Gina Szanboti

This is not the argument in favor of your position that you think it is...

You know that scene in IT where the kids basically had their pre-teen orgy in the cave? I can deal with that in the novel because I get to control how I imagine it in my head. But I do not want to see that scene played out with teen actors having to play it out on screen. The point is there are differences in media, and what can pass in one, doesn't fly in another. Hell, I've written some shit myself I'd never want to see animated or in live action, but I think it worked on the page. If child murders were carried out in games as something cool that the heroes do? Yeah, you might see some kids who shouldn't be playing those games but are, imitating them because the heroes made it look admirable. And older teens might shrug off rl murders as no big deal, cause the good guys slaughter little kids all the time, who cares. That's what I mean about differences in how it's portrayed mattering. We already have dozens of cases where kids desensitized to death gleefully hound other kids to suicide for fun. It just makes no sense to me to insist that media has zero influence on people, especially teens who are still forming their world views and self views, when advertisers spend billions to influence people. If media had no influence, they wouldn't waste their money. All those Chinese restrictions? Almost all of them can be gotten around simply by not including Chinese characters. Easy breezy. And some of them don't even seem to be enforced. I've seen quite a few Chinese-made series that revolve around life after death or reincarnated characters. I've seen spirits, if not called "ghosts." The first 2 Ghostbusters movies ran there, but the reboot didn't, not because of ghosts but because the box office was so poor for the first 2 that they didn't see the point since Chinese audiences just weren't interested. I've seen some fairly graphic violence as well as BL-themed series that tiptoed around the issue, but the subtext was clear to anyone with eyes. A lot of Japanese BL titles do likewise. So yeah, most of them could pass muster if they wanted to. If they don't want to, and think they can still make a profit, then they'll choose that.

I really enjoyed it, although it got a little Trigger-happy at the end. I'm not sure what's hard to understand about it though. Seemed like a pretty straightforward fantasy to me.

The DOJ will step in shortly and have them drop the case.

I've had a jar of yeast, lonely in my fridge all this time. I realized yesterday when I went to the store that it might be that they have it sometimes, but not early in the morning, which is when I have to go, because it's too hot to go during the day (even coming home once the sun is up is too hot because no shade from direct sun), and they close before dark so it's still too hot. I had thought they were restocking before the store opened or after it closed the previous day, but the place was crawling with people stocking shelves, and lots of empty spaces throughout the store. At least there is bread. But I wanna make a pizza. And banana bread.

No, it's the fact that it normalizes adults sexualizing children. When kids are hurt or killed in anime or live action dramas, it's not usually presented as being desirable. It's how you show the character is evil for not sparing children or deliberately targeting them. The exception is shounen action, which is power fantasy for boys who dream of being heroes and taking risks while doing some of the hurting and killing themselves. Most kids recognize real life is not like that. But lusting after children is presented as harmless and funny or hot (except in porn, where harm may be the fetish - and the subtext that we wouldn't make this just for you, so you know you're not alone). It's edgy and cool, and there's nothing wrong with it. The teacher in KnJ is a nice guy who is just powerless in the face of a child's seduction. Because it's as you suspected, kids really do want to sex up adults. That's why I have a problem with it, not because I can't tell the difference between animation and real life. As a serious novel, I wouldn't even have a problem with KnJ. On paper it explores some serious issues that deserve attention. But you can't deny that animating it and making it an erotic comedy with some dramatic elements changes the game. The latter ends up looking like cover for the eroticism so that fans can righteously claim they're there for the drama and not the kiddie porn. As for China's up and coming animation industry, that's a distraction from the point that Japanese creators still have to pander to them right now.

Ok, it's been 4+ months now, could we please get some flour on the grocery shelves? Preferably in bags? I get that it takes some time to alter supply streams, but this is ridiculous.

From the first video it's clear that Andy Kaufman was Carl Reiner's love child.

Y'all talk like we're the only market that changes shit up during localization. Japan has far more to worry about in catering to China's censorship than the US's. Even Hollywood censors itself or films alternate scenes to be able to sell in China. It's the biggest market in the world, so of course anyone who wants to have a presence there will toe their party line. If they're saying "we don't want to be censored in the West" it's only because they're afraid of offending the Chinese censors by complaining about them.

Does that mean they turned you down, or they just won't get off their asses to approve or deny?

1. The mods don't even know I'm alive. 2. I am the resident pedant who corrects the spelling and grammar of everyone equally, except for Ghostrek, because I can't spend my life here. 3. I hope to be successful in my lobbying efforts for an angry Grrr rating for posts, as well as for larger emojis and post tags. No Grrr, no peace! Make your voice heard here!

I guess I don't see what the problem was, at least until you made it one by running away. You were talking about the dog, right? The dog had legs. There's no reason not to describe it as you did just because its owner had none. It's not like you yelled, "OMG, you have no legs! Where are your legs?!" That would've been bad. If only you'd just smiled at her and asked, "Is this your dog?" or if it was obvious from a leash or something, just gush over how pretty it was and ask its name or any of the things you'd have said if the owner had legs. People with disabilities know they have them and they know you know, so there's no need to triptoe around it like the elephant in the room. Like it's ok to say "See what I mean?" to a blind person. Or sign, "Did you hear the news?" to a deaf person.