Forum › Handsome Girl and Sheltered Girl discussion

586679-586678-51yyd2ts_il._sl500_aa300__super
joined Oct 4, 2018

Kanda-sexual is my new favorite word

Agreed

+1

Avatar_a24d1ef02fc0_128
joined May 24, 2015

"Why are there over 1000 forum posts about a comedy manga? skips back a page to see a triple quote along with a paragraph of extra text ah, that'd do it."
I'm personally 100% pleased with these last few chapters. The pointless angst and drama at the start bc of the "hidden gender" has karmically been rebalanced by all the fluff and jokes we're getting now.
A+ definitely getting this series if it ever gets NA publishing

8ldsxx8gdfh7s211
joined Jan 11, 2019

yalls writing WHOLE ESSAYS here, im just here enjoying the cute yuri man...

One can do both.

8ldsxx8gdfh7s211
joined Jan 11, 2019

They sure figured out pretty fast how lesbian sex works

Well, dumb teens have managed to figure out sex since the dawn of time. Sex is one of those "easy to learn, difficult to master" type of things.

joined Aug 21, 2017

Why did Muppo touch his eyes after working with peppers

11973
joined Nov 14, 2014

Wow this has become too sweet for me to be able to handle! <3 <3 <3

Also those last two pages, no matter whose art she uses, mochi is still mochi xD

8ldsxx8gdfh7s211
joined Jan 11, 2019

Why did Muppo touch his eyes after working with peppers

The same reason I did: we're both big dumbs.

Hana3
joined Mar 22, 2018

I like this one. I like this one a lot.

8ldsxx8gdfh7s211
joined Jan 11, 2019

Also, y'all are missing that Ookuma, whether bi, lesbian or single-target, is clearly a furry:

joined Jul 26, 2016

^Well it's Ookuma. Weird just comes with the territory. =3=

Images%20(13)
joined May 13, 2020

Eh, single target sexuality may be my least favorite trope in yuri

This reads less like single target sexuality and more like Ookuma being dense and a sap.

^ this. Ookuma also said "up until now I've never been interested in a guy..."

She's Kanda-sexual first, useless gay second.

Setsuko2
joined Jan 20, 2014

omg chapter 11 (and 10 by default since it's precursor to 11) makes this manga worth it by 1000%

joined Aug 29, 2019

Could someone educate me on the issue of single target sexuality (or, often "it's okay if it's you")? ["essay" coming up]

I kind of see why it would leave a bad taste. It's like saying, "oh, I'm only gay for you, so I'm actually straight, no homo." Kind of just dodging LGBTQ+ representation to avoid discrimination or something. (I personally don't feel like it is the case here because it isn't highly emphasized)

But also, in general... Can people be unlabeled? Is there such thing as being "mostly straight"? Does attraction to one individual who does not fit into one's sexuality require a label as pansexual, omnisexual, etc.?

Definitions can be helpful when people apply them to themselves—when they learn that there’s a category that corresponds to their own sexual/romantic experience, and they can say, “I’m not weird, there are a lot of other people out there who are [___]sexual/romantic.”

When people try to apply them to others, or to fictional characters, labels tend to be restrictive rather than enlightening—either readers want characters that reflect their own sexuality back to them, or they assume the author is representing [___]sexuality and then critique how it’s being done (even if there’s no evidence that’s what the author is doing at all).

You're once again knocking it out of the park, being all lucid and making sense. I personally don't like the compulsion to slap a label on every expression of romance and sexuality, but if you frame it as a means to an end, a stop-gap on the way to realizing your own identity (not just sexually) it is understandable. I like J.E. Marcia's psychological model on identity, in which "adopting" a label would fall into the "foreclosure" and exploratory "moratorium" states, probably on the way to self-realization through identity achievement.

