halifax_slasher ([info]halifax_slasher) wrote,
@ 2007-01-04 22:51:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:non-florilegium

Strawberry Marshmallow: Perverted or not perverted?
Okay, so I like the manga Strawberry Marshmallow. It's relatively cute, if you are into that kind of thing, but more importantly it is often very funny. For example, the first installment features several kid characters being late for school, so older sister Nobue offers to drive everyone there. Chika (Nobue's little sister, who knows her well) refuses, but Chika's friends assent, and get in the car. Nobue then drives right past the school, despite the protests of her passengers. That night they return, and explain to Chika, somewhat shamefaced, that they went off and did touristy things near Tokyo. This wouldn't be much of anything, except for the pacing: most of the story involves the worry of getting ready for school in a hurry, which leaves two pages for the "kidnapping" and one panel for the climactic return and explanation. It's like a Sophoclean tragedy in that the conventionally interesting stuff (what most manga would focus on: the touristy hijinks) happens off-stage. I love this story. Not all of them work this well, but they're all short, and the hit-to-miss ratio is pretty good.

That was all justification for why I read the manga in the first place. The problem is: according to [info]erinfinnegan, Strawberry Marshmallow is a notorious lolicon pervert series. And if this were true it would answer some questions. Why is there an ever-growing cast of pre-teen girls and no males ever appearing in the comic? Why does Nobue occasionally go all moe on the little girls, and try to kiss them? The pre-teen panty shots are pretty rare, rarer even than what appears in Little Lulu or Nancy, but when they do appear--well, they don't feel like Nancy. And why are they there at all? Do we really need this many baths, young ladies? The cover of volume one has two twelve-year-olds hugging on top of a giant strawberry; the back cover of volume two has one of them in a bikini (!). What did they do to Matsuri after drugging her (!) one night (!) in the story "Sinister Sleepover"(!)? Are the obsessively documented minutae of quotidian acts we witness the girls go through fetishistically documented minutae of quotidian acts (ala Kokoro Library)?

What I'm asking is: Is Strawberry Marshmallow well-concealed kiddie-porn, or is it a perfectly innocent romp that just looks like kiddie-porn because it's Japanese?




(Post a new comment)


[info]sunseenli
2007-01-05 05:08 pm UTC (link)
Do we really need this many baths, young ladies?

To be fair, the answer to this is always yes. I took an hour long bath pretty much every night that I could get away with it as a kid...and I still would to this day. Baths are fun.

Is Strawberry Marshmallow well-concealed kiddie-porn

If it's that carefully concealed, maybe it's only porn if it has that affect on you? I mean, the Frederick's of Hollywood catalogue isn't porn, but it's much more stimulating. (And even then...no harm no foul, maybe?)

Then again, I'm dressing as a 14 year old schoolgirl in most of my icons, so you might want to take my advice from where it comes.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-06 02:30 am UTC (link)
Yes, but were you taking those baths with your little friends and their older sister?

"Pron" is obviously a hopelessly vague word, and neither Strawberry Marshmallow nor a Victoria's Secret catalog (I've never seen a FoH, so I made the substitution) is pronography in the usual sense; I mean, anyone who purchases pronography from a pronography store and ends up with Strawberry Marshmallow is going to feel ripped off. But...

When I was in Japan I went into a store in Akihabara called "Little Sister" which turned out to be a child pronography store (oops!). They sold things like lolicon manga and video games that (judging by the samples running) let the player simulate molesting children. Now, there was, of course, no actual child pronography as we understand it lying around the store (this was not some back-alley shop, and even Japan has, you know laws (as of 1999)), but there were videos running on video monitors, videos that might otherwise have looked fairly innocent, of little girls romping in swimsuits, in their PJs, trying to reach things off of high shelves, etc. Who took these videos? Some of them could have been innocent home videos--I mean, if someone takes a picture of his daughter at the beach, who's going to blame him? Without the context, I might not have noticed the way the camera lingered as the girls posed. I watched those videos for five hours. So I can state with authority that had they been spliced into a family super-8 recording I would never have recognized some of these shots for what they were.

