Talk:Yaoi/Archive 1

Do not redirect Yaio
This article should not redirect from Yaio, Yaio is not simply a misspelling of Yaoi, but the name of an Amerindian tribe that inhabited the Trinidad and tobago areas, as well as Guiana. No article yet exists for these people, but it is certainly presumptuous and slightly annoying to assume that someone search for yaio is in fact searching for yaoi.

Origin
Yamete kudasai, oshiri ga itai yo! ("Please stop, my butt hurts!") is not what yaoi stands for, but it's a common enough humorous expansion to deserve some mention somewhere ....
 * I thought it was yamette, oshiri itai... well, but that's the shorthand version anyway. -- AllyUnion (talk) 00:09, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Whatever it allegedly stands for, it sounds more like a backronym than a true etymology to me. If someone can confirm this (I'm basing it on gut feeling alone) perhaps the page should include a note about this. (EldKatt 11:42, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC))


 * That's correct. It's a made-up, humorous backronym. - Montr&eacute;alais 15:34, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

jaoi? With a j? RickK 04:21, 18 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * What? Not like an english j-sound, anyway... If you are talking about IPA or Sampa, it would be j...

Regarding the pronunciation, sound like "Yow-ee" rather than "Ya-oy" is in fact precisely the wrong way around for Japanese -- is it commonly mispronounced in the US? Jpatokal 14:23, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)


 * Is this Japanese? why not make a note? --&#21704;&#36234;&#20013; (talk)  12:16, May 30, 2004 (UTC)


 * Some psychologists have claimed that Yaoi is a hidden form of lesbian pointing out that the role reversals occure very frequently.

I can't make any sense of this. Which psychologists? What role reversals? How does this relate to lesbianism? Can somebody who's more familiar with this subject explain and/or rewrite the sentence? &mdash;67.69.189.36 13:29, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I can't either. The only thing I remember is reading an article in the Los Angeles Times describing why young girls are so attracted to yaoi when it was talking about Anime Expo. -- AllyUnion (talk) 00:13, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree. I have just finished a project on Yaoi and BL which involved interviews and statements from fans, artists and publishers of such material and this never came up. I also looked in to all the analytical pieces written on this subject (they're aren't many of note) and again this theory was never mentioned. If we could have a source for this theory I would be less sceptical about its worth. I also find it very odd (the meaning is fairly hard to decipher positively) and also poorly explained. If we are going to make a point about role reversal I would highlight instead a very interesting conclusion that I came to - that the role reversal is a complex mix of enablement - enabling women to become male and play that role; the reality that infact this is straight sexuality that the reader is experiencing between people of the same sex but not the same gender (strict gender roles can often be observed); female gender dissalusionment and female relationship disillusionment - they can enjoy yaoi/BL because it does not reflect the grim reality of their oen experiences and also enables revenge. Men are mase to feel the pain of a woman - literally when they lose their homosexual 'virginity' - when penetrated for the first time - and even more so the pain of love, passion and obsession.

I'm not saying that this rant should be included in the page!!! - but that there are many more valid and interesting things to say about role reversal in yaoi. --Sharonlees 13:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

joke
I took out the 'joke' part of the yaoi entry. I don't think it belongs at all. And it is offensive. If you are only posting it to be funny, post it in a forum instead, not on a serious website which is devoted to scholarly research. This seems like something a twelve year old would include.


 * Perhaps putting it under the joke section is not optimal, but I think it does belong in the article somewhere. As mentioned before, people do frequently hear this.  Hence, there are some scholarly value in documenting the existence of this phrase.  As for offensiveness, could you clarify why you find it offensive?  If you meant that looking at in only as a joke, then I can see your point.  Nevertheless, its humorous quality should still be noted. madoka 20:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Confused
This article list Yuu Watase as a BL author. We're refering to the same Watase who did Fushigi Yugi, right? What BL/yaoi did she do? I'm asking because here name on there seems like a mistake.

Reactions from conservatives?
I am surprise that with so much implied Yaoi in anime, that none of the conservative group take actions against anime... I mean, they can even do that to Spongebob... so it surprised me, you know.


 * I think the reason is because it is largely under their radar. The reality is that, despite what some anime fans may think, anime is still not exactly a "mainstream" phenomenon in America.  Sure, it's everywhere, but so is sci fi, detective fiction, fantasy, and horror, and those aren't really mainstream, per se, either.  Like all of those, anime is still a niche market, it just happens to be one that is enjoying a large boom in popular appeal at the moment.  How long that will last is unclear, and largely irrelevant to this discussion, however.  Since anime itself is still something of a niche interest, specific sub genres of anime are even moreso.  Mecha and toy shows like Pokemon and Yugioh are a bit more well known than other anime, but thats because they have popular series aired on cartoon network, whereas yaoi and shounen ai series have nothing similar to their name.  Something might bring it to their attention in the future, but I think it is more likely that the popularity of anime will peak and begin to decline before that happens.

Ha! I'm sure that that almost all conservatives don't even know what anime even is in the first place, and if they do, they don't care enough to even notice Yaoi. If they did, I feel they will not publicly complain about it since its a very very small subculture anyway. --75.37.28.100 00:24, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Added back the correct pronounciation - All 3 syllables are pronounced.
Ya-oy is incorrect, as is Yow-ee. The word is an acronym, so the "oi" is not a diphthong.


 * I agree. Japanese pronunciation should be followed. It shouldn't be misread as a dipthong. --lux 07:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree with 'yow-ee' as a gravely incorrect pronunciation, but will contend with your notion that 'ya-oy' is incorrect, because it is actually not only viable but perhaps more common in colloquial tongue. I strongly agree that with you in that the Japanese pronunciation should be followed at all times. However, please do not forget that there are linguistic differences between the spoken and written that can affect delivery and perception in the former. In conjunction with certain contextual conditions, these subtle differences are why, to a fluent or native speaker, "yah-oy" is acceptable and "yow-ee" is completely unacceptable in actual speech. This suggests that the problem is with the treatment of the latter two syllabaric characters by non-fluent or non-native speakers. All 3 kana are indeed pronounced, but not necessarily with equal weight. Please allow me to elaborate.


