![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 October 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for merging with Fictosexuality on 11 June 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus to merge. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This page has been
transwikied to
Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here ( logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
-- CopyToWiktionaryBot 05:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
The person who edited this page to include Queer Studies, is built on no proof and every hyperlink, leads to the source, but the source itself has no mention of Nijikon, anime, nor otaku. I have cause to believe that the current edit is made in ill faith for a certain agenda.
This is, ultimately, one of wikipedia's biggest mess ups, and may end up being time to remove public edits entirely. OneManCast ( talk) 15:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Since I cannot edit the article myself due to the locked status I'll write my corrections here. They are as follows:
1. In the paragraph "Otaku sexuality" it is stated that "Patrick Galbraith, drawing on Jack Halberstam's theory, reevaluated them as queer men." I have read the entire 30 page long paper (Otaku and the Struggle for Imagination in Japan) and it doesn't draw a conclusion between nijikon and "queer men." In fact the term "queer" merely appears 3 times in the entire paper and always in combination as "queer theory" and in a completely different context. The term "queer men" doesn exist in the paper nor does the paragraph about Jack Halberstam talk about nijikon being queer men. This citation is a complete fabrication. Please correct that. You can check the paper yourself as it is free and legally available as PDF by the official publisher
( https://www.dukeupress.edu/Assets/PubMaterials/978-1-4780-0629-9_601.pdf).
2. In the paragaph "Alternative sexual orientation" a correlation between nijikon and asexuality is drawn. However this is also purposefully taken out off context.
Quote from the cited paper: "Past studies of “otaku” or “fujoshi” have overlooked the existence of those who do not experience sexual or romantic attraction to real people. Drawing on qualitative interviews, this article aims to discuss the relationship between erotic manga and compulsory sexuality. It is found that while there is some variation in their narratives, this is similar to that seen in the narratives of people who identify as asexual."
The author doesn't compare nijikon with asexuality but draws a comparison between how nijikon express their sexual non-attraction to real people with how asexuals say they don't feel sexual attraction to people. However nijikon do feel sexual attraction to fictional characters thus they cannot be asexual. This would pose a contradiction as you cannot be sexually attracted to something and at the same time be asexual. In fact the entire base definition in the nijikon article here on wikipedia states that clearly:
"Nijikon (二次コン) or nijigen konpurekkusu (二次元コンプレックス), from the English "2D complex", is a sexual or affective attraction towards two-dimensional anime, manga, and light novel characters, as opposed to attraction towards real human beings."
To be sexually attracted is in the definition. How can nijikon be asexual when their entire definition is based on sexual attraction?
3. lolicon has been omitted as a nijikon sub category from the initial paragraph at the top and was delegated into the "Discrimination in legal and ethical controversy," mainly mislabeling it as child pornography.
However nijikon originated from the lolicon boom in the 1980s. Here a quote from the Japanese nijikon wikipedia article ( https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E6%AC%A1%E5%85%83%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%83%AC%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9) translated into English:
"The term ``nijikon was used to refer to the partiality towards anime girls within anime and manga fandom during the lolicon boom of the early 1980s , which followed the anime boom of the late 1970s . It began to be used as a jargon . [5]"
Original Japanese quote:"「二次元コンプレックス」という術語は、1970年代後半のアニメブームの後に来た1980年代初頭のロリコンブームの際に、アニメ・マンガファンダム内部でアニメの少女に対して偏愛する行為に対して、一種のジャーゴンとして使われ始めた[5]。"
Also it was initially called「二次元ロリコン」(lit. 2-Dimensional lolicon) and 「アニメ・ロリコン」 (anime lolicon) even.
Original quote from the Japanese wikipedia article: "当初は「二次元ロリコン」「アニメ・ロリコン」とも呼ばれた[5] 。"
Please revert the part of the article back to "Additional research includes work on its most controversial sub-attraction, lolicon."
Also add to the article that it originated in the lolicon boom in the 1980s as well as the fact that nijikon was initially called "2-Dimensional lolicon" and "anime lolicon."