Now, I am a big John Stanley fan, and I often chat up customers who buy Little Lulu comics so we can geek out together. But this one old guy I started talking to, all he would talk about was how Little Lulu always showed her "bloomers." He then pointed out several panels (there are a great many in any Lulu comic) in which Lulu bends over and, yes, displays her "bloomers." "Girls used to show their bloomers; they don't show their bloomers much any more," he said. When the fellow rang up he had not only Little Lulu but also Akiko, Patty Cake, and The Baby-Sitter's Club.

Obviousy there's nothing sexual about these comics--I gave Baby-Sitter's Club to my sisters, for God's sake--and I am not in the least bit creeped out by reading Patty Cake. And obviously there was something sexual about the Little Sister videos, such thalt I would have felt weird, say, buying one.

TCM will say (largely correctly) that the author is dead, but I am nevertheless curious about how this text is supposed to be received. Perhaps it's just cute. Perhaps it's filthy, and I just haven't recognized it as such. It's disquieting not to recognize a book as an authorial wankfest: Piers Anthony and John Norman both took me a long time to, you know, notice. nd while there's nothing wrong with an authorial wankfest, I prefer to know when I'm reading one. Also, I prefer it not to involve eleven-year olds.

My feelings for Sailor Venus are a completely different animal, and have no bearing on the conversation.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]ericbuttface2
2007-01-06 07:47 am UTC (link)
>I watched those videos for five hours.

!!! It sounds like Kerry gave you an even filthier tour of Japan than I received.

The library incest cartoon you showed me was totally fetish porn and this cartoon probably is too. I know you already know this, but other people should be reminded that lots of fetishists are aroused by things that most people wouldn't consider to be porn. Is footage of women trying on shoes that's being sold to foot fetishists pornography? I would say yes.

An anecdote on this sort of kiddie porn: In high school I took a media arts class. At one point one of the less popular students, whom everyone assumed to be a latent homosexual, showed the class his video. His video was a music video featured his little sister running around and frolicing and posing on a bed. Now clearly he hadn't intended to make a wank video of his little sister and then show it to classmates, but that didn't change the fact that what he created consisted exclusively of sexualized images of children. When the video had finished the entire class just stared wide-eyed, mouth-agape in awkward silence until one girl finally just exclaimed "Oh my god, I think I'm going to be sick!"

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-06 11:13 pm UTC (link)
Kokoro Library has the distinction of being less sexual and more pornographic than Strawberry Marshmallow.

Unintentional pornography (medical textbooks, National Geographics, The Diary of Anne Frank) in a very interesting genre; I would like to see more simulated unintentional pornography, where people make porn and then pretend that it was an innocent found text that was never supposed to be sexual.

Dagnabbit, where's Taint when you need him?

I wish I could have made art in high school that would have made my classmates sick...

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]sunseenli
2007-01-06 08:56 pm UTC (link)
Yes, but were you taking those baths with your little friends and their older sister?

Well...depends on the age we're talking about, I guess. ::laughs:: (Hey, I LOVE the water. Wish I had a hot tub, gedemmit...)

As for the rest...I really don't know. It's a lot to think about. That's one of the problems (the only problem I have, really) with fetishes: if it's a fetish for something otherwise completely non-sexual, it's really "Anything Goes". While I'm not a prude, I'm not completely comfortable with the thought that I might be giving some guy the show of his life while bending over to tie my shoe because he's got a sneaker fetish. But then, perfectly normal guys fantasize about women they saw just riding the bus that day so...I dunno.

Wanting to know the intent beforehand of an author is a pretty good idea, but then again, does the intent really matter all that much if it didn't come across clearly? I mean, Wizard of Oz really isn't a pertinent political treastise anymore, but retains its value as a wonderful fantasy story. Is Lewis Carroll's photography porn or art? I don't know.

