[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/jp/ - Otaku Culture

View post   
  [?]In ghost mode, only threads with non-archived posts will be shown
File: 54 KB, 640x480, MMS6.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3015640 No.3015640 [Reply] [Original]

Why has Japanse TV standards become much more strict in recent times? Nipples are pretty much not allowed, asses have become rare, and many stations have started to restrict panty shots

The following posts will have a trolling copy pasta about stuff common in shows in the early eighties during prime time, on the station that is nowadays one of the most strict today, TV Tokyo. The following is copy pasta contains trolling, but it is accurate.

>> No.3015647

>What the fuck was wrong with Japan back then. How could they, for prime time enjoyment, have an episode of a show that is about a group of shota who discovered frisbees can be used to get nice shots of girls. First they strip the young girls to their underwear using frisbees with hooks on them. While they are holding onto their clothes, the main boy tricks one of them to drop their ripped skirt, leading to farther embarrassment. Then they show these students, with their female, teacher sewing the clothes back together, meaning these young girls are in some state of undress. The teacher doesn't do the logical thing, punish the boys, she instead tells the girls they will get revenge. While this is happening, a frisbee comes in, thrown by a male teacher, and takes away one of the girl's bra, giving us a shot of this near-loli's nipples. Then the male teacher wears the near-loli bra as a bonnet, how could anyone approve of a teacher doing this to young female students.

>> No.3015656

>>3015647

>The next day, we see the young boys pretty much doing what ever the hell they want with their frisbees. This includes a total disregard for authority, as they throw a frisbee at two young female cops, hitting the ass of the first cop, and the crotch of the second cop, giving us panty shots of both. Then the girls, with the approval of their teacher who is participating, challange the boys to a frisbee battle. In this multiple girl's panties are shown, and one of the loli have her shirt ripped with no bra, giving us a shot of her nipples. The main guy after this happens somehow tricks her into dancing, forcing her to reveal herself more than she already was. The teacher and girls then use the frisbees to strip the leader shota bare ass naked, with a penis shot and all. The teacher and girls (who's actions are of course praised by the female teacher) leave the naked shota there in the woods with his clothes shread, meaning he has no way to get any clothes and will be forced to leave naked. Then, lets pretend this was trying to say you will be punished in some kind of sick way if you originally do bad stuff, you would think it would end with the boys learning their lesson, but it doesn't end there. Turns out the shota had a camera in the frisbee, and they post enlarged pictures of the young teacher and a young near loli student with their panties being seen, and a shot of the breasts of another young student, being displayed for all the class to see. They also had copies they spread around once the teacher began to remove them, with a couple of the girls in tears. Then it ends with the girls taking a revealing pose (panties showing) saying something that probably means "ah well, what can you do" (I don't speak Japanese, so I can't say for sure).

>> No.3015669

It was all cartoonish back then
Now it's all the detail on frilly panties, and breast jiggling physics

>> No.3015668
File: 46 KB, 640x480, snapshot20090728230007.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3015668

>> No.3015679
File: 37 KB, 640x480, snapshot20090728230233.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3015679

>> No.3015681

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

>> No.3015690

>>3015647
>>3015656
SUBS FUCKING WHERE


As to the topic at hand, blame Evangelion for pissing off women.

>> No.3015692

I don't give a shit about what you're saying. But I do want to know what show you're describing.

>> No.3015715

>>3015647
>>3015656
Before anyone asks that is describing Machiko Sensei.

>> No.3015720

Want to know what happened?
We happened.

Now any series gets to the states in hours, and they don't want any kind of western overreaction. In the old times, they didn't expect anyone outside Japan to see their perversion, so it they went for it. You can chart the rise of fansubs with the loss of explicit fanservice.

Just trolling, it makes no sense. I blame that now there is more "otaku are creepy" awareness and they could get letters if they show underage genitalia. Mostly preventive and ever escalating.

>> No.3015727

>>3015715
>Before anyone asks that is describing Machiko Sensei.
That is correct, episode 8 to be exact
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=9T83BTL0 is the RAW.

>> No.3015728

>>3015720
English dubs suck anyway.

Fuck you, America.

