As far as I can tell, this isn't porn. Too heavy on the incest for me to read it, but that doesn't make it cutworthy. I'd like someone who has read it to give a bit more detail, though.

Well, they are third-year middle schoolers, so fifteen years old roughly, for whatever that is worth. The most explicit details seem to be what is listed under the A Date With Rosie Palms examples. Not as explicit as some other things, but it is pretty obvious with its pandering, such as extensively showing the awful young looking (yet in her second-year of middle school, one below the main character who she also has the hots for, so roughly 13/14 years old) Mikazuki Kiryu's panties (such as near the end of chapter 34), and the like. What with the obvious pandering and all. I can't recall exactly, given that it's been a while since I skimmed through to see what the fuss was about (and it's only grown since then), but it doesn't look like something we should keep.

edited 5th May '12 10:36:54 PM by BlackDove

As the first line of the page indicates, it is technically not incest. My interest is largely confined to the chapters/episodes which involve the well-endowed and otherwise troperiffic Miharu Mikuni, but I can give a synopsis of the relevant aspects.

Ako and Riko spend the entire series trying to seduce their stepbrother. He is 15 and the twins 16 as of chapter 1. Other "candidates" in the inexplicable quest for Keita's affections include his teacher Yuuzuki (23), his classmate Miharu (~15), and Yuuzuki's younger sister Mikazuki (~14 and a blatant Token). Keita and Miharu advance from middle school to high school near the end of the anime.

Significant fanservice elements that I can remember include groping, BreastSponges*

that trope apparently got baleeted

, BodyPainting, dry humping, Footsie Under the Table, PantyShots, averted panty shots, watersports, as well as probably several more that I haven't seen. In general, any attempts at sex acts are intentional on the part of the twins or accidental on the part of anyone else, and always resisted by Keita. The only explicit sex act I've actually seen from it was in an animated gif on an imageboard, and thus may have been fanart.

The anime ended after 12 episodes but the manga and OVAs are still going, according to the other wiki, which means that in more recent chapters all major characters should be above our age threshold.

edited 5th May '12 10:42:26 PM by EnragedFilia

That's...quite the list of fanservice elements.

I didn't have to go far down the page to find some pretty squicky stuff. Add to the fact that the main characters look underage, and I think this is yet another page that we can do without.

I would place the execution above most porn. It has drama and a plot and isn't shoving fanservice in your face every second.

This is like leagues better than Eiken, and I'm sure the story would still work if you took out the fanservice.

On the other hand, there is a lot of fanservice and some near nudity. Hence an R+ rating for the anime. The manga is similar although note that unlike some other ecchi, it's more a certain amount per-chapter thing rather than a per-page thing.

And note that I haven't seen this series before now, so again I'm going to be overshadowed by actual fans.

So... Good execution, might still be porn.

edited 6th May '12 5:06:05 AM by UltimatelySubjective

They don't quite look underage (as in, prepubescent or barely pubescent), for me at least.

edited 6th May '12 7:19:10 AM by OneMore

While I feel your pain here, I can't help but also feel that you're grasping at straws with the whole "X looks underage!" thing. Yes, this show is sketchy as hell and painfully moronic, but that does not automatically make it paedo-bait.

Do these people look pre-teen there?

We're not cutting things because you find them squicky, Kaiser.

Out of curiosity, what is the demographic for this? Is it aimed at teens or adults?

edited 6th May '12 6:43:09 AM by ccoa

The manga is for seinen, says Wikipedia.

I would like to note that the TV series aired censored, and there is no sex, just a more Fanservice-oriented Slice of Life, Harem Genre show that has the girls go a little extreme to win the Unwanted Harem.

This, and this:

Makes me agree with this:

I mean, to me personally, 16-14 year olds doing strange things isn't terribly uncommon (being that I'm 17 myself), but given that this is presumably a work aimed at an older audience than that, and that these characters are doing a lot of risque things onscreen—not to mention that there's an adult in the mix here trying to have sex with a much younger person who is decidedly underaged—makes me think ill of this concept even without seeing it. The "incest" thing doesn't terribly bother me, since it's obviously contrived to give the veneer of fetish without actually being technically incest, but the implication that it's there to pander to a fetish—again, with young teenagers—is also inappropriate.

See, that you can describe something as softcore porn and it involves young teenagers should be a nice, big red flag. Sure, it may have a great story, but it's also a fetish-pandering piece of sexualization of young people aimed at an older audience, which is not something, insofar as the new rules are concerned, that we want on this site.

Whether they look their age is irrelevant, because they are still that age, and are still doing creepy shit in a work aimed at least in part at turning older people on.

This is a valid point, but perhaps an explanation of why whatever s/he thought those things were creepy would be in order?

So, I hope I'm not the only one who thinks "hm, 14-16 year olds having fetish-laden softcore porn adventures in a work aimed at 18-30 year olds is creepy."

How does one censor fanservice if there is no explicit nudity?

