Google is your friend if you really care enough.

Koguma has no earrings. I'm not quite sure where this idea even spawned from. We totally saw her ears in this chapter:
https://dynasty-scans.com/chapters/hino_san_no_baka_ch03#10
https://dynasty-scans.com/chapters/hino_san_no_baka_ch03#11

last edited at May 11, 2019 5:15AM

I'll give the artist that, this is gorgeous. Even if the pairing is nonsensical.

last edited at May 11, 2019 5:03AM

The red bondage rope of fate.

last edited at May 11, 2019 5:03AM

Alcohol is the strongest wingman.

One letter off to make it the usual selfcest.

^Her sensitive kneecaps, duh.

Heaven's Hole indeed.
Kiara was so much better in CCC though.

If Graf says it like that, it almost sounds like this was not an accident or somethin'

@Krayos13 The trick is not to sink your horrible human teeth into another's flesh and instead just nibble with your lips. LIke a suction cup.

This artist was very kind to Sakura's assets.

Bugs > ghosts
It's just common sense.

This little maniacal fantasy of Magilou's is cute and all, but we know that she is actually hanging over Velvet's shoulder right now, completely knocked out.
Seriously, since when was this pairing popular? lol

I have many questions, all of which I don't want to ask.

Facts: Sharp ears are made to be licked.

They always existed and will always exist. It's part of human nature.

The church was always good at destroying everything that didn't fit their world view. We are damn lucky that they decided to assimilate Norse and Celtic religions and thus preserved some of those ancient texts or otherwise all these amazing legends would only exist by word of mouth today. We know that other cultures didn't fare so well...

"I'm not a stalker, officer, I swear! We are family, so it's NORMAL:"

last edited at May 11, 2019 4:31AM

Well I thought it was wholesome that Hino could see Koguma's exhaustion and offered her a lap pillow. She even woke her up for class, even though she could have easily exploited it to skip.

Oh and she denied the idea that being unable to sleep after a horror movie was childish, once again knocking Koguma's immature impression of herself.

Do you think we should treat real people and fictional characters with the same level of ethical priority? If the trolley problem had your favourite fictional character (who doesn't exist) on one track and an actual living breathing human being on the other would you be conflicted about saving the actual living breathing human? Like that's what I'm talking about here not like really loving fictional characters and investing in them but straight up believing they have the same intrinsic worth as actual human life.

Why do you debate an argument nobody made then?

Yeah, still don't really know what you're going on about at the top, sorry. I was addressing a specific subset of people trying to claim that being uncomfortable with this manga was unreasonable/wrong/some other dismissive adjective and the fact that none of their arguments really swayed me on the subject partially because discomfort is subjective and thus can't be wrong and partly because the arguments are just all kind of ill-conceived and lacking empathy.

If that was what you were refering to, then as a reply to my post it was off-topic. And you are really not one to talk about empathy after completely ignoring the context of the characters' feelings in the matter...

"It's just a joke" is not really a good defence for why people shouldn't take issue with something. Besides it's not like I'm frothing with rage I read the chapter and my response was an exasperated sigh because I really like this manga and that development skeeved me out.

If a rather harmless act being a punchline in a joke isn't a good defense of why it shouldn't be treated as something bad... well then nothing really is. In which case you clearly don't want to be open minded about it.
Another irrelevant point. I have said nothing about you acting angry, because I didn't perceive it that way.

Fictional characters don't have the ability to make decisions or moral judgments they are a vessel for the narrative the author wants to happen. If she were a real girl and this were a real situation my response to people uncomfortable with it would be "Mind your business unless she says otherwise" but she's not and thus her responses and decisions simply don't have the same weight. It's the same reason "Well, she CHOOSES to dress like that" falls flat as a justification for skimpy outfit designs. Koguma didn't choose anything, the author did. Also, I love teasing as much as the next girl but if someone I had a crush on peeked at my underwear while I was sleeping without my consent that crush would die a very quick death.

