![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Thanks. Already flagged.
likes the cheeses.
@melcarba: I had been meaning to review the anime and manga of Ryo Kyu Bu, but as someone else said it just slipped through the cracks. With the amount of stuff that we have to review, it's sometimes easy to miss things and I do apologize for it.
Whether the page will get restored or not I can't say until I and the other panel members can review it. I can say that those adaptations will need to be a *lot* tamer on the little-girl fanservice to get a restore vote from me, but I will give them a fair shake.
The best thing you can do to ensure that the panel members make the correct decision is to give us information on works as clearly, constructively, and comprehensively as possible. My advice would be to try not to take things personally since this is a subjective process, and votes won't always go in ways you agree with.
edited 27th Jun '12 8:20:04 PM by Meeble
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!
Thanks. I don't really take anything personally. I hope that the show would be judged fairly.
Until further notice
...Wait, we're allowed to re-flag cut works? *smacks forehead* No wonder I thought I was being ignored.
edited 27th Jun '12 9:16:54 PM by Pyrite
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
Not without good reason.
Reality is that, which when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick
Until further notice
Would "insufficient material covered during 5P assessment" be considered reasonable grounds? *flogs dead horse*
edited 27th Jun '12 9:16:32 PM by Pyrite
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
☆♥☆
Thinking they worked off insufficient and/or wrong info would be the main reason to re-flag a cut work.
Until further notice
Okay then, here goes nothing.
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
At least give a detailed post providing the "missed" information though. It makes things harder when that information isn't brought forward.
Until further notice
Okay. Please bear with me on the flogging of dead horses, but I was going to re-flag Lotte No Omocha on the grounds that it might not have been given an objective assessment. (EDIT: At time of writing, the page is covered by the "Unwanted Topic" banner, so I can't do anything about that.)
It has its own list of argument links in the post links thread, so I'm going to just repost my assessment
and the reason why I feel that it needs to be re-looked at properly.
Manga:
- Targeted at the seinen demographic (serialised in a seinen magazine).
- Moderate amounts of crude / sexual humour, some of which involves the underaged characters (e.g. penis / breast jokes and the occasional flasher). This is generally played for comedy and as far as I recall, none of the underaged characters are actually put in clearly sexual situations... with one exception. (See later.)
- The issue of Lotte requiring semen is brought up at regular intervals; no actual or intimated sexual activity has actually taken place. The main character is not keen on the idea, although he admits some degree of affection. An argument can be made for an Electra Complex-type of situation.
- The relationship between Lotte and Naoya is treated as a Precocious Crush with some reciprocation, mixed with paternal instinct (which is a whole different can of worms on its own, but I digress), and remains chaste. No overt sexual aspects of the relationship noted.
- It's shown that Asuha's mother seduced Naoya when she was 18 and he, 13. The act itself is not shown.
- There is some artwork that may be interpreted as age-inappropriate and catering to paedophiles. It is not the predominant focus of the work.
Anime:
- Aired on multiple channels and is currently streamed openly on Crunchyroll (with English subs) by Kadokawa.
- Contains a few sexual references (less than the manga). Brief references to panties and breasts.
- The issue of Lotte requiring semen is rarely mentioned (usually in passing as part of a joke); the matter is generally ignored for the bulk of the series.
- The relationship between Lotte and Naoya is treated as a Precocious Crush with some reciprocation, mixed with paternal instinct. Aside from the odd reminder (see previous point), the relationship is chaste and any mention of sexuality is regarded as inappropriate.
- It is implied that Asuha's mother seduced Naoya when he was 13. This is mentioned in passing.
- Very small amount of potentially paedo-pandering content; the worst of it is in Episode 10 (1 prolonged underaged panty shot and a couple of brief shots of the girls dressed in age-inappropriate outfits), with the remainder containing next to no similar content (not even the Beach Episode was played for fanservice). And potentially one or two of the EyeCatches, but they're blink-and-miss.
