Changed w/o discussion: Ms Fanservice.Anime

16 is still below the age of consent in some states, let alone countries, to say nothing of being considered too young to be featured in porn.

Not that this is technically counted as porn, but the guidelines for that seem like a more meaningful baseline than ages of consent that vary based on where you are.

EDIT: Also "looked and acted 16" is rather subjective anyway.

edited 25th Sep '16 8:19:44 PM by neoYTPism

In terms of tv tropes though highschool age aka 16 is fine, any lower is sent into Content Violation and that's usually for far worse stuff.

As it is its just her normal outfit and the entire series has aired on Toonami and Sy-Fy before.

edited 26th Sep '16 12:35:14 AM by Memers

Good enough for me.

edited 26th Sep '16 12:18:13 AM by Karxrida

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?

I would file that under Getting Crap Past the Radar. Just because something's considered family-friendly, doesn't mean that its subtle fetishization of teenagers is something we should feature in a page image. After all, it's not about avoiding being family-unfriendly. It's about avoiding being creepy.

Why are we going by what happens to be the age of consent in some states, but not others? Wouldn't going by the age requirements for porn make more sense, if only for being more analogous to it, albeit not equivalent?

And again, anime has plenty of fanservicey grown women, so it's not like we're walking on eggshells here.

Worth noting that the age of consent has nothing to do with child pornography at all.

A bit more reasonable might be "If it looks like a child it's probably not a good idea to propose it as an image for this trope".

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

"Looks like a child" is subjective, especially in a medium known for big-eyed characters.

In any case, even if "canonically of an age at which it'd be child pornography if she were real" isn't a disqualifier for a page image, it should be considered a flaw, or at the very least something to avoid when characters who aren't canonically that young are clearly also options.

edited 27th Sep '16 10:57:43 AM by neoYTPism

I doubt that someone can mistake Yoko for a child.

For the love of god, at least stop suggesting blurry screencaps that hurt my eyes.

Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.

On second thought, I suppose we could consider Tsunade at least an option.

edited 1st Oct '16 1:38:54 PM by neoYTPism

I have no idea what work this is from◊ (I found it on a random search of google images) but I love the multiple levels of the joke.

This signature says something else when you aren't looking at it.

Ah, forgot all about that until you reminded me. It was brought up in a thread years ago for Visual Pun, and I raised concerns that it might be too dirty for a non-sexual trope, but it is a brilliant visual pun, and someone clicking the anime subpage of Ms. Fanservice probably knows what they're getting themselves into.

As with before, though, I'd like to know whether the character is canonically teenage or an adult.

Reverse google image search and some link checking shows that it is from a manga we have a page for, Ane Doki. The wiki article only lists her as a high school student, but there is a line about how if she were 4 years younger she would have been in the same class as the boy. He is 13, so she would be about 17.

This signature says something else when you aren't looking at it.

Barring a completely straightforward depiction, I'm fine with the fangirl.

Way too risqué for me. I'm not comfortable having an image where a girl is effectively pleasuring herself.

edited 3rd Oct '16 11:57:48 AM by Karxrida

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?

Not sure that's necessarily any worse than showing a lot of cleavage. IMO it's the "she's canonically 17" part that's concerning, and as I often say, "a flaw, but not necessarily a disqualifier."

Just realized now I forgot to bring up Jessie, from Pokemon.

edited 3rd Oct '16 5:33:39 PM by neoYTPism

There's a huge difference between showing some cleavage and what can be taken as an obvious mastrubation parallel (if not actually being considered mastrubation). I seriously don't understand how that image is being considered at all.

The Jesse image is a bit too underplayed. She's just wearing a fancy dress.

edited 3rd Oct '16 7:54:21 PM by Karxrida

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?

A fancy dress... that shows cleavage. And a lot of leg. While those legs are crossed. That's three fanservice cliches at the same time. You know, sort of like on the main page, except IMO the Jessie one's more attractive than the Jessica one. ^note (Prettier face, has a waist that isn't so small as to make it look like something's medically wrong with her...)

Readers will have clicked on an anime subpage of Ms. Fanservice. If you're in any public place where "anime" and "fanservice" go together, at least as far as things to look at in public go, I'm not sure why they'd draw the line at female masturbation, let alone something merely intended to remind us of it.

edited 3rd Oct '16 10:13:09 PM by neoYTPism

Jessie's not a Ms. Fanservice. The trope is not fanservice in general, it's a female character who is frequently the one providing it. Jessie doesn't make a habit of dressing like that.

Fair enough, then, let's keep looking. ^note (For the record, my familiarity with Pokemon doesn't really extend beyond out of context scenes either.)

Or alternatively start coming up with collages featuring the characters we already have... I'm not even sure where to go from here, actually.

edited 3rd Oct '16 10:25:42 PM by neoYTPism

That Jessie image is also up on New Money in addition to her not being the trope.

Jessie was the old pic pulled and replaced because was not a fanservice character.

I found another pic of Fujiko that is not bad [1]◊ (it is the same in Lupin characters page, but more bigger).

Here it is at 350 pixels wide:

Is that logo/watermark (whichever it is) in the bottom-left corner a concern?

Thats no good, only the bottom panel is this trope the rest is more dangerous Action Girl.

edited 4th Oct '16 3:08:02 PM by Memers

Yeah, it does seem fitting for a trope besides this one.

It feels like the real topic here is one of censorship rather than image picking.

The current character seems to be a perfect fit, and I just checked, Gurren Lagann is freely available in several mainstream places without any sort of content warnings or censorship of the character who currently provides the page image (at least in the US, which is normally pretty big on censoring what can be considered sexual content).

Perhaps this topic should be moved.

edited 4th Oct '16 4:51:47 PM by Jokubas