Fictional characters don't have any choices, so no story has any meaning or depth, because it's just make believe. What a futile way of argumentation. This is how the characters are portrayed, so if you put real life standards into it, you have to treat their actions and reactions as real as well. If you dislike it, you may say that Hino is a bad person or Koguma is not resolute enough, those are character traits.
Skimpy outfits are the choice of the character in-universe. If you want to discuss meta reasons, then that's a different topic. Never conflate the two.

Good for you, that's your ultra specific personal reaction to it. Other people might laugh it off or be a bit embarrassed, but not mind it etc.

I don't even know what you're talking about in the first paragraph I can't find a context in this exchange where it makes any sense so I can't really address it. If you could clarify I'd appreciate it.

Fine.

Literally no comment in this entire thread has actually effectively justified their belief that being uncomfortable with this manga is unjustified. The line between bullying/harassment and teasing is super fine and entirely subjective so it's asinine to try to claim that your particular stance is the right one when there is no right stance it's a matter of personal experience and perspective.

^This was one of your posts. You say here that nobody effectively justified their beliefs to you (while also missing the point what those beliefs were). Then you superimposed the idea of a "right stance" on the conversation that never existed. You strawmaned us (well most of us).

Authors portraying things I think are bad/harmful as not bad/harmful doesn't make them less uncomfortable. In fact it makes them uncomfortable and kind of angering because it reads like propaganda supporting a stance I find distasteful. It's not about the fates of the characters it's about the actual thing that is happening itself having strong negative associations that I lack either the will or the desire to overcome. It doesn't matter if Hino isn't actually going to sexually harass Koguma I find violating people's privacy and consent distasteful and the in universe ramifications are moot because the issue isn't the fates of these people who don't exist it's that skirt flipping is gross and I don't want to read about it. Hell, it doesn't even have to be something I think is morally suspect, scat makes me uncomfortable as all hell and no amount of context or authorial intent would change that.

Being uncomfortable over such minor things is your right. But you did put in implications towards it being bad. But it is a punchline, a joke, nothing with deeper meaning, so projecting deeper meaning into it just makes it appear that you want to feel uncomfortable and indignant about it.

(I think scat is very morally suspect. What moral life form could enjoy such degeneration?)

The thing is for some readers something bad is happening here. They feel Hino's behaviour is crossing a line and the author justifying it through Koguma's reactions isn't really different from trying to say something bad isn't happening. You clearly disagree but as I said bullying is subjective and if I didn't have a massive double standard blind spot for yuri I would find this insanely creepy because god knows if Hino was a boy I wouldn't touch this story with a mile long pole.

See, this is where context comes in. Bullying is only bullying if it is perceived as such by the party in question. Even in real life a large quanitiy of people will not see skirtflipping as bullying. Especially between two people who obviously have a crush on each other. You very suddenly have a problem with something that is on equal footing with literally every other prank/teasing Hino did until now. It might even be tamer than that time she rubbed "aphrosidiac" on Koguma.
You feeling uncomfortable? Understandable.
Classifying this as bullying or morally deplorable? Not so much.

I agree. I totally understand BugDevil.

Facts aren't going to get in my way of enjoying lesbian nuns though.

Even better, that they were lesbians and in love is a fact. They expressed their love despite knowing the consequences and personally, I find that far more romantic~

last edited at May 10, 2019 5:46PM

Please be less smug, especially when you're being wrong at the same time. Discomfort isn't right or wrong it is a subjective personal reaction. It can be in tune with societal standards or not but ultimately it is divorced from the concept of correctness because it just is what it is whether or not you think it's reasonable. Save your trite "gotcha" nonsense.

The context of the work doesn't matter. The content is the content and prettying it up and making it palatable doesn't make it not what it is. If someone is sensitive to bullying and feels discomfited by Hino's behaviour here because it sets of red flags for them it doesn't matter if the author doesn't intend for that to be the case. If an author writes a sex scene that sure looks and feels like rape but they pinkie swear it's not really rape people aren't mistaken in being uncomfortable with it because the authorial intent doesn't matter it looks and feels like what it looks and feels like. Just because your interpretation is in line with authorial intent doesn't mean other interpretations are flawed. I fully understand the authors intent but I straight up just don't agree with it when it comes to this most recent chapter and for others that point came earlier because they have a different line in the sand. Intent isn't magic.