- The predominant theme of the anime is on the importance of friends and family; there is no mention of pre-teen sexuality apart from the original premise (mentioned above), and potentially-titillating material is limited to the pubescent / post-pubescent characters.
Personal opinion: I would propose keeping (clean and lock if needed), if no other reason to reject it can be found, because of the sanitised anime version that gets rid of most of the paedophilic undertones.
Please let me know if I have misrepresented anything.
Meeble's weighed in and voted against the anime version based on the first 4 episodes. Based on his reasoning, I can safely assume that he will probably find the remainder of the episodes equally objectionable, if not more. (Personally, I think we both saw the same content, it's just that I apparently have lower standards when it comes to acceptability.)
However, the other 4 members have based their opinions on either the first few chapters of the manga or the premise alone, and the remaining votes are split 2-2. For those who've seen only the first few chapters of the manga, I will say that the objectionable content in the manga will get worse (certainly not to KnJ levels, and generally played for humour, but there's no denying the presence of age-inappropriate innuendo and imagery).
As for those who object based on the premise, I must state again that the approach to the basic premise determines the difference in content between the anime and manga; while the manga gets more mileage from crude humour, the anime takes a more subdued approach. Those who have argued to keep the page have argued on the basis of the toned-down content of the anime compared to the manga - there was a proposal to rewrite the article based on the anime content alone, and not on the manga version. But as Meeble's decision shows, whether the anime has been toned down sufficiently to be considered "acceptable" is questionable - which, while subjective, remains valid.
Anyway, in potentially-debatable cases such as this, might I propose that the 5P focus their attention on the specific part of the work being supported (in this case, the anime version and not the manga), and review a larger proportion of the content to make a more informed judgement call? I doubt it'll change your minds about the series, but it's more for the sake of transparency.
The less-diplomatic way of putting it, and apologies for stepping on anyone's toes, is that (as those who've watched it will understand) "fucked by the premise" is not an objective assessment of actual content. If the decision following proper assessment is to keep it cut, then I have no objections.
edited 27th Jun '12 10:47:24 PM by Pyrite
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
Conceptually Frameworked
Since Ro Kyu Bu has come up again, I'll post some images I found.
It originated as a Light Novel, so I think it's relevant to consider the source work. It's about 320 pages long, and has a total of 20 images. Basically I downloaded a raw version of the novel (I don't believe a translated version exists) and these are all the images in the first volume:
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
Sorry, obviously since we don't have the text they lose most of their context.
But, in a work ostensibly about basketball, there aren't any basketball pictures is my point. And almost all the pictures in the novel are enough to make most people uncomfortable.
Based on the anime (which seems less problematic, if only because the fanservice is interspersed with plenty of other scenes) there is a story there, and none of the situations are sexual in nature.
However, can't absolutely say that this isn't pedo-pandering.
edited 28th Jun '12 1:12:47 AM by UltimatelySubjective
"Nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri, quo me cumque rapit tempestas, deferor hospes."
I'm an Irene!
The Anime and Manga both have a scene where Airi's breasts are grabbed. And she is 12. It's pedophile-pandering. There is no "special context". It was just for fanservice, nothing more. All versions except the PSP have been vouched for.
Also, sometimes it considered a "Lolicon" manga. Notably, Lotte was never classified as that although Kodomo No Jikan is.
edited 28th Jun '12 1:42:54 AM by Hydronix
Quest 64 thread
Enough about Ro-Kyu-Bu was already seen in the other thread.
Also, wasn't Lotte cut and kept cut by Fast Eddie's mandate, overriding any discussion? I don't know if it's worth spending time on it unless one wants to address FE directly.
☆♥☆
No, that was Kodomo no Jikan. All Eddie did to Lotte was make a comment implying he'd be for cutting it.
I'm an Irene!
FE did not cut it. He voted to cut it. Based on the premise. A re-vote is entirely possible.