4. In the "Alternative sexual orientation" paragraph the article falsely equals Dr. Saito Tamaki's concept of "multiple orientations" to sexual orientations (quote: "Queer theorists elucidate alternative sexual orientations through Saitō Tamaki's concept of "multiple orientations."). However Tamaki's concept of "multiple orientations" has nothing to do with sexual orientations whatsoever. Let me quote Tamaki on this (Source: Beautiful Fighting Girl p25):
"Multiple Orientation
“Double orientation” is a psychiatric term. It refers to a phenomenon we see in patients suffering from schizophrenia and other mental illnesses who talk of delusional beliefs like being the mayor of Tokyo or being a bil- lionaire, even as they help clean their hospital ward under their nurse’s directions. No matter how severe the delusion, most patients are able to distinguish between the delusional standpoint and their own. The under- standing of one’s own position is called “orientation,” so these patients are said to have “double orientation.” As we have seen thus far, otaku are capable of jumping freely between multiple fictional contexts and easily moving back and forth between the role of receiver and creator. So we could say, metaphorically, that otaku have the capacity not for double but for multiple orientation."
Screenshot proof: https://imgur.com/6JtGbcX
In other words: multiple orientations means alternating between multiple fictional contexts. Not multiple sexual orientations.
Baten99 ( talk) 03:43, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
lolicon has been omitted as a nijikon sub category from the initial paragraph at the top and was delegated into the "Discrimination in legal and ethical controversy," mainly mislabeling it as child pornography- but the article does not say lolicon is child pornography, it says it is "occasionally classified as 'child pornography'". The text is describing how other people have labelled it, not labelling it.
So one way or another that part about nijikon being queer men has to be removed due to the sheer logical fallacy of it- but the article does not say nijikon are queer men. It says "Patrick Galbraith, drawing on Jack Halberstam's theory, reevaluated them as queer men". It's describing what one academic said. AntiDionysius ( talk) 17:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Just as a heads up, it looks like this post will be getting some attention it is the subject of an article on NicheGamer
https://nichegamer.com/nijikon-and-yuri-wikipedia-entries-woke-gender/ DarkeruTomoe ( talk) 01:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 October 2020. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for merging with Fictosexuality on 11 June 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus to merge. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This page has been
transwikied to
Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here ( logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
-- CopyToWiktionaryBot 05:22, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
The person who edited this page to include Queer Studies, is built on no proof and every hyperlink, leads to the source, but the source itself has no mention of Nijikon, anime, nor otaku. I have cause to believe that the current edit is made in ill faith for a certain agenda.
This is, ultimately, one of wikipedia's biggest mess ups, and may end up being time to remove public edits entirely. OneManCast ( talk) 15:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
Since I cannot edit the article myself due to the locked status I'll write my corrections here. They are as follows:
1. In the paragraph "Otaku sexuality" it is stated that "Patrick Galbraith, drawing on Jack Halberstam's theory, reevaluated them as queer men." I have read the entire 30 page long paper (Otaku and the Struggle for Imagination in Japan) and it doesn't draw a conclusion between nijikon and "queer men." In fact the term "queer" merely appears 3 times in the entire paper and always in combination as "queer theory" and in a completely different context. The term "queer men" doesn exist in the paper nor does the paragraph about Jack Halberstam talk about nijikon being queer men. This citation is a complete fabrication. Please correct that. You can check the paper yourself as it is free and legally available as PDF by the official publisher
( https://www.dukeupress.edu/Assets/PubMaterials/978-1-4780-0629-9_601.pdf).
2. In the paragaph "Alternative sexual orientation" a correlation between nijikon and asexuality is drawn. However this is also purposefully taken out off context.
Quote from the cited paper: "Past studies of “otaku” or “fujoshi” have overlooked the existence of those who do not experience sexual or romantic attraction to real people. Drawing on qualitative interviews, this article aims to discuss the relationship between erotic manga and compulsory sexuality. It is found that while there is some variation in their narratives, this is similar to that seen in the narratives of people who identify as asexual."
