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

Again, this isn't about appeasing Google anymore. It's about Eddie wanting to remove porn and pedo-pandering stuff from the site.

edited 30th Apr '12 10:39:05 AM by videogmer314

Eddie has nothing against the idea of porn. Please stop saying that. It's just that getting in trouble because of porn twice taught us it's no longer easy to keep around. It's paedo-pandering he personally takes issue with.

"If you aren't him, then you apparently got your brain from the same discount retailer, so..." - Fighteer

Already knew that, and if you had been paying attention, I said pretty much the exact same thing to many tropers who came in without getting the whole picture. From what I understand, the impression is that Eddie is doing this because he genuinely believes that the stuff he's targetting gives very bad to the site as a whole, something that can only be truly measured via off-site visitors raising complaints or sampling the inbounds of every potentially problematic article.

We got in trouble the first time around due to generally NSFW/NSFK/non-Family Friendly content on a certain portion of our articles, not just porn, and it was remedied by taking Google off the offending articles and replacing them with alternatives with less stringent TOS. This time, the problem was stated to have been solely due to off-site links on Naughty Tentacles, which AFAIK can be easily fixed by removing the links and (if necessary) locking the page, yet the trope still remains cut under the premise that "porn-exclusive tropes" have no place here (which has been said time and again to be a false accusation in Naughty Tentacles' case).

edited 30th Apr '12 10:50:20 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Say, anyone know what demographic To Aru Majutsu No Index is marketed towards? Because it features a twelve-year-old girl wearing THIS◊, and a bunch of fairly significant characters are loli-fetishists besides. This series is cool, and I'd hate to see it go, but would this be enough to cut it?

The pig of Hufflepuff pulsed like a large bullfrog. Dumbledore smiled at it, and placed his hand on its head: "You are Hagrid now."

Wikipedia page on the thing says that the manga and anime of the light novel are Shōnen.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:01:42 AM by TwoGunAngel

The manga is shonen.

But

Should be taken into account for this particular instance.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:02:29 AM by Raidouthe21st

We Are Our Avatars Forever (Now on Discord by invitation, PM)

Okay, so it should be safe.

The pig of Hufflepuff pulsed like a large bullfrog. Dumbledore smiled at it, and placed his hand on its head: "You are Hagrid now."

There's also the fact that Kuroko is generally treated in-universe as being quite creepy due to her sexual behavior, particularly for her harrassment of her similarly-aged "oneesama" Mikoto Misaka.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:13:39 AM by MarqFJA

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.

Well yeah, but how is that any different from the girl from KNJ? Other than a few years of age.

Kuroko is treated as creepy, but she's not the only underaged character to dress like that. I don't think the series merits cutting since nothing progresses past fanservice and the fanservice has nothing to do with the main plot, but the author at least creeps me out at times.

Well, the very first scene in the entire story involves the main character accidentally stripping the little-girl-nun.

And later on, he ends up shoving his hand in her mouth.

Totally non-sexual, but hey, bringing things up out of context is fun.

I must say that the "fanservice" Hamburger Time posted is extremely creepy to me, and would still be even on an adult.

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.

Actually, Index does contain pedo pandering. It's not really the point of the work, but it's undeniably there. It probably should be flagged. It's been okayed for US release and is targeted to teens, but the outfits prepubescent characters wear is pretty damning according to our policy.

That means either

A.) The policy permitting works automatically that are appropriate for distribution in the US is incorrect or

B.) Our policy is actually more stringent than the ratings agencies for manga.

We may need to re-evaluate something.

I suspect it's more along the lines of B.

I know we've been treating animated/drawn work as having a different standard than live work, but should we? It strikes me that the Media Watchdogs appear to be working from a double-standard if what's being done in a work matters less than what's being done with the actors in it.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:37:22 AM by Fighteer

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

There is no ratings agency for manga. It's up to the publishers to decide what their ratings are.

Yes, I think we should. Live action has issues related to the wellbeing of the actors that drawings / animation doesn't. US law makes this distinction, why shouldn't we?

Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.

I suspect that the Moral Guardians are a lot harsher on Anime/Manga than on Western broadcasting and literature because of their personal biases making them unwilling to even consider the idea that Anime is anything but cartoon porn.

See the once and (restored?) AAINT trope.

I think it's B.

Fighteer: I think you have to allow looser standards for anime and manga. We'd end up cutting most of the anime from this site otherwise. While some people would be okay with that, I think that would hurt this site too much. Rather than targeting fanservice I think a more sensible policy is forbidding relationships between adults and children and those who look like children.

However, this may be too lenient. Thinking back, I can recall some drooling descriptions of fetishy outfits worn underaged character on the Index character pages. That is not acceptable. So, personally, I'd give a little more slack to anime and manga, but once a creepiness threshold has been reached we step in and say 'No, just no. We're not letting that go on.'

I will admit right now that I don't know when it would start being too much. It's very open to interpretation when something is creepy or not as the previous debates show.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:44:45 AM by Arha

Well, "evaluating a work" is separate from "keeping its page clean", isn't it?

edited 30th Apr '12 11:49:40 AM by OneMore

There are also degrees of fanservice, yes? That outfit is on the extreme end IMO, near to nudity.

Oppression anywhere is a threat to democracy everywhere.

Remembering an incident in another community involving a moderator slap-down of some very unfortunate Sassami fan art, yes there is definitely a "creepy" line that should be drawn somewhere for drawn/written works. I couldn't tell you where it is but I would not hold much against the person enforcing it.

Isn't it played for laughs, rather than any kind of titillation? As far as I know, others did point out that her swimsuit was ridiculous. (haven't watched the anime, just heard a little about that scene)

edited 30th Apr '12 11:52:44 AM by OneMore

"We'd end up cutting most of the anime from this site otherwise."

Doesn't that speak more to the works in question than it does to our editorial policies? I'm actually not being facetious here; it strikes me as disturbing that manga and anime get held to looser standards than other media, as if they are deliberately pandering to fetishes that aren't acceptable elsewhere.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

One More: Yes, it's played for laughs, but the other outfits in the series seem to suggest that it's also supposed to be titillating. You're supposed to laugh at Kuroko being insane, not that a child is wearing an outfit like that.

Fighteer: Saying most anime was an exaggeration, but I think if you want to cut any and all underaged fanservice you're going to end up going for the likes of Clannad (Sunohara Mei) and Fate Stay Night (Ilyasviel von Einzbern). Thile there is no opportunity to romance either, they do seem to be played for some amount of fanservice.

I'm trying to argue from a practical point of view is all. If we cut all the anime that has any hint of this we're going to lose a lot of articles and potentially editors.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:57:44 AM by Arha

I think the main problem with anime/manga is that 1) they have pictures, which makes them both more objectionable (because text is always treated more lightly) and easier to riffle through to find a shocking image, and 2) they're foreign, and thus less familiar. There's all kinds of potentially bannable content in US novels, it's just harder to find and less likely to be salient to the casual browser.

edited 30th Apr '12 11:56:17 AM by lebrel

Calling someone a pedant is an automatic Insult Backfire. Real pedants will be flattered.