Heisei Haizanhei ☆ Sumire-chan - Ch. 64 - The Scheming Woman

[JoeKerr]

Thank you for this, I was planning on replying to them with something similar but you did it much better

Don't reply to copy-pasted comments. It's not worth it.

 

[Litreara]

The double page spread is a joke. "She was seen coming out of a love hotel with the boss, she's probably sleeping with him to keep her job" - well yeah, she kinda does, but there's a catch. There's a bit of expansion of Todoroki's character in the double spread, but the primary intent is to tell a joke, and this joke falls apart if there's no shock value to it.

If the intent is a shock-value punchline, my criticism is the tonal cost. The issue isn’t that the shock fails, but that the method is disproportionate and reckless. The explicit detail feels like indulgence, trading gravity and character nuance for a cheap thrill, when a subtler twist could have achieved the same effect without breaking consistency.

If an author tells a joke of sexual nature, does this mean it is them channeling their personal fetishes into their work? Satomi U made multiple middle-aged women lust after a teenage boy, does this mean she wants to fuck one herself, or was it written this way because there's comedic value in this arrangement? You don't need to be into BDSM pegging to know that it is probably something freaky and that you can extract shock comedy value from it by making your characters engage in it.

That’s a false equivalence. The issue isn’t the inclusion of sexual humor, but how its explicitness serves the narrative. The “middle-aged women lusting after a teenage boy" trope works as comedy through awkwardness and exaggeration, without needing pornographic detail. The pegging scene, however, is drawn in a graphic, fetishistic way. The argument isn’t that the author must have the fetish, but that they chose a pornographic perspective instead of a comedic one. The shock comes from the explicitness, which feels like indulgence rather than from the theme itself.

Which usually comes down to making personal attacks towards the author after experiencing the slightest bit of discomfort when consuming their work. "The work has shown X, that's probably because the author is Y" should really be the last resort when analysing an artistic work, after you've already proven that X doesn't work within the framework of the manga.

You’re right that ad hominem attacks are a weak form of criticism. Media literacy, however, examines the effect of authorial choices, not just intent.

My critique isn’t “the author has a fetish, therefore the scene is bad.” It’s the opposite: this specific, graphic choice feels tonally gratuitous and narratively inefficient within the story’s framework, suggesting authorial indulgence.

In this manga, sex is framed as grim in the AV arc, yet here it’s treated as a shock-value punchline with explicit detail. This tonal inconsistency is the textual evidence. Any suggestion of a personal slip is not the starting point, but a possible conclusion drawn from why such a jarring and inefficient choice was made.

Rewriting the story and the characters so that they are not into pegging? As minimal of a rewrite as it is, that would be a different manga from what it is now, for one, it'll be a manga about a world where pegging doesn't happen, or maybe it happens but between people who are freakier than Todoroki, because Todoroki is too much of a prude to engage in it. If I were to witness this kind of rewrite happen, then I would start questioning the author and her integrity as an artist.

You’ve misunderstood the purpose of the alternative. The goal isn’t to erase pegging or change the character’s interests, but to show that the explicit depiction was a narrative choice, not a necessity.

The critique focuses on visual storytelling, not the character’s actions. Todoroki can be into pegging, and the power dynamic can stay central. Presenting it through graphic detail rather than implication or symbolism is an artistic choice. The alternative scene demonstrates that the narrative goal of showing her dominance could be achieved without the tonal shift into explicitness. Arguing for a different directorial choice does not question the character’s authenticity.

This manga doesn't have MangaDex-specific "Erotica" tag, yes. But it is a manga about gravure idols and the industry's seedy underbelly which has shown plenty of raunchy or sexual encounters by this point.

That’s a false equivalence. The difference is between showing sexual content and using an erotica lens.

Earlier scenes treated sex as grim critique, exposing exploitation. This double-page spread, however, depicts a character moment in gratuitous, explicit detail for shock value. The tonal shift turns erotica’s tools into a punchline, departing from the manga’s established framework.

The absence of an Erotica tag on Yanmaga underscores the inconsistency. The scene feels like an indulgent slip rather than a narrative necessity.

None of them had any important or even named characters either. This double spread has two.

That distinction strengthens the critique rather than weakens it. Using named characters in such an explicit scene shifts the focus from critique to characterization.

In the AV arc, anonymity highlighted the industry’s dehumanizing nature. Applying the same explicit perspective to named characters, especially for a shock-value gag, turns them into props for a fetishistic punchline. It is a tonal mismatch because the tools of structural critique are repurposed for a jarring character moment, which makes the scene feel gratuitous.

 

[rabidfish]

If the intent is a shock-value punchline, my criticism is the tonal cost. The issue isn’t that the shock fails, but that the method is disproportionate and reckless. The explicit detail feels like indulgence, trading gravity and character nuance for a cheap thrill, when a subtler twist could have achieved the same effect without breaking consistency.


