Talk:Yaoi/Archive 1

message: I took out the 'joke' part of the yaoi entry. I don't think it belongs at all. And it is offensive. If you are only posting it to be funny, post it in a forum instead, not on a serious website which is devoted to scholarly research. This seems like something a twelve year old would include.
:Perhaps putting it under the joke section is not optimal, but I think it does belong in the article somewhere.  As mentioned before, people do frequently hear this.  Hence, there are some scholarly value in documenting the existence of this phrase.  As for offensiveness, could you clarify why you find it offensive?  If you meant that looking at in only as a joke, then I can see your point.  Nevertheless, its humorous quality should still be noted. madoka 20:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  joke 

message: I am surprise that with so much implied Yaoi in anime, that none of the conservative group take actions against anime... I mean, they can even do that to Spongebob... so it surprised me, you know.
:I think the reason is because it is largely under their radar.  The reality is that, despite what some anime fans may think, anime is still not exactly a "mainstream" phenomenon in America.  Sure, it's everywhere, but so is sci fi, detective fiction, fantasy, and horror, and those aren't really mainstream, per se, either.  Like all of those, anime is still a niche market, it just happens to be one that is enjoying a large boom in popular appeal at the moment.  How long that will last is unclear, and largely irrelevant to this discussion, however.  Since anime itself is still something of a niche interest, specific sub genres of anime are even moreso.  Mecha and toy shows like Pokemon and Yugioh are a bit more well known than other anime, but thats because they have popular series aired on cartoon network, whereas yaoi and shounen ai series have nothing similar to their name.  Something might bring it to their attention in the future, but I think it is more likely that the popularity of anime will peak and begin to decline before that happens.
Ha! I'm sure that that almost all conservatives don't even know what anime even is in the first place, and if they do, they don't care enough to even notice Yaoi. If they did, I feel they will not publicly complain about it since its a very very small subculture anyway. --75.37.28.100 00:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reactions from conservatives? 

message: I'd like to make it clear however that all the above animations or manga books are not yaoi in themselves, but merely had doujinshi written by other authors using the characters. All except for Gravitation which did focus on a BL relationship. -- 67.81.42.121 07:53, 6 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment 

message: The followings are my opinion.
--- There has been the concept of pederasty which mainly refers to the classic Greek pederasty in Japan, and this concept has been called shounen-ai (:ja:少年愛). Novelist Inagaki Taruho had written many boy-boy homosexual-like stories in early to middle 1900's, but he also wrote famous essay book /Shounen-ai no Bigaku (The Aesthetics in Shounen-ai) / in around late 1960's. SHOUNEN-AI in /Shounen-ai no Bigaku/ referred to those of wide-meaning pederasty including ancient Greek pederasty, Japanese shudo, Chinese Rendo-ai (love to beautiful boy) etc. The concept of this book is that of original meaning of pederasty and this is original usage of the term, Japanese /shounen-ai/.
--- In early 1970's, some pederastic/homosexual cinema films were introduced in Japan such as the film based on Thomas Mann's /Der Tod in Venedig/. Bjorn Andersen who played a boy in this film was widely known in Japan and many fans of young girls appeared. Almost at the same time, the new wave of shoujo-manga took place and were widely spreaded. Hagio Moto, Takemiya Keiko, and Yamagishi Rhouko are major manga artists of this wave. They made the works including the themes of boy-boy (around 12 to 14 years) homosexual love relation, such as /Tooma no Shinzo/, /Kaze to Ki no Uta/, /Hi izuru tokoro no Tenshi/ etc. The style of these works was called /shounen-ai/ manga.
--- In the middle of 1970's, novelist Kurimoto Kaoru (aka Nakajima Azusa) wrote some pederastic stories such as /Ma-yonaka no Tenshi/ and /Tsubasa aru Mono/. In these stories, Kurimoto described sexual relation between adult men and young man (beautiful boy over 16 years). She could not publish these stories. But after she got success and became one of the most famous novelists, she published these stories in 1980's and wrote more stories of pederasty. Her works were also classified as /shounen-ai theme/ works.
--- In 1981, magazine /JUN/ had been published, and it had been soon changed its name to /JUNE/. Kurimoto Kaoru contributed many pederastic works to this magazine. Manga artist Takemiya Keiko drew the cover pictures and illusts for this magazine in the early volumes. Then pederastic /shounen-ai/ stories were called /june/. Throughout 1980's, /shounen-ai/ and /june/ were genre name of pederastic male-male relation novels and mangas. Many fan-writers made thier debut in this magazine and some of them became professional novelist as Kurimoto Kaoru operated regular work-shops of shounen-ai stories on this magazine and many fan-writers contributed many fan-stories in 1980's.
--- In the late 1980's, the term /Ya-O-I (yah-oh-ee)/ appeared. And the term /Tambi-shousetsu/ began to be used for classifying special type of june/shounen-ai stories. In this time, the terms /shounen-ai/, /june/, /ya-o-i/, and /tambi-shousetsu/ were used. Many girls and young women created /doujin-shi/ magazines in which they expressed /shounen-ai/ stories and mangas and illusts. These extraordinarily much doujinshis were sold in Comikets (Comic Markets in Japan).
--- In the middle of 1990's, some publishers of ya-o-i/june works etc. began to utilise the term /boh-izu-rabu == boys love/, perhaps to commercially characterize/distinguish and appeal their books, i.e. ya-o-i stories and mangas.
--- In the 2000's, /ja:bouizu-rabu/ or /BL/ have established its citizenship as an independent genre in Japanese subculture. And now, /BOUIZU-RABU/ is very big name and big genre in stories, mangas etc. for mainly young women and girls.
--- Addition: the relation between Yaoi/BL and anime seems to be secondary. The relation is just on borrowing anime characters and using them as characters appeared in Yaoi/BL stories. Anime may be non-essential to Yaoi/BL stories in Japan.
These are outlines of the history which I know.(For more details, I should research. The articles in Japanese Wiki include perhaps some errors because many writers do not know the history and historical situations of these genres.) --Maris stella 05:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The History of Yaoi/BL in Japan 