 * To get a feel for how this works if you are not a fluent or native speaker, try speaking a particular Japanese word of your liking correctly (being faithful to the syllabaric characters) but rapidly and repeatedly. Imagine a normal-paced conversation in a fast-lane environment as you do. Think about how your pronunciation becomes affected in this process. This phenomenon is easily observed in words like the highly important「です」 where the "u" component of "su" is usually silent; in places where it appears in the middle of a word it can be pronounced so fleetingly that it is almost silent, for example with words like 「キャスト」, 「ウイスキー」, and 「スペシャル」.　Usually, only when such words are pronounced slowly and deliberately for purposes  of emphasis does the "u" sound come to the fore. The point of this, of course, is to show that the guiding principle, while it definitely exists, is not always as obvious as some would like to think.


 * That the guiding rule does exist is important to remember, because many of us would like to get away with incorrect pronunciation and claim some license as an excuse. I myself am a stickler for all forms of grammatical rules as one who studies computational linguistics. On the other hand, it is important to remember that knowing the correct rule that governs that situation is not immediately obvious to everyone, so both care and grace to others must be excercised.


 * Going back to my earlier comments, the confusion lies elsewhere and addressing that issue is the key to resolving the ambiguity. I believe it arises from the strong tendency of non-native speakers to treat the 「い」 in 「やおい」and similar constructions as an 「いい」 sound instead, as is obvious here with everyone romanizing the singular 'i' as 'ee'. The 「い」 is in fact a short "i" sound that is neither "ee" nor "eye", it is merely 「い」, though it would appear there is no convenient, unambiguous way to romanize that syllable. Think of it as half of "ee" if you will. To make the true "ee" sound in Japanese, it would be written explicitly as 「いい」. 「い」as it stands is free to join certain other syllables to form phonemes such that a construct like 「おい」 is correctly pronounced as 'oy'. In a resounding 'yes', that dipthongs can and do in fact exist in Japanese, and not only that, but their usage is hardly uncommon. Moreover, this particular dipthong is very common and is properly spoken and heard as a single phoneme.


 * Consider even expressions like 「おいっ！」and 「遅い！」 and it will become clear that this particular syllabic vowel pair is prevalent; there is no other way possible to produce the "oy" phoneme in writing and yet it is encountered frequently in everday speech. Take the notion of 「い」 being pronounced as "ee" away, and it ought to eliminate the notion that 「やおい」 can be pronounced as if it were a Chinese name (Yao Ii, and yes, I am acquainted to someone by that name) instead of a word natively born in modern Japanese. To those still having doubts and raise the objection of "wee" being a phoneme itself and perhaps acceptable, the answer is simple: while "wee" is a phoneme, it does not belong in the word at all. In order to pronounce　「やおい」as being close to 'yow-ee' or 'yao-ee', the kana must read 「やういー」,「やうぃ」, or even「やおうぃー」, which resemble nothing close to「やおい」. These (former three) are not the 'ee's you are looking for. 「い」is no more or less than「い」unless it's trying to be 「いい」 or 「いぃ」(more on this later).


 * Quirks like these are why one *will* hear a lot of things in Japanese that can appear to be dipthongs or are dipthongs for practical purposes, at least as far as the spoken language is concerned. You won't usually hear a Japanese fluent or native speaker say 面白い【おもしろい】with an emphasis on that 「い」. It is pronounced 'o-mo-shi-roy' unless under emphasis, and a native speaker might feel awkward consistently saying 'o-mo-shi-ro-ee'. (Slang, however, allows us to say 「おもしれぇ」'o-mo-shi-reh', but that's a different issue).


 * Note there are even further quirks to the treatment of the 'i' sound in Japanese that can make it even more daunting. An example of this was with the character Lily Shearfield in the ((visual novel)) Duel Saviour by「戯画」GIGA; her stern character constantly corrects others who pronounce her name 「リリ」 or 「リリー」, insisting that it is 「リリィ」(note the small "i" is not a simple font size change but an actual character that changes pronunciation as opposed to being there for style, implying that the "ly" of "Lily" is longer than 「リ」 but shorter than 「リー」). Again, these are cues strongly tied to the cultural environment of the spoken word and require experience in the native environment to fine tune more than anything else.


 * After all that, what we are left contending with then, is not that 'oy' is unfeasable but that the "i" should be stressed because it is an acronym. In which case, its identity as an acronym no longer limits it to function solely as an acronym, as it has developed into its own word with its own proper meaning. Thus, whether it is pronounced 'ya-oy' or 'ya-o-i' (remember not to lengthen that 'i'), it is perfectly acceptable; "yow-ee" on the other hand, as our friends in Monty Python would say, is right out. seikensha 14:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to go with lux on this one. Any time a word is imported from another language, the correct pronunciation is the way it is pronounced in the original language. AssassinGalaxia 14:59, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Yaoi, while commonly used as a word, is actually an acronym - there is no 'official' pronunciation, though the most common is the one currently given in the main article. In other words, there shouldn't be a fuss over the pronunciation of a word that doesn't technically exist. MadameRuby 23:40, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * No, actually the string やおい has precisely one possible pronunciation in Japanese, and as stated above it's "yah-oh-ee". Jpatokal 05:45, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I have heard two seperate versions of where the term "yaoi" had originated from and thought that it may help in the pronunciation category.

There is an acroym for yaoi, in which, I've heard it spoken "yow-ee" This comes from (and you can find it here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaoi ) the phrase "「ヤマなし、オチなし、意味なし」 (yama nashi, ochi nashi, imi nashi), meaning "no climax, no punch line, no meaning.""


 * "Yow-ee" is not the correct pronunciation by any standard: formal syllabic, colloquial, or otherwise. Please refer to my post above.
 * The phrase "yamanashi, ochinashi, iminashi" certainly seems to be the generally accepted origin of the word as is used in open forums such as 2ch.net, a prominent Japanese BBS on the scale of the world's biggest and whose participants are almost always native Japanese speakers. Please refer to the Japanese Wikipedia entry for やおい　as well, on http//ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/やおい in the 3rd line under the section 「来歴」(raireki). Also, it should be noted that the use of the acronym "BL" (for "boys' love") seems to be increasingly more commonly used in colloquial speech as a euphemism for やおい; the acronym is briefly noted under the same section, 3rd line of the 6th paragraph. seikensha 12:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Then there is the second, やおい which is spoken, as mentioned, "yah-oh-ee" which is the correct Japanese pronunciation. In this version, yaoi means "rose". In certain areas of the slash fandom, femalexfemale and malexmale have been referred to as "the lily and the rose" (yuri if and yaoi).


