I concluded Mei is a sex assault victim not because of a kiss. But rather the time when she offered sex to Yuzu and told her she will be gentle. That means she has experience in sex, not just fooling around.

A totally unwarranted assumption--it proves nothing of the sort. Mei has obviously read books and watched TV, where that trope is as common as dirt.

People really need to stop projecting onto the text--if the author wanted to depict Mei as psychologically broken because of a previous rape, they had copious amounts of space in which to do it, but nothing remotely like that has been presented.

People really need to stop projecting onto the text

Why? It does zero harm, can make engaging with the work more entertaining, and can lead to interesting interpretations that one wouldn't think of without it

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 10:35AM

DY4Y posted:

People really need to stop projecting onto the text

Why? It does zero harm, can make engaging with the work more entertaining, and can lead to interesting interpretations that one wouldn't think of without it

I just don't want to think or imagine Mei being rapped if it wasn't the author's intention, saying it's harmless in this case is bizzarre, the whole manga would need a warning for readers if that was the case.

thomasina said that she could be wrong too, it is an interpretation after all and that's okay, and if she's right then there's a lot of text that needs to be changed in the manga, but we really need to be careful with such delicate subjects and don't burden the characters like that if we're not sure.

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 11:39AM

DY4Y posted:

People really need to stop projecting onto the text

Why? It does zero harm, can make engaging with the work more entertaining, and can lead to interesting interpretations that one wouldn't think of without it

I just don't want to think or imagine Mei being rapped if it wasn't the author's intention, saying it's harmless in this case is bizzarre, the whole manga would need a warning for readers if that was the case.

thomasina said that she could be wrong too, it is an interpretation after all and that's okay, and if she's right then there's a lot of text that needs to be changed in the manga, but we really need to be careful with such delicate subjects and don't burden the characters like that if we're not sure.

Wasn't talking about sexual assault there. Only that projecting is not a bad thing

People really need to stop projecting onto the text

Why? It does zero harm, can make engaging with the work more entertaining, and can lead to interesting interpretations that one wouldn't think of without it

Because it's a form of reader fantasizing that takes us away from the text itself. Of course, anybody is welcome to do that for themselves as much as they want. But these assertions are presented as interpretative arguments about how other readers are supposed to understand the text.

Hypothetically, it might give me pleasure to imagine that Mei now acts the way she does because she feels guilty about secretly engaging as a sex worker doing compensated dating, and I could even argue that such a reading is based on her accepting Matsuri's blackmail challenge back in Chapter 12.

But that would be utterly incommensurate not only with the tone of the work but with the totality of the evidence we have been given, and to make a claim that Mei is "really" highly sexually experienced and duplicitous toward Yuzu simply would be to muddy the waters for people trying to understand the actual work. As we have seen, there are now a number of readers who take it on faith that "Mei's actions must be understood as those of a survivor of sexual violence."

It's clear that the Citrus series started out being considerably edgier about sexuality but soon ratcheted things back a lot --the nerfing of Matsuri from a borderline yandere psychopath into a cuddly wingwoman is just one example of how this series fairly quickly went from spiky to fluffy.

So go ahead and pretend that Mei is autistic, or a rape survivor, or a killer robot, or is coldly using Yuzu for affection, or is secretly pledged to a nunnery, or whatever you want--reading is for pleasure, after all. But don't pretend that's the Citrus we're all reading.

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 12:22PM

People really need to stop projecting onto the text

Why? It does zero harm, can make engaging with the work more entertaining, and can lead to interesting interpretations that one wouldn't think of without it

Because it's a form of reader fantasizing that takes us away from the text itself. Of course, anybody is welcome to do that for themselves as much as they want. But these assertions are presented as interpretative arguments about how other readers are supposed to understand the text.

No it doesn't. Projection is a way to analyse the text. No text stands on it's own, everything is built on unsaid premises. Some are clearer than others but every text that exists does this. Projection then is a way to emphasise with the characters and to search for those unsaid premises by comparing them to real life.

There's no singular correct way to read any given story. Every interpretation that can be drawn from the text is valid, some more than others but all are still valid. The only problem is when people try to argue that only their own reading is correct and everything else is wrong. I've yet to see anyone here doing that

I'm just reiterating the same point I've already made though so I'm just gonna give up now

Every interpretation that can be drawn from the text is valid, some more than others but all are still valid.

In literary interpretation, fantasy projection onto texts is the opposite of a valid interpretation. If you think those preposterous scenarios I listed (I could come up with many more "based" in the text) are examples of "valid" interpretations, we have no shared basis for further discussion.