Neat convo, though. :)

And Sailor Venus is pretty hot. Too bad I'm a brunette.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-06 11:26 pm UTC (link)
It's true that just about anything is potential pornography for some sicko. Lord knows that girl on crutches doesn't realize she's indulging my problems as she hobbles down the street. But there seems to be (seems to be? is?) a moral difference between fantasizing with a shoe catalog and fantasizing with a grammar school yearbook, even though neither hurts anyone.

I just don't want to buy Strawberry Marshmallow volume three and get carted away by the feds like Dwight Whorley.

Would [info]thecomicman like to weigh in on authorial intent?

Too bad I'm a brunette.

Ah, but you see I am not. "Venus Hal chain encircle!"

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]sunseenli
2007-01-07 11:24 pm UTC (link)
But there seems to be (seems to be? is?) a moral difference between fantasizing with a shoe catalog and fantasizing with a grammar school yearbook, even though neither hurts anyone.

Well, yes. I agree with you. But, regardless of whether you're supposed to or not, you're not fantasizing over the kids in Strawberry Marshmallow, so, I think you're okay.

Ah, but you see I am not. "Venus Hal chain encircle!"

Oh lord, that would make a great drawing. I hope I find time. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ericbuttface2
2007-01-07 05:50 am UTC (link)
>I'm not completely comfortable with the thought that I might be giving some guy the show of his life while bending over to tie my shoe because he's got a sneaker fetish.

My favorite story along these lines is about balloon fetishists. These people like to see girls blowing up balloons until they pop. (I believe the building tension, anticipation of the popping, and sudden surprise of the balloon popping right in front of the girl's face parallel sexual climax in their minds) So they'll go to a party supplies store when there's a pretty girl working at the counter and say that they need some balloons for a child's party but they're worried about the balloons popping while being blown up, so they ask the girl to blow up different brands of balloons until they pop to compare brands. Then after she does, they'll buy some balloons and quickly run home to masturbate.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-07 06:51 am UTC (link)
Wow, that's a great idea. I should try this, not because I'm sexually attracted to girls blowing up balloons, but because I have no way of knowing that I'm not...

I wonder if this tale has passed or will soon pass into party supply store clerk lore, and now they're all on the lookout for it.

There are endless similar possibilities for other perversions. "I'd like to buy these crickets to feed to my lizard, but I'm afraid of what might happen if one got loose and I stepped on him accidentally. Could you step on a few just so I can make sure its safe?"

I assume eventually the mainstreaming of paraphilia on daytime talkshows will reveal all such secret desires, and every time anyone asks for anything unusual from a clerk he'll get slapped (which, of course, only indulges another paraphilia).

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]sunseenli
2007-01-07 11:11 pm UTC (link)
Oh man, that sucks. I mean, if you're going to have a balloon fetishist come into your store, I'd much prefer the other camp, the ones that develop an emotional attachment to the balloons? But then, I'm still afraid of balloons popping, so that's probably why.

At least they buy the balloons. That'd really piss me off.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]ericbuttface2
2007-01-08 03:18 am UTC (link)
>At least they buy the balloons. That'd really piss me off.

Well, there's two camps of balloon fetishists. The first, which I just mentioned and others who think lying to the girl at the coutner is wrong. So what they suggest is just going in and saying, "If you'll blow one of these balloons up until it pops, no questions asked, I'll buy $50 dollars worth of balloons from you."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]sunseenli
2007-01-08 05:17 pm UTC (link)
Well, there's two camps of balloon fetishists.

So I've heard. (NSFW)

So what they suggest is just going in and saying, "If you'll blow one of these balloons up until it pops, no questions asked, I'll buy $50 dollars worth of balloons from you."

