Moe

I don't understand your constant attempts at being taken seriously either, 90sAce.

If I ever try to defend something as an "art form", I will give a broader context and treat the show/film as a whole and not only as a catalyst for a certain single emotion or (SIGH) paraphilia, just like you'd do with the stuff you consider an art form.

The problem was you were defending the exploitation of minors as part of the art form itself.

Defending a movie or comic book for its artistic qualities in spite of having content like that is one thing, but you were trying to give justification for doing that.

And no, normal adult men don't just search for and collect pictures of random children or babies on the internet - comparing that to appreciating a baby or a grandkid is just... wrong.

So what I don't get from the anime buffs here - is do they want to be taken more seriously as an art forum, or do they just want to give apologetics for including exploitative drawings of underage girls, and claim that the adult men who read this are just doing it from some "objective appreciation" (lol, just lol).

I also don't understand the logic here, as though you're saying simply because "Japan does it", that it's automatically "ahead" of the West.

From what I know of culture as a whole, sexual exploitation of minors, or viewing young women as simply sex objects has way more routes in more barbaric or oppressive cultures than it does in modern enlightened ones. So if anything the fact that this is more acceptable shows just how far behind Japan is in a lot of ways.

I'm aware there's a trend to view "Japan" as more advanced than the West, which I think is mainly due to a lot of electronics technologies they've developed (such as ruling the video game console market) - but this is pretty short sighted. It doesn't even mention the fact that just 70 years ago they were a totalitarian empire responsible for some of the worst modern war crimes (while the US was founded as a republic on the Enlightenment principles).

So this black/white view of "Japan" being "ahead of the West" is pretty dumb. When it comes to their sexualized portrayls of minor girls in animation, I'd definitely say they're behind the West.

No, if anything I would be defending moe as something that is not inherently bad nor exclusive to art form. "In spite of" is your premise, not mine. And I didn't, because that was not the point of the debate I was focusing on. I was just defining the word and trying to explain why it's not inherently related to sexualization.

This is what I don't understand - what I hear from Guap and a few others the most is how plots and character development in a lot of adult animes are up there with a lot of well-received live action films.

...so then why is so much effort also invested in defending smutty pictures of underage girls, and trying so hard to distinguish between paraphilia and just "appreciating cuteness (whatever that means)".

Reminds me of the claim of "only reading Playboy for the articles". Personally I'd think if someone wanted anime to be taken more seriously, they'd be advocating for it to take a stance against that type of content, rather than simply arguing why it's "not that bad", since the exploitative content is one of the big things that keeps people from taking it seriously.

Probably because appreciating cuteness, or finding things cute, is not a paraphilia. Jesus freaking Christ. Where the hell do you come from?

And you seriously expect people to believe that adult men who search out pictures of tween girls with short skirts or impossibly large boobs are just "appreciating cutenes" - rofl

Right, and plenty of adult men who watch "Girls Gone Wild" just do it to "appreciate cute facial expressions".

When your argument sounds pretty much identical to the Jack McClellan video I posted, that should say something.

If someone wanted to appreciate cuteness, they'd watch videos of cats or dogs - not artwork depicting girls in the most sexualized ways possible. That's ridiculous. If you don't feel like this thing has any elements of paraphilia in it, why are you so compelled to defend it anyway - that's usually a sign of guilt IMO.

Welp I think this is a dead horse, so I'll just sum up my points here.

First off people don't draw or view sexually provocative artwork of young girls just to "appreciate cuteness" - that's really just apologetics for a paraphilia, no different than "I read Playboy for the editorials". Comparing it to appreciating a baby in real life is also ridiculous - no one goes down to the park and sits and stares at other people's children to 'appreciate them' (unless they're wearing a trench coat and driving a windowless van, lol)

Second, people don't have to be immersed in anime or "Japanese culture" to understand it or object to it, anymore than someone "has to be a Saudi" to criticize child marriages. I'm sure there are plenty of Japanese social critics who object to it too.

