Hagure Idol Jigokuhen - Vol. 4 Ch. 22 - Angel Addict
- Thread starter MangaDex
- Start date
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@BestBoy You really need to read about Boston marriage https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_marriage and the concept of companions in the past. This tradition disappeared precisely because gays and lesbians began to use it as a cover and straight people no longer wanted preoccupied gossip to speculate about how they "were fucking”. This also was one of the reasons why the idea of romantic friendship in Western Europe was also discredited with time.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2018
- Messages
- 1,545
@SuperOniichan First, they weren't straight if they were in a romantic friendship. Second, historians have been misunderstanding homosexual relationships far longer than "Boston marriages" have been around. See Sappho of Lesbos.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@BestBoy What? Do you know what a romantic friendship is? This is a modern term for old-fashioned friendships that were overly intimate by modern standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romantic_friendship. Asian culture still idealizes this kind of friendship, but people like you are constantly trying to call it subtext or bait.
Ahaha, really. What can historians understand in history, as if it was their profession? The fact that you mention Sappho, who didn't live with any woman and, according to the most famous legend, committed suicide due to unrequited love for one dude, only confirms your ignorance. And since you are not familiar with the topic, the Boston Marriage is a certain term for the form of relationship of the 18-19th centuries, and not an universal euphemism for a “gay couple”.
Ahaha, really. What can historians understand in history, as if it was their profession? The fact that you mention Sappho, who didn't live with any woman and, according to the most famous legend, committed suicide due to unrequited love for one dude, only confirms your ignorance. And since you are not familiar with the topic, the Boston Marriage is a certain term for the form of relationship of the 18-19th centuries, and not an universal euphemism for a “gay couple”.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2018
- Messages
- 1,545
edit: I will preface this by saying, if your linking to Boston Marriages was to say, "not all lesbians have sex" then yes, but that's not what my comment was in reference to. It was about the common practice of erasure of non-normative relationships (bi, homo, asexual, etc) perpetrated by historians. If that's all it was then we have no beef and it's probably just a misunderstanding. If you're saying historians never did anything like that then we have beef.
You can be homosexual and not have sex, bud. Two women/men in a romantic relationship are homosexual. Also, people like me? What are you implying here?
Historians get shit wrong all the time and somewhere down the line some new historian will correct the record. Just like doctors were getting shit wrong for all of history up until pretty much the late 1800s early 1900s. Funny that you mention "the most famous legend"about Sappho's death seeing that it's regarded as unhistorical. In other words, her whole jumping off a cliff for Phaon was made up. I don't think I'm the ignorant one here. You've already explained that the country you live in has antiquated understandings of homosexuality ("lesbians are either sexually open girls or scary feminists"), so it follows that you probably share that understanding as well.
I'm aware of what a Boston Marriage is. I read your link. It's a term derived from the book, The Bostonians, to refer to romantic friendships or life partnerships. Why does it seem like you aren't the one who knows what these terms actually mean?
You can be homosexual and not have sex, bud. Two women/men in a romantic relationship are homosexual. Also, people like me? What are you implying here?
Historians get shit wrong all the time and somewhere down the line some new historian will correct the record. Just like doctors were getting shit wrong for all of history up until pretty much the late 1800s early 1900s. Funny that you mention "the most famous legend"about Sappho's death seeing that it's regarded as unhistorical. In other words, her whole jumping off a cliff for Phaon was made up. I don't think I'm the ignorant one here. You've already explained that the country you live in has antiquated understandings of homosexuality ("lesbians are either sexually open girls or scary feminists"), so it follows that you probably share that understanding as well.
I'm aware of what a Boston Marriage is. I read your link. It's a term derived from the book, The Bostonians, to refer to romantic friendships or life partnerships. Why does it seem like you aren't the one who knows what these terms actually mean?
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@BestBoy Again. Do you understand that the word “romantic” in romantic friendship does not mean romantic relationships, but the difference between the emotional closeness of this friendship and modern traditions of friendship? If you don’t want that people “implying” anything to you, stop acting like an uneducated queer man of the 21st century who thinks that straight people are physical disgusted with each other and the history of straight culture never allowed more intimacy between them than in the modern world.
If the legend is inconvenient for me, then it is invented. But I will believe that Sappho is a lesbian, although the entire discourse about her lesbianism was based on the interpretation of her poems to women and often deliberately ignores that she wrote poems to men too. You operate absolutely superficial cliches and deliberately ignore any attempts to enlighten you, so you are obviously a demonstratively ignorant person.