message: The following were removed without explanation by a couple of anonymous editors:
*Gravitation
*Loveless
*Tokyo Babylon
*Yami no Matsuei
I've re-added Gravitation, but I'm not familiar enough with the other three to know whether or not they should be re-added as well. --Icarus 04:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yami no Matsuei is shounen-ai, not BL. DrGaellon 23:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of Yaoi 

message: I've taken out Watase Yuu's name from the Overview as she is not a yaoi manga author. She is a shoujo manga author instead with such titles as Fushigi Yuugi, Ayashi no Ceres, Imadoki, Alice 19th, etc.
Seoi 00:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview 

message: I removed "Yukio Mishima" from the Examples as he is a popular Japanese novelist, not a manga author nor a BL manga work himself.
I've added back in:
*Loveless
*Tokyo Babylon
*Yami no Matsuei
I've also added in "Animal X", "Ikoku Irokoi Romantan", and "Koori no Mamono no Monogatari".
Seoi 00:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal + (Re)Additions in Examples of Yaoi 

message: Is there a reason why there are so many authors/mangakas and books listed? I see why Bronze, Kaze to Ki no Uta, and Gravitation may be important, but fail to see the importance of Ikoku Irokoi Romantan or Kashou no Tsuki or even Enzai. Similarly, the authors' list is long and overwhelming; even as a frequent yaoi reader myself, I got a little irritated by the number of authors in this article. I don't want to edit this in case there's a point, but I hope someone will revisit that part of the article? Vignette00 19:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  question 

message: I have removed the JP best sellers list as this was really in essence an advert. The link for the Mark McLelland article was redirecting to an empty space and so I have posted a link to a different article on a similar subject - though I suggest that seeing as we have an articles section - the references section needs to be just for articles/essays that are less obviously about yaoi (hence my choice of essay/article linked) or merged with the articles and interviews subheadings - which is actually getting worryingly large. I think that all posted are very worthy and of merit so I don't think there is any need to remove - eep that wasn't very helpful I suppose. (sharonlees 10:39, 14 July 2006)
Just had to add articles and interviews back onto page - why it was removed I don't know as they are quite informative etc?!?!
If a comment had been made etc I might not have done this... --Sharonlees 12:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References, Articles and Interviews 

message: I think that the list of authors and manga-ka is far too long and actually not that useful. The majority of the names don't have thier on pages on Wiki and therefore is redundant for quick reference or a novice looking for some key names - which I presume was its intended job. I also think its too long - I assume the point of the list originally was to inform the reader by giving them some key examples - but it has turned into a directory of authors mostly - which isn't a bad thing but perhaps should have its own page. I won't do anything like this of course with a good amount of support/feedback but I think its the way to go. Also I would dispute how many actually are yaoi manga-ka/authors. --Sharonlees 11:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Authors and Manga-ka 

message: Ok had a bit of an issue with the usage section - which implied all yaoi was in the majority based on enemy pairings and had no real plot - so I've taken on board the enemy pairings and moved it to the doujinshi section - re-written etc. In the doujinshi I've changed wording and things that implied there was some great unknown yaoi conflict/war of the otakus of the world going on - come on peeps - does anyone really care if someone draws or writes about your fave male character getting it on with another guy?? If so grow up - it doesn't matter - there are more important things - sheesh....... Any way I think that as a whole this article blows - I never realised before but I've been looking over some of the best rated Japan wiki articles and they are great - this could be too! Right now we dont even deserve the B grade - but with sooo many people adding their fave pairings mangas and artists (making this page clogged and cumbersome) and adding BL - or even implied BL - to this yaoi page it'll never be top rate. Which makes me sad T_T   --Sharonlees 09:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fix me Please (this article screams) 

message: To me, the "Examples of Yaoi" section looks a bit messy. It might be a good idea to separate the examples into manga, anime and BL games, but many of the examples now come in multiple forms. What does everyone think is a suitable method of organising the section? Statuess 15:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples of Yaoi (again) 