Third, arguing for it as a serious art form is silly; it's not serious art unless by the same standard films like American Pie are "art" simply because they're "part of American culture" - it's just cheescake aimed at a very lowbrow demographic, and definitely hurts anime from being appreciated for it's plot or character development.

With that said, I know it's inevitable that people will still devote long-winded essays trying to argue in favor of it, or claiming that you have to have watched 100s of different anime shows or be an expert on "Japanese culture" to understand, lol

And you seriously expect people to believe that adult men only search out pictures of their favorite characters to masturbate to them? Please, stop being such a manchild.

Oh, now we are again in the level of actually watching fiction and getting sucked into a particularly directed mood or purpose, instead of Google searching stills or images by your own account. Fine then.

I didn't watch the video, but seeing how you misinterpreted any single thing I said in the thread I wouldn't give credit to your comparison.

Do you know that people watch videos featuring little kids or babies for that matter as well, right? Pretty much anything that looks cutesy to them. I don't want you to label my 57-year-old mother as a pedophile for sharing with her friends.

What kind of "most sexualized ways" are you even talking about?

As said, Azumanga and K-On! are not sexualized. Unless you consider having a uniform a defining element of sexualization. Because if you look at the shows, you'll find that:
-There are not risky or revealing shots of the characters.
-There is not sexual innuendo at all among them.
-There are not sexual tones or undertones overall in these shows.

Now, if you talk about that Gunbuster still you'll use for everything, you may have a point. That point, however, is completely tangential to the things we are talking about here.

You are an idiot. And I've spent enough time with a guy who is not able to discuss without making offensive statements and implications about people who have a different opinion than his.

That's a strawman - I was talking about the "sexualized" potrayals of young girls in the type of anime you and Guap were describing.

Your claim is that people viewing the sexual content are "only doing it to appreciate cuteness" is what I said is ridiculous. It would be like a straight male claiming to watch Girls Gone Wild just to "appreciate" the girls' hairstyles. Even if these shows aren't actual porn, the sexual content isn't there just coincidentally like you're implying.

Now you're splitting hairs - again I'm talking about the sexual content in these type of shows. You yourself also made an anology to "kitty GIFs"; now you're moving the goalposts.

Again you're comparing family photos to sexualized drawings of non-existent children. And claiming that people who take family photos do so for the same reason as men who view risque drawings of girls.

Who do you think is buying this?

I'm not talking about Gunbuster or a specific show (Gunbuster was just a random example from a previous thread) - I'm going by specific content in this thread - such as Guap mentioning men watching one of these shows imagining the girls to be lesbians.

And then you discover that the show airs at three AM and has a fandom that's mostly 16 to 40 year-old males who consider the girls to be lesbians."

Right... men watch cartoons about lesbian tween girls for completely "non-sexual reasons".

Wow you can always tell when someone's got nothing to add when they have to resort to name calling - did I strike that big a nerve?

I don't even know what your "opinion" is anyway - it sounds to me that you're claiming the sexual content isn't meant to be marketed as "sexual", it's simply there for "appreciation purposes" - I don't see how that's an opinion, so much as just flat out wrong.

I wasn't implying anything about "you" either - I just have a hard time believing you believe the purpose of the sexual content "isn't" just exploitation, and I think you're going out of your way to apologize for this more than anything else.

Heh. I'm stupid. Let's keep rolling the ball.

No, that's a mere observation that apparently to you people only search stuff interpretable as sexualized to masturbate. And it is more and more absurd when it turns that the only element of "sexualization" is wearing a school uniform or having big boobs.

You haven't watched the shows, you haven't experienced how they deal with mood, music, color palette to create an overall feeling, please stop making assumptions that have nothing to do with reality. There's a reason why I've made a difference between searching images and watching shows. You are treating them as if their only defining element was character design.