The author doesn't compare nijikon with asexuality but draws a comparison between how nijikon express their sexual non-attraction to real people with how asexuals say they don't feel sexual attraction to people. However nijikon do feel sexual attraction to fictional characters thus they cannot be asexual. This would pose a contradiction as you cannot be sexually attracted to something and at the same time be asexual. In fact the entire base definition in the nijikon article here on wikipedia states that clearly:
"Nijikon (二次コン) or nijigen konpurekkusu (二次元コンプレックス), from the English "2D complex", is a sexual or affective attraction towards two-dimensional anime, manga, and light novel characters, as opposed to attraction towards real human beings."
To be sexually attracted is in the definition. How can nijikon be asexual when their entire definition is based on sexual attraction?
3. lolicon has been omitted as a nijikon sub category from the initial paragraph at the top and was delegated into the "Discrimination in legal and ethical controversy," mainly mislabeling it as child pornography.
However nijikon originated from the lolicon boom in the 1980s. Here a quote from the Japanese nijikon wikipedia article ( https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E6%AC%A1%E5%85%83%E3%82%B3%E3%83%B3%E3%83%97%E3%83%AC%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9) translated into English:
"The term ``nijikon was used to refer to the partiality towards anime girls within anime and manga fandom during the lolicon boom of the early 1980s , which followed the anime boom of the late 1970s . It began to be used as a jargon . [5]"
Original Japanese quote:"「二次元コンプレックス」という術語は、1970年代後半のアニメブームの後に来た1980年代初頭のロリコンブームの際に、アニメ・マンガファンダム内部でアニメの少女に対して偏愛する行為に対して、一種のジャーゴンとして使われ始めた[5]。"
Also it was initially called「二次元ロリコン」(lit. 2-Dimensional lolicon) and 「アニメ・ロリコン」 (anime lolicon) even.
Original quote from the Japanese wikipedia article: "当初は「二次元ロリコン」「アニメ・ロリコン」とも呼ばれた[5] 。"
Please revert the part of the article back to "Additional research includes work on its most controversial sub-attraction, lolicon."
Also add to the article that it originated in the lolicon boom in the 1980s as well as the fact that nijikon was initially called "2-Dimensional lolicon" and "anime lolicon."
4. In the "Alternative sexual orientation" paragraph the article falsely equals Dr. Saito Tamaki's concept of "multiple orientations" to sexual orientations (quote: "Queer theorists elucidate alternative sexual orientations through Saitō Tamaki's concept of "multiple orientations."). However Tamaki's concept of "multiple orientations" has nothing to do with sexual orientations whatsoever. Let me quote Tamaki on this (Source: Beautiful Fighting Girl p25):
"Multiple Orientation
“Double orientation” is a psychiatric term. It refers to a phenomenon we see in patients suffering from schizophrenia and other mental illnesses who talk of delusional beliefs like being the mayor of Tokyo or being a bil- lionaire, even as they help clean their hospital ward under their nurse’s directions. No matter how severe the delusion, most patients are able to distinguish between the delusional standpoint and their own. The under- standing of one’s own position is called “orientation,” so these patients are said to have “double orientation.” As we have seen thus far, otaku are capable of jumping freely between multiple fictional contexts and easily moving back and forth between the role of receiver and creator. So we could say, metaphorically, that otaku have the capacity not for double but for multiple orientation."
Screenshot proof: https://imgur.com/6JtGbcX
In other words: multiple orientations means alternating between multiple fictional contexts. Not multiple sexual orientations.
Baten99 ( talk) 03:43, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
lolicon has been omitted as a nijikon sub category from the initial paragraph at the top and was delegated into the "Discrimination in legal and ethical controversy," mainly mislabeling it as child pornography- but the article does not say lolicon is child pornography, it says it is "occasionally classified as 'child pornography'". The text is describing how other people have labelled it, not labelling it.
So one way or another that part about nijikon being queer men has to be removed due to the sheer logical fallacy of it- but the article does not say nijikon are queer men. It says "Patrick Galbraith, drawing on Jack Halberstam's theory, reevaluated them as queer men". It's describing what one academic said. AntiDionysius ( talk) 17:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
Just as a heads up, it looks like this post will be getting some attention it is the subject of an article on NicheGamer
https://nichegamer.com/nijikon-and-yuri-wikipedia-entries-woke-gender/ DarkeruTomoe ( talk) 01:47, 25 November 2023 (UTC)