Getting on an alt to post this so I don't get banned for disagreeing but here's my take:
I don't want to get into the debate of whether or not people are justified in thinking "trap" is a transphobic slur, and I honestly don't think anyone can convince anyone on this, but regardless going on a site-wise purge of old works is just not a good idea. I doubt anyone, when using trap in translations, is actively trying to be hateful. I think a better solution would be to add warnings before clicking on the manga in question. It is a fact that many just don't consider trap a slur, adding a warning can allow people who consider so still enjoy the manga, while others who believe otherwise avoid it. Purges would just further alienate and radicalize people who disagree

You know I sometimes wonder if people use a vpn and a different mail address to state such opinions that they deem important, but know will get banned for. Not sure if that would be enough to spoof an anti-second-account system. What with that post two above me being the first and only post of that freshly created account.

Sorry, long time lurker, don't really post on forums very much. I just think the actions taken here are bad enough that 8 had to actually create an account and voice my concerns. I've been following some manga here for years and I really don't want staff arbitrarily getting rid of some manga because some people love to feign offence to feel special.

considering whats going on right now in the us and uk.

So... anyone willing to enlighten me what this is referring to?

considering whats going on right now in the us and uk.

So... anyone willing to enlighten me what this is referring to?

I would assume the recent slate of laws in US states and the UK that make it illegal to provide any medical or psychiatric care to trans people.

considering whats going on right now in the us and uk.

So... anyone willing to enlighten me what this is referring to?

I would assume the recent slate of laws in US states and the UK that make it illegal to provide any medical or psychiatric care to trans people.

I know it's kinda unrelated to the main topic, but do you have a reading recommendation for this? I haven't heard of that and would like to learn what's going on in this case.

considering whats going on right now in the us and uk.

So... anyone willing to enlighten me what this is referring to?

I would assume the recent slate of laws in US states and the UK that make it illegal to provide any medical or psychiatric care to trans people.

I know it's kinda unrelated to the main topic, but do you have a reading recommendation for this? I haven't heard of that and would like to learn what's going on in this case.

The ACLU statement on the US State law most relevant is pretty concise and accurate, although limited to the specific case. I am more unfamiliar with the UK law unfortunately.

considering whats going on right now in the us and uk.

So... anyone willing to enlighten me what this is referring to?

I would assume the recent slate of laws in US states and the UK that make it illegal to provide any medical or psychiatric care to trans people.

I know it's kinda unrelated to the main topic, but do you have a reading recommendation for this? I haven't heard of that and would like to learn what's going on in this case.

Same. Just spent half an hour on Wiki and the most I could find was that in 2020 seven US states were "considering bills to prevent transgender children from accessing healthcare related to gender transition" and "South Dakota's bill would make it a felony for healthcare providers to provide this care, and it includes an exception for to allow them to perform surgeries on intersex children meant to make them fit into the gender binary." No newer updates on present status.

What I could find on the UK roughly boils down to onerous and cumbersome bureaucracy (that drew stern European Commission critique in 2020) and "in 2018 Stonewall described UK transgender healthcare as having "significant barriers to accessing treatment, including waiting times that stretch into years, far exceeding the maximums set by law for NHS patients"." Also a 2013 NHS survey that found "other National Health Service programs are lacking; almost a third of respondents reported inadequate psychiatric care in their local area." (In the same "94% of transgender people using the gender identity clinics were satisfied with their care and would recommend the clinics to a friend or family member" though so apparently varies by specific topic.)

So basically the South Dakota one died already in Feb 2020, Alabama has something in the works and Arkansas is literally worse than Hitler?

IIRC the UK barred minors from getting hormone treatment?

IIRC the UK barred minors from getting hormone treatment?

Puberty blockers.

IIRC the UK barred minors from getting hormone treatment?

Yeah that turned up a hit.

Arkansas is literally worse than Hitler?

As a German I think I have to say: no, they're not, although I guess Godwin's Law has to be adhered to...

Reading the Arkansas Bill has been insightful as well. I concur with the APA's assessment that it's a misguided piece of legislature that may very well do a lot more harm than good.
As a former psychology major I've always been on the side of giving good mental healthcare to people in distress and letting the clinical psychologists and therapists figure out the best methods to deal with psychological suffering (which gender dysphoria pretty much invariably entails). They are the experts, and if their method of choice is reassignment and hormone therapy, I'm confident that they know what they're doing and are aware of the responsibility they bear.

It's pretty much the same story about the UK. They also don't trust the current assessments. I'm curious how the scientific consensus will develop in the next ten years or so.

As a German I think I have to say: no, they're not, although I guess Godwin's Law has to be adhered to...

No need to lecture a raging history nerd about that. Surely the meme isn't that old?

Probably won't want to linger too much on this since the issue has already been addressed and the admins have asked for it not to be debated.
Looking at the doujin itself, it could be made adherant to the site's rules if the title was changed to its original Japanese title and the single use of the offensive English title on page 2 were to be edited out, as the term isn't actually used once in the main dialogue, but that's all down to the admins and if they're more comfortable with it staying off for good, we gotta respect that.

Looking at the doujin itself, it could be made adherant to the site's rules if the title was changed to its original Japanese title and the single use of the offensive English title on page 2 were to be edited out, as the term isn't actually used once in the main dialogue, but that's all down to the admins and if they're more comfortable with it staying off for good, we gotta respect that.

If there's only a few instances to which this violation applies, I'd rather see a solution similar to what luinthoron suggested, with a specific tag that allows avoiding it as well as a preface page added at position 0 with a statement that puts things in perspective. Would be a humongous task if there were a lot of relevant titles here, but at least going by the titles there were only about four, which I would say is potentially feasible. That would not require defacing the work.
Ultimately, though, you're right and it's their call.

last edited at Mar 31, 2021 6:10PM

All right. Between here and the Discord, it seems roughly everything on this topic has been said. This thread will be locked, but I'd like to clarify a few things.

1. The removed doujin will remain removed. There are other sites that host it, we don't believe it is a significant loss to our catalogue. I understand the feeling of having content removed - even content one didn't read - will always feel disproportionately negative, compared to content added. However, we do not believe that is a reason unto itself to change the decision that was made.

2. Other content mentioned that may share the term "trap" will be reviewed and considered carefully before any further action is taken. We do not intend to alter individual translations we had nothing to do with to fit our ideal. It is highly likely that some minor content will be removed. I will emphasize only once that it is not unusual for content to leave the site, unusual though these circumstances may be.

3. Rule 1 of the forum rules states: "Being overly aggressive, insulting, or generally a jerk is against the rules. Hate speech, racism, sexism, etc. By the same token, do not refer to trans people and/or crossdressers as "traps." I felt there were some misconceptions about how that particular part of the forum rule read, so there it is. (Please note that Discord has its own set of rules.)

Everything is always subject to change, and what I've written here will surely hold true to that as well. If you wish to continue this discussion for whatever reason, there are other places to do that. Thanks, take care.

last edited at Mar 31, 2021 6:57PM