There is no damn sexual content in these types of shows. If you don't go past the level of reading my posts don't bother answering to them.

I'm not comparing anything to anything. I'm talking about cuteness, not about sexually appealing content. And that video is not a "family photo". That video is an exploitative use of the general perception people have of babies as cute.

The "moe" manga/anime? I don't know. Azumanga and Yotsuba have consistantly appeared in tops of comic sales in the US. Maybe there's a lot of closet pedophiles out there after all, eh?

Your point? Do you know that there is a devoted and consistant group of fans that always likes to ship characters and write fanfictions of them in a love relationship? They do it with any show, no matter how sexualized it is. This is irrelevant to talk about the actual content of the story.

Oh, sorry, maybe I had to be polite to you when you are implying with no basis that I'm a closet pedophile.

And what is the purpose of including this?

Problem is your assertions about the shows keep changing - you're now claiming people are watching them for the plot and characters; but at the same time claiming they're just watching them to "appreciate cuteness" (such as in a Youtube video of a baby).

So I'm really confused - which is it?

But according to Guap, the show is marketed specifically to that demographic, and the men watching it are imagining the characters to be lesbians - so that means it's definitely not just about "appreciation", or about the plot and character relationships like you're claiming.

Didn't imply that at all, I implied that you don't really believe the risque content is there without any exploitative purpose as you seem to be claiming - due to the fact that you seem so defensive about that suggestion.

Technically it wouldn't be "pedophilia" anyway if the girls are adolescent, but having an abnormal obsession with young teen girls would still be a paraphilia; and you can't tell me that a show about lesbian teen girls marketed to 40 year old males (Guap's description) isn't about exploitation.

The purpose of drawing schoolgirl uniforms is fitting the characters in a school setting.
The purpose of drawing big boobs depends on how exposed they are.

About cuteness. I think you are mistaking a basic point of my reasoning. I am not talking about cuteness as a physical attribute, but a feeling. A feeling that can be evoked through a physical attribute, but also through a mood, a set of interactions, a character personality, a quirk, a song, a background design, a color palette. Anything.

I don't get defensive just because. I get defensive if I read offensive implications, and your "maybe" was one of them. I'm glad to have misinterpreted if that's the case. Though next day we'll discuss the difference between liking something and being sexually obsessed with it

By the way, I don't know which lesbian girls show are you talking about. Because I've already said that the characters of the shows I mentioned are not sexualized... They are just friends who hang around.

Sorry, my previous post got overriden when I edited. Regarding the "lesbians" thing - this was Guap's description of an anime show; this is why I disagree with you that it's the same as admiring "cute characters" in a film like Toy Story - since Toy Story isn't marketed specifically to adult males like the animes that Guap is talking about

Also, according to Wikipedia "moe" isn't even a genre, it's just a slang term for when someone is attracted to a character in an anime.

So whatever it is - I really don't see how it's comparable to someone just seeing a cuddly baby or cat and smiling - or how it's mentally healthy at all (especially if the characters are portrayed as underage). Not anymore than someone "falling in love" with a celebrity that they've never even met or interacted with in real life. Screams "John Hinkley Jr." if you ask me. We're not talking about tween girls having a crush on Justin Bieber either.

So I don't even know what this thread is trying to advocate at this point, sounds like it's just trying to suggest that it's "normal" for single adult men to have fantasy relationships with fictional (underage) characters, even though I doubt that most shrinks would agree with that this is normal or mentally sound. Even if specific animes aren't sexually explicit themselves, at best still be just as disconcerting as an adult male having an abnormal interest in child stars in beauty pageants - and advocating this as some "basic male instinct" (*barf*)

Oh but you have to be "Japanese" to understand, right?

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Moe_(slang)

It's you the one who keeps filtering the term through sexual implications. Why is it so difficult to you to understand that you can find a character attractive, or that character can evoke a set of nice feelings in you, without it being a source for masturbation? Is it because it's anime, or do you have the same problems with live action characters?