 * No, it doesn't. Rose is bara or roozu. Jpatokal 07:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Jpatokal is correct. Though, it's understandable why the confusion is there; the popular media was the first to label the gay community as the 薔薇族 (bara-zoku), quite literally the Rose People. Otherwise it has nothing to do with the development of やおい except for the fact that it was another label. seikensha 15:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Since it is so often disputed, does anyone has access to a clip of a Japanese person, with Japanese as their first language saying "yaoi"? I also think that this would actually be useful to the article. Statuess 15:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * My pronunciation isn't perfect, but it should suffice... should I upload one? Stryik 03:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Can someone please check the pronounciation? As it is now, it's exceptionally against the pronounciation "yow-ee" even as a layman's pronounciation, but the Japanese speaking people I've spoken to say it's a fine layman's pronounciation and every time I hear it said properly, I can see why people would hear it as "yow-ee" if they don't know how it should be pronounced, whereas with the acceptable pronounciations I'm left thinking "Where did they get that from?" Iwanttobeasleep 20:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Instead of fighting about right and wrong, why doesn't someone just IPA code the correct pronunciation? DrGaellon 23:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. It wasn't even that hard... >.>; Why didn't someone get around to it before? Stryik 03:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh. And a side note - it is most definitely three syllables. There is no diphthong. Stryik 03:46, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Blargh, triple post - I'm having some qualms about this particular sentence: "However, yaoi is frequently heard as only two syllables, where under acceptable pronunciation produces the phoneme /oi/ with the 「お」 and 「い」 syllabic characters." Unless someone can verify this, I'd suggest simply excising this sentence entirely - I've never heard /o/ and /i/ in Japanese being merged into /oi/ (even in fast speech - I've heard relaxed vowels, but that's about it)... much less even hearing the diphthong /oi/. Stryik 03:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment
I'd like to make it clear however that all the above animations or manga books are not yaoi in themselves, but merely had doujinshi written by other authors using the characters. All except for Gravitation which did focus on a BL relationship. -- 67.81.42.121 07:53, 6 July 2005 (UTC)

Obsolete?
Just curious, why in the world is there the statement: now-obsolete shōnen-ai. ? Just what is obsolete about it? Far as I know, it's still a perfectly valid term, and the article about it makes no mention. Melodia Chaconne 9 July 2005 19:15 (UTC)
 * Old terms like shounenai or tanbi are considered obsoletes in Japan. Shounenai can be used to refer to tragic old shoujo titles like Keiko Takemiya's Kaze to Ki no Uta, but not for recent BL titles. Have you read the Shonen-ai article ? Or maybe you were just talking about the use of the term shounenai in the US...

The History of Yaoi/BL in Japan
The followings are my opinion.

--- There has been the concept of pederasty which mainly refers to the classic Greek pederasty in Japan, and this concept has been called shounen-ai (ja:少年愛). Novelist Inagaki Taruho had written many boy-boy homosexual-like stories in early to middle 1900's, but he also wrote famous essay book /Shounen-ai no Bigaku (The Aesthetics in Shounen-ai) / in around late 1960's. SHOUNEN-AI in /Shounen-ai no Bigaku/ referred to those of wide-meaning pederasty including ancient Greek pederasty, Japanese shudo, Chinese Rendo-ai (love to beautiful boy) etc. The concept of this book is that of original meaning of pederasty and this is original usage of the term, Japanese /shounen-ai/.

--- In early 1970's, some pederastic/homosexual cinema films were introduced in Japan such as the film based on Thomas Mann's /Der Tod in Venedig/. Bjorn Andersen who played a boy in this film was widely known in Japan and many fans of young girls appeared. Almost at the same time, the new wave of shoujo-manga took place and were widely spreaded. Hagio Moto, Takemiya Keiko, and Yamagishi Rhouko are major manga artists of this wave. They made the works including the themes of boy-boy (around 12 to 14 years) homosexual love relation, such as /Tooma no Shinzo/, /Kaze to Ki no Uta/, /Hi izuru tokoro no Tenshi/ etc. The style of these works was called /shounen-ai/ manga.

--- In the middle of 1970's, novelist Kurimoto Kaoru (aka Nakajima Azusa) wrote some pederastic stories such as /Ma-yonaka no Tenshi/ and /Tsubasa aru Mono/. In these stories, Kurimoto described sexual relation between adult men and young man (beautiful boy over 16 years). She could not publish these stories. But after she got success and became one of the most famous novelists, she published these stories in 1980's and wrote more stories of pederasty. Her works were also classified as /shounen-ai theme/ works.

--- In 1981, magazine /JUN/ had been published, and it had been soon changed its name to /JUNE/. Kurimoto Kaoru contributed many pederastic works to this magazine. Manga artist Takemiya Keiko drew the cover pictures and illusts for this magazine in the early volumes. Then pederastic /shounen-ai/ stories were called /june/. Throughout 1980's, /shounen-ai/ and /june/ were genre name of pederastic male-male relation novels and mangas. Many fan-writers made thier debut in this magazine and some of them became professional novelist as Kurimoto Kaoru operated regular work-shops of shounen-ai stories on this magazine and many fan-writers contributed many fan-stories in 1980's.

--- In the late 1980's, the term /Ya-O-I (yah-oh-ee)/ appeared. And the term /Tambi-shousetsu/ began to be used for classifying special type of june/shounen-ai stories. In this time, the terms /shounen-ai/, /june/, /ya-o-i/, and /tambi-shousetsu/ were used. Many girls and young women created /doujin-shi/ magazines in which they expressed /shounen-ai/ stories and mangas and illusts. These extraordinarily much doujinshis were sold in Comikets (Comic Markets in Japan).

--- In the middle of 1990's, some publishers of ya-o-i/june works etc. began to utilise the term /boh-izu-rabu == boys love/, perhaps to commercially characterize/distinguish and appeal their books, i.e. ya-o-i stories and mangas.

--- In the 2000's, /ja:bouizu-rabu/ or /BL/ have established its citizenship as an independent genre in Japanese subculture. And now, /BOUIZU-RABU/ is very big name and big genre in stories, mangas etc. for mainly young women and girls.

--- Addition: the relation between Yaoi/BL and anime seems to be secondary. The relation is just on borrowing anime characters and using them as characters appeared in Yaoi/BL stories. Anime may be non-essential to Yaoi/BL stories in Japan.