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 12:47PM

This is fiction. A work of fantasy. A lot of absurd things happen in Citrus and + but it was entertaining because while the plot certainly was not rooted in reality, the characters (or rather their emotions) were. The confusion of a first love, first kiss, a sexual awakening, those were all rooted to reality that was heightened due to character's circumstances. Projection is unavoidable and should not be unwelcome as long as it's healthily discussed.

I know there's another discussion where headcanon completely took over but in the case of Citrus and Citrus+ people are not re-writing or purposely omitting the actual text to fit their desired outcome. They are merely reading the text in a way that helps them understand character motivations. If it helps them love the story and the characters more, then what's the actual harm? Does it damage the text if people find a way to further explain Mei's behavior? Does seeing Mei as a victim of sexual assault lessen the story which is essentially about two very different step sisters who are in love with each other?

It's completely human to want to connect and if that's the way a person reads, then why the need to condemn them for how they enjoy the works just because it's not a method some might prefer?

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 1:39PM

It's completely human to want to connect and if that's the way a person reads, then why the need to condemn them for how they enjoy the works just because it's not a method some might prefer?

We're talking past each other at this point--I'm saying that people are making up a different story based on the barest shreds of evidence in the text, and in contradiction of the evidence of the overall text as a whole. As I've said again and again, if people want to use a story as the basis to conjure up further fantasies of their own, they're certainly welcome to do that.

Mistaking those imaginative rewritings of the text for the actual text is, of course, a mistake, albeit, as several people have pointed out, a relatively harmless one, until others pick up that mistake and start passing it off as a widely accepted reading of the text.

We're talking past each other at this point--I'm saying that people are making up a different story based on the barest shreds of evidence in the text, and in contradiction of the evidence of the overall text as a whole. As I've said again and again, if people want to use a story as the basis to conjure up further fantasies of their own, they're certainly welcome to do that.

But as I previously stated, seeing Mei as a sexual assault victim does not actually change any thing in the text? It's merely explaining her behavior. It doesn't change what or who she is (a deeply troubled individual who repressed her feelings to the point that they are disjointed for her and she does not know how to process them) which essentially does not take away from the story. Sure it adds something but it does not detract from the coming of age love story that Citrus is supposed to be.

Mistaking those imaginative rewritings of the text for the actual text is, of course, a mistake, albeit, as several people have pointed out, a relatively harmless one, until others pick up that mistake and start passing it off as a widely accepted reading of the text.

It's an explanation of character motivation not a rewrite of the story. What people are doing here is not a rewrite. Mei is still the stoic individual she has been written (regardless of whether or not people believe she is a victim of sexual assault) and she is still going to end up with Yuzu.

It's an explanation of character motivation not a rewrite of the story. What people are doing here is not a rewrite. Mei is still the stoic individual she has been written (regardless of whether or not people believe she is a victim of sexual assault) and she is still going to end up with Yuzu.

Thanks for clarifying the issue here. I would submit that making up a character motivation very nearly out of whole cloth absolutely is simply rewriting the story in order to suit a reader’s personal preference or to fit their preconceived notions. It involves conjuring up past events for which there is no evidence in the text (that Asshole Fiancé repeatedly molested Mei, that multiple adults raped her, etc.). It also entails ignoring or downplaying the in-text explanations for the character’s behavior (Mei’s rigid traditional upbringing, her disproportionate sense of responsibility because of the trauma of her father’s leaving the family, etc.).

This conversation has probably dragged on long enough, sparked as it was by readers arguing “You all are too hard on poor Mei, since she’s a rape survivor.” Until the author supplies material to support that reading (as potentially could happen), I continue to assert: “Assumes facts not in evidence.”

Thanks for clarifying the issue here. I would submit that making up a character motivation very nearly out of whole cloth absolutely is simply rewriting the story in order to suit a reader’s personal preference or to fit their preconceived notions. It involves conjuring up past events for which there is no evidence in the text (that Asshole Fiancé repeatedly molested Mei, that multiple adults raped her, etc.). It also entails ignoring or downplaying the in-text explanations for the character’s behavior (Mei’s rigid traditional upbringing, her disproportionate sense of responsibility because of the trauma of her father’s leaving the family, etc.).

Can’t speak for all but explaining Mei as a sexual assault victim does not diminish from her textual experiences. I certainly have not discounted or forgotten what she’s gone through with her family. The assault thing is additive for sure but not subtractive.

Her experiences with her family make her an easy prey for a sexual predator. Assault does not explain everything.

