Perv on a Japanese Schoolgirl in Tekken Team's Project Morpheus Demo

[BX3]

Reminds me of that one game that lady tried to come out with when the Kinect was heating up, but, y'know... just a ton more Japanese. Was kinda surprised by the subject matter at first until I realized that the latest Tekken itteration technically has 6 schoolgirls in it. Dat Harada knowin' what he likes.

Also, I think this is my first time seeing a thread so single-handedly derailed. Pretty funny. Good jerb, Rocket.

Also, also, apparently according to parts of this thread, this is porn, which is hella disconcerting, because it means I've been watching, like, a TON of porn. Some of it around my friends and family. Not the kind've revelation you expect to have in the morning.... =(

 

[Deshin]

Anything past puberty is not a child, quote as many dictionaries as you like no one in their right mind refers to teenagers as 'children'.

You are telling me that a dictionary is not relevant to the definition of a word, because you think no one agrees with me.

Puberty is the cut off point where you stop being a child, it's really that simple. No reliance on laws or cultures; "Do your privates work?" If yes, congrats, you're no longer a child. Now I'll agree it doesn't make you an adult, but to still call one a child, especially with the conoctations and implications ("Some people don't think there is a right or wrong way to "do" the "tits and ass" of a child. Could you explain what part of that "amuses" you?") that go with it would be irresponsible of the speaker.

You state your opinion of when one is not a child, but when I do this, with two reliable sources, my argument is invalid? Hm.

Yup, pretty much.

Now here's me being as pedantic: Only one of your reliable sources mentions "age of majority", the other states "coming of age" which is a vague statement but typically and coloquially means bumping uglies. Also the entry states:

1
a : an unborn or recently born person
b dial : a female infant
2
a : a young person especially between infancy and youth
b : a childlike or childish person
c : a person not yet of age

So you chose the entry that most accurately backed up your statement instead of one in a higher priority such as "a young person between infancy and youth". Good cherry-picking.

As for the other reliable source: "A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority:" which translates to "A person who is under 13 or under 18" which is an iffy entry at best and downright flawed at worst.

Also, no one so far has agreed with you. In fact half this thread has derailed into people calling you out. As someone else said, you're an intelectual, we get it, you can stop showing off now.

 

[Lightknight]

Oh no, people have fantasies. Someone call the puritan police to prudishly complain about how organisms evolved to survive through reproduction are focused on the elements of reproduction including role-play. Let's be sure to defend the rights of ordered 1's and 0's!

*psst, no one tell them about the internet in which real school girls are getting perved on, because then they may have a real problem with real victims to deal with*

Seriously though, while I've never been particularly mindful of this fetish, I understand that they do exist and I'm not going to demonize people for being attracted to those uniforms. Lord only knows how I thought about those cheer leader uniforms when I was still in school. Is the age of the girl creepy? Probably. I do take issue with questionable digital representations of children. But my highschool had 18 (norm) and 19 year olds (semi-common). May have even had a 20-year old or two (held back twice or started a year late and held back once).

Eh, if I'm going to pick my battles though, I'd say I care a lot less about this particular scenario since I don't know anything about her age.

 

[Deshin]

Cherry-picking? No, friend. Here, let me ask you a question: why aren't you using this definition:

"One strongly influenced by another or by a place or state of affairs." Or;

"A son or daughter of human parents." Or;

"An immature or irresponsible person."

Because you are choosing the definition you think best describes your intended meaning. Or are you cherry-picking too?

C-O-N-T-E-X-T

The context we have for now is a person's age, not their relation or mental capacity. I can see what you're doing ya know, knock it off. (I believe you're smart enough to know what you're doing and are intentionally doing it)

 

[kael013]

Child is a perfectly fine descriptor for someone under the age of eighteen. Both Oxford and Merriam give many definitions, including the following:

"A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority." - http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/child and "A person not yet of age." - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

Well, let's look at your definitions: "A young human being below the age of puberty" - well she obviously isn't as she has breasts, something a woman doesn't have before puberty. So that just leaves "or below the legal age of majority" which is more nebulous: 18-21 in the US, 16 in Bolivia, and [i/][b/]8[/b][/i] in Saudi Arabia and Iran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority#Countries_and_subdivisions). So, sorry, no, child is NOT a perfectly fine descriptor for someone under the age of 18. Heck, even the definitions you give don't support that conclusion. The vast majority of cultures may have 18 as their age of majority (and even a good portion of them have caveats for younger ages if married/emancipated/has a kid/etc.) but that doesn't give the members of those cultures - that means you and me - the right to impose our views on those who don't by setting an universal definition on something so nebulous and arbitrary.