These are outlines of the history which I know.(For more details, I should research. The articles in Japanese Wiki include perhaps some errors because many writers do not know the history and historical situations of these genres.) --Maris stella 05:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC) / correction, --Maris stella 10:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Examples of Yaoi
The following were removed without explanation by a couple of anonymous editors:
 * Gravitation
 * Loveless
 * Tokyo Babylon
 * Yami no Matsuei

I've re-added Gravitation, but I'm not familiar enough with the other three to know whether or not they should be re-added as well. --Icarus 04:30, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Isn't Loveless shounen-ai? I'm going to re-add Loveless but I don't know the other two. mirageinred 05:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I have pointed out the shotacon content in Loveless. Because I think it is important to note that Loveless is the first manga/anime with shotacon allusions to do commercially well in the West. Plus in a way this is a sub-genre within yaoi/BL.

Tokyo Babylon is most certainly a BL manga. Much of it is implied, but there is definite romance (or at least flirting) between Seishirou and Subaru. I can't imagine why it was taken off the list.

Yeah its just that BL - there is a BL/shouenen-ai page you guys!! --Sharonlees 09:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Yami no Matsuei is shounen-ai, not BL. DrGaellon 23:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Although I'm not a frequent contributer to this article, I'm going to add "Captain Tsubasa" to the list of manga that have been used for the creation of doujinshi. Although it is quite old, many works were based on it and it is frequently cited as an example in scholarly articles. --Karrde 23:22 19 March 2007

Overview
I've taken out Watase Yuu's name from the Overview as she is not a yaoi manga author. She is a shoujo manga author instead with such titles as Fushigi Yuugi, Ayashi no Ceres, Imadoki, Alice 19th, etc.

Seoi 00:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Clarified the pronounciation paragraph as well. (Did so the same day as above edit; forgot to note.)

Seoi 01:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal + (Re)Additions in Examples of Yaoi
I removed "Yukio Mishima" from the Examples as he is a popular Japanese novelist, not a manga author nor a BL manga work himself.

I've added back in:


 * Loveless
 * Tokyo Babylon
 * Yami no Matsuei

I've also added in "Animal X", "Ikoku Irokoi Romantan", and "Koori no Mamono no Monogatari".

Seoi 00:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

question
Is there a reason why there are so many authors/mangakas and books listed? I see why Bronze, Kaze to Ki no Uta, and Gravitation may be important, but fail to see the importance of Ikoku Irokoi Romantan or Kashou no Tsuki or even Enzai. Similarly, the authors' list is long and overwhelming; even as a frequent yaoi reader myself, I got a little irritated by the number of authors in this article. I don't want to edit this in case there's a point, but I hope someone will revisit that part of the article? Vignette00 19:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps it's to possibly show the range and breadth of yaoi as an established (sub)genre in Japan, while it is just going "mainstream" (being picked up by publishing houses, being sold at large bookstores, etc) in America?

Seoi 20:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't there be a section for the bara styled and oyaji styled yaoi? I can't even find a seperate catagory of it.

Like the G-men magazine and a lot of other famous bara artists in Japan.

I do not think the yaoi list is representative enough of the more explicit manga - and really true yaoi. A lot of the titles are BL - or even only implied BL!!!! Which is fine I guess but there has to be more actual yaoi on the list. I have added Ayano Yamane's Finder Series but really there should be some more real yaoi on there. Perhaps I'll get round to adding some more????

References, Articles and Interviews
I have removed the JP best sellers list as this was really in essence an advert. The link for the Mark McLelland article was redirecting to an empty space and so I have posted a link to a different article on a similar subject - though I suggest that seeing as we have an articles section - the references section needs to be just for articles/essays that are less obviously about yaoi (hence my choice of essay/article linked) or merged with the articles and interviews subheadings - which is actually getting worryingly large. I think that all posted are very worthy and of merit so I don't think there is any need to remove - eep that wasn't very helpful I suppose. (sharonlees 10:39, 14 July 2006)

Just had to add articles and interviews back onto page - why it was removed I don't know as they are quite informative etc?!?! If a comment had been made etc I might not have done this... --Sharonlees 12:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Publishers
Forgot to write why I removed Golden Age Manga - www.goldenagemanga.org - from the Publishers section. First, the company hasn't yet even 1 title to its publishing credit, yaoi or otherwise. Secondly, it seems to be no more than a vanity press (with the typical pod business model) and is regarded with some skepticism by long-time industry watchers & some professionals/semi-professionals. Ref: &  (& plenty others in a Google search). At this point in time, since it hasn't shown itself to actually be a yaoi publisher yet, I don't think it should be listed. (It's also a bit strange that Golden Age Manga was added 1 July 2006, 2 months before the company even announced itself open for business.) --kor

Fixed entry about American Manga. Incubus is now published by Kitty Media. Feel free to fix my wording to make it flow better. -- Jordan Marks

Authors and Manga-ka
I think that the list of authors and manga-ka is far too long and actually not that useful. The majority of the names don't have thier on pages on Wiki and therefore is redundant for quick reference or a novice looking for some key names - which I presume was its intended job. I also think its too long - I assume the point of the list originally was to inform the reader by giving them some key examples - but it has turned into a directory of authors mostly - which isn't a bad thing but perhaps should have its own page. I won't do anything like this of course with a good amount of support/feedback but I think its the way to go. Also I would dispute how many actually are yaoi manga-ka/authors. --Sharonlees 11:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Fix me Please (this article screams)
Ok had a bit of an issue with the usage section - which implied all yaoi was in the majority based on enemy pairings and had no real plot - so I've taken on board the enemy pairings and moved it to the doujinshi section - re-written etc. In the doujinshi I've changed wording and things that implied there was some great unknown yaoi conflict/war of the otakus of the world going on - come on peeps - does anyone really care if someone draws or writes about your fave male character getting it on with another guy?? If so grow up - it doesn't matter - there are more important things - sheesh....... Any way I think that as a whole this article blows - I never realised before but I've been looking over some of the best rated Japan wiki articles and they are great - this could be too! Right now we dont even deserve the B grade - but with sooo many people adding their fave pairings mangas and artists (making this page clogged and cumbersome) and adding BL - or even implied BL - to this yaoi page it'll never be top rate. Which makes me sad T_T  --Sharonlees 09:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Examples of Yaoi (again)
To me, the "Examples of Yaoi" section looks a bit messy. It might be a good idea to separate the examples into manga, anime and BL games, but many of the examples now come in multiple forms. What does everyone think is a suitable method of organising the section? Statuess 15:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you're right but as you said many come in multiple mediums now.... I also think that most arent strictly yaoi anyway and this just makes a long untidy list even more so..... --Sharonlees 16:07, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Difference of Shounen-Ai and Yaoi
this article is just my opinion. -When I first encountered the terms Shounen-Ai and Yaoi,I was confused which is which.But understanding their entymologies, I came to these conclusions: -Shounen-Ai focuses on the romantic relationship of two boys. this focuses more on romantic love. After all, Shounen-ai literaly means "boy love." -Yaoi focuses on the sexual relationship between two boys. the theorized entymologies themselves can be used as            bases for this. If it did come from "no peak, no point, no meaning," then where is the romantic relationship there? It wouldn't make sense if the focus is love but it would if the focus is sex. the other possible origin, "Stop, my ass hurts," is obviously pornographic by nature.

