We draw a guy half naked and no one bats an eye. We add one detail on the breast of a girl and everyone loses their minds. This is injustice.

Should the truth tag be added for this bit of commentary?

Cliff_Edge said:

Should the truth tag be added for this bit of commentary?

What part of "detail" is he referring to though? KlK doesn't show female nipples, and even as a straight male I always thought that is for the best.

That is what he's referring to. Showing a female nipple often results in more controversy than showing a male nipple. Or in this case, the genitalia of a young boy.

Its just one of those many weird contradictions we have in society. (Varying by what society and culture you're in of course). Like how American society is more accepting of violence on TV than a female nipple.

sir_burpalot21 said:

That is what he's referring to. Showing a female nipple often results in more controversy than showing a male nipple. Or in this case, the genitalia of a young boy.

Its just one of those many weird contradictions we have in society. (Varying by what society and culture you're in of course). Like how American society is more accepting of violence on TV than a female nipple.

While I agree with you that it's weird how splashing people's innards is more acceptable than a shot of a (properly shown/drawn)genitalia, but in KlK's case, Mikisugi and Matarou doesn't really cut the argument actually.

Female nipple is considered as a more private part than male nipple, that's why 'socially acceptable' female swimsuits must have a top while a male doesn't, or why it is generally more acceptable for a guy to bare any part of his chest than a girl to do the same. While Mikisugi's chest is indeed (hilariously) made to be sexualized, the male chest in general is just not considered a sexual body part enough for girls to start drooling and scream "BOOBS!" all over the internet at the sight of it like a guy would do when he sees a bare female chest. The fact that all sizes of female breasts can invariably hold sexual value while only ultra-exaggerated male breasts can be considered sexual by the sexual stimulation response it would caused once shown is the reason why we have this.

It's not a matter of gender inequality, since I think it is pretty clear to see how animes that shows female nipples are in fact much more likely to objectify their female characters than those that doesn't show the nipples.

Similar logic applies to Matarou's penis, which is drawn as 2 simple semi-ovals overlapping one another, the same way that was shown to be acceptable in many Japanese shows, even ones aimed for children years ago like Doraemon or Crayon Shin-chan. This is the case of the genital being drawn in an extremely cartoony way, which while it may hold some ambiguity in acceptability, can hardly described as being sexual at all.

It's like how having monsters explode in to flames at the end of Tokusatsu shows more acceptable than having the monster's guts explode out from its body with blood shooting outward like a fountain, they're essentially the same thing happening, but very different in levels of graphicness. In reverse, I think showing a featureless grown man's penis would attract much more controversy than a featureless female crotch.

I hope the official commentary here is either joking or not taking this argument seriously, whatever the case.

azurelorochi said:

Intelligent stuff

This is exactly why I think the truth tag should be added. The only reason I hadn't is that the words are in the commentary rather than the image itself, but I'm sure the Powers That Be will read this thread and allow it.

Cliff_Edge said:

This is exactly why I think the truth tag should be added. The only reason I hadn't is that the words are in the commentary rather than the image itself, but I'm sure the Powers That Be will read this thread and allow it.

The problem isn't with the tag but the wiki. If we were to include this in truth then we would need to change the wiki. I think that we could include this in the Deep Thought pool.

Diabolicwave said:

The problem isn't with the tag but the wiki. If we were to include this in truth then we would need to change the wiki. I think that we could include this in the Deep Thought pool.

I checked the wiki shortly after adding the truth tag:

Use on Danbooru

Any image which carries such a message either in itself or an accompanying text commentary by the artist.

(emphasis mine)

So it looks like the wiki will not need to be changed, and my earlier worry that the truth tag might not be appropriate for this picture (due to the truth being in the commentary and not the image itself) was for naught.

As for the Deep Thought pool, the pool seems to be for images that wouldn't be out of place in the Louvre or a "Philosophy Of Art" textbook. While the commentary would fit that description, the image itself does not. If you think that this image should go into the pool because of its commentary, then by all means add it.

ADDENDUM:
Some of the images in that pool have the tag social_commentary, which seems appropriate for this image('s commentary). Adding tag....