>> No.3015744

This topic is shit, it is obvious women got pissed off, and otaku became undesirable.

>>3015647
>>3015656
This sounds extremely fappable. I now understand why frisbees are so popular.

>>3015668
>>3015679
I have been meaning to check this out, worth it?

>> No.3015752

I read an article by Stephen King that says essentially the same thing only from western film media. He talked about how in the 1970s there was a film with a young boy in a restaurant jumping up and down stark naked on a table. While I couldn't imagine what the fuck would be happening in such a scene you couldn't make that film today and if you tried you'd be arrested for child pornography.

What happened is "political correctness" which began dictating what was and was not socially acceptable and began enforcing rules for what could be put in films and on television.

Imagine trying to put a show like G.I. Joe on TV today. You couldn't possibly. They use guns for god's sake GUNS! (ignore the fact that the only things which could die were robots). You can't use guns on a television program for children, they might get the idea to bring guns to school! Everything needs to be some sort of 'fake' gun like some laser device that can't actually kill.

It's censorship, it's out of hand, it's stupid, and it accomplishes nothing.

>> No.3015781

>>3015752
Political correctness has gone mad, let me tell you.

>> No.3015791

>>3015752
Or maybe it's because CP was legal in the west until early/mid 70's, and in Japan until mid/late 80's.

>> No.3015797

Hey. They still have tits and shit sometimes. Remember Sekirei?

>> No.3015812

>>3015791
Possibly and I can't say certainly because I've never seen the clip but from the article it was Stephen King's impression that the scene was rather innocent, however innocent a scene can be of a boy jumping up and down naked on a table. I can only imagine that it was from behind or only from the waist up and had some significant context in the movie and wasn't thrown in simply to display 'legal' child pornography.

But I couldn't tell you. I don't even remember if he said what movie it was.

>> No.3015818

>>3015797
Wasn't airing the uncensored episode a fuckup on the station's part?

>> No.3015831

>>3015818
I have no idea. I just remember nipples. And there are still plenty of asses and panty shots.

>> No.3015832

>>3015752
But didn't G.I. Joe also put on messages that advised clearly against this, with the tagline "And knowing is half the battle!"?

>> No.3015834

I saw a film a few years back, stupid as hell, about some woman barbarian warrior. Kinda like a female Conan and it certainly looked like the same time period. It showed the barbarian chick growing up and had her naked except a loin cloth until she was old enough they needed to hide her tits. The last shot of her in a loin cloth only the actress was probably about 6.

Imagine trying to make that movie today.

>> No.3015835

>>3015752
>>3015812
A child can't legally consent to cinematic nudity, it has nothing to do with political correctness.

>> No.3015850

>>3015832

The G.I. JOE movie is going to be horrifically bad. I could stomach Transformers because I loved them as a kid but I can't imagine anything good coming out of this one.

>> No.3015874

>>3015835
I dunno, I think it IS political correctness because either such laws didn't exist where consent was required in the 1970s and "political correctness" came along and yelled "think of the children!" or it was illegal in the 1970s and everyone involved in that film's production has been arrested.

So I'm not sure what you mean by political correctness has nothing to do with it.

>> No.3015891

>>3015835
And there's some sort of potential harm in being nude on film? A line needs to be drawn between child PORN and simple nudity. Unsexualized film of a naked child should not fall under laws making it illegal to produce child porn.

>> No.3015897

>>3015835

Nudity /= Pornography. There are plenty of well-publicized cases in western media of underage nudity - I think there's even a wikipedia page on it. Pointlessly enough, it's entirely legal for them to get naked and be filmed, yet illegal for them to see the premier because of the rating caused by their own nudity.

Wrap your heads around that.

>> No.3015916

>>3015874
Are you retarded? Laws evolve and change over time. Around the same time period it was legal for a husband to rape his wife - let me guess, this was also changing by this magical "political correctness"?

Man maybe we should just return to some sort of feudal-agrarian society, at least back then our minds weren't corrupted by PC.

>> No.3016019

I like how free speech faced a centuries-long arduous uphill struggle against the conservative forces that wished to repress it, peaked somewhere in the 80s, and then was brought down by leftists who realized that unrestricted expression could hurt peoples' feelings.