Sorry, smugness is all I have when someone outright denies any thought out and nice attempts at discourse as "not a good justification".

You didn't get it, huh? I was being facetious. I know there is no right and wrong here, but you portrayed your point as legitimate and then said everyone else couldn't prove themselves "right" to you. Which is ironic as neither could you. When you are the one who makes it about right and wrong, you cannot be the one to dismiss it and pretend that you actually accomplished anything.

Ah yes, the context doesn't matter. Well if that is so, then I suppose neither do your feelings on it. I don't need to know how you came to the conclusions you did, because just at face value, your point is contradicting the actual manga. See how problematic that kind of thinking is? Context always matters. Yes, you might still feel uncomfortable, but don't you do less so, knowing the author neither intended anything bad nor will go down a bad path with the story?

In this particular case where nothing bad actually happened, none of the parties felt bad, nothing bad was even implied and you simply have nothing to base your discomfort around other than some vague feelings... Yes, I'd say the authorial intent trumps them.
Your example is ludicrous and incomparable. If something bad happened and the author said it didn't, fair enough. Such a contradiction does not exist in this case however. It is a situation you can interpret both ways if you really try, but that's just it. It's vague and therefore intention matters. No magic needed.

last edited at May 10, 2019 5:38PM

You know BugDevil, I really do understand what you are saying. I don't just have a romantic view of the middle ages, I have a romantic view of everything.

Which is why I deleted my post. Because I just want everyone to get along. Not get into arguments. I really wasn't trying to argue with you, but I thought maybe someone might misunderstand, so I deleted it.

Welp, romance is nice. And medieval times especially get romanticized regularily (good old knights, princesses and dragons). Religion is just a topic where I don't like to ignore how bad it really is. I think especially on a site like this that is understandable.

If it means anything, I didn't want to argue either. Especially not against you. I saw it more as a correction of the facts.

It's even sadder when you remember that these women actually believed they'd go to hell for these letters.

I think middle age nuns have more nuanced theological beliefs than the average church going American. In the middle ages religion was a philosophical study for nuns, not some sort of dogma handed down by the most charismatic pastor.

Before science, religion was science. Monks and nuns were the ones who sought the truth critically through the lens of religion. Even if they decry it as a sin, it's a bit different than simply "do this and go to hell".

One day our current scientific theories will seem quint and outdated. Just like how Einstein replaced Newton, even things we currently hold to be absolutely true, like the theory of evolution might be supplemented by a more general and advanced theory. When that happens we don't want future generations to think we dogmatically believed in things like evolution right? What we believed in is the pursuit of truth, not any one theory.

Similarly, I think you should rest easy thinking that what these nuns sought was not dogma in religion, but truth in a uncertain world.

That's a funny way of saying they were super religious and dogmatic.
Because that's what they were, no matter what your idea of proto-science may be lol

You seem to be more of an expert on medieval religious practice than people who actually lived during that time and deigned to write down their experiences. Religion is not science. It does not allow for "outdated" and "updated" stuff (the West is just slowly shedding its religious idiocy and that's why all the rules keep loosening). Especially not in the goddamn middle ages.

The truth nuns and priests sought out was all in the name and view of god. Mendel might have laid the foundation for genetic biology, but he also still believed women were inferior, god would punish anyone who ate meat on the Sabbath and judged men for sodomy.

I guess you kind of have a romanticized view of those dark times. There is literally nothing good about the middle ages. You better believe that these nuns knew 100% they would go to hell. They might have justified it away, but not because of some "truth", but because humans always try to escape punishment. Until Martin Luther himself appeared to split the church into two large sects, nobody ever dared to question either the bible nor the way the church did things.

In summary: Religion is all about keeping its followers stupid, gullible and afraid. It is simply unrealistic to believe that nuns were anywhere brave or intelligent enough back then to question their shitty dogma.

EDIT: Why does this always happen to me? At some point one has to wonder if these posts are just voices in my head...

last edited at May 10, 2019 5:01PM