I meant to ask if you could provide a link to the original question to which you refer?

FreakyFilmFan4ever wrote:I meant to ask if you could provide a link to the original question to which you refer?

My point is that it's the underlying, implicit dispute here, which no one is actually addressing because they either consider the answer so obvious or consider it too awkward to address.

@Lavinius: I don't think this discussion reduces down to the question whether or not it is okay to jack off to either character; that's part of the topic, for sure, but the dispute over what art is allowed to do seems to take precedence. It's a matter of personal morals what you are willing to use as fap material, and I don't think the discussion will lead anywhere conclusive - nor do I believe that everybody in this thread is even interested in masturbation to cartoon characters.

@Sachi: You don't have to go back in time, just to other places on earth. The Burka is nothing but a complete de-sexualization of women in public. Forget not showing ankles - nothing is allowed to be shown. Combine that with the African tradition of FGM, and the prudery reaches levels of physical harm to extinguish any trace of "sinful" behaviour. There's nothing historical about it either, as it is still happening today.

Derantor wrote:@Lavinius: I don't think this discussion reduces down to the question whether or not it is okay to jack off to either character; that's part of the topic, for sure, but the dispute over what art is allowed to do seems to take precedence.

My point is that the only reason I can suppose that art wouldn't be allowed free reign in the depiction of nudity, sexuality &c. is if it's of concern that it could lead to someone jacking off to it immorally (or otherwise having their sexuality corrupted).

Certainly one can say that art should not fear censorship even if it stokes immoral desires in the beholder, but the question of whether or not those desires are in fact immoral remains a pretty integral part of the topic that should be acknowledged if you want ~real communication~ here.

I mean, aren't those concerns addressed? I think most people who are concerned are concerned because they fear that art will set an example that will be used to mold one's behavior in real life (it's okay to jerk off to Asuka, therefore I can jerk of to pictures of real 14 year olds). The slippery slope in effect. The discussion on whether or not the nudity is sexual to begin with is part of that, I'd think. I'm not sure what you think is lacking here; the more nuanced posts of certain people are just that; more nuanced. We won't come to a conclusive judgement of the morality here, even if we try to discuss it.

As far as I get it, the morality of masturbating to Asuka/Rei/etc. is only supposed to be a part of the discussion inasmuch as we discuss the artworks' and Eva franchise's attitude to such acts. The question that C.T.1290 asked is whether there was anyone else that was bothered by the (admittedly real) character sexualization in some Eva works and that evolved into a related-by-blood discussion of the meaning of the sexualization in Eva works. But whether it's morally alright or utterly irredeemable to masturbate to Asuka and/or Rei never was the main point of this thread, from what I understand.

Considering the "slippery slope" effect, I'd say art has the right to do whatever it wants, even if what it does is considered absolutely disgusting. Cuties I intensely dislike because it says "nah" to its own internal point in favor of really strange butt/crotch shots of underage children, but I wouldn't actually sue Netflix because art is too precious as its own entity to be subject to (as Kendrix wonderfully pointed out) constantly changing and shifting ideas of right and wrong.

Lavinius wrote:Certainly one can say that art should not fear censorship even if it stokes immoral desires in the beholder, but the question of whether or not those desires are in fact immoral remains a pretty integral part of the topic that should be acknowledged if you want ~real communication~ here.

So, the idea of there being an objective morality is a very interesting one. Even the stuff almost everyone says is immoral (killing, for example) can have widely agreed upon exceptions to that rule given the circumstances (killing in self defense, for example), so I tend to hold the idea of objective morality at arm's length.

As for Asuka, 14-year-olds having feelings for each other isn't immoral. Shinji can (and does) think that Asuka is sexually attractive. It's what Shinji does with that sexual attraction in the Hospital Scene of EoE that's the issue. People tend to beat themselves up too much for "thought crimes," even if the emotions behind those thoughts weren't initially considered immoral. We can (and should) criticize Shinji for masturbating over Asuka's unconscious body in the hospital, but I don't think anyone should berate a teenager for thinking that another teenager is sexually attractive. Mismanagement in that regard in the lives of teenagers can lead to very confused and conflicting sexually charged emotions when they become adults.

I don't think it's healthy for adults to harbor sexual attractions and/or fantasies involving children, fictitious or no, but that's a different matter than what the TV series presents to its viewers. (Well, that it, depending on how you want to interpret Misato and Shinji's interactions in Episode 23.)

FreakyFilmFan4ever wrote:I don't think it's healthy for adults to harbor sexual attractions and/or fantasies involving children, fictitious or no, but that's a different matter than what the TV series presents to its viewers. (Well, that it, depending on how you want to interpret Misato and Shinji's interactions in Episode 23.)

Of course, I wasn’t trying to make it seem like sexual attraction to fictional characters is healthy or normal by any stretch of the imagination. I was just trying to counter the idea that because the characters are teenagers, it’s somehow pedophilia. That “Cuties” movie on Netflix is pedophilia, the Eva character lewding cult is not (although it’s still messed up).

I see Cuties as more of a grey area, actually. (Again, a philia is more about someone’s relationship to the subject, not the subject itself. The real question is whether or not it’s kiddie porn, which I would say is also a grey area.) It’s basically Hideaki Anno’s Love & Pop, but about 8 - 11 year old dancers instead of high schoolers with separating interests. I don’t want to highjack this thread on that subject, though, so PM me if you wanna discuss it further.

I mean, for me it goes both ways, on one hand they are just pixels voiced by people who are in their 20's, on the other hand they still feel like they are kids and while it does bother me, I try not to think about it much when I sometimes rewatch end of evangelion.