message: Could someone please scrap that section and replace it with a short notion of the IPA representation? It reads like a forum post or weblog or something. I can understand why someone would be peeved about common mispronunciations, but Wikipedia is hardly the place to rant about that kind of thing, especially in an article that doesn't focus on pronunciation, but on Japanese gay porn comics. — Ashmodai (talk · contribs) 07:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Could someone <I>please</i> include the proper (i.e.-Proper Japanese) pronunciation of the word "Yaoi". Thanks...IloveMP2yea 04:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a long discussion quite a few posts above yours... I just added it. Stryik 03:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  IPA Pronunciation Notation 

message: This section is getting out of hand with additions and edit warring. And when I tried to reduce the number of examples, anonymous users started reverting the changes. I don't think that this section adds anything to the article except a source of controversy, and thus I'd like to ask if there would be any support for having it removed. If not, then could we at least agree on no more than two or three pairings per example-type to list there? Before my edit, there were 12 pairings in the "not-quite-Seme/Uke" examples, which is FAR too many. Thanks for reading and replying with your thoughts on the matter. Nique1287 00:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm definitely in agreeance with at least keeping the list trimmed. Having an expansive list can only lead to fandom wars, in my opinion, and there's really no need for something like that. After all, this is an encyclopedia, and should have a certain level of professionalism. I'm not sure how I would feel about eliminating the list entirely, but I do, to reiterate, agree with keeping the list small at the very least. Lithiumflower 00:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  About the Popular Yaoi Pairings in Anime section 

message: I suggest we remove the "Notable titles which have been the subject of yaoi doujinshi" section.  It's getting out of hand.  If we did list each and every title, it would be a whole lot longer, and some of the titles ocassionally get randomly deleted.  I say it should go, for the sake of simplicity.
--MayumiTsuji 20:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. If there's more than one male character in a series, there's probably been yaoi doujinshi about it, and that list is more than a page long at 1280x1024! I say we scrap it. (Also, please use two = signs (second, instead of first, header) when you're making a new discussion, or use the + button at the top of the page to create one in the proper format automatically. Thanks!) Nique talk 21:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Titles in the doujinshi section 

message: Okay, we've been blanked out by vandals what, twice over the last week? Since there's really not much more to constructively add to the topic, and since we have a major vandal problem with this page, I think we should protect it. ~SeventhHaido 12:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vote on protecting the page 

message: The article said, "The English letters form a backronym of the Japanese phrase...", which can't be the case, for then the phrase would have to be the acronym of the abbreviation. I've changed "backronym" to "acronym", but if it should be stressed that the Japanese phrase is a backronym instead of an original meaning the sentence would have to be reworded altogether. --H.A.L. 15:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The English source is rather irrelevant anyway, since the English word "yaoi" in itself is just roma-ji... it should be correctly written as an acronym, since the Japanese phrase was the source of the Japanese word "yaoi." Stryik 03:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  acronym vs backronym 

message: Is it just me, or does this page feel a bit difficult to understand for someone with no prior knowledge of the topic? I'm seeing a bunch of terms thrown around everywhere and I don't even know what they all mean... I've added (Boy's Love) next to "BL" in the opening paragraph of the article... does anybody else think this ought to be tagged? Stryik 04:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccessible? 

message: Instead of having this Yaoi#List_of_popular_yaoi_titles_from_Japan, wouldn't it be better if we just refered to :Category:Yaoi? Added bonus: it would cover all notable titles. Ninja neko 13:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Listing titles 

message: This section seems to list all imprints that have EVER had a yaoi or shounen-ai title, and it's misleading.  Many of these imprints (e.g. Margaret, Princess) are overwhelmingly non-yaoi, and if someone bought these imprints in the belief they'd see yaoi titles, they'd be disappointed.  Does anyone mind if I remove the imprints that I know are non-yaoi? Lijakaca 18:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yaoi imprints 

message: As someone who has a sound knowledge of not only the history of yaoi but the psycho-analytical stance and theory on it - I am appalled by the fluffy and frankly childish way the yaoi article has been written and edited - its gone from lists of pairings, to having factual inaccuracies, to containing nothing of any real substance. I have actually stopped any edits I would have done because it depresses me so to see it constantly changed by people who read yaoi and consider themselves experts because of it. I'm not claiming to be an expert but the work i have done on Japanese popular culture, media and ethnographic psychology has been well recieved and read.
I think people mean well but we are no way ready to say this is a finished article and to lock it from edits....
Someone say they agree or I might just go insane. Its a real shame :( --Sharonlees 16:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wish i was an expert on Yaoi. What a job description for the census! 82.153.230.138 23:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  OMG People 

message: This section is just my opinion. It was removed but I think it should be put back. When I first encountered the terms Shounen-Ai and Yaoi, I was confused which is which. But understanding their etymologies, I came to these conclusions:
:Shounen-Ai focuses on the romantic relationship between two boys. This focuses more on romantic love. After all,Shounen-ai literally means "boy love". Yaoi focuses on the sexual relationship between two boys. The theorized etymologies themselves can be used as bases for this. If it did come from "no peak, no point, no meaning," then where is the romantic relationship there? It wouldn't make sense if the focus is love but it would if the focus is sex. Therefore, Shounen Ai is romantic by nature as Yaoi is erotic.
The other possible origin, "Stop, my ass hurts," is obviously pornographic by nature.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by K.A.David (talk • contribs) 12:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Difference between Shounen Ai & Yaoi 

message: Homestar Runner has it's own wiki, why not a Yaoi Wiki, or BL Wiki, or at least an Anime/Manga Wiki? (Japanophile Wiki?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.236.220 (talk) 
You can make one yourself. Although I don't see why it is needed. This seems like plenty  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animematt (talk • contribs) 18:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yaoi Wiki? 