Pronunciation
Could someone please scrap that section and replace it with a short notion of the IPA representation? It reads like a forum post or weblog or something. I can understand why someone would be peeved about common mispronunciations, but Wikipedia is hardly the place to rant about that kind of thing, especially in an article that doesn't focus on pronunciation, but on Japanese gay porn comics. &mdash; Ashmodai (talk · contribs) 07:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

IPA Pronunciation Notation
Could someone please include the proper (i.e.-Proper Japanese) pronunciation of the word "Yaoi". Thanks...IloveMP2yea 04:08, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There's a long discussion quite a few posts above yours... I just added it. Stryik 03:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

About the Popular Yaoi Pairings in Anime section
This section is getting out of hand with additions and edit warring. And when I tried to reduce the number of examples, anonymous users started reverting the changes. I don't think that this section adds anything to the article except a source of controversy, and thus I'd like to ask if there would be any support for having it removed. If not, then could we at least agree on no more than two or three pairings per example-type to list there? Before my edit, there were 12 pairings in the "not-quite-Seme/Uke" examples, which is FAR too many. Thanks for reading and replying with your thoughts on the matter. Nique1287 00:09, 21 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm definitely in agreeance with at least keeping the list trimmed. Having an expansive list can only lead to fandom wars, in my opinion, and there's really no need for something like that. After all, this is an encyclopedia, and should have a certain level of professionalism. I'm not sure how I would feel about eliminating the list entirely, but I do, to reiterate, agree with keeping the list small at the very least. Lithiumflower 00:32, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please keep it shortened up. Whoever's reverting it keeps using the line "for someone looking for an anime popular in yaoi circles" - I'm not getting this. Surely there's a page out there that can have a list of anime popular with yaoi folks - it doesn't really have anything to do with what _yaoi_ is. If it can't be decided on, I'd rather have no list at all.

Titles in the doujinshi section
I suggest we remove the "Notable titles which have been the subject of yaoi doujinshi" section. It's getting out of hand. If we did list each and every title, it would be a whole lot longer, and some of the titles ocassionally get randomly deleted. I say it should go, for the sake of simplicity. --MayumiTsuji 20:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)MayumiTsuji


 * Agreed. If there's more than one male character in a series, there's probably been yaoi doujinshi about it, and that list is more than a page long at 1280x1024! I say we scrap it. (Also, please use two = signs (second, instead of first, header) when you're making a new discussion, or use the + button at the top of the page to create one in the proper format automatically. Thanks!) Nique talk 21:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Vote on protecting the page
Okay, we've been blanked out by vandals what, twice over the last week? Since there's really not much more to constructively add to the topic, and since we have a major vandal problem with this page, I think we should protect it. ~SeventhHaido 12:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

acronym vs backronym
The article said, "The English letters form a backronym of the Japanese phrase...", which can't be the case, for then the phrase would have to be the acronym of the abbreviation. I've changed "backronym" to "acronym", but if it should be stressed that the Japanese phrase is a backronym instead of an original meaning the sentence would have to be reworded altogether. --H.A.L. 15:50, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The English source is rather irrelevant anyway, since the English word "yaoi" in itself is just roma-ji... it should be correctly written as an acronym, since the Japanese phrase was the source of the Japanese word "yaoi." Stryik 03:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Inaccessible?
Is it just me, or does this page feel a bit difficult to understand for someone with no prior knowledge of the topic? I'm seeing a bunch of terms thrown around everywhere and I don't even know what they all mean... I've added (Boy's Love) next to "BL" in the opening paragraph of the article... does anybody else think this ought to be tagged? Stryik 04:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Listing titles
Instead of having this Yaoi, wouldn't it be better if we just refered to Category:Yaoi? Added bonus: it would cover all notable titles. Ninja neko 13:23, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Yaoi imprints
This section seems to list all imprints that have EVER had a yaoi or shounen-ai title, and it's misleading. Many of these imprints (e.g. Margaret, Princess) are overwhelmingly non-yaoi, and if someone bought these imprints in the belief they'd see yaoi titles, they'd be disappointed. Does anyone mind if I remove the imprints that I know are non-yaoi? Lijakaca 18:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC) --I removed them, and also split the section into Imprints, and Magazines.Lijakaca 18:22, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

OMG People
As someone who has a sound knowledge of not only the history of yaoi but the psycho-analytical stance and theory on it - I am appalled by the fluffy and frankly childish way the yaoi article has been written and edited - its gone from lists of pairings, to having factual inaccuracies, to containing nothing of any real substance. I have actually stopped any edits I would have done because it depresses me so to see it constantly changed by people who read yaoi and consider themselves experts because of it. I'm not claiming to be an expert but the work i have done on Japanese popular culture, media and ethnographic psychology has been well recieved and read. I think people mean well but we are no way ready to say this is a finished article and to lock it from edits.... Someone say they agree or I might just go insane. Its a real shame :( --Sharonlees 16:13, 26 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I wish i was an expert on Yaoi. What a job description for the census! 82.153.230.138 23:42, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Difference between Shounen Ai & Yaoi
This section is just my opinion. It was removed but I think it should be put back. When I first encountered the terms Shounen-Ai and Yaoi, I was confused which is which. But understanding their etymologies, I came to these conclusions:
 * Shounen-Ai focuses on the romantic relationship between two boys. This focuses more on romantic love. After all,Shounen-ai literally means "boy love". Yaoi focuses on the sexual relationship between two boys. The theorized etymologies themselves can be used as bases for this. If it did come from "no peak, no point, no meaning," then where is the romantic relationship there? It wouldn't make sense if the focus is love but it would if the focus is sex. Therefore, Shounen Ai is romantic by nature as Yaoi is erotic.