[quote/]What is your issue exactly?[/quote]

Yeah, really. What [i/]is[/i] your issue?

OT: Oh, Japan, ignoring the current controversy and spreading diversity by appealing to the perv in every man and lesbian. Never change.

 

[Lightknight]

Child is a perfectly fine descriptor for someone under the age of eighteen. Both Oxford and Merriam give many definitions, including the following:

"A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority."

and

"A person not yet of age."

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/child
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

The demo in question is titled "Summer Lesson" and features a young looking girl in a school uniform. What is your issue exactly?

Do you think the definition perhaps applies to human children and not say, digital 1's and 0's that were never born and have no sentience or physical form?

I mean, don't get me wrong, I have a serious problem with depicting young children even in digital form. But I'm just pointing out that this is not a child. This is not a person. This is an object, an IP. Might as well be one of those Japanese love pillows.

As for the age of the individual. Is the age known? As stated above, I went to school with 18, 19, and potentially 20 year olds (though 20 year olds would have had to have been held back twice). I've seen Japanese girls in their 30's that looked younger than this one. Do universities also have uniforms in Japan like some do here?

Additionally, is there any explicit content being held here? Is its erotic potential only relevant to those who would have a fetish about this? For example, would I, having no school girl fetish, play this game and just see it as a boring study session sim? Or is the girl specifically depicted sexually in a way that would make me subconsciously sexualize the image?

Don't know. But you know what? Guys aren't doing anything wrong if they do like the uniform and if they do like Japanese girls. They're only doing something wrong if it's specific to children.

 

[Roofstone]

Maybe it is because I look at porn all the time, but what is the issue here? It is not really that pervy.. Is it?

 

[Ruisu]

Nothing disappointing here, except maybe that westerns can't deal with the fact that fictional characters are fictional, and pretty much anything goes with them.

 

[Lightknight]

Child is a perfectly fine descriptor for someone under the age of eighteen. Both Oxford and Merriam give many definitions, including the following:

"A young human being below the age of puberty or below the legal age of majority." - http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/child and "A person not yet of age." - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/child

Well, let's look at your definitions: "A young human being below the age of puberty" - well she obviously isn't as she has breasts, something a woman doesn't have before puberty. So that just leaves "or below the legal age of majority" which is more nebulous: 18-21 in the US, 16 in Bolivia, and [i/][b/]8[/b][/i] in Saudi Arabia and Iran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_majority#Countries_and_subdivisions). So, sorry, no, child is NOT a perfectly fine descriptor for someone under the age of 18. Heck, even the definitions you give don't support that conclusion. The vast majority of cultures may have 18 as their age of majority (and even a good portion of them have caveats for younger ages if married/emancipated/has a kid/etc.) but that doesn't give the members of those cultures - that means you and me - the right to impose our views on those who don't by setting an universal definition on something so nebulous and arbitrary.

It should be noted that the age of majority is also not the age of sexual consent. Japan, for example, can have the age of consent ranging anywhere from 13 to 18.

So citing the legal word "child" as being a person who isn't in the majority is also a bit of a red herring if we're discussing sexuality even though we are quite appalled at the notion of 13 year-old consent.

Defining someone as a child legally is more of a bureaucratic definition than cultural. So it shouldn't necessarily flood over into a cultural discussion.

 

[Lightknight]

I have a serious problem with depicting young children even in digital form. But I'm just pointing out that this is not a child. This is not a person. This is an object, an IP. Might as well be one of those Japanese love pillows.

What is digital form if not 1's and 0's? I am curious as to how you came to believe that the digital depiction of "young children" is wrong, but the use of computer code to display "young children" is not. Did you not say "this is not a child. This is not a person." So what exactly is wrong with displaying 1's and 0's that look like a child, if they "are not people?" Either they are people, or they are not. You can't argue using both definitions.