message: I thought that an important aspect of yaoi was that it is marketed towards girls. Good article about it here: http://www.greencine.com/article?action=view&articleID=96  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.162.200.131 (talk) 21:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already mentioned in the the 'usage' section but it might be a good idea to add it to the introduction as well Tanya had 15:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marketed at girls? 

message: HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE YAOI?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.17.249 (talk) 00:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's "pronunciation". (Momus (talk) 20:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  PRENOUNCIATION 

message: There seems to be a tug of war over the "sexually explicit" part of the definition and I can see why- the article is not consistent in its definition of yaoi:
According to most of the article, yaoi is a publishing genre the Japanese call "Boy's Love", but Boy's Love is not always sexually explicit. According to other parts of the article, yaoi is sexually explicit BL and shounen-ai is non explicit BL. This means yaoi is more like a subgenre of Boy's Love.
To untangle this mess we need to choose one definition and stick with it. If yaoi is sexually explicit BL then we can no longer refer to it as a publishing genre and most of the 'Usage' and 'Yaoi vs. BL' sections need to be rewritten. If yaoi IS the same as BL then we need to change parts of the definition, add non sexual titles to the 'Publishing' section and maybe explain that some people only refer to yaoi as sexually explicit (the last paragraph in 'Yaoi vs. BL' mentions this). I personally prefer the second option because it's easier and the better written parts of the article are the ones that equate yaoi with BL in general. Thoughts? Tanya had 15:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the feedback! The ongoing frustration is no doubt caused by this very issue- someone will always add Gravitation to the list because it's BL, someone will always delete it because it's shounen-ai. I actually think the opposite of you- as far as I can tell the term "shounen-ai" is falling into disuse in western fandom and it's taking the yaoi/shounen-ai dichotomy with it. You just don't see it used much anymore and western publishers never use it either. It seems to me that these days, yaoi is more often used to describe any male/male title marketed at girls, which is the same definition BL has. Now that I think about it, adding a separate, main article about BL with a "yaoi vs. shounen-ai" section might also solve this problem. I will wait for more opinions before I attempt anything.Tanya had 16:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I just call anything with maleXmale relations in it Yaoi...keeps it simple. I find all these subterms to be a bit annoying, personally  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally understand what you mean but I think this definition of yaoi is even less common than the rest. You're welcome to try and change the article but I'm pretty sure you will encounter strong resistance.Tanya had (talk) 19:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, i have always called it Yaoi, and the other stuff Yuri. Never fancied the shonen/shoujo-ai terms. I suppose I could call it "BL". You have to keep in mind that a lot of yaoi is rather sexually explicit too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 14:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  sexually explicit or not 