The other possible origin, "Stop, my ass hurts," is obviously pornographic by nature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by K.A.David (talk • contribs) 12:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You make a good point that there is a difference between yaoi and shounen-ai but unfortunately fall over on your 'evidence' - the whole origin for the word yaoi being an acronymn is internet hype created fiction and even worse a tasteless joke promoted by those with a less favourable view of the genre. --Sharonlees 12:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Yaoi Wiki?
Homestar Runner has it's own wiki, why not a Yaoi Wiki, or BL Wiki, or at least an Anime/Manga Wiki? (Japanophile Wiki?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.236.220 (talk)

You can make one yourself. Although I don't see why it is needed. This seems like plenty —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animematt (talk • contribs) 18:29, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Marketed at girls?
I thought that an important aspect of yaoi was that it is marketed towards girls. Good article about it here: http://www.greencine.com/article?action=view&articleID=96 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.162.200.131 (talk) 21:49, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's already mentioned in the the 'usage' section but it might be a good idea to add it to the introduction as well Tanya had 15:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I am wondering why "yaoi" made by males is not considered Yaoi. I mean...it is still a maleXmale relationship. What makes it not yaoi? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animematt (talk • contribs) 18:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

PRENOUNCIATION
HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE YAOI? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.188.17.249 (talk) 00:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * It's "pronunciation". (Momus (talk) 20:02, 29 January 2008 (UTC))

sexually explicit or not
There seems to be a tug of war over the "sexually explicit" part of the definition and I can see why- the article is not consistent in its definition of yaoi:

According to most of the article, yaoi is a publishing genre the Japanese call "Boy's Love", but Boy's Love is not always sexually explicit. According to other parts of the article, yaoi is sexually explicit BL and shounen-ai is non explicit BL. This means yaoi is more like a subgenre of Boy's Love.

To untangle this mess we need to choose one definition and stick with it. If yaoi is sexually explicit BL then we can no longer refer to it as a publishing genre and most of the 'Usage' and 'Yaoi vs. BL' sections need to be rewritten. If yaoi IS the same as BL then we need to change parts of the definition, add non sexual titles to the 'Publishing' section and maybe explain that some people only refer to yaoi as sexually explicit (the last paragraph in 'Yaoi vs. BL' mentions this). I personally prefer the second option because it's easier and the better written parts of the article are the ones that equate yaoi with BL in general. Thoughts? Tanya had 15:06, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tanya My humble opinion is that BL and Yaoi are different. Yaoi is sexually explicit in nature (although it varies in degrees) and BL can simply be stories of male love - without any sexual scenes. There should be no debate (this is definately fact). I have stopped editing recently out of frustration but would appreciate someone addressing the mess --Sharonlees 12:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the feedback! The ongoing frustration is no doubt caused by this very issue- someone will always add Gravitation to the list because it's BL, someone will always delete it because it's shounen-ai. I actually think the opposite of you- as far as I can tell the term "shounen-ai" is falling into disuse in western fandom and it's taking the yaoi/shounen-ai dichotomy with it. You just don't see it used much anymore and western publishers never use it either. It seems to me that these days, yaoi is more often used to describe any male/male title marketed at girls, which is the same definition BL has. Now that I think about it, adding a separate, main article about BL with a "yaoi vs. shounen-ai" section might also solve this problem. I will wait for more opinions before I attempt anything.Tanya had 16:38, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

ok, since I didn't get enough feedback I'm going ahead and changing the article to remove contradictions and make it cohesive. All my reasons are stated above. The matter of yaoi being sexually explicit is addressed in the section about shounen ai and yaoi and I will also add titles that aren't explicit to the publishing list later on. My punctuation is bad and could probably use corrections, though.Tanya had 14:35, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I just call anything with maleXmale relations in it Yaoi...keeps it simple. I find all these subterms to be a bit annoying, personally —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 21:03, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I totally understand what you mean but I think this definition of yaoi is even less common than the rest. You're welcome to try and change the article but I'm pretty sure you will encounter strong resistance.Tanya had (talk) 19:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, i have always called it Yaoi, and the other stuff Yuri. Never fancied the shonen/shoujo-ai terms. I suppose I could call it "BL". You have to keep in mind that a lot of yaoi is rather sexually explicit too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 14:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Equality section
I removed most of the "equality" section as it is biased, incorrect and seems to confuse shoujo/josei BL with gay manga. Here are my reasons:

The title "Equality" is in itself problematic. Suggesting equality as the alternative to traditional seme/uke roles is judgemental and seems to imply that all seme/uke relationships are unequal. There is nothing in the "Seme and uke" section that supports this. The real objective alternative to traditional seme/uke roles is non-traditional seme/uke roles. Also:

1st paragraph:
 * Seinen and shounen is not BL. The increasing amount of male/male plots in seinen and shounen is not relevant to a discussion about seme/uke roles in BL/yaoi.

2nd paragraph:
 * bara is not considered to be part of the BL/yaoi genre.
 * there is no misconception that bara is about equality.