>> No.3016030

>>3016019
Quit deluding yourself. If you're American, speech is as free as it's ever been.

>> No.3016052

>>3016030
In a legal sense: yes.
In a cultural sense: I don't think so. Our society is largely self-censoring, and while matters of sexuality are slightly less taboo than they were 30 years ago, just about everything else is more questionable than ever before.

>> No.3016062

>>3015916
Evolution only is applicable to a forward process. This is retardation of law based on fear and ignorance.

But things go in a loop, we are just leading back into dark ages where Christianity runs a couple of wars then we go all fuck yeah sex with children.

>> No.3016065

>>3015916
I don't know what your point is ... I understand that laws evolve but they don't always evolve for the better. Much of what we're faced with in terms of censorship is getting out of hand, in my opinion. Whether that's progression is up to you to decide.

>> No.3016079

>>3015668
>>3015679

Source?

>> No.3016185

I love how the US found a loophole in the very plain language of the first amendment by simply redefining speech, since the Miller Test would clearly be unconstitutional by the intent of the first amendment.

>> No.3016561

It's also because of the advent of cable/satellite television, videotapes, DVDs, and other video sources. In the old days there was only broadcast TV, so everything had to be on it. Now, you can get pretty much anything you want on through other sources, so broadcast TV is filled with only the most inoffensive, lowest-common-denominator stuff.

Broadcast TV is going to get even more watered down in the future, as the internet becomes yet another established source of video.

>> No.3016571

>>3016062
>Evolution only is applicable to a forward process.
Actually no.

>> No.3016575

>>3016185

That's what happens when you get a bunch of lawyers together.

>> No.3016635

>>3016571

Actually yes. Backwards, it's Devolution.

Retard.

>> No.3016670

>>3016635
You mean regression right?

>> No.3017795

>Imagine trying to put a show like G.I. Joe on TV today.

I remember the good old days when they banned Darkwing Duck from TV due to "violence". They are far too concerned about everything these days. At the time they were airing (and canceling) it, I had long ago already watched James Bond movies at like age 7-8.

Not to mention the most scary show I ever saw as a kid was The Muppet Show and Fraggles.

I also watched JEM and other "girl" shows, just because the girls were relatively attractive.

All this have made me very cynical to choices and decisions by other adults when it comes to children.

>> No.3017805

>>3015791
Pornography wasn't legal in the West until the early to mid 70s.

>> No.3017808

>>3016635
>implying evolution has "forward" and "backward"

No. Don't pretend to know anything, and don't even try to call anyone else a retard.

>> No.3017813

>>3017808

Well, it kind of does. Not the biological evolution, obviously, but you're using the word in a different sense.

>> No.3017904

>>3016635
Devolution means decentralization, dummy. It has nothing to do with evolution.

>> No.3018771
File: 34 KB, 320x452, Frank_Einstein_penfold.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3018771

>> No.3018778

>>3017904

Protip: words have more than one meaning, baka.

>> No.3018887

Main problem with people in today's world is that they cannot distinguish between sexual and non-sexual nudity. Seeing genitals does not destroy the mind of a child: in fact, most children have genitals of their own.

Well okay that's not the main problem, that's more like problem #10,892.

>> No.3018919

>>3018887

For that matter, seeing people fucking does not destroy the mind of a child. For proof, just take one good look at any one of those jungle-monkey societies where the entire clan lives in one giant hut. I doubt they have seen any need for child psychologists in their tribes.

Having sex oneself is less certain territory. I think somebody should conduct a huge study on that to make it all scientific and impartial.

>> No.3018945
File: 440 KB, 805x1200, 024.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3018945

>> No.3018944

>>3015647
>>3015656
>>3015640
I'm going to have to request source for this.

>> No.3018951

>>3018919

>child psychologists

They have Village Shamans for that, anyway.

>> No.3018964

Most things are only as dirty as you make them out to be.

>> No.3018971

>>3018945
Doujin name?

>> No.3018972

>>3018919
You don't have to go that far. South American indian societies mostly dismiss any clothing with the exception of a protection for the penis. They also don't hide when they want to have sex with someone(they will openly state that they want it, even when it's with a white person who happens to be at the village). Some are also liberal about homosexual relations.