message: I removed most of the "equality" section as it is biased, incorrect and seems to confuse shoujo/josei BL with gay manga. Here are my reasons:
The title "Equality" is in itself problematic. Suggesting equality as the alternative to traditional seme/uke roles is judgemental and seems to imply that all seme/uke relationships are unequal. There is nothing in the "Seme and uke" section that supports this. The real objective alternative to traditional seme/uke roles is non-traditional seme/uke roles. Also:
1st paragraph:
*Seinen and shounen is not BL. The increasing amount of male/male plots in seinen and shounen is not relevant to a discussion about seme/uke roles in BL/yaoi.
2nd paragraph:
*bara is not considered to be part of the BL/yaoi genre.
*there is no misconception that bara is about equality.
3rd paragraph:
*yaoi/BL is not established as a woman's space "where reality does not matter". Where did that come from?
*equality movement that recognizes gay/bi men- this is not really true, unfortunately. Publishers are aware that gay/bi men read BL but this has no significant effect on the genre. Also, how is this relevant to the subject of traditional seme/uke roles in yaoi/BL?
Tanya had 03:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the point of the seme and uke to NOT have an equal relationship? They all seem very one sided to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animematt (talk • contribs) 18:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's definitely not the point of a seme/uke relationship. The seme and uke might be different from one another but that doesn't mean they're not equal (unless you believe having a square jaw and being a top also means being superior and in control of the relationship). Seme/uke pairings can be equal or unequal, depending on the title. Tanya had (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, well I guess I just don't understand the point of the "uke and seme" then. The vary nature of the definition just rings one dominating over another to me.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 15:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Why is bara not considered part of Yaoi? It is maleXmale relations. Also, wasn't bara some of the first maleXmale stories? (Bara tribe and lily tribe)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 15:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yaoi/BL is part of the shoujo category- it's manga for girls. Bara type muscle men can *only* be found in gay manga  for gay men so we're talking two different publishing genres here. I'm not sure how old bara is... the term refers to an old magazine but the art style might be more recent. Gay manga has its own interesting history but unfortunately I don't know a lot about it.Tanya had (talk) 16:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright then, But what about a male that writes what you would define as "BL"?  I have heard from many people that it is not yaoi unless a female writes it. If it was from a male, they just call it "gay porn"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 05:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally think that if it looks like BL, reads like BL and sold like BL then it's BL (there are actually a few BL writers that are rumored to be male such as Kisaragi Hirotaka). The boundaries aren't so clear in western fandom and no one ever agrees on what counts as "real" yaoi besides commercial BL from Japan. I think this is what creates so much confusion.Tanya had (talk) 19:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I ask because I know that shota is often sold under the yaoi label. I remember when Boku no Pico came out, it was pretty popular. But when the fans found out that a lot of shota is written by males, and or mainyl targeted at males they hated it. Yet the stories would still be considered under the yaoi/shoujo genre.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know very little about shota. All I know is that BL shota that's intended for girls does exist. Shota for men wouldn't be considered as shoujo or BL in *Japan* but anything could happen in the western fandom, where each word seems to have 3 different interpretations... Tanya had (talk) 17:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I would agree in that there is a very small segment of Japanese gay culture that enjoys shota (which would presumably include those who are predisposed to pedophilia). However, given that about 5-7% of the Japanese population is gay (if we go by contemporary estimates), you are talking about a very minuscule number of people as would be consumers. Given that shota is commercially published (Shounen Shikou is a popular one), it is only logical to conclude (read: not original research) that the vastly more populous heterosexual female audience is going to make up the greater share of those consuming said works. I would seriously doubt that it is specifically targeted for the lesser of the two aforementioned audiences. That would not make sense, in the context of a publishing business. You should realize that your western moral judgment and western viewpoint are irrelevant to Japanese women. There just isn't the moral panic caused by the depictions of pre-teens in sexual situations that there is in the west. Japanese society is, by and large, not concerned that a pedophile is lurking behind every dark alley. As such, this sub-genre of yaoi thrives. From what I hear, it is the "cuteness" factor that enamors the women to read such works. Yes, some of the artists are men. But the same is true for yaoi (some of the more notable Naruto doujin-kas are gay men). So, to imply that there are few or no female shota artists is just plain wrong. Most notably, Yun Kouga who is known for Loveless, is one. There are numerous others, you can find some other names on one of the manga databases like "baka-updates manga." As for your comments about Boku no Pico, well that is, once again, from your own viewpoint. Perhaps the circles you travel in felt that way, but most of the yaoi boards would tend to say otherwise. It is hugely popular with the female audience over on Aarinfantasy. Not only that, but all of the shota-con fansubbers and scanlators for Aarinfantasy are female. Furthermore, I'd say it is a safe bet that most all of the scanlation groups that release shota titles are 100% female. Nobody really gives a damn what gender the artist is or who the target audience is, as long as it looks good they'll take it. I also suspect that there is a cheap thrill to be had from reading something that is considered extremely taboo by our western culture. 130.127.48.188 (talk) 21:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Equality section 

message: Please consider using the lengthy External Links section, as sources for the article, if these meet WP:V#Sources ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  EL section 

message: I did enter this on another page that I thought was your 'talk page' but it seems I didn't.  To answer your query on my talk page:
--The cited Mark McLelland article on 'the bulk of yaoi manga in Japan is doujinshi'.
I read this article, and I can't help but notice that while the article was uploaded with a recent date, many of the subjects he speaks of is still dated, in the text of the article, as mid-to-late 90's; just before the pro-BL publishing zenith in Japan. The actual citation used says At present, the majority of yaoi manga are produced by amateur women fans either as dōjinshi (fanzines) or on the Internet. There are now so many amateur yaoi titles, and such is Japanese women’s interest in them, that special editions of general manga and animation magazines often bring out ‘boys’ love’ specials.
He follows that up with talk of a 1999 collection to prove his point. Can you see what I mean, by dated?
It looks like the Mark McLelland piece was updated for the web, to include the Biblos Bankruptcy of 2006, and to update info on the licensing boom in the states--however, much of his article is still talking about the Japanese scene...circa the 90's. Since the late 90's boom, things have changed. Most notable, the pro 'BL' publishing scene which clearly out-produced the amateur scene. ^_^ Not trying to bring trouble, but that was my reason for asking for a citation check. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gynocrat (talk • contribs) 
:I believe the 'bonking' article was originally written in 2001 and later updated in 2006, so as you say, it could be outdated.  As it is, I believe the verifiability policy recommends that if the statement on the bulk of yaoi is doujinshi is to remain in the article, the citation to the bonking article must stay with it.  If you wish to remove the statement about the bulk of yaoi being doujinshi, I believe the usual thing to do is to find a reliable source that says differently, for further clarification.  Please note the section on self-published sources in particular. (sorry to have to point it out)-Malkinann (talk) 01:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Doujinshi Citation 