As for the original question: There's absolutely such a thing as "mostly straight" or "effectively straight", but it could be defined several ways. I'll insert myself as an example: I don't really care what's in the pants, but I don't feel attracted to "clearly male physique" (face, build, bulk), so if a guy were to convincingly cross-dress (or actually be trans and pass well enough), I'd be down with that. (Un)fortunately I'm married to a woman. That last factor very much narrows down how my sexuality manifests to "effectively straight".
I wouldn't really care what's in the pants as long as the rest of the body looks feminine, and I don't know a label that properly describes it, nor do I care if there really is one. I think that's a bit weird, but that's okay, we're all weird in our own ways. Labels, while somewhat useful in discourse, are ultimately just rough categories that will almost never fully describe an individual.
I could speculate (!) that Ookuma has a similar perspective. She's not bothered one bit by what is and isn't in Kanda's pants, but was clearly attracted to her more masculine, if slender, physique.

Of course many people do care about what's in the pants, but initial attraction/falling in love is basically never about the genitals. Rather, it's about other, "unreliable" markers of sex and gender that can be misleading or be misread (as was the case in this manga). And probably pheromones.

All we can be certain about in Ookuma and Kanda is that they're now in a lesbian relationship, and I'm fine with leaving it at that.

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 7:25AM

Mahiru
joined Aug 28, 2016

Small nitpick, but the whole "We're not gay/bi/pan, it just so happens our particular love is so special that it transcends gender" thing still feels like such a cop-out to me. Granted it fits a little more than usual in this story, but It's just such a worn out and nonsensical trope. Like, are you that desperate to vindicate heteronormativity in your gay story?

Edit: just realized that this is apparently a whole discourse already. Oops lol. Anyway I'll just say I don't mind leaving it ambiguous and unlabeled, but saying the thing explicitly is another issue, so I stand by what I said.

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 8:01AM

joined Sep 6, 2018

Why y'all having heated discussions about serious topics on a comedy yuri manga lmao

It’s part of what makes this website so fun... flame wars over insignificant things which no one in real world would bother listening to. It’s kinda like overhearing English Literature majors arguing over the symbolism used in “Oliver Twist” while they’re working at Denny’s restaurant. How hilarious!

18992b47e3036da3324d1a85848e4b9e
joined Jul 16, 2019

Also, y'all are missing that Ookuma, whether bi, lesbian or single-target, is clearly a furry:

How can you send a picture? Teach me please

herenowforever
joined Feb 11, 2018

As for the original question: There's absolutely such a thing as "mostly straight" or "effectively straight", but it could be defined several ways. I'll insert myself as an example: I don't really care what's in the pants, but I don't feel attracted to "clearly male physique" (face, build, bulk), so if a guy were to convincingly cross-dress (or actually be trans and pass well enough), I'd be down with that. (Un)fortunately I'm married to a woman. That last factor very much narrows down how my sexuality manifests to "effectively straight".
I wouldn't really care what's in the pants as long as the rest of the body looks feminine, and I don't know a label that properly describes it, nor do I care if there really is one. I think that's a bit weird, but that's okay, we're all weird in our own ways. Labels, while somewhat useful in discourse, are ultimately just rough categories that will almost never fully describe an individual.

You're gynesexual. I think lot of people find it more natural to describe the body shapes and other features as to what they are attracted to.

https://lgbta.wikia.org/wiki/Gynesexual

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 8:55AM

Img_0215
joined Jul 29, 2017

Why y'all having heated discussions about serious topics on a comedy yuri manga lmao

It’s part of what makes this website so fun... flame wars over insignificant things which no one in real world would bother listening to.

Wow, I hope you people never see an actual "flame war" or even a real "heated discussion"--you'd need to change your diaper.

Images__01
joined Nov 3, 2019

I'd like to place an order for an Ookuma please. Delivered ASAP!

I'm loving this manga! Super happy about the development and the characters are hilarious xD Keep it coming!

joined Aug 29, 2019

You're gynesexual. I think lot of people find it more natural to describe the body shapes and other features as to what they are attracted to.

https://lgbta.wikia.org/wiki/Gynesexual

Am I, though? Gynesexual (arguably) specifies female anatomy, which usually refers to genitalia. That's precisely not the case, so the related "finsexual" would be the better label. I doubt that enough people are familiar with the term and I don't feel the need to force the label, so I'd refrain from using it in general discourse anyway. I mean think about it: at least for our current generation (being millennial), these labels feel like an afterthought (i.e. coined during our lifetime to classify something that didn't need classification before). It'll probably be different for future generations, but right now I'm more likely to alienate people by using freshly coined (some would say made-up) terminology that most people won't understand. It's jargon from the lgbt+ community that hasn't (yet?) permeated society at large.

