The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations)

I believe that straight uses — "tentacles grope/rape/penetrate people" are to be avoided. If it's called out in the work in some way, "Hey, are those tentacles groping you? I thought that only happened in hentai!" then it's fair game.

We do not want the article to become an index of tentacle rape works. Just, no thanks.

edited 16th Nov '16 6:50:57 AM by Fighteer

Yeah, I remember some of the cleaning I did for Panty Shot. Timestamped links with detailed descriptions everywhere. Worst was probably on the Scooby Doo page, about baby series, which had a full page of such examples. I mean, seriously? Don't want to see that again.

Anyway, the only straight uses of Naughty Tentacles I could think would be appropriate would be off-screen instances. Might go under parodies, though, as horrible things happening off-screen tend to be played for jokes.

Evan's Spiked Tentacles of Forced Intrusion!

Is it a straight or a gay example if it's Vaarsuvius doing it?

I was more thinking of non-explicit ecchi stuff like Negima, it had actual on screen groping and such but not extreme stuff and such, they usually had a joke attached to it like a Clothes Eating Octopus but it still happened.

Rape and penetration are out of the question but tentacle sexual harassment is what I was meaning.

edited 16th Nov '16 8:07:11 AM by Memers

Caligula is back as well and can be checked off as "done" here I think.

Also, I notice here that Ryona appears to be duplicated. Encyclopedia Dramatica is already cut as a vandal page. Finally, CaptainGerBear was already discussed and kept.

I'm going to haul Naughty Tentacles in for a nice trope description improvement in the appropriate Projects thread, just so we can give it that signature TVTropes touch.

...why is everyone looking at me like that?

Only if you say "So we can reach out and touch someone!"

Joking aside, I do agree the article could have a better name.

But yeah, glad to see the cleanup and it should be interesting how it all plays out.

@Fighteer: I lolled. Also, that'd be a great way to open a door's lock. Since it literally is "forced intrusion" in that case.

Cutlisted Sandbox/Caligula. No use in having it now, is there?

I would like evaluation to be done on I Love My Brother. Essentially, it's a fan comic on The Loud House, but it contains several instances of incest, which I feel violates the terms for the website. Could you analyze it?

Austin DR The proper way to get an item in the queue is to go to the work's page, click the "Report Page" button in the right hand bar, then put your concerns in that text box. Don't forget to check the box that says you think it violates the content policy.

Incest in and of itself, incidentally, is not enough to get something zapped under the policy, regardless of how you personally feel about it.

That said, incest, by itself, is certainly not against any terms of this site. We have a whole index of related tropes at Incest Is Relative, and many works with a lot of incest, ranging from the ancient (Oedipus the King) to modern (Game of Thrones).

If the page has turned creepy and fetishistic, we can arrange for a cleanup, and possibly a lock if the problem persists. But unless it's literally porn, it's probably not a matter for P5.

But no harm in asking.

eta but oh well. :)

edited 23rd Nov '16 10:07:37 PM by Xtifr

I think the incest won't do anything, but I think everyone in that show is underage?

In theory, apart from underaged sex of various descriptions, we don't judge any fetish in particular more harshly than others. In practice, something that has more extreme fetishes like vore and whatnot are generally focused exclusively on said fetish and purely pornographic. Incest, however, is practically mainstream depending on the medium and by itself is largely unworthy of our attention.

However, if the above statement is correct, the work in question may violate our policy on other grounds.

edited 23rd Nov '16 11:05:15 PM by Arha

Are the characters aged up from the show? (Troping from work and can't check myself on potential NSFW issues)

Per Characters.The Loud House Lincoln is 11, Luan is 14, and Lucy is 8. So if the characters in the fanwork are the same age there is definite potential for a review there.

Wellll google search picked the first chapter up on e-hentai, but it isn't actually explicitly sexual yet. Lincoln is at one point standing around in just his boxers and it is seems to imply he has sex with Lucy, but it didn't get further.

However, google also picks up chapter 2 and that one is restricted to exhentai and that doesn't bode well. But I can't check it from just my phone.

(And our trope page seems to say no to sex with Lucy yet, calling later sex with Lynn as Lincoln's first time)

edited 23rd Nov '16 11:55:34 PM by Adannor

Speaking of potentially-explicit fanworks featuring underaged characters, I recently reported Dn D Poisoned on the grounds that it contains explicit cutscenes involving at least two twelve-year-old boys. I'm playing the game right now, and I actually quite enjoy it thus far. I haven't bumped into any of the explicit cutscenes yet. But I have been doing some research on this game, and yeah, I bumped into a couple of the explicit cutscenes - I can link them if necessary.

Another thing worth mentioning is that there is a sequel to the game in the works featuring aged-up versions of the characters (and Mello, Near and Matt are around 18-ish in the second half of the source material), but the thing is, the sequel's in Development Hell. The original game has very little sex involved, but the fact that it has minors involved is a cause for concern by itself. So assuming the sequel will be more of the same with aged-up characters, that should be able to stay should it ever be released.

I understand that there is no P5 right now, but... yeah. These are my thoughts on the VN and the reason why I reported it.

Ah, the author has a link to the part 2 on his tumblr. Alright then.

Lucy and Lincoln get interrupted, although the imagery was really up the line right before it ^note [[spolier:Lucy rubbing her crotch through her pants in anticipation]] Aside from that they only get as far as makeouts.

...Ahh, the Lynn sex scene is a flashback. Aaand it's on-screen. Aaaand has a few rather explicit shots. That's kind of a smoking gun here.

While we're on the topic of explaining things we've reported for our future 5P, I reported Umibe No Onna Noko for numerous graphic sex scenes involving middle schoolers, including one relating to the scat fetish. There might be an artistic defense for it considering the manga's been licensed and is being sold at Barnes and Noble, but it definitely deserves a look.

That page doesn't lie. It hasn't got that many tropes on it, but those tropes are literally just either grimdark or NSFW. So from what I gather, it's a grimdark manga about middle school kids... with sex.

What? Why couldn't they use high-schoolers or adults for this instead?

I'm thinking whoever made the deal, on this side of the ocean, to license it didn't actually read or reasonably examine the thing; B&N's blurb on the site can be summed up as light teen romance.

To play devils advocate, a couple reviews paint it as a manga version of Kids (itself a huge YMMV deal on art vs porn/exploitation) with a comparatively realistic art style, and it supposedly plays the sexuality for a squicky-disturbing angle rather than for titillation.

edited 25th Nov '16 8:11:41 PM by carbon-mantis

Yeah, that's an Inio Asano manga, which skews my opinion heavily towards 'unflinching tale of the dark side of adolescence' rather than 'child porn'. He's a critically-acclaimed author famous for delving into the weirder and more disturbing aspects of childhood with a remarkable amount of sensitivity - you're likely to get about as much deliberately erotic material as you would from a PSA on child abuse.