>> No.3018977

>>3017808
Whoa now, you're now stepping into a world that reading shit online won't solve for you.

Now you can easily say "because evolution has no path nor direction it cannot be regressive" but that is stupid. A reduction in capabilities that disregard more favorable attributes simply because the society is able to support failure does not mean that retard babies are a stage of evolution.

Honestly that sounds completely retarded and even if you don't intend it that way, that's the only way it's going down here.

Implying that evolution has no direction implies that there is no such thing as beautiful, delicous, or fit. Trying to dissuade opinion simply because of it being an idea rather than a solidified absolute is the same as trying to tell me that god burned as a bush on top of a sand nigger hill and told some guy to kill his son.

Evolution doesn't have a direction? Are you simply a faggot?

>> No.3018994

>>3018977
What are you, a supporter of intelligent design?

>> No.3018999

>>3018919
The lack of reporting a problem doesn't necessarily mean there isn't a problem.

The society probably adjusts to whatever problems are caused however.

>> No.3019010

>>3018994
That fits exactly with my statement completely since it doesn't ignore any of the points I was making, yeah.

I support Darwin theory and nothing else. Allow the worthless to be removed and whatever is favorable will overtake whatever is present.

The world has become a flock of goats lead by other goats. Allowing Europe to have a say in anything only shows that we are regressing as a being. Humans are becoming more retarded the more Europeans think of what is proper.

>> No.3019020

The cause is the internet. Before the internet very few westerners were able to access Japanese media. It was a small subbing groups spreading VHS tapes etc.

Now it's everywhere and popular. This leads to awareness from the prudes, feminists and religious zealots of the western world. It puts Japan in the spotlight and suddenly they are pressured by westernised countries. this has a knock on effect on those with moralist agendas in Japan too and filters down the chain to eventually impact on the media itself.

>> No.3019022

>>3019010
Funny you argue against european ideas because you are threading a path dangerously close to eugenics, which used to be quite popular in Europe.

>> No.3019046

>>3016635
Even if a species becomes less intelligent, weaker, or slower, it's still called evolution because of selective pressure. For whatever reason, those traits being selected for.

The only place I could see "de-evloution" actually being a word is where a gene pool is being maniupulated by a non-natural force. (OH! I see! So that's what's going on! It's a conspiracy!)

>> No.3019057

>>3018977
I was kinda with you until, " implies that there is no such thing as beautiful, delicous, or fit," because these are very subjective terms. Look at how disgusting being fat is to us today. Way, way in the past, being fat was looked upon as a good quality because it clearly distinguished a successful person. Anyway, I'm not as interested in that kind of discussion, and it's off-topic.

To be on-topic, I think the answer is actually kinda simple. Someone said it already, but my opinion is that it's simply because the whole world is connected now. When you have so many people connected, you're bound to get the fags that cry about literally everything simply because of the sheer amount of people now able to communicate with each other.
I think that it's just easier for the more "common, politically correct" people to group up and make some serious influences than it is for the "geeks and social shut-ins" to do the same. Thus, the common people take over, and that leads to what we have today.

In the past, it was easy for these groups to close themselves off and enjoy what they liked or, vice-versa, be closed off from others by others and not be heard. But now with the advent of the "common" people using the Internet, they think that because they have an equal voice online, they're hugely important. These people are able to translate their petty online actions into seemingly-serious real life actions, and so they influence politicians, TV stations, etc, and the whole world is affected in this way as a result.
Meanwhile, the "geek/shut-in/whatever's left" crowd is still looked down upon or just as a joke by most people since they refuse to understand or communicate with them.

>> No.3019071

>>3019057
I just realized my first part about "evolution" made no sense. Disregard that, I wasn't reading that one sentence right.

>> No.3019085
File: 170 KB, 685x410, iamdisappoint.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3019085

>59 posts and 4 image replies omitted

>> No.3019158

>>3018971

Doujin name is Tamate Note by Z-Less.

This mofo makes the best typemoon doujins I have seen.

>>
Reply to thread [?]Don't expect anything heroic. Your post will not be uploaded to the original board.
Name
E-mail
Subject
Comment
Action