inches longer, which is the difference between a short skirt and "probably failing to even cover underpants when sitting." Once they moved at all away from a direct representation of the Japanese school uniform, they went over a line in my book.
The Madoka ones look like they're about an inch away from drastically changing the section of the shop they're selling the DVDs in.
If the skirts are accurate to actual japanese schoolgirl skirt length, then you don't have much of a leg to stand on. In general, though, their skirt lengths are kind of a silly thing to fixate on if the show itself doesn't exploit their skirt-lengths for panty shots and the like. It reminds me of this conversation I had with a bunch of feminist friends, wherein they were upset that She-Hulk was sweating in a picture where she was weight-lifting, because sweat is 'sexual'. It's ridiculous.
If you're watching shows where you're worried about that line... why would you even seek out more of the same? I can't get my head around it.
Personally, right now I'm just trying to watch all of the anime series that get talked about as classics, both so I can experience them and so I can discuss them knowledgeably. I'm not going to throw out my Cowboy Bebops and Baccanos just because Japan produces a lot of creepy shit.
I'm clearly not talking about shows like Cowboy Bebop. The genre I meant wasn't "anime" but more like shows about school children and young girls. If these were aimed at children and young girls, there wouldn't be any sexualization of anything.
If you're watching shows where you're worried about that line... why would you even seek out more of the same? I can't get my head around it.
Personally, right now I'm just trying to watch all of the anime series that get talked about as classics, both so I can experience them and so I can discuss them knowledgeably. I'm not going to throw out my Cowboy Bebops and Baccanos just because Japan produces a lot of creepy shit.
I'm clearly not talking about shows like Cowboy Bebop. The genre I meant wasn't "anime" but more like shows about school children and young girls. If these were aimed at children and young girls, there wouldn't be any sexualization of anything.
Not necessarily. There were panty shots in Ghost Stories.
It reminds me of this conversation I had with a bunch of feminist friends, wherein they were upset that She-Hulk was sweating in a picture where she was weight-lifting, because sweat is 'sexual'. It's ridiculous.
So there's no room for context? A floor's eye view picture focused on a cartoon lady's crotch, with enormous strains of sweat streaming down her body, doesn't color your judgment?
Comments
You are correct.
I watched Little Miss Sunshine, and that features weird sexualization of a child (for comic purposes). But, when watching it, I never once formulated her character as "underaged". She's just a girl. Just a child. The framing is so far removed from any line that I wasn't even aware a line existed.
If you're watching shows where you're worried about that line... why would you even seek out more of the same? I can't get my head around it.
While I do see the implied sexualization of the characters by using that term now I didn't see it before. I guess my 'perve antenna' is not as sensitive as yours.
Now I understand where you are coming from. Personally anyone ten years or younger than myself I consider to be 'underage'. In large part because I think it would be really weird to be closer in age to the person you are datings parents than to the person you are dating.
Got it.
Something like Love Hina on the other hand...
I generally think of it like HTMKSteve is sayin here though, like as a legal demarcation. Underage for cigarettes, booze, voting, driving, etc. I work w/ teens though, so these meanings hold a lot more relevance in my mind than the sexual stuff.
The crazy woman I just got rid of gave me some nasty looks when I was watching Madoka. Now I think that when she saw the characters on screen she was seeing them in a pervy underage way while I was just seeing them as the characters in a story.
And you don't always know what you're getting. Yes you can throw out 90% of stuff based on the cover/title/synopsis. But sometimes there are going to be unpleasant surprises. Generally how I think of it. Probably not how many fans think of it, unfortunately. At the end of the day you've still got teenagers wearing incredibly short skirts and stockings. Yes those are magical girl costumes, but the whole genre pretty much bothers me.
Obviously the clothes aren't realistic, they are magical girl costumes, but I don't see in what way they are incredibly revealing or sexualized. Real teenagers in the real world wear less clothes than that. Azumanga Daioh is more sexualized than Madoka.
I also strongly oppose awful sexualized character designs. I just think you just might be a bit oversensitive seeing it where it doesn't exist. Then again, not that long ago people would be shocked by some ankle showing. Crazy religious nuts would probably be upset by it today. Everyone's got a line in a different place.
What matters to me more is how the characters are portrayed in the show. You can have a character design that is not sexual visually, but is portrayed in a very bad way in the show. (No example comes to mind immediately.) You can also have a character with a really bad design that is portrayed in a very good way to give the design context and make it non-offensive (Faye Valentine).
These skirts, they are too short. No girl in my... ugh... middle school dressed like that. Just to be clear, I'm all for people of both genders wearing what they want, and American culture in general becoming less prudish, but these characters are drawn by adults.
I'm not saying anyone in this thread has any kinds of desires towards any anime character. I'm saying I find it weird that the way people describe what kind of character is in a show is by their legal status in relation to sex (or if they would technically class as child pornography).
In a thread about the titillization (sp?) of anime characters, I think my fine to be weirded out by the casual use of such terms, rather than terms I've heard and read among any non-anime type people (namely: kids, teenagers, children).