That’s a false equivalence. The issue isn’t the inclusion of sexual humor, but how its explicitness serves the narrative. The “middle-aged women lusting after a teenage boy" trope works as comedy through awkwardness and exaggeration, without needing pornographic detail. The pegging scene, however, is drawn in a graphic, fetishistic way. The argument isn’t that the author must have the fetish, but that they chose a pornographic perspective instead of a comedic one. The shock comes from the explicitness, which feels like indulgence rather than from the theme itself.


You’re right that ad hominem attacks are a weak form of criticism. Media literacy, however, examines the effect of authorial choices, not just intent.

My critique isn’t “the author has a fetish, therefore the scene is bad.” It’s the opposite: this specific, graphic choice feels tonally gratuitous and narratively inefficient within the story’s framework, suggesting authorial indulgence.

In this manga, sex is framed as grim in the AV arc, yet here it’s treated as a shock-value punchline with explicit detail. This tonal inconsistency is the textual evidence. Any suggestion of a personal slip is not the starting point, but a possible conclusion drawn from why such a jarring and inefficient choice was made.


You’ve misunderstood the purpose of the alternative. The goal isn’t to erase pegging or change the character’s interests, but to show that the explicit depiction was a narrative choice, not a necessity.

The critique focuses on visual storytelling, not the character’s actions. Todoroki can be into pegging, and the power dynamic can stay central. Presenting it through graphic detail rather than implication or symbolism is an artistic choice. The alternative scene demonstrates that the narrative goal of showing her dominance could be achieved without the tonal shift into explicitness. Arguing for a different directorial choice does not question the character’s authenticity.


That’s a false equivalence. The difference is between showing sexual content and using an erotica lens.

Earlier scenes treated sex as grim critique, exposing exploitation. This double-page spread, however, depicts a character moment in gratuitous, explicit detail for shock value. The tonal shift turns erotica’s tools into a punchline, departing from the manga’s established framework.

The absence of an Erotica tag on Yanmaga underscores the inconsistency. The scene feels like an indulgent slip rather than a narrative necessity.


That distinction strengthens the critique rather than weakens it. Using named characters in such an explicit scene shifts the focus from critique to characterization.

In the AV arc, anonymity highlighted the industry’s dehumanizing nature. Applying the same explicit perspective to named characters, especially for a shock-value gag, turns them into props for a fetishistic punchline. It is a tonal mismatch because the tools of structural critique are repurposed for a jarring character moment, which makes the scene feel gratuitous.

Nah bro you got cooked

 

[Brewers90]

If you came to this manga after reading Yakumo-san I.....I don't blame you for being a little confused.

 

[JoeKerr]

Wow, I gotta say I am suitably impressed by that one poster's commitment. We're talking anti-vaxxer levels here.

In other news. Oh dear God, that glove she's wearing, is amazing!

 

[mgRdr]

subtler twist

This manga isn't about subtlety.

The argument isn’t that the author must have the fetish

?

, which feels like indulgence

Any suggestion of a personal slip is not the starting point, but a possible conclusion drawn from why such a jarring and inefficient choice was made.

The scene feels like an indulgent slip rather than a narrative necessity.

...

My critique isn’t “the author has a fetish, therefore the scene is bad.”

Of course it isn't. It is "the scene is bad, therefore the author has a fetish".

In this manga, sex is framed as grim in the AV arc

Earlier scenes treated sex as grim critique, exposing exploitation.

See the image above.

You’ve misunderstood the purpose of the alternative. The goal isn’t to erase pegging or change the character’s interests

Your alternative did just do that, it replaced pegging with a tamer fetish and a weaker joke.

departing from the manga’s established framework.

I do not know what your LLM of choice imagines this manga to be, but the established framework of this manga is that it is a comedy, the narrative of this manga literally wouldn't have been happening if it wasn't leading to jokes being told, and the characters ultimately exist to be props for punchlines, fetishistic or not.

 

[D0ncoming5torm]

For a second there I thought it would be something hot, but then I just ended up wanting to claw out my eyeballs.

 

[delta_angelfire]

i got curious if sumire chan would ever crossover with sexy fujiyama but it seems like someone already got hit with the bondage beam!

 

[caliche9700]

Her girl failure levels are off the charts

 

[outinthegardener]

Well this is a pickle. Former manager lady has some deviant character traits- The sadism, the way she thinks of using other people, paints her as not very nice. It's an interesting contrast to our usual squad of girl failures. Much nicer people, and less "successful" at the business.

I said at the very beginning that this story was about all the layers of selling images and becoming a commodity spectacle of yourself. Todoroki is like the image of success wallpapered over her failures. High power executive, has poor track record with managing talents, only keeps her job because of a personal relationship with the president, rude to coworkers, traumatized poor Souko, etc. I bet the sadism and the inner fear of failure fuel each other in a dependency spiral.

The sex scene was pretty mild to me. Only thing unusual about it was that it depicted a taboo sex act. Aside from that, it was about as explicit as the porno arc or when Unico was with her husband/BF. This was not nearly as shocking as it could have been. Nowhere close to Robert Maplethorpe territory. I think it did its job of introducing the character.