This conversation has probably dragged on long enough, sparked as it was by readers arguing “You all are too hard on poor Mei, since she’s a rape survivor.” Until the author supplies material to support that reading (as potentially could happen), I continue to assert: “Assumes facts not in evidence.”

The assault background is not my means to explain her slow pace progress. I’m on the boat where her upbringing and lack of parental guidance and affection coupled with her heiress duties made her detached, cold, and passive. It’s years of that coupled with sexual assault that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei. Not just whether or not she was repeatedly assaulted by her first fiancé.

It’s years of that coupled with sexual assault that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei.

To me this has precisely the same status as saying, “It’s years of that coupled with the fact that Mei’s mother was an ice demon that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei.”

Nothing in the text contradicts my statement, it is congruent with Mei’s behavior in the story, and there’s no less evidence in the text for my statement than there is for yours.

To me this has precisely the same status as saying, “It’s years of that coupled with the fact that Mei’s mother was an ice demon that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei.”

Nothing in the text contradicts my statement, it is congruent with Mei’s behavior in the story, and there’s no less evidence in the text for my statement than there is for yours.

Lack of maternal affection during formative years can certainly cause someone one to be emotionally stunted so it could definitely be a contributing factor to what makes Mei who she is.

To me this has precisely the same status as saying, “It’s years of that coupled with the fact that Mei’s mother was an ice demon that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei.”

Nothing in the text contradicts my statement, it is congruent with Mei’s behavior in the story, and there’s no less evidence in the text for my statement than there is for yours.

Lack of maternal affection during formative years can certainly cause someone one to be emotionally stunted so it could definitely be a contributing factor to what makes Mei who she is.

LOL. That would mean that Mei is half-yokai, which certainly would explain a great deal . . .

LOL. That would mean that Mei is half-yokai, which certainly would explain a great deal . . .

Apologies. I thought you were writing metaphorically. Like calling her mother an “icy b*tch” for ignoring her daughter this whole time. Sarcasm doesn’t read well for me because of lack of intonation.

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 6:13PM

It’s years of that coupled with sexual assault that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei.

To me this has precisely the same status as saying, “It’s years of that coupled with the fact that Mei’s mother was an ice demon that did nothing but mold her into Turtle Mei.”

Nothing in the text contradicts my statement, it is congruent with Mei’s behavior in the story, and there’s no less evidence in the text for my statement than there is for yours.

Nothing in the text contradicts you but nothing supports you either. The sexual assault has actual evidence (very little, but it's still there if you squint) that you just dismiss for no apparent reason other than "that's not enough"

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 6:17PM

Nothing in the text contradicts you but nothing supports you either. The sexual assault has actual evidence (very little, but it's still there if you squint) that you just dismiss for no apparent reason other than "that's not enough"

The concrete evidence in text we have is in no way shape or form commensurate with what the lurid telenovela fanfiction in question requires and thus arbitrarily presumes. Which really should be a reason apparent enough.

Is this all because of the lack of progress? Or because they went from Yuzu removing Mei's clothes in ch32 of Citrus to barely few kisses in Citrus+?

Because June 2nd of Citrus+ p17 contains a pretty clear statement about Saburouta ignoring all the previous progress in their relationship.

You can't make any theory about their behavior after such a break in internal consistency, which was lampshaded by Matsuri's reaction. If the author doesn't give a crap about such a big thing, I doubt your details will lead you anywhere.

last edited at Sep 23, 2021 6:54PM

I probably have just finished reading Citrus for the 6th times. I finally found something that we all probably miss.
In the original series in Chapter 8, Mei was looking at a family photo. Page 15, 16, & 17. Mei's mother is in the photo. (Shou, Mei, and Mei's mother).
That is so unusual because her normal photo is always Shou, Mei, and Grandfather. I wonder why she looks at that photo at that moment as opposed to the one with grandfather in it, instead of her mom.

I probably have just finished reading Citrus for the 6th times. I finally found something that we all probably miss.
In the original series in Chapter 8, Mei was looking at a family photo. Page 15, 16, & 17. Mei's mother is in the photo. (Shou, Mei, and Mei's mother).
That is so unusual because her normal photo is always Shou, Mei, and Grandfather. I wonder why she looks at that photo at that moment as opposed to the one with grandfather in it, instead of her mom.

Interesting. Since you’ve just been through the whole thing, were there any other significant references to Mei’s mother?

To my recollection, she’s a lot like Huck Finn’s mother in Mark Twain’s novel—by definition she must have existed, but we learn next to nothing about her.