It's only cut to remove ghost wicks. It's perfectly capable of being restored by P5 decision.
He only has specifically labeled Kodomo No Jikan as pedophile-pandering and is never coming back. Probably some other porn works.
Quest 64 thread
Conceptually Frameworked
Conversation on it still doesn't appear to have ceased and not many people have mentioned the light novels in detail.
Sorry if it's the wrong thread; I started preparing this post well in advance.
A verdict to remain cut does already seem all but certain though.
"Nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri, quo me cumque rapit tempestas, deferor hospes."
I'm an Irene!
PSP version is most likely to cut, but we only have screens without context.
There's a loli meter which screams "bad" to me, but we just need that context for a final decision.
Quest 64 thread
likes the cheeses.
@Pyrite: Thank you for posting your thoughts on Lotte No Omocha.
While I too was turned off by the premise of the work, I knew of other Audience-Alienating Premise type shows that were otherwise clean, so I made sure to give Lotte a fair shake in my review.
However, as my findings here indicate, it simply had so much problematic content above and beyond the premise itself that I do not feel I could vote to restore it given our current guidelines.
This is one of those series that had plenty going for it outside of the problematic content, as it had several genuinely funny and heart-warming moments in the episodes I reviewed. It's just a shame that the good stuff is packaged with so much sexualization of a pre-teen.
I do believe that I gave this work a fair chance before judging it, so I do not foresee my vote changing.
edited 28th Jun '12 5:23:25 AM by Meeble
Visit my contributor page to assist with the "I Like The Cheeses" project!
Until further notice
Meeble: You've already mentioned that before, and like I mentioned in my previous appeal for re-review, I respect your decision to vote against it because you did your research. I'm fine with whatever decision the 5P makes as long as it's based on an objective assessment (emphasis mine). (And that's the only reason why I keep bringing it up again and again.)
EDIT: Actually, you know what? This was a pretty stupid idea. Discar and Komodin voted to keep, Meeble voted to cut, Catalogue hasn't been around lately, and Martello's replacement hasn't been found. It would be unfair to call for a review with 2 out of 5 members (on whom the swing vote would definitely depend) missing, unless the roster is to be permanently cut down to 3. Just consider this my monthly rant and move on.
edited 28th Jun '12 8:12:40 AM by Pyrite
Not a substitute for a formal medical consultation.
I'm an Irene!
Meeble, could you review the Manga version as well? It's surprisingly cleaner on that specific area. It has absolutely no panty shots whatsoever.
Quest 64 thread
The Demon Slayer
If you're talking about the Lotte manga, I think it was worse than the anime in regards to questionable content.
I'm an Irene!
It's actually pretty darn clean. Save one scene.
But that's extremely tame as well. You have to actually read it. While the premise does seem questionable, the content really isn't.
Quest 64 thread
I did read the Lotte manga. It had far, far more than one pantyshot. My personal opinion is that the manga is pretty clearly over the border of what we want here.
Pretty flower
The Lotte manga is slightly worse than the anime in regards to what's supposed to be cut. While I don't believe either crosses the line the point still stands that if the anime doesn't pass then the manga won't either.
#IceBearForPresident
I'm an Irene!
There was no actual pantyshots. And every single one(which can't be a panty shot by definition) with Lotte and the other 10 year old is played 100% for laughs.
If there was that I missed, it's with the adults anyway, and barely happen at all.
Despite the subject, it never is really any different from any other manga. It's certainly not pornography, and the pedophile-pandering is widely misinformed here. The Anime has enough underage panty shots for it. The Manga? None.
The only single scene in the Manga that could be taken that way is a single 12 year old having sex(he was 12 at the time, not 13) which allowed them to conceive Ashuna. In addition, this is barely onscreen and absolutely nothing explicit is showing. In fact, nothing explicit is ever shown once for any character.
edited 28th Jun '12 4:35:12 PM by Hydronix
Quest 64 thread