Either way, that would just leave the anime at the same basic point of issue: softcore porn fetish-based fanservice involving young people aimed at substantially older people.

edited 6th May '12 7:57:22 AM by Flyboy

Quoting specific points:

It's not a matter of whether they look their age. If they looked and were stated to be 13, that's one thing. But the only time "they look underage" is a valid point is when their actual ages (whether stated or inferred) are old enough to not conflict with the rules. Otherwise the issue would be "they are underage".

Having been watching Yu-Gi-Oh! a lot lately, it's pretty easy. Skirts can be lengthened, cleavage can be covered, shots can be shortened, etc.

Stupid double post...

edited 6th May '12 8:04:33 AM by BadWolf21

Will take a look at it with fresh eyes. I plan on sampling 3 eps of the TV anime and 2 of the OAVs. I'll post my findings here and keep y'all updated.

Update the first: Things don't look good already. Our protagonist is still in middle school putting him in the 14-15 range (and thus underage). Sisters are 15-16 (and thus borderline, although they look younger). About halfway through first episode the 13-14 year old girl (who looks about 11-12) blatantly and intentionally flashes her panties at spineless protagonist. He also gets a face full of crotch from a girl his age.

Update the second: Pervert teacher has an Imagine Spot involving a threesome. Both Band-aid sister and hair-dec sister are naked (with covenient arm placement). Eyecatch uses a blatant panty shot of 13 year old girl. Towards end, another naked imagine spot on part of protagonist. Update the third: A few minutes into ep, suggestive makeout scene with both sisters followed by a scene I won't bother explaining that wouldn't look out of place in softcore porn. Another naked imagine spot from pervert teacher featuring both sisters, and the 13 year old. Also what I would assume is a flashback to several of the more suggestive moments towards the end. Will continue evaluation in following post. Verdict stands at borderline. OAVs may or may not push one way or the other.

edited 6th May '12 9:31:36 AM by tdgoodrich1

Alright, what is the specific guideline?

Although, they may not be underage in the sense that it would therefore be childporn, but there are younger characters (the one that's 13-14ish) doing this shit too, as well as these younger characters being sexually pursued by substantially older characters. Combine all that with the fact that, while they may not be technically underage by whatever guidelines we're using, they're young and they're in a work designed to pander to the fetishes of much older people, which is bad itself as well.

Hm. Never thought of that.

Refer to Bobby G's post for general information

They're either looking for Porn or Pedobait, although some have said various types of perversity may push things over the line.

But I believe that the determination of what meets the criteria is up to 5P members.

What we're giving them is our perspectives and opinions.

My point is that we have largely avoided specific guidelines to prevent rules lawyering.

Anyway, Bobby's post is fairly comprehensive.

edited 6th May '12 8:18:45 AM by UltimatelySubjective

I'd like to point out that pedophilia is attraction not to legally underage, but physically undeveloped.

Also, depictions of characters in sexual positions (no pun intended) are absolutely not neccessarily intended to arouse, rather than as humour.

edited 6th May '12 9:37:14 AM by OneMore

Reviewing OVA series now. First one I sample opens with a scene involving an octopus. Goddamnitsomuch.

Update the first: Only a dream on protagonists part. Wakes up, eats breakfast, and spits yogurt into band-aid sister's face. And yes, it does suggest that. Also a number more of suggestive imagine spots from everyone. Involving full-on nudity only saved from being outright porn by Barbie Doll Anatomy. Why did I volunteer for this sh*t?

Update the second: Band-aid sister has now outright propositioned the protagonist. Goddamnitgoddamnitgoddamnit.

Update the third: Nothing I can say about remainder of episode or start of this one by virtue of crossing from borderline porn into outright. 7.5 min into the next OAV I sampled and sisters have located his porn stash. I don't like where this is going.

Update the final: More outright pornographic scenes. Little I can say while keeping things PG-rated. Verdict to follow.

edited 6th May '12 10:39:51 AM by tdgoodrich1

"We're not cutting things because you find them squicky, Kaiser."

I never said we were.

Ahem. "I didn't have to go far down the page to find some pretty squicky stuff."

Yes, I said that. That's completely different from what ccoa said, though.

Let's drop this semantics argument, shall we?

ETA: Seems I messed up the threads here.

edited 6th May '12 10:32:11 AM by SeptimusHeap

"In any case, I feel that the only thing pertinent to our policy in this work is the word "lolicon" in the work's name."

Huh?

EDIT: lol oh nvm

edited 6th May '12 10:32:29 AM by KaiserMazoku

Final Verdict: Cutlist

Reasoning:

• Of five characters who are sexualized:
  • The sisters are borderline in terms of actual age, but look a bit younger
  • The 13-14 year old is blatantly underage and looks prepubescent
  • The other girl is definitely underage (14-15)
  • Protagonist is 14-15
• Target demographic is Seinen
• OVAs get far too explicit as noted above
• While the TV series is comparatively tame, it is still borderline enough to warrant a clean and lock
• Sisters are flirting (and worse) with their stepbrother. The parents-of-the-year encourage this.
• Plot revolves around protagonist studying for entrance exams
• Mitigating factors?: Nope!
• The art and animation look cheap to boot.

(edited to fix markup) (re-edited to add deleted reasoning)

edited 6th May '12 10:58:33 AM by tdgoodrich1