I'm not arguing for or against your statement. I am just very curious as to how this occurred.

I'm stating that she isn't a she. 'It' is a nothing. Lines in a painting, words on a page. It has no rights, no thoughts, no emotions. Does not suffer pain or humiliation, does not desire.

So I'm making a distinction for the definition you presented as not one that flows into the digital non-human side. That this is not a child. However, at best it could be a depiction of a child and I would have a problem with that if done with erotic intentions. As is, her age is ambiguous. she certainly doesn't fall into the toddler-looking Chinese olympic gymnast entries that were supposed to be at least 15-16. But she also isn't 35 though I'll admit to having seen Japanese women in their 30's that I wouldn't have raised an eyebrow at seeing in a high school class.

So... I am disagreeing with your use of the definition to apply to non-humans, but agreeing that depiction of minors in erotic manners is unethical and immoral. But I'm also prefacing that we know nothing of this 'game' nor the actual age of the individual. There's also a philosophical debate on how 1's and 0's can ever be immoral. Sure, you and I have personal qualms with it. But it's entirely victimless. If I can mow down thousands of 1's and 0's then can I really blame someone for getting the hots for a 17 year old school girl? Err... morals are hard.

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

>"perv on a Japanese schoolgirl"
>video shows nothing of the sort
>girl's AI responds to lewd gestures

Cool sensationalist title Escapist.

 

[gigastar]

Only a matter of time until the breast physics developers get their hands on the tech.

Oh im willing to bet that Team Ninja is already working on something with this tech.

 

[Cowabungaa]

Why can't japan just get off its perverse fascination with a being a high school student with all its awkward bullshit. I'd swear that judging by their entertainment industry you'd think that life just ends for the Japanese man when he gets his diploma out of high school.
Life gets way more interesting out of highschool but maybe thats just for west. Maybe in japan you go to college and then march off to your 12 hour a day 6 days a week cubical job and stay there till you commit suicide in your depressing tiny tokyo apartment.

Easy there fella, let's not get bogged down too much.

But I too share the confusion about Japan's apparent love with the awkward, bashful high school girl aesthetic.

 

[WindKnight]

it reminds me of 3D animated hentai. Don't ask.

What needs to be asked, it's pretty self-explanatory.

OT: Well duh. Anybody expected Japanese game developers not to make something like this the moment they got their hands on a VR system? Ogling girls sells like hotcakes in Japan, just look at current anime. Sure, so it does in the West, but we tend to be a bit more discreet.

Funny thing is, when the most infamous hentai Urotsukidoji: legend of the Overfiend was released in the UK, there were perhaps 500 anime fans... and it sold over 50,000 copies, which also a lot better than it did in Japan.

Not gonna say some weird s*** doesn't come out of Japan, but we in the west sure love to gobble it up, and the primary audience isn't anime fans.

Why can't japan just get off its perverse fascination with a being a high school student with all its awkward bullshit. I'd swear that judging by their entertainment industry you'd think that life just ends for the Japanese man when he gets his diploma out of high school.
Life gets way more interesting out of highschool but maybe thats just for west. Maybe in japan you go to college and then march off to your 12 hour a day 6 days a week cubical job and stay there till you commit suicide in your depressing tiny tokyo apartment.

Easy there fella, let's not get bogged down too much.

But I too share the confusion about Japan's apparent love with the awkward, bashful high school girl aesthetic.

The majority of the stuff we're seeing is aimed at teenagers/young adults. Leaving aside Shojo (girls), the majority of stuff that gets proted over is either Shonen (boys) or Seinen (adolescent/young adult boys).

 

[WindKnight]

it reminds me of 3D animated hentai. Don't ask.

What needs to be asked, it's pretty self-explanatory.

OT: Well duh. Anybody expected Japanese game developers not to make something like this the moment they got their hands on a VR system? Ogling girls sells like hotcakes in Japan, just look at current anime. Sure, so it does in the West, but we tend to be a bit more discreet.