I probably have just finished reading Citrus for the 6th times. I finally found something that we all probably miss.
In the original series in Chapter 8, Mei was looking at a family photo. Page 15, 16, & 17. Mei's mother is in the photo. (Shou, Mei, and Mei's mother).
That is so unusual because her normal photo is always Shou, Mei, and Grandfather. I wonder why she looks at that photo at that moment as opposed to the one with grandfather in it, instead of her mom.

Interesting. Since you’ve just been through the whole thing, were there any other significant references to Mei’s mother?

To my recollection, she’s a lot like Huck Finn’s mother in Mark Twain’s novel—by definition she must have existed, but we learn next to nothing about her.

I don't want to read it for the 7th time. That are 13+ volumes, maybe some other day. But Mei stated (Chapter 7 Pg 32) that she chose Shou instead of her mom when they divorced. As everyone knows, she worships Shou, because he put the school in front of his own happiness. That was how she accepted the divorce. She decided to take over the school (at the age of 11, 5th year at elementary school!!!), until Shou comes back. Because of that, pg 33 explains that she would do ANYTHING to protect the school, with a background panel of Amamiya and Gramps. She lost her purpose in life. She then wants to have sex with Yuzu, for the first time, and Yuzu did the right thing for refusing it. That sequence also explains it all. But how come the mom was never there except in a photo with a very young Mei for merely 3 pages I have no idea. There was neither direct reference, nor something that maybe you can guess. It is like a black hole. Also, Mei's mom is shown wearing traditional outfit (Yukata) in the photo.
Mei's belief comes from the old Shou. Yuzu's belief is backed up by the current Shou.

I probably have just finished reading Citrus for the 6th times. I finally found something that we all probably miss.
In the original series in Chapter 8, Mei was looking at a family photo. Page 15, 16, & 17. Mei's mother is in the photo. (Shou, Mei, and Mei's mother).
That is so unusual because her normal photo is always Shou, Mei, and Grandfather. I wonder why she looks at that photo at that moment as opposed to the one with grandfather in it, instead of her mom.

Interesting. Since you’ve just been through the whole thing, were there any other significant references to Mei’s mother?

To my recollection, she’s a lot like Huck Finn’s mother in Mark Twain’s novel—by definition she must have existed, but we learn next to nothing about her.

I don't want to read it for the 7th time. That are 13+ volumes, maybe some other day. But Mei stated (Chapter 7 Pg 32) that she chose Shou instead of her mom when they divorced. As everyone knows, she worships Shou, because he put the school in front of his own happiness. That was how she accepted the divorce. She decided to take over the school (at the age of 11, 5th year at elementary school!!!), until Shou comes back. Because of that, pg 33 explains that she would do ANYTHING to protect the school, with a background panel of Amamiya and Gramps. She lost her purpose in life. She then wants to have sex with Yuzu, for the first time, and Yuzu did the right thing for refusing it. That sequence also explains it all. But how come the mom was never there except in a photo with a very young Mei for merely 3 pages I have no idea. There was neither direct reference, nor something that maybe you can guess. It is like a black hole. Also, Mei's mom is shown wearing traditional outfit (Yukata) in the photo.
Mei's belief comes from the old Shou. Yuzu's belief is backed up by the current Shou.

You know what I've always wanted to know about her mother because I figured she'd have some kind of plot significance at some point in the story. I thought in like the last few chapters of O.G Citrus she'd make some kind of surprise appearance (shame it didn't happen)

You know what I've always wanted to know about her mother because I figured she'd have some kind of plot significance at some point in the story. I thought in like the last few chapters of O.G Citrus she'd make some kind of surprise appearance (shame it didn't happen)

Wasted potential, in my Citrus?!

You know what I've always wanted to know about her mother because I figured she'd have some kind of plot significance at some point in the story. I thought in like the last few chapters of
O.G Citrus she'd make some kind of surprise appearance (shame it didn't happen)

What kind of mom is that who does not show up at her daughter's wedding? You go even if your ex-husband has remarried. You go there for your daughter. Well, it will be a no show, as the final chapter-epilogue wedding scene shows (and no, the chance of her still inside the chapel is smaller than Sayaka and Miyabi still inside the chapel)
Yes, I counted and identified everyone in the wedding scene. Even Mineko (in a lot of school systems over the world, she would be referred as a dean) and their home room teacher show up. The only person who is not there is Grandma Taniguchi.

last edited at Oct 2, 2021 4:59AM