message: I trying to improve the Gay science fiction article, and i guess this Yaoi has some overlapp. I assume there is a large amount of science fictional / fantasy content, as with other anime/manga? If someone knowledgable could write a summary, it would be great. If not, i'll do it, but cannot be blamed if i get things wrong!
Also: is it possible to identify the first science fictional yaoi, or the most influential or bestselling?
Yobmod (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yaoi science fiction and fantasy 

message: This is all stuff that's been unreferenced for yonks and I can't find any references.  Putting it here for safekeeping, and hopefully future referencing. -Malkinann (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unreferenced stuff 

message: I took the liberty of rewriting the intro, which was riddled with errors, inconsistencies, and contradictions. Hopefully it is more clear now. The definition of seme and uke was wildly wrong. The seme can be and often is younger and more "feminine," and the uke is often older and more "masculine." That is a major part of what makes the dynamic intersting, right? If it was just masculine older boys/men going after feminine, passive, younger boys, it wouldn't be very interesting at all. I have no idea where the definition in the previous edition came from. Also, as I wrote earlier, the zokugo dictionary is extremely unreliable as a reference. I think any references to the zokugo dictionary should be replaced with more reliable sources. Matt Thorn (talk) 03:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Forgive me if this sounds cheeky, but do you have any suggestions for alternate, more reliable sources for the definitions or the variations in the seme/uke relationships?  Even the stuff about the "height rule" being breakable (which I think is fairly common knowledge amongst yaoi fans) has lain uncited for months. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the US-Japan Women's Journal, and Mizoguchi's paper in particular seems like it would be very useful for identifying relationship variations.-Malkinann (talk) 04:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Not cheeky at all. The problem is there are no definitive resources, in Japanese or English, and anyone who tells you "This is definitive" is just proving their ignorance.  You should hear Japanese B.L. fans argue about seme and uke and pairing and everything else under the sun. But if you would offer the definition of seme and uke that I deleted to Japanese fans, 95% of them would say, "That's completely wrong." Then ask those same people, "All right, define the terms for me, you'll get a wild argument that ends in no consensus, beyond the fact that the seme is the aggressor and the uke is the "aggressee." (Too bad there's no good antonym for "aggressor" in English.) Actually, I was just looking at the Japanese "Boys' Love" page, and was amused to see the same puzzling definition of BL as a sub-genre of "yaoi." Then I looked at the discussion page, and guess what? The article's being written by guys. I mean, I'm a guy, too, but I've been doing this for twenty years. Wait, I don't mean "doing" in that sense. Not that it would be a problem if I was. Some of my best friends "do that," really. I mean I've been studying the genre for 20 years, and have talked with literally hundreds of Japanese fans of the genre, not to mention artists and editors. (One of my colleagues was the editor who created Juné. Another is Keiko Takemiya, who arguably invented shounen ai.) Um, where was I? Oh, yeah. The point is that the Japanese Wikipedia is seriously underdeveloped, and you end up with articles like that one being written be people who have only fragmented and sometimes distorted knowledge of what they're talking about. There are, however, several books (all in Japanese) and many academic papers (some in English, like mine) on the subject that can be used as references. I'll go check my bookshelf and see if I can find attempts to define the genre and technical terms. I know I have at least three books there that should be helpful. To be honest, I'm not all that familiar with the English-language literature anymore. I find most of it exasperating, so I stopped reading it years ago. I find that even a lot of the Japanese nationals who write in English on the subject have a shallow knowledge, and seem to think they can get away with writing what amounts to an off-the-cuff essay just because they're Japanese. I don't know if that's true of Mizoguchi. Sorry to rant. Matt Thorn (talk) 06:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Definition is one of my least fave things to do - I'm much more interested in fan activity.  There's a slight problem now with the lead in that the "Usage" section contradicts it pretty comprehensively.  Looking forward to seeing some additions to the further readings from you.  I'm aware of Dru Pagliassotti being a fan and a scholar, recently she's written an essay on terms, but I'm not keen on using it because it's forward-looking rather than grounded in tradition, including all depictions of male/male romance/erotica for females by females. -Malkinann (talk) 12:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm. I just read the "Usage" section, and I don't see it contradicting my rewrite of the intro, but maybe I'm missing something. It's not a very well organized section, and probably contains some unnecessary trivia, but the only thing that struck me as misleading was at the very end, where it says "shounen ai" used to refer to pedophilia. The correct term would be "ephebophilia", since sexual attraction to prepubescent boys has never been socially acceptable in Japan, or anywhere else I can think of. There's a big difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia. I'm going to change the word. If anyone has any objections, let's talk about it here, but I recommend that you first read the article on ephebophilia, which is quite informative. Matt Thorn (talk) 13:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite of intro 

