Gal to Bocchi - Ch. 21

[MangaDex]

 

[Krune]

thank you for another outstanding chapter, good for them the gyaru got the head pats she's been hoping for and "Bocchi" was finally able to run her fingers through Hayabashi-san's hair.

 

[sixfish11]

Are we gonna have to add the yuri tag soon?

 

[Bistai]

@sixfish11 I was about to say, this feels more and more like yuri with every passing chapter.

 

[henman]

I didn't get it. Why to blow at her? What does mean "you are like chalk"? Is this a compliment?

 

[Airwave2k2]

So we are in the gymnastics equipment chalk against friction route... using toys and much lube when it comes down to it...

 

[Campi_the_Bat]

She touched her hair, they're married now.

 

[thirite]

@henman Hayashibara is joking Hina is acting as though she is the chalk dust herself for being so apologetic for touching her hair. She blows at her because you can blow chalk dust away. It is her "testing if Hina is chalk dust".

@Campi_the_Bat She better take responsibility

 

[Alice_is_lost]

I'm waiting patiently for the "I'm not good with gyarus but I couldn't help but falling in love with one"

Thank you so much for the chapter 💖💖💖💖💖💖💖

 

[SuperOniichan]

@Bistai Given how good shippers are at reading context, the yuri tag can be used with any title about female friendship.

 

[Bistai]

@SuperOniichan I mean, yuri is a pretty broad term. It doesn't just refer to romantic relationships. As long as the story focuses on a strong emotional relationship (best friends, bitter rivals, lovers, ect) between two girls, it's yuri. I get really annoyed when I see the Shoujo Ai tag, because pretty much all of that is also yuri. Thanks to the weird made-up distinction that was made when the term became widely used in western countries, I have to look at two tags to find this shit when it really should just be under one.

So yeah, it's not just shippers reading context that can make that stuff yuri, it very much is yuri as long as those feelings of friendship are strong enough, and the story puts enough focus onto it.

 

[SuperOniichan]

@Bistai This reading of the term was coined by Japanese male yuri fans in order to have a loophole to write any meaningful girl x girl interaction into yuri. Including demanding the removal of any male characters from this, claiming that they are "trying to get into the yuri". Although the "platonic yuri" itself is a real thing and even was the original form of yuri, for me it has the same toxic vibes as the attempt by some Western fans to mix shoujo ai and yuri subtext.

 

[Bistai]

@SuperOniichan ...okay, I don't know where you're getting this, but I really don't give a shit about whatever history may be behind it. My point is that this method of defining yuri is far too limiting, since the appeal of yuri goes far beyond romantic relationships. Calling anything not specifically romantic "shojou ai" is a meaningless distinction and makes the situation needlessly complicated. They both have the same sort of appeal, so just call them the same thing. I don't know where you get the idea that shojou ai and yuri somehow have two different subtexts. It's the same appeal. I think you're applying motivation that doesn't necessarily exist here.

 

[SuperOniichan]

@Bistai You did not understand me. I'm talking about the part of yuri fandom that tries to use the term shoujo ai for works that have some subtext but were never actual lesbian works, saying "shoujo ai is subtle yuri". For them, this is a kind of loophole.

 

[Bistai]

@SuperOniichan okay, I did misunderstand what you meant. My bad, reading your comment again after that clarification makes me realize that's what you meant. Though, I don't think the work has to be lesbian to be considered yuri. But if you're talking about series where there happen to be two female characters with a strong relationship, but the series obviously isn't about that relationship, then I definitely understand that. To give a bit more of an idea of where I'm coming from, I found this interview with the author of Urasekai Picnic to be a really good rundown of how I see yuri. A lot of dedicated yuri I've read also seems to follow what what he says here (except for the whole "inanimate objects can be yuri" thing. I get where he was going with that, but it's a bit much for me). That's more talking about the idea of yuri though. As a genre, I'd just say it only applies when those yuri themes are the main focus of that work.

Edit: I'm a dumbass and forgot to post the interview: https://teletype.in/@kati_lilian/SJA8KwjjN

 

[SuperOniichan]

@Bistai I read this interview several times, partly because he explained some of the yuri tropes and thought patterns in it. For example, when he writes about the famous "observer effect" or how hard Bushi worked on "emotional bonds" in Bandori. Nevertheless, I learned about this approach to yuri even earlier, namely from the description of one of Erica Friedman's trips to Japan, where at one of the events she argued with her Japanese friend about whether yuri might not be strictly lesbian. Personally, in such cases, I try to talk more about yuri subtext (Eupho, Revue, Amanchu), bait (any all-female ecchi), or yuri-ish, when the works are as ambiguous as possible. Not to mention the so-called "platonic yuri", which I jokingly call works about "super duper female friendship". Naoko Yamada is especially good at this.

 

[Bistai]

@SuperOniichan Okay, if you're familiar with the interview's contents, then I don't need to keep trying to explain my own views on it really. I think I was just confused by the different categories you're using and how you mean them. I run into people trying to claim that yuri is only romantic a lot, so I sometimes assume that's what people are talking about. That's a fault on my part. Glad to get that cleared up though. I understand what you mean a lot better now.

 

[SuperOniichan]

@Bistai Well, in fact, a lot of Japanese people still follow the prejudice that lesbian or near-lesbian relationships are innocent because there are no men involved (well, you get the idea), so it can sometimes be difficult to determine what the author's intentions were and what they meant.