I watched Evangelion for the first time when the pilots were older than I was, so it wasn't weird at all. As I've aged, my memories of watching the show for the first time are anchored to that time in my life, so I haven't found it any stranger as I've gotten older. I also understand that these characters aren't real and therefore I don't care. The only reason we know these characters are 14 is because someone went out of their way to say they're 14.

Nuclear Lunchbox wrote:I watched Evangelion for the first time when the pilots were older than I was, so it wasn't weird at all. As I've aged, my memories of watching the show for the first time are anchored to that time in my life, so I haven't found it any stranger as I've gotten older. I also understand that these characters aren't real and therefore I don't care. The only reason we know these characters are 14 is because someone went out of their way to say they're 14.

I think their age is definitely a bit of an informed attribute. Across the board I think they actually look about 16-17, and I really dunno what difference it would make to the story if the kids were in high school instead of middle school. Then again, this is hardly unique to Eva. How often are teenage anime characters ACTUALLY drawn to resemble their canonical age?

I don't see much of a problem. Most of the anime have similar setting, character with a very young setting age+ more mature looks.

Archer wrote:Across the board I think they actually look about 16-17, and I really dunno what difference it would make to the story if the kids were in high school instead of middle school. Then again, this is hardly unique to Eva. How often are teenage anime characters ACTUALLY drawn to resemble their canonical age?

Well, I guess you haven't seen any teenager of Asia, particularly from eastern side of this world up close. In short I'd say everyone looks pretty much the average considering their ages individually as in Rei and Asuka being 14 while Mari being 16-17. The boys are a bit below average though. And needless to say, the whole anime industry is of Japan.

Berserker wrote:

Archer wrote:Across the board I think they actually look about 16-17, and I really dunno what difference it would make to the story if the kids were in high school instead of middle school. Then again, this is hardly unique to Eva. How often are teenage anime characters ACTUALLY drawn to resemble their canonical age?

Well, I guess you haven't seen any teenager of Asia, particularly from eastern side of this world up close. In short I'd say everyone looks pretty much the average considering their ages individually as in Rei and Asuka being 14 while Mari being 16-17. The boys are a bit below average though. And needless to say, the whole anime industry is of Japan.

Nah, I still think the elongated anime proportions make the characters look a bit older than their canonical ages. Someone like Simon from Gurren Lagann looks more 14 to me.

Also, is Mari actually 16-17? I don’t recall it being stated anywhere so I just assumed she was the same age as the other kids, just more... well developed.

This is barring any Curse of Eva time fuckery because (having not read the spoilers yet) I’m still pretty sure she’s actually at least 10 years older than the other kids.

Archer wrote:Nah, I still think the elongated anime proportions make the characters look a bit older than their canonical ages. Someone like Simon from Gurren Lagann looks more 14 to me.

Actually, I think Simon has the exact opposite problem. He's way too short, he looks 10 rather than 14. And because of that, his relationship with Yoko ends up seeming really creepy. Being a teenager myself, I can remember what I looked like when I was 14, and I sure wasn't 3 feet tall.

However, Berserker's claim that Asian teenagers look older than European teenagers is very interesting, especially the claim that Shinji actually looks too young. What would be considered a realistic depiction of Japanese teenage boys in anime, if we were going by that?

BusterMachine4#916631 wrote:Actually, I think Simon has the exact opposite problem. He's way too short, he looks 10 rather than 14. And because of that, his relationship with Yoko ends up seeming really creepy. Being a teenager myself, I can remember what I looked like when I was 14, and I sure wasn't 3 feet tall.

To be fair, he never really has a relationship with Yoko, he just has an unrequited crush on her, which is fairly normal for boys that age. Also, Yoko is technically also 14, though that one’s also a bit of a stretch.

Archer wrote:To be fair, he never really has a relationship with Yoko, he just has an unrequited crush on her, which is fairly normal for boys that age. Also, Yoko is technically also 14, though that one’s also a bit of a stretch.

Yeah, when I found that out I was actually pretty surprised. In my head, I assumed that Simon was about 10 and that Yoko was around Kamina's age, meaning 18. That's just what I assumed based on the way they were drawn. Neither one looks even remotely like a teenager.

I always pegged Mari as being 15 like Kaworu.

According to the science a girl can reach her final cupsize anytime between 13 and 17, Mari's just on the early end of that spectrum.

We can talk all we want about sexualization through camera angles, art style, moneyshots, clothes, tropey dialogue etc. but just looking the way she does is not actually unrealistic.

I was much the same (but shorter, chubbier and much less brave in the face of giant monsters) & you bet I was bullied for it, so I kinda tend to be a little touchy when someone floats the idea that a 14/15 year old with big breasts is inherently ridiculous or could only possibly exist for fanservice.

I'm part spanish on my father's side so I was a bit on an early bloomer compared to my classmates, too - same with my brother, he had the beginnings of a mustache when all his peers still looked like little boys. Or a friend of my sister's who had the opposite problem, his father was a Cherokee guy from the local US military base & he maybe for that reason he ended up hitting puberty later than all his classmates - so ppl made fun of him for being babyfaced and 'looking like a girl' until his growth spurt finally arrived. We also had one sister take after mom's family/get more of the central European genes & not start being woman-shaped till she was 15 or so; We looked pretty similar & kept getting confused as children, but now we're vastly different shapes. (though mostly cause she is two heads taller now. XDD)

So obviously there's a heck of a lot of individual variation here. IDK where the average in Japan would be tho. (& hence, if Asuka & Mari could end up behind or ahead of their peers)

Even when you account for individual variation, I just think the Eva art style adds at least a year or two on all the kids. An example going in the other direction would be the Madoka Magica cast, who despite also being 14, look more like they’re 12-13 due to the cutesy art style.

I’m basing most of my judgment from a previous job I had teaching high schoolers (so like, 15-18) and subjectively, I think that’s the range where the Eva kids look like they best fit in.