On Guap's mention to fans who imagine lesbian relationships... Let them do. They are just interpreting the shows in their own special way. If there is not any lesbian tone or undertone in the story that should end the debate. The rest is giving credit of objectivity to personal interpretations, which is quite absurd.

Feel free to take a look at the pictures being posted and try to tell us it's "not a source of masturbation" - the men watching this are just doing it because these girls have such interesting personalities.... yeah

http://media.moddb.com/images/groups...agentaika2.jpg

I'm not aware of any live action shows featuring underage actors in sexual situations allegedly marketed to 18-40 year old men (probably because it would likely be illegal for one thing).

The same concept would be true for any show - if an adult male obsessively watched "Hanna Montana" and liked to fantasize he was in a relationship with the character, then he'd definitely be in need of psychiatric help - even if the attraction wasn't "sexual" at all it still wouldn't be mentally or emotionally sound

If you're just talking about shows "in general" which some one somewhere chooses to follow like this, that's a different story - but according to Guap this "genre" is designed specifically for that demographic - that's why it's getting attention.

Here's where the confusion lies - according to Guap the shows he have in mind are "for adults" - so they're designed specifically for that demographic, right?

What you're doing now is contradicting him and claiming that the shows are made for children, but simply have a cult following of lonely males.

---

The problem here is that this thread isn't even really about "anime" (since it turns out "Moe" isn't even a genre and is something entirely subjective) - it's more of a thinly veiled apologetic for having fantasy relationships with fictional (underage) characters, or why "kid's shows" like My Little Pony are really "for adults" - or something.

And how this is somehow comparable to appreciating a cute cat or a baby. Guap himself mentioned the characters being lesbians - and (normal) people who watch cute cats on Youtube don't fantasize about boning the cat, so Roosvelt would be rolling in his grave if he knew his quote was being used to legitimize what it is here.

Well, Agent Aika is anything but moe, so I don't know why are you trying to fit it in this discussion. I don't recall saying that moe excluded sexualization, though. If anything I said that they are separated elements that the author can choose to combine or not.

I don't recall saying either that I need to justify my sexual attraction to things. However if I don't feel sexual attraction to something it's obvious that I shouldn't be justifying the contrary. So trying to get that answer from me is kind of futile.

Whatever Guap says and whatever I say is not necessarily the same, Guap focused the debate in a way that I personally wouldn't, but it's up to him.

The rest of the discussion is dead-horseing (¿?) a damn lot at this point, so let's leave it here.

I researched it and "Moe" isn't a defined term, it's just a slang term which refers to female characters in anime or cartoons which have a lot of male admirers (Guap himself claimed My Little Pony is part of the genre, and that's not even anime).

So it's not more of a genre than "Hollywood films with hot male leads" is - since it's not based on the content of the film/show itself, just on what demographics it's appealing to.

Even if it's not sexual, the premise of the thread was comparing it to appreciating a cute cat or baby using a Roosevelt quote; I was arguing that it's not comparable and that the interest isn't entirely non-sexual (which you yourself seem to be admitting). The claim that these shows are automatically "for adults" if they have cult male followings is also poor, since by the same logic if "A Serbian Film" aired on Nickelodeon and had a lot of young fans, it'd be a "kid's movie".

But yeah, I'm tired of going around in circles too, so for all I care now - you win.

Uh-oh, a wild 90sAce appeared! Time to abandon thread

__________________
Mubi

Oh, just to clarify, in anime shows are classified as "for adults" or "for kids" (or whatever) just according to their source material, which usually is the manga magazine. Manga magazines usually serialize many different series and have a specific demographic target (adult males, teen males, adult women, teen women, etc. are the usual ones), so everything they publish falls automatically in that target, no matter how is its content or genre. That's why anime original works on the other hand don't have an official demographic classification; like most Ghibli films, for instance.

That's not very effective