3rd paragraph: Tanya had 03:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * yaoi/BL is not established as a woman's space "where reality does not matter". Where did that come from?
 * equality movement that recognizes gay/bi men- this is not really true, unfortunately. Publishers are aware that gay/bi men read BL but this has no significant effect on the genre. Also, how is this relevant to the subject of traditional seme/uke roles in yaoi/BL?
 * Isn't the point of the seme and uke to NOT have an equal relationship? They all seem very one sided to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Animematt (talk • contribs) 18:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
 * That's definitely not the point of a seme/uke relationship. The seme and uke might be different from one another but that doesn't mean they're not equal (unless you believe having a square jaw and being a top also means being superior and in control of the relationship). Seme/uke pairings can be equal or unequal, depending on the title. Tanya had (talk) 18:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, well I guess I just don't understand the point of the "uke and seme" then. The vary nature of the definition just rings one dominating over another to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 15:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Why is bara not considered part of Yaoi? It is maleXmale relations. Also, wasn't bara some of the first maleXmale stories? (Bara tribe and lily tribe) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 15:18, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yaoi/BL is part of the shoujo category- it's manga for girls. Bara type muscle men can *only* be found in gay manga for gay men so we're talking two different publishing genres here. I'm not sure how old bara is... the term refers to an old magazine but the art style might be more recent. Gay manga has its own interesting history but unfortunately I don't know a lot about it.Tanya had (talk) 16:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright then, But what about a male that writes what you would define as "BL"? I have heard from many people that it is not yaoi unless a female writes it. If it was from a male, they just call it "gay porn"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 05:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I personally think that if it looks like BL, reads like BL and sold like BL then it's BL (there are actually a few BL writers that are rumored to be male such as Kisaragi Hirotaka). The boundaries aren't so clear in western fandom and no one ever agrees on what counts as "real" yaoi besides commercial BL from Japan. I think this is what creates so much confusion.Tanya had (talk) 19:22, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I ask because I know that shota is often sold under the yaoi label. I remember when Boku no Pico came out, it was pretty popular. But when the fans found out that a lot of shota is written by males, and or mainyl targeted at males they hated it. Yet the stories would still be considered under the yaoi/shoujo genre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.210.17 (talk) 23:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I know very little about shota. All I know is that BL shota that's intended for girls does exist. Shota for men wouldn't be considered as shoujo or BL in *Japan* but anything could happen in the western fandom, where each word seems to have 3 different interpretations... Tanya had (talk) 17:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree in that there is a very small segment of Japanese gay culture that enjoys shota (which would presumably include those who are predisposed to pedophilia). However, given that about 5-7% of the Japanese population is gay (if we go by contemporary estimates), you are talking about a very minuscule number of people as would be consumers. Given that shota is commercially published (Shounen Shikou is a popular one), it is only logical to conclude (read: not original research) that the vastly more populous heterosexual female audience is going to make up the greater share of those consuming said works. I would seriously doubt that it is specifically targeted for the lesser of the two aforementioned audiences. That would not make sense, in the context of a publishing business. You should realize that your western moral judgment and western viewpoint are irrelevant to Japanese women. There just isn't the moral panic caused by the depictions of pre-teens in sexual situations that there is in the west. Japanese society is, by and large, not concerned that a pedophile is lurking behind every dark alley. As such, this sub-genre of yaoi thrives. From what I hear, it is the "cuteness" factor that enamors the women to read such works. Yes, some of the artists are men. But the same is true for yaoi (some of the more notable Naruto doujin-kas are gay men). So, to imply that there are few or no female shota artists is just plain wrong. Most notably, Yun Kouga who is known for Loveless, is one. There are numerous others, you can find some other names on one of the manga databases like "baka-updates manga." As for your comments about Boku no Pico, well that is, once again, from your own viewpoint. Perhaps the circles you travel in felt that way, but most of the yaoi boards would tend to say otherwise. It is hugely popular with the female audience over on Aarinfantasy. Not only that, but all of the shota-con fansubbers and scanlators for Aarinfantasy are female. Furthermore, I'd say it is a safe bet that most all of the scanlation groups that release shota titles are 100% female. Nobody really gives a damn what gender the artist is or who the target audience is, as long as it looks good they'll take it. I also suspect that there is a cheap thrill to be had from reading something that is considered extremely taboo by our western culture. 130.127.48.188 (talk) 21:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

On Bara. It's not really a 'genre' in Japan. According to recent trends and new collections put out by Kousai, Bakudan, and Ookra Shupan in the last three years--there's a market for male fans of BL, and gay mangaka are making what is called 'BL' but looks very much like what westerners call 'bara'. I spoke to the owner of Lumiere in Japan [they own Rainbow Shoppers online] for my own write-up on the history of 'gay manga', and was told that the stories foreign fans call 'bara' is actually marketed as 'BL' in Japan. They distinguish themselves by art-style and names like 'menslove' and 'machotype' and 'g-men'. It seems to me that 'bara' is just another western umbrella term that distinguishes romance 'BL' made by gay mangaka for gay 'BL' fans from the traditionalist 'BL' for women by women. Gynocrat (talk) 16:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

EL section
Please consider using the lengthy External Links section, as sources for the article, if these meet WP:V ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:32, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The Doujinshi Citation
I did enter this on another page that I thought was your 'talk page' but it seems I didn't. To answer your query on my talk page:

--The cited Mark McLelland article on 'the bulk of yaoi manga in Japan is doujinshi'.

I read this article, and I can't help but notice that while the article was uploaded with a recent date, many of the subjects he speaks of is still dated, in the text of the article, as mid-to-late 90's; just before the pro-BL publishing zenith in Japan. The actual citation used says At present, the majority of yaoi manga are produced by amateur women fans either as dōjinshi (fanzines) or on the Internet. There are now so many amateur yaoi titles, and such is Japanese women’s interest in them, that special editions of general manga and animation magazines often bring out ‘boys’ love’ specials.

He follows that up with talk of a 1999 collection to prove his point. Can you see what I mean, by dated?

It looks like the Mark McLelland piece was updated for the web, to include the Biblos Bankruptcy of 2006, and to update info on the licensing boom in the states--however, much of his article is still talking about the Japanese scene...circa the 90's. Since the late 90's boom, things have changed. Most notable, the pro 'BL' publishing scene which clearly out-produced the amateur scene. ^_^ Not trying to bring trouble, but that was my reason for asking for a citation check. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gynocrat (talk • contribs)


 * I believe the 'bonking' article was originally written in 2001 and later updated in 2006, so as you say, it could be outdated. As it is, I believe the verifiability policy recommends that if the statement on the bulk of yaoi is doujinshi is to remain in the article, the citation to the bonking article must stay with it.  If you wish to remove the statement about the bulk of yaoi being doujinshi, I believe the usual thing to do is to find a reliable source that says differently, for further clarification.  Please note the section on self-published sources in particular. (sorry to have to point it out)-Malkinann (talk) 01:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Yaoi science fiction and fantasy
I trying to improve the Gay science fiction article, and i guess this Yaoi has some overlapp. I assume there is a large amount of science fictional / fantasy content, as with other anime/manga? If someone knowledgable could write a summary, it would be great. If not, i'll do it, but cannot be blamed if i get things wrong! Also: is it possible to identify the first science fictional yaoi, or the most influential or bestselling? Yobmod (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Straightening Up Some Facts. (Haha, bad pun.)
I made a huge overhaul on the basics of what yaoi is and added sources. Here are the links, the text, and the translations!

-

http://zokugo-dict.com/27hi/bl.htm

BL/Boy's Love:

BLとはボーイズラブ（Boy's Love）という和製英語の頭文字で、男性の同性愛を題材とする女性向けのマンガや小説を意味する. やおいの一種. BL wa (Boy's Love) to iu waseieigo no kashuramoji de, dansei no douseiai wo taizai to shite josei-muke no manga ya shousetsu wo imi suru. yaoi no isshu.

BL is an English-influenced Japanese acronym called "Boy's Love,"and it means comics, stories, etc. intended for women, with a theme of male homosexual love. Type of yaoi.

-

http://zokugo-dict.com/36ya/yaoi.htm

Yaoi:

やおいとは、男性の同性愛を扱った作品のこと. yaoi to wa, dansei no douseiai wo atsukatta sakuhin no koto

"Yaoi" is works that dealt with male homosexual love.