I will not even comment on attempts to ascribe to me the views that I myself mention in a mockingly negative context, since this is so arrogant demagogy that it is even pointless to discuss it.
So, you read my link and are now trying to blame me for not knowing its meaning, using a quote from there? If so you are trying to troll me, then it is too fat. And if you are trying to accuse me of something, then you would better know first that the term Boston Marriage means two independent women living together as an alternative to marriage and financial dependence from men, and not romantic friendship. Why can not you first study the topic, and not try to attack me to formally say at least something?
If the legend is inconvenient for me, then it is invented. But I will believe that Sappho is a lesbian, although the entire discourse about her lesbianism was based on the interpretation of her poems to women and often deliberately ignores that she wrote poems to men too. You operate absolutely superficial cliches and deliberately ignore any attempts to enlighten you, so you are obviously a demonstratively ignorant person.
I will not even comment on attempts to ascribe to me the views that I myself mention in a mockingly negative context, since this is so arrogant demagogy that it is even pointless to discuss it.
So, you read my link and are now trying to blame me for not knowing its meaning, using a quote from there? If so you are trying to troll me, then it is too fat. And if you are trying to accuse me of something, then you would better know first that the term Boston Marriage means two independent women living together as an alternative to marriage and financial dependence from men, and not romantic friendship. Why can not you first study the topic, and not try to attack me to formally say at least something?
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@BestBoy Once you edit your comment after my reply, I will reply in a new message. If you were familiar with historical science, you would know that attempts to interpret intimacy between historical figures as homosexual relations are a kind of local meme between historians. Even if historians know that such intimacy was considered normal at that time or rumors of homosexuality were completely false propaganda by opponents, they would still speculate on this, especially now. For example, Marie Antoine has turned into a lesbian icon and constantly receives books about her "queer sexuality", although all this is based on lewd anti-monarchist brochures, which also contained incest charges with her young son. It is for this reason that so many historical figures on Wikipedia have the “LGBTQ History” category, as historians have created too much speculation about their sexuality, but failed to prove them. For example, Henry III of Valois.
Boston marriage was exactly what I indicated below. A form of non-sexual and non-romantic cohabitation that has been discredited and discontinued due to becoming a trandy closet for lesbian relationships and straight women refusing it because of fear of false suspicions of lesbianism.
Boston marriage was exactly what I indicated below. A form of non-sexual and non-romantic cohabitation that has been discredited and discontinued due to becoming a trandy closet for lesbian relationships and straight women refusing it because of fear of false suspicions of lesbianism.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2018
- Messages
- 1,545
@SuperOniichan I made a preface edit so feel free to address it if you like. I don't think we disagree with each other in general. I think we just misunderstood each other.
I recognize that "romantic friendship" is an attempt at categorizing what we today view as a lesbian asexual relationship (or homoromantic asexual if you're a stickler for definitions). I think I should clarify that my understanding of hetero/homosexuality isn't confined specifically to sexual attraction, but romantic attraction as well. Just in case there was a misunderstanding there.
The question of Sappho's sexuality is unanswered, certainly, but the fact that several of her works were altered to be heteronormative is exactly what my original comment was about. Historians whitewashing history.
As for my accusation towards you, I apologize. I couldn't glean any mocking tone from your other comments and assumed you were just another homophobe on the internet. That's entirely my bad.
Yes, a Boston Marriage is two wealthy women in cohabitation, but the cohabitation of a same-sex couple was either a romantic friendship or a life partnership. The entire origin of the term is rooted in romantic friendship, and the sociology of the term even notes how for some it was because of a deeper connection with women than men. Just more evidence that Boston Marriage could be a result of romantic friendship.
edit: regarding your reply to the edit, yes historians ascribing modern terms to historical acts is always going to be difficult. Regardless, I think it's important that we recognize that these emotions and identities we've explored and defined in modern society aren't something brand new and born out of the ether, but likely prevalent throughout history yet lacking the proper definitions we have today.
I recognize that "romantic friendship" is an attempt at categorizing what we today view as a lesbian asexual relationship (or homoromantic asexual if you're a stickler for definitions). I think I should clarify that my understanding of hetero/homosexuality isn't confined specifically to sexual attraction, but romantic attraction as well. Just in case there was a misunderstanding there.
The question of Sappho's sexuality is unanswered, certainly, but the fact that several of her works were altered to be heteronormative is exactly what my original comment was about. Historians whitewashing history.