Also consider this: strictly speaking I'm still (potentially) bisexual, as in a person's sex not being an excluding factor. That I'm only attracted to feminine-gender-coded behaviours and (granted, largely female-sex-coded) shapes doesn't change that. It's just additional information, and it refers specifically to aspects that are more considered gender, not so much sex as in reproductive facilities and X/Y manifestation. In terms of taxonomy it would be a different category that can coexist. It's basically "bi with extra steps".

And anyway, I don't "identify as finsexual", but rather "finsexual describes my preferences/lived reality pretty well" or maybe "I'm finsexual". Saying "I identify as" falsely implies to me a great degree of conscious choice, that I adopted the identity rather than adopting the label that describes my identity. I think that implication/perception might be a big factor in the aversion towards the plethora of labels that we often see.

Referring back to the Manga I'd say that Ookuma being "Kanda-sexual" is certainly not false, as she most definitely is attracted to Kanda, regardless of questions of gender and sex. Are there potentially other women that she might be attracted to? Sure, and it's likely that there are other men as well. It doesn't seem like she's given it much thought, and it'd be kanda cool (see what I did there?) if they explored that avenue a little more, but you can't have everything. I doubt she'll be shocked when she "realizes" that she's " kanda bi" (I did it again!), as she is in a happy and apparently healthy relationship after all. Heck, she doesn't even know what guys look like down below (as unrealistic as that might be), so for all intents and purposes she might be grossed out by male genitalia and actually be a minsexual lesbian.

Down the rabbit-hole we go!

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 10:13AM

Img_0215
joined Jul 29, 2017

Down the rabbit-hole we go!

What's the term for those who are only sexually/romantically attracted to people while down rabbit holes?

Surely there must be one . . .

joined Aug 29, 2019

Down the rabbit-hole we go!

What's the term for those who are only sexually/romantically attracted to people while down rabbit holes?

Surely there must be one . . .

Considering how many of the terms on the LGBTA-Wiki are less than two months old (as in "coined in June 2020") we might just go ahead and coin one. Lepocavinsexual? Could also be sexual attraction towards rabbit holes. Does kinda sound wrong.

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 10:47AM

joined Nov 17, 2019

Down the rabbit-hole we go!

What's the term for those who are only sexually/romantically attracted to people while down rabbit holes?

Surely there must be one . . .

Considering how many of the terms on the LGBTA-Wiki are less than two months old (as in "coined in June 2020") we might just go ahead and coin one. Lepocavinsexual? Could also be sexual attraction towards rabbit holes. Does kinda sound wrong.

I skiped to the last page to see a discussion about the latest ch release, but this is what I found.

C__data_users_defapps_appdata_internetexplorer_temp_saved%20images_lavender_town_screenshot
joined Dec 9, 2014

I don't think you need a lot of labels to describe a sexuality. The four most used are accurate enough imo. If you are only attracted to feminine guys (as a guy), that's still bisexual because they're still guys. If you are only attracted to feminine guys as a female, that's still straight.
I mean, if someone is straight but is only attracted to a specific body type, do they need a new label for that? Like thick bodies, would that be thicksexual? Sexuality labels are used for describing the sex/gender preference specifically, not the individual characteristics of the category.

I find the Kandasexual wording more on the comedy side rather than legitimately explaining her sexuality. The whole "genitals don't matter" sounds like pansexual, although I guess she could still be gay without realizing it because she's too dense.

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 11:07AM

AnimexObsession
Screenshot%20(107)
joined Dec 27, 2014

Oh shet she actually tells her, now i gotta read up, thought this secret was gonna go on for dozens of chapters but hell yeah now i'm in again

last edited at Aug 12, 2020 12:16PM

To reply you must either login or sign up.