message: Has anyone else seen this? I was searching for pages (in Japanese) that talk about BL and are actually written by BL fans (known as "fujoshi," or "rotting girls," in case you didn't know), and though there are countless pages in which fujoshi discuss particular works, pairings, etc., they are very few that talk about the phenomenon on a "metaphysical" level. This has been true as far back as I can remember. It always seems like the people who want to analyze BL as a phenomenon are not fans themselves. Anyway, here is a rare site that, to some extent, talks about the genre on a meta-level. Predictably, much of it is tongue in cheek, but the "glossary of fujoshi terminology" is both amusing and informative. Take the definitions of uke and seme:
Uke: In a work dealing with love between men, the character who, during sexual intercourse, is penetrated. Example--"This uke is like a chihuahua, he's so cute!"
Seme: In a work dealing with love between men, the character who, during sexual intercourse, penetrates. Example--"The seme in this story is totally my type!"
No ambiguity here. (^_^;) There are so many hilarious terms defined here, but most of them are terms fujoshi actually use. (I know, since I spend a lot of time around fujoshi, and they seem to forget that I'm not a fellow fujoshi but a middle-aged man.) But while a lot of his site is tongue-in-cheek, it is the real deal, created by real BL fans, and therefore in my opinion is more "authoritative" than 95% of scholarly work on the subject (including my own). Matt Thorn (talk) 08:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Cute!  I can't read it, though.  If one interprets the external links guideline liberally, it's okay, because it's related to the subject, and has unique information that isn't on here. -Malkinann (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry! I misspelled the URL. It's "http://fujyoshi.jp", not "fujoshi." Matt Thorn (talk) 04:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  http://fujyoshi.jp 

message: As I've been merging in shonen ai, I think I've kind of got most of what will be useful.  I plan to use a  so that everyone can easily find the old page should they want to. The last little bits I'm unsure of are what to do with these referenced sentences: "Many enthusiasts say they are drawn to the beauty and distance of the characters, as well as the idealistic depictions of male love. Some argue that because shōnen-ai excludes females from the relationship, it is sexually non-threatening to its female audience while still allowing them to identify with its characters.(ref)  Others would argue that it is perfectly natural for women to be attracted to the idea of love and sex between males.(ref)"  It's a bit of a delicate issue, especially as if a discussion of the appeal isn't exceptionally well-written, it runs the risk of saying that fans are psychos.  And then there's the idea of how much weight we should give any discussion... Thoughts, please? -Malkinann (talk) 22:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There are any number of sources that could be referenced here. In my own Girls and Women Getting Out of Hand, I reference several Japanese writers who have written on the subject (Chizuko Ueno, Yukari Fujimoto, Keiko Takemiya, Shihomi Sakakibara), and also my own theory based on fieldwork, and include quotes from fans. I also refer to at least three scholars who have written in English about the appeal of Slash (Camille Bacon-Smith, Henry Jenkins, Constance Penley). I could have mentioned at least one or two other writers, as well. I think it's possible to present a number of theories without making fans sound like psychos. I think it's important to include something on the appeal, because the uninitiated who first encounter BL/Slash almost invariably react, "WTF? Are these women perverts?" By the way, until recently I had only an excerpt of my article on my web site, but the other day I uploaded the entire thing. I figure it's not going to harm sales of the book. About the Takemiya essay, unfortunately I cut it out without noting the publication information (this was almost twenty years ago, when I was just starting my research and didn't think about such details), and Takemiya herself has no recollection of where it was published. (-_-;) Matt Thorn (talk) 06:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Howzat for starters?  And yet, the uninitiated would also go "Hm, Lesbianism in erotica?  Boys will be boys, ha ha!"  Damned double standards... -_-  Could it also be possible that Takemiya's essay dates from 1996?  She's quoted as saying something similar in this paper by Lunsing, who uses the quote from something written by Satou. -Malkinann (talk) 12:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the Takemiya essay is much older. Maybe 1989 or even '88. I have a scan of the whole thing, and somewhere I must have the original that I cut from the magazine, but I didn't notice the lack of publication information until it was too late. I could really kick myself for that. And the ironic thing is that Takemiya, who is now a colleague of mine, has no recollection herself. As for the double-standard, this is probably straying from the topic, but Setsu Shigematsu (a Japanese-Canadian scholar) wrote one of the few English-language essays I really like and agree wholeheartedly with titled "Dimensions of Desire: Sex, Fantasy, and Fetish in Japanese Comics" (In Themes and Issues in Asian Cartooning: Cute, Cheap, Mad, and Sexy. J.A. Lent, ed. Bowling Green, Ohio: Popular Press, 1999). I summarize her argument in my "Out of Hand" paper. Although her writing style (at the time) was over-the-top academese, it's still worth plowing through all the name-dropping and jargon. When I first read it, I thought, "Yeah! That's it! Why didn't I think of this!?" (haha). Anyway, I think the current "Appeal" section, though badly in need of copy-editing, is a good start. I'd also like to include Sakakibara's controversial theory that yaoi fans are "gay men born into women's bodies," as well as I my own pet theory, which is--well, you can read it in great detail in my "Out of Hand" article. Matt Thorn (talk) 15:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