As for my accusation towards you, I apologize. I couldn't glean any mocking tone from your other comments and assumed you were just another homophobe on the internet. That's entirely my bad.
Yes, a Boston Marriage is two wealthy women in cohabitation, but the cohabitation of a same-sex couple was either a romantic friendship or a life partnership. The entire origin of the term is rooted in romantic friendship, and the sociology of the term even notes how for some it was because of a deeper connection with women than men. Just more evidence that Boston Marriage could be a result of romantic friendship.
edit: regarding your reply to the edit, yes historians ascribing modern terms to historical acts is always going to be difficult. Regardless, I think it's important that we recognize that these emotions and identities we've explored and defined in modern society aren't something brand new and born out of the ether, but likely prevalent throughout history yet lacking the proper definitions we have today.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@BestBoy No, it was an attempt to separate the old-fashioned concept of friendship from how straight people prefer to form friendly relations in modern society. It’s true that due to the lack of objective knowledge about homosexuality at that time, many queer relationships were marked as ambiguous as such (Nobuko Yoshiya, I look at you), but your constant attempts to claim that any intimate friendship between people was ultimatum queer relationships, just extremely gross. To talk about erasing homosexual folks and at the same time rudely erasing the experience of straight people, denying the possibility of any platonic intimacy between them, is simply hypocritical.
In fact, Sappho's sexuality has always interested people more than her life and work at all. And if you forget, then I remind you that in modern historiography there is an obsessive trend to search for querness at every opportunity. Do you think this is better? Do you recall the whole wave of lesbian films that completely erase the heterosexual connections of famous women just to portray rumors of their bisexuality as defining their life lesbian identity? I'm not even talking about the female archaeologist for whom a lesbian story was literally invented to manipulate her archaeological achievements in an artificial queer context and buy shippers by cute actress yuri ship. Heteronormativity? Hah, don't make me laugh.
Of course I'm homophobic. Is that why I complain about Rui devaluing lesbian sexuality or portraying Misora's bisexuality as a loophole so that otaku can simultaneously fap on yuri with her and dream of her as a pure, but very hot waifu?
You are juggling with terms without understanding their meaning. Romantic friendship is an artificial term, at that time it was an ordinary form of close friendship and no one considered this a special phenomenon. And the Boston Marriage never had roots in this, because its essence was not friendship or any intimate relationship, but the mutual support of two women who wanted to devote themselves to a career without having to get married, so as not to depend on a man. Yes, in the last time of its existence, the Boston Marriage was often a cover for lesbian relations, but this was not the very root of the phenomenon and did not speak about the asexuality of such relations. Only about their public shell. If you do not fully understand that romantic friendship is an old-fashioned form of friendship, and not an outdated concept of sexuality, then just take out the 19th-century or early 20th books and read how it depicts friendship between people, especially women. Damn, even the same Lord of the Rings.
In fact, Sappho's sexuality has always interested people more than her life and work at all. And if you forget, then I remind you that in modern historiography there is an obsessive trend to search for querness at every opportunity. Do you think this is better? Do you recall the whole wave of lesbian films that completely erase the heterosexual connections of famous women just to portray rumors of their bisexuality as defining their life lesbian identity? I'm not even talking about the female archaeologist for whom a lesbian story was literally invented to manipulate her archaeological achievements in an artificial queer context and buy shippers by cute actress yuri ship. Heteronormativity? Hah, don't make me laugh.
Of course I'm homophobic. Is that why I complain about Rui devaluing lesbian sexuality or portraying Misora's bisexuality as a loophole so that otaku can simultaneously fap on yuri with her and dream of her as a pure, but very hot waifu?
You are juggling with terms without understanding their meaning. Romantic friendship is an artificial term, at that time it was an ordinary form of close friendship and no one considered this a special phenomenon. And the Boston Marriage never had roots in this, because its essence was not friendship or any intimate relationship, but the mutual support of two women who wanted to devote themselves to a career without having to get married, so as not to depend on a man. Yes, in the last time of its existence, the Boston Marriage was often a cover for lesbian relations, but this was not the very root of the phenomenon and did not speak about the asexuality of such relations. Only about their public shell. If you do not fully understand that romantic friendship is an old-fashioned form of friendship, and not an outdated concept of sexuality, then just take out the 19th-century or early 20th books and read how it depicts friendship between people, especially women. Damn, even the same Lord of the Rings.