-

http://zokugo-dict.com/12si/syotakon.htm

Shotacon (Shotakon/Shoutarou Complex/Shota Complex/Shota):

ショタコンとは、未成年男子（少年）を対象とする性的嗜好のこと. shotakon to wa, miseinen danshi (shounen) wo taishou to suru seiteki shikou no koto

"Shotacon" is a sexual liking of the subject of underage young men (boys).

火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 06:41, 13 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for this, but I'm unsure on two things - firstly that BL is a subgenre of yaoi - I thought that in Japan, yaoi was the old word for plot-what-plot doujinshi featuring males, and that BL was an attempt to reclaim some respectability, and is the new umbrella word for all male-male "homosexual" material for women in Japan. Can you please provide another citation backing this up?  Also, the definition of shotacon in the yaoi article is unclear - "underage young men" doesn't really say a lot - the shotacon article itself has "prepubescent" which is much more understandable as to how old the boys are portrayed as being. -Malkinann (talk) 12:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yaoi USED TO be just plot-what-plot materials, but it developed into a blanket term for all. BL is the term for all yaoi AIMED AT WOMEN. Yaoi is all male-male homosexual material. I don't have another source; I only have what I translated. I guess I could go find another Japanese dictionary. As for shotacon, I'll go edit the official page, because the definition says "miseinen," which definitely means "underage" and not "prepubescent." I'll go fix that now. 火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * If that's the case, then can you please edit up the Yaoi section here based on your sources? Also, are you aware of anything about the by-men-for-men "gay manga"?  If Yaoi is the blanket term for male-male "homosexual" material, then logically there must be yaoi aimed at men, so that needs clarifying too. In this article, it treats yaoi as a subtype of "Boy Loves Boy" manga, and treats gay manga separately. -Malkinann (talk) 03:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Done. There was something wrong with the formatting that blocked out a lot of that section, so I fixed that, too. Yaoi aimed at men, as you said, is called "gay manga." After years researching, I have never heard of "Boy Loves Boy" manga and have not come across that term on any Japanese language sites. What would it even be called? "BLB?" "Boy Loves Boy?" "Shounen Suki Shounen?" "Shounen wa Shounen ga Suki?" My guess is that whoever wrote that article made the term up. Maybe it's just me, but I don't trust any material that doesn't give direct quotes in the Japanese language. 火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 04:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that. As that article is an academic article, that makes it a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards, so we must endeavour to find many reliable sources to get a full picture.  Please take care to preserve the text-source relationship when working with an article with inline citations. Is what you just fixed coming from the dictionary definition?  I can help you dual-cite it if that's the case.-Malkinann (talk) 05:06, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it's from the definition. I don't know anything about what Wikipedia considers a reliable source; I'm just saying that, I, personally, do not trust anything that doesn't give actual Japanese text. Unless I can read it myself, I'm skeptical of it. Maybe I'm just too picky. -shrug- 火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 02:31, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the article is developing split personality again with two new definitions of yaoi. For example- Usage section paragraph 1: "Yaoi is used in Japan to include doujinshi and sex scenes, and does not include gay publications." 4 lines later: "...and yaoi for gay men by gay men is called "gay manga." I don't know which definition is more correct but it really can't be left as is. Another big question is- if yaoi includes gay manga then why does the article only deal with BL? Almost each mention of "gay manga" carefully distinguishes it from article's subject matter, yaoi.Tanya had (talk) 09:37, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Part of it is probably the "yaoi ronsou" - gay men find the depiction of men in girl-aimed yaoi distasteful, so they prefer to distance "gay manga" from girl-aimed BL. The Lumsing article may be able to provide further details on "gay manga", but I'm not sure I could squeeze any more out of it - I've read it too often.  An article having a split personality is a good thing, as long as both sides cite their sources.  So we can say "such-and-such a source says this, but so-and-so says that" and present both sides, appropriately weighted. -Malkinann (talk) 13:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * What you describe seems ideal for this article. It's probably the only way to settle the disagreements over yaoi being 'male/male, 'BL' or 'hardcore BL'. Aestheticism.com works fine for me.Tanya had (talk) 17:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I assumed by "gay publications," they mean nonfictional gay publications, like magazines, dating guides, etc. 火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 02:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Firenationprincess- Do you know Japanese well enough to read the Japanese wiki articles for BL, yaoi or gay manga? That might clear things up a bit.


 * Haha, why didn't I think of that? -facepalm- It would take me a while, but I've got plenty of free time, so why not? :) I'll get on that now. 火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 04:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * ...Wow. I should have known. From what I could gather without a dictionary, there's plenty of conflicting information on those pages. More importantly... there are no sources. -.-; So, I didn't even bother thoroughly translating. Oh well. 火の王国の王女 ~Fire Nation Princess~ (talk) 04:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, let's look at the sources to clear things up a bit. The pedagogy article, about doujinshi, indicates that it's talking about gay manga, not gay lifestyle magazines. ""Gay stuff is more real," explained a yaoi fan echoing other female informants who repeatedly told us that the genre of manga found in the gay community is "about reality" By reality, yaoi readers were referring to depictions of behaviors which actually occur between gay males. On the other hand, yaoi and boys' love dojinshi, which "are fantasy," are seen as the imagined relationships between males, which exist only in the minds of female yaoi creators and readers."  Aestheticism.com isn't responding right now for me, is it responding to anyone else? -Malkinann (talk) 03:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * If I may...The "dictionary" cited is of highly questionable reliability. The idea that "boys' love" is a subgenre of "yaoi" is just plain wrong. Yaoi was a trendy term that originally referred to homosexual-themed parodies of "straight" anime or manga, and was coined as a joke, referring to the "plot-what-plot?" nature of so many of those parodies. BTW, I have this straight from the horse's mouth. I'm a good friend of manga artist Akiko Hatsu, who was a member of the small doujinshi group that first coined the phrase. It then came to be used to refer to all female-oriented, gay-themed doujinshi. It lost it's meaning, though, when female-oriented, gay-themed manga became a viable commercial niche, consisting of original works, rather than parodies. "Boys' love" is an all-inclusive term that replaced the more problematic "yaoi."
 * Second, there is no such thing as male-oriented yaoi. Some men, gay or straight (myself included) may read and enjoy boys' love (Hell, I'm translating some for publication right now), but manga created by and for gay men is not remotely like yaoi/boys' love. Most Japanese gay men find boys' love to be absurd or even offensive to gay men. As any Japanese boys' love fan will acknowledge, the genre is a fantasy created by and for women and having