Funny thing is, when the most infamous hentai Urotsukidoji: legend of the Overfiend was released in the UK, there were perhaps 500 anime fans... and it sold over 50,000 copies, which also a lot better than it did in Japan.

Not gonna say some weird s*** doesn't come out of Japan, but we in the west sure love to gobble it up, and the primary audience isn't anime fans.

500 anime fans in the UK? Where did you get that number from? It's specific and I am extremely curious. I would have thought there'd be way more than that.

We're talking about a specific time period in the 90's (when there was a big 'cult anime' boom) when manga video and the like were starting out with sci-fi, nasties and stuff like that, and would make safe titles 'edgier' with fifteening (artificially adding swearing to the script to get a 15 certificate, so it would be cooler to teenagers).

 

[kael013]

The vast majority of cultures may have 18 as their age of majority (and even a good portion of them have caveats for younger ages if married/emancipated/has a kid/etc.) but that doesn't give the members of those cultures - that means you and me - the right to impose our views on those who don't by setting an universal definition on something so nebulous and arbitrary.

Actually, it does. It's called language. In English, a child can refer to any human under the age of majority. So if you live somewhere that has an age of majority at, say, 16, and you happen to be English, a seventeen-year-old would not be a child using that definition.

Simply saying that other people or places don't use it, is not a compelling argument.

Well, if you want to get into language semantics... The word child can also be used to refer to an adult if used by an even older adult, like a 70-year old calling someone 30 years younger child. Of course, the reverse also applies as a 30-year old can call a 70-year old a child when they're acting like one. Therefore, we are all children since that word can be applied to anyone. Can you see where I'm going with this?

Also, English isn't the only language in the world and I can think of many, [i/]many[/i] people that will argue with you that because you use that one language that gives you carte blanche to set definitions to cultural traits.

And finally, simply saying that you do use it is not a compelling argument.

 

[thewatergamer]

Soooo how is this wrong or pervy?

I don't speak Japanese but all I saw was an A.I. reacting like a normal human, it looks pretty much how two human being would interact with each other, I don't get how this is perverted...

Again I don't speak Japanese though so maybe I'm just missing something, its more likely though people are seeing something that isn't really there... Could be wrong though I guess I'll just wait for more context and wait until we can see more

 

[Fox12]

I'd swear that judging by their entertainment industry you'd think that life just ends for the Japanese man when he gets his diploma out of high school.

Because That's technically the truth, especially if you're just a run of the mill salaryman, handing off his paycheck each month to his wife.

Please show the sources you used to come to the conclusion that the "average" Japanese salary man loses control over his money to his wife.

Japan's New Middle Class; the Salary Man and His Family in a Tokyo Suburb
By Ezra F. Vogel

Can't find a better exact source, it's because most of it that I heard came directly from my Japanese friends.

A book is not a source for that claim; I won't link you to a book detailing American History to support my argument that Ford built a car. What you do is show a specific page or portion of text relevant to your claim.

Conjecture and hearsay aren't sources either, no.

Also, his response should be double spaced, with 1" margins, times new roman. The fact that his sources weren't written in the proper MLA format, with no annotations or footnotes is also totally unacceptable. I also expected at least three primary source documents to be included among his sources.

Oh, wait, this is an Internet forum, not a graduate course. Oh...

 

[Lightknight]

So what is the "digital depiction" of a child? Because you just said this isn't a child, it's a thing, an "it." So how do you display a child digitally if no digital display is a child? Did you mean to say the display of real children? Am I missing something? I feel I'm missing something.

This isn't displaying a child digitally. This is a depiction of a child. The distinction is that this isn't a person.

I'm trying to distinguish between a picture or video of a real person that is in a digital format from a fabricated work of fiction.

So a better word is that this is a construction, fabrication, fiction.

The definition you made applies to humans. This is not a human. It has no rights and is not legally a minor or a major. It is nothing. No digitally fabricated image will ever be in the majority age. Not unless it has real sentience and our laws change.

 

[VanQ]

This ain't nearly as creepy as you make it out to be. I'd say lighten up but then again this is the guy that called Atelier Totori an "objectification sim."

Anyways, looks uninteresting. That guy has a ballin' iDOLM@STER shirt though. I'd have a drink with him and discuss idols any day.