Group Leader
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2018
- Messages
- 2,531
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ENRjGUTA2H4
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2019
- Messages
- 1,933
@Yotomoe
That's a total win on my book by the author, it's like a cooking manga but with sex. People who like women should try to learn this stuff anyway. This chapter only with TL included tried to taught us 3 techniques, 3 tools in the toolbox! But that's just the female genitalia, learning to explore the whole body of one's partner is the real SSS move no matter the gender nor sex.
That's a total win on my book by the author, it's like a cooking manga but with sex. People who like women should try to learn this stuff anyway. This chapter only with TL included tried to taught us 3 techniques, 3 tools in the toolbox! But that's just the female genitalia, learning to explore the whole body of one's partner is the real SSS move no matter the gender nor sex.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2019
- Messages
- 1,933
@SuperOniichan
So THIS is what you meant last time. Funnily enough, this chapter is probably the only vanilla "material" without trauma inducing events in the whole series up to this point. (Yes, I consider this vanilla. Specially after all the shit we've seen so far)
Also read most of your acalorated discussion. This is indeed a loopwhole for again "Lesbian characters? Heck yeah, double the lewd" because apparently male authors can't lewd their men in a way it's not gross.
But if we wanted a story that didn't do that we would have a female writer instead. It's hard to write bi or lesbian characters when you aren't actually in the situation. Method acting as a learning tool can only get you so far.
That's also probably the reason I'm more into Manhwa this days. Cause I can generally see the guy in the straight couple having fun too (Gimme that fanservice, I don't mind it for the greater good!). The downside is that they tend to be dramatic AF, to the point where I realize they are just soap operas.
Guess who grew up watching soap operas anyway? Yep, that's me watching telenovelas with my caretaker at age 5 enjoying the heck out of them. Did I also mention that I enjoy theather a lot and Revolutionary Girl Utena is a series I reference a lot but haven't had the opportunity to finish? I'll eat over the top acting all day!
So THIS is what you meant last time. Funnily enough, this chapter is probably the only vanilla "material" without trauma inducing events in the whole series up to this point. (Yes, I consider this vanilla. Specially after all the shit we've seen so far)
Also read most of your acalorated discussion. This is indeed a loopwhole for again "Lesbian characters? Heck yeah, double the lewd" because apparently male authors can't lewd their men in a way it's not gross.
But if we wanted a story that didn't do that we would have a female writer instead. It's hard to write bi or lesbian characters when you aren't actually in the situation. Method acting as a learning tool can only get you so far.
That's also probably the reason I'm more into Manhwa this days. Cause I can generally see the guy in the straight couple having fun too (Gimme that fanservice, I don't mind it for the greater good!). The downside is that they tend to be dramatic AF, to the point where I realize they are just soap operas.
Guess who grew up watching soap operas anyway? Yep, that's me watching telenovelas with my caretaker at age 5 enjoying the heck out of them. Did I also mention that I enjoy theather a lot and Revolutionary Girl Utena is a series I reference a lot but haven't had the opportunity to finish? I'll eat over the top acting all day!
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@Raknasuu I have seen and read the yuri written by actual queer women. If you remove the apparently good knowledge of actual Japanese LGBTQ culture, a lot of it will be just a collection of the most over-the-top queer clichés. For example, the obsessive belief that every homophobe is a secret tsundere in your direction, or that the straight girl you are in love with is actually in a toxic relationship with a bastard boyfriend. And of course the pervasive idealization of abuse like the idea that your crush loves you, so you shouldn't be afraid to seduce them to prove it to them. Men are often blamed for the fact that a lot of their romance is fetishized male fantasy, but in fact, almost all queer ficthion is exactly the same set of fetishes and specific fantasies.
Well, compared to outright rapes, relationship manipulation is really "vanilla". But the problem is that if the problematic nature of open violence is clear from the start, then such manipulations are ready to do much more harm and are harder to notice. Especially when the author claims to have a feminist message and study of sexuality, but in fact only reinforces the next toxic stereotypes.
P.S. As far as I understand, when discussing this chapter in the afterword of the volume, the author almost openly mentioned that such a yuri was allowed by the editor since the Rui theme was unable to keep the MC's virginity theme without actual sex scenes. That is, regardless of the author's love for yuri, it was simply used as a loophole for writing MC's sex scenes and at the same time "preserving" the illusion of her innocence for male readers.
Well, compared to outright rapes, relationship manipulation is really "vanilla". But the problem is that if the problematic nature of open violence is clear from the start, then such manipulations are ready to do much more harm and are harder to notice. Especially when the author claims to have a feminist message and study of sexuality, but in fact only reinforces the next toxic stereotypes.