text: I would recommend against a large appeal section (a little one should be okay) because it could end up very opinionated and one-sided.  It could also result in edit wars, as a person stumbling upon the article might see one of the theories and think, "That so doesn't apply to me!" and remove that theory.  Also, a lot of those theories seem to be written by people who aren't into yaoi and they make a lot of assumptions about women's sexuality, which can be very rude.  And even with references, a large appeal runs the risk of being full of original research, and if the editors have a lot of biases, the kinds of references used might reflect that.  Those are my two cents.  MayumiTsuji (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I know I sound like I'm contradicting myself, but I think Mayumi Tsuji has a good point. The only two "theorists" among those I mentioned who are truly into the genre are Sakakibara (who has the most radical theory) and Takemiya (who can rightly claim to be the "mother" of boys' love in Japan). And although my own work is based on observation of and much conversation with literally hundreds of "true fans," I can't claim to be a hardcore fan myself. It might be best to keep it short and simple. But I do think it is important to say, "This writer argues 'A', while this other writer argues 'B'," otherwise we run the risk of portraying "theories" as objective fact. I wouldn't want even my own theories presented that way, for the very reasons Mayumi states. Perhaps an "Appeal" section isn't necessary at all. For comparison, I just checked out the Romance novel article, and at the very end is a short (three paragraph) section titled "Critical attention." The difference in title is significant: instead of asking the unanswerable (and possibly rude) question, "What makes these fans tick?" it points out that the genre has earned serious attention from both academic and non-academic writers and critics. That section might serve as a model for a similar section in the "Yaoi" article. Matt Thorn (talk) 10:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What would a "Critical attention" section involve for yaoi?  The romance novel's critical attention section deals with the low-brow stigma of reading romance novels, and ever so briefly touches on the appeal.  Would a critical attention section here involve themes of yaoi, and feminism and yaoi? -Malkinann (talk) 11:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have a brilliant answer off the top of my head, but it is certainly true that the appeal of shounen-ai/yaoi/BL has been a source of endless fascination among scholars and critics. Apart from the prominent people I've mentioned, they are probably no fewer than 20 less-well-known scholars or graduate students, both in Japan and outside Japan, who have written articles or given conference presentations on the subject. Most are pretty lame, IMO, but it shows there is interest. It might be enough to mention this fact, mention some of the more prominent names, and provide references to what they have written, rather than trying to summarize the content of the material. Does that make sense? Matt Thorn (talk) 12:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: But in saying that there is academic interest in the appeal, it is logical to then briefly cover the main arguments.  I'm trying to think of other stuff that could be in a 'critical attention' section in order to balance the focus on 'why'.  In McLelland's 2000 book, he reckons there wasn't much English-language scholarship, and even less in Japanese (p.61) - has there been a "BL boom" in the literature since then? -Malkinann (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends what you consider a boom. Mostly it's been conference papers, many quite obscure, or commentary in general-audience books or magazine/newspaper articles. It's been common in Japan since the early 1980s, at least, and in English since the early 1990s, but there probably has been an increase in output in English since 2000, simply because the genre has taken root in the English publishing market. The remarkable thing is that most of this stuff, both Japanese and English, has been written as if the author is the first person to ever write about it, which shows how little research they put into. So they keep reinventing the wheel. Or in this case, "reinventing the Geocentric World View" might be a more apt metaphor, since so many of them reach the highly questionable conclusion that girls like this stuff because they are afraid of adult sexuality. (If they want to escape from sexuality, why create and read comics about guys bonking each other right and left?) I think Fred Schodt was the first to write about the subject in English, in 1983. (See pages 100 and 101 in his still-essential Manga! Manga!.) Hmm. Maybe I can find time to draft a really brief overview of "critical attention. Don't hold your breath, though. And if anyone has the time and motivation to do it, by all means, take a shot. You can use my Sandbox to experiment. Matt Thorn (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like Malkinann and I wrote drafts in the sandbox at the same time. Is mine too long-winded? (Am I too long-winded? Wait; don't answer that.) Matt Thorn (talk) 01:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

text: You're right about the inline citations. I was just to lazy to do the coding, so I just dumped all the sources in the "References" section. (^^;) BTW, I think I must have found out the info on that Takemiya essay at some point, because one copy of my manuscript on my computer confidently states "1993, p. 80" or something like that. My copy of the book is in my office at school, and I don't know when I'll be able to go get it. I don't suppose anybody has a copy of Fanning the Flames lying around? It's a good book, BTW. Editor Bill Kelly (the one who does baseball, not the other Bill Kelly who does something else on Japan) is one of the few Japan scholars I would classify as Truly Brilliant™ and he made sure the book was good. We all had to rewrite out chapters several times before they passed muster with him. Unfortunately, the publisher screwed up all over the place. (They included the wrong graphic for my chapter! And Bill has never forgiven them for putting a photo of a Yomiuri Giants cap, instead of a Hanshin Tigers cap, on the cover.) Anyway, I'll add the inline citations soon, but if anyone wants to make any changes first, please go ahead. As you can see, Malkinann cited several sources I'm unfamiliar with, so we might want to lengthen (or, alternatively, seriously abridge) the section. Matt Thorn (talk) 04:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussing the appeal in the article?