The phrase "no questions asked" really should just be translated as "Run the other way. Now." :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]ericbuttface2
2007-01-09 02:23 pm UTC (link)
Actually the author of that webpage is the person who told me the balloon fetishist anecdote.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]sunseenli
2007-01-09 02:30 pm UTC (link)
Oh wow, that's really funny! What a small world! I happened on that page one day a few years back when I forgot the URL to Deviant Art, and typed "deviant art" into Google.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]ericbuttface2
2007-01-10 03:32 am UTC (link)
I guess there aren't that many people talking about balloon fetishists.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Reply from suspended user)

(Reply from suspended user)

[info]thecomicman
2007-01-05 06:46 pm UTC (link)
i vote kiddie porn.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-06 01:22 am UTC (link)
We weren't deciding which movie to watch, tcm, we were talking about comics.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]naniwa
2007-01-09 12:31 am UTC (link)
It is manga that teases so much it is considered porn. It is a manga series that runs in a notorius moe/bishojo magazine and the market is seinen (adult males) readers. The moe element is so thick it has created many dounjinshi that takes the manga to the next level.

The fetishes are so thick that they are taken to an extreme by that the readers. Obviously there is the lolicon element. The characters are loli in everyway. They are drawn in a way that is popular in the lolita only magazine sector - like Shojo Tenkoku. Actually etchi artist Yug draws in a design like this but takes it a step closer to the eroi by drawing his underage characters nude even more (they never cross the line to sex but the eros is heavily implied). Actually Barasui in interviews said he took influence on the designs by super young shojo manga like Hime-chan no Ribbon and Ponytail Hakusho cause he wanted his characters to look super-cute and pure... Woah!

There is a character for everyone:
onee-chan - Nobue
meganekko - Matsuri
boke - Miu
pure - Chika

There is an innocence to the look of the cast and once again Barasui in interviews stated he purposely drew them this way so that their strange actions would get a rise (he is a big fan of in your face comedy like Downtown and 4 panel manga). Add to that his use of perspective to get panty shots and eroi scenes in the sugar sweet story and there you go a manga that doesn't look erotic on the surface but is eroi in many ways underneath.

Its pretty obvious just from who publishes this title. If MediaWorks wanted to present this to shonen readers they could have but they decided the seinen magazine would be the best audience. Heh, and it is working globally. But the best part for me is how the yuri fans also like this series. Now that is a moe that makes it even more erotic for me (but I tend to look at manga in a different way than most).

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-09 03:29 am UTC (link)
I'm not sure I understand all the words, but the gist of it seems to be: "Of course Strawberry Marshmallow is porn, you morons! How could anyone interpret it as anything else?"

Oh, well.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]erinfinnegan
2007-01-09 03:42 am UTC (link)
That's Ed, he's like, the manga expert I ask for this sort of thing. Manga in Japan is classified in the magazine it's serialized in - and the magazines go by demographic. Strawberry Marshmellow is run in a magazine for perverts, and not in an innocent girl's magazine. Theretofore, lolicon!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-09 04:14 am UTC (link)
Wait a minute--Strawberry Marshmallow ran in Dengeki Daioh, the same magazine than ran Azumanga Daioh and Yotusba.

Is everything filthy?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]erinfinnegan
2007-01-09 04:21 am UTC (link)
Apparently!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

The Verdict
[info]halifax_slasher
2007-01-16 05:49 am UTC (link)
"I only read it for the interviews."

(Reply to this)


[info]penrobokai
2007-02-13 04:19 am UTC (link)
I enjoy reading the Amazon reviews with a smug sense of superiority.

"The ultra-cute characters in Strawberry Marshmallow will appeal to adolescent girls, the show's obvious target audience; older viewers and boys may find them cloying."

I too was a fool to think Yotsuba& was somehow different and pure and totally not aimed at perverts just because I like it.

(Reply to this)

Funny quote
(Anonymous)
2008-05-16 11:34 am UTC (link)

If you are shooting under 80 you are neglecting your business;
over 80 you are neglecting your golf.
-- Walter Hagen


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://ebloggy.com/oscarpierceie

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…