P.S. As far as I understand, when discussing this chapter in the afterword of the volume, the author almost openly mentioned that such a yuri was allowed by the editor since the Rui theme was unable to keep the MC's virginity theme without actual sex scenes. That is, regardless of the author's love for yuri, it was simply used as a loophole for writing MC's sex scenes and at the same time "preserving" the illusion of her innocence for male readers.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2019
- Messages
- 1,933
@Superoniichan
Fuck that first paragraph. I have nothing to object on there as I have read all those stereotypes you are mentioning and thought the same thing. Yuri written by female and queer authors is indeed full of abusive and toxic relationships... The only yuri coming to mind right now that seems way too pure to the point it gets stupid is probably Futaribeya where author decides to keep the relationship between MCs ambiguous. I can think of quite a few exceptions to the rule, you know, like yuri works where those stereotypes are used in purpose to make an statement about why they are wrong. But you used the world "most", and I can't disagree.
My problem, and I think you discussed this already, is with the thing about "illusion of her innocence". The manga openly depicts the MC as a sexually frustrated person, and while the first encounter with this girl might be considered rape, all the stuff they did after that was certainly not (We agreed that the relationship is toxic nonetheless last time). I know that for Japanese readers yuri is at the same time a taboo and idealized as pure. After all, the truly sick people for them are those that enjoy BL (Which is also filled with these toxic stereotypes more often as far as I have experienced)
But I think that the suppossedly "pure nature" of yuri does NOT justify MC's sexual intercourse for the readers as something that comes out of naivety. Nor most readers think of her as innocent anymore. And even if she's bi she might just have a preference for women in the first place... I might be falling into the author's trap on here tho.
Fuck that first paragraph. I have nothing to object on there as I have read all those stereotypes you are mentioning and thought the same thing. Yuri written by female and queer authors is indeed full of abusive and toxic relationships... The only yuri coming to mind right now that seems way too pure to the point it gets stupid is probably Futaribeya where author decides to keep the relationship between MCs ambiguous. I can think of quite a few exceptions to the rule, you know, like yuri works where those stereotypes are used in purpose to make an statement about why they are wrong. But you used the world "most", and I can't disagree.
My problem, and I think you discussed this already, is with the thing about "illusion of her innocence". The manga openly depicts the MC as a sexually frustrated person, and while the first encounter with this girl might be considered rape, all the stuff they did after that was certainly not (We agreed that the relationship is toxic nonetheless last time). I know that for Japanese readers yuri is at the same time a taboo and idealized as pure. After all, the truly sick people for them are those that enjoy BL (Which is also filled with these toxic stereotypes more often as far as I have experienced)
But I think that the suppossedly "pure nature" of yuri does NOT justify MC's sexual intercourse for the readers as something that comes out of naivety. Nor most readers think of her as innocent anymore. And even if she's bi she might just have a preference for women in the first place... I might be falling into the author's trap on here tho.
Dex-chan lover
- Joined
- May 14, 2018
- Messages
- 4,763
@Raknasuu The main idea of this series is either its fall as a pure person, or a struggle as a pure person against a perverted industry, or both. Even though the title "Hagure" suggests she is a shameless person, the plot still clearly separates lewd with other women and lewd with men. When this chapter was released as part of the volume, the author almost openly wrote in the afterword that although the original yuri subplot was not planned due to the desire to make the heroine a technical virgin, but he and the editor decided to use yuri as "safe" lewd content during her development.
It plays on the traditional otaku prejudice that the yuri relationship is "purrest" because it does not include a man and "protects" the girl maideness from "lewd things". I don't know where Misora's development will lead her in the end, but in this case yuri is more or less used as a loophole that conveniently solves several problems at once. This may not work or seem problematic to us as two Western guys with a modern mindset, but in Japan this is still the normal view of female sexuality. At the same time, this is my personal opinion and understanding of the work, so if you read it differently, it's okay.
It plays on the traditional otaku prejudice that the yuri relationship is "purrest" because it does not include a man and "protects" the girl maideness from "lewd things". I don't know where Misora's development will lead her in the end, but in this case yuri is more or less used as a loophole that conveniently solves several problems at once. This may not work or seem problematic to us as two Western guys with a modern mindset, but in Japan this is still the normal view of female sexuality. At the same time, this is my personal opinion and understanding of the work, so if you read it differently, it's okay.