 

[JoeKerr]

I do not know what your LLM of choice

You're absolutely right.
On hindsight, it's bloody obvious that wall of text was spewed by a machine.

 

[Boomthorkell]

That double page spread feels so unnecessary and over the top. Like, did the author really need to show us that for us to understand Todoroki’s character? Dunno, it seems to me that the author can’t help herself and lets her fetishes slip out every now and then.

And before someone accuses me of not having media literacy, I get the symbolic value—power dynamics, agency, thematic subversion, and control. But media literacy involves analyzing authorial choice, and my critique is that the chosen method (an explicit fetish scene) was a gratuitous way to achieve it. The symbolism didn’t require the pornographic detail, which is what makes it feel like an authorial slip rather than a narrative necessity. The same effect could have been achieved by drawing the boss kneeling to lick her boot while Todoroki’s holding a whip. The explicit choice feels less about narrative and more about indulgence.

Also, it’s worth remembering that this is not an erotica manga, so dropping in a scene like this kinda feels out of tone. Sure, there were sex scenes during the AV arc, but none of them were given a double page spread like in this chapter.

Thanks for the chapter!

I think the CEO getting his ass absolutely drilled and then begging for more from a woman whose existence radiates psychopathy really helped establish their characters. Really, these people are grotesque and they are real, in a sense.

Bootlicking just isn't the same as Femdom Anal.

Now, if her previous works have a lot of hard femdom, I definitely would agree with you it must be a fetish, too. I don't mind if it works with the story, though, and is used to establish negative traits.

[I.e., these are bad people doing bad things.]

 

[Boomthorkell]

The double page spread is a joke. "She was seen coming out of a love hotel with the boss, she's probably sleeping with him to keep her job" - well yeah, she kinda does, but there's a catch. There's a bit of expansion of Todoroki's character in the double spread, but the primary intent is to tell a joke, and this joke falls apart if there's no shock value to it.

If an author tells a joke of sexual nature, does this mean it is them channeling their personal fetishes into their work? Satomi U made multiple middle-aged women lust after a teenage boy, does this mean she wants to fuck one herself, or was it written this way because there's comedic value in this arrangement? You don't need to be into BDSM pegging to know that it is probably something freaky and that you can extract shock comedy value from it by making your characters engage in it.

Which usually comes down to making personal attacks towards the author after experiencing the slightest bit of discomfort when consuming their work. "The work has shown X, that's probably because the author is Y" should really be the last resort when analysing an artistic work, after you've already proven that X doesn't work within the framework of the manga.

Rewriting the story and the characters so that they are not into pegging? As minimal of a rewrite as it is, that would be a different manga from what it is now, for one, it'll be a manga about a world where pegging doesn't happen, or maybe it happens but between people who are freakier than Todoroki, because Todoroki is too much of a prude to engage in it. If I were to witness this kind of rewrite happen, then I would start questioning the author and her integrity as an artist.

This manga doesn't have MangaDex-specific "Erotica" tag, yes. But it is a manga about gravure idols and the industry's seedy underbelly which has shown plenty of raunchy or sexual encounters by this point.

None of them had any important or even named characters either. This double spread has two.

I don't blame an older woman for fantasizing about younger men or vice versa (or men for younger women). Honestly, Japan only recently shifted their age of consent, so it's not like they have a centuries long tradition against milfs bagging a teenager. Usually that's how a Japanese boy lost his virginity was some loose local woman.

Though I think I will shame the Japanese and Tropical Belt cultures by saying lusting for 12-under is fucked.

 

[Brobobo]

uhh... wow? i guess?

 

[Boomthorkell]

If you came to this manga after reading Yakumo-san I.....I don't blame you for being a little confused.

NOW A DIFFERENT MEAL IS BEING SERVED!

Badum Tsch

 

[Weebius]

That's like the 2nd year in a row I got jump scared by old man pegging in something I'm reading.

 

[rudezki]

Absolute comedy gold

 

[Litreara]

This manga isn't about subtlety.

?



...


Of course it isn't. It is "the scene is bad, therefore the author has a fetish".



See the image above.

Your alternative did just do that, it replaced pegging with a tamer fetish and a weaker joke.

I do not know what your LLM of choice imagines this manga to be, but the established framework of this manga is that it is a comedy, the narrative of this manga literally wouldn't have been happening if it wasn't leading to jokes being told, and the characters ultimately exist to be props for punchlines, fetishistic or not.

Well, it seems to me that this is going nowhere, and no amount of trading dissertations is going to change that. Since I’m honestly burned out on these kinds of circular discussions, I’m going to disengage here.

As I’m the one stepping away, that makes you the one who’s right, or as the guy I just added to my ignore list put it, the one who got cooked.

Anyway, I do appreciate that you responded to my comments in a civil manner instead of resorting to snarky, dismissive remarks. That kind of attitude is exactly what gets people sent straight to my ignore list.

 

[JoeKerr]

"ChatGPT write a passive-aggressive closing remark."

 

[wallsg]

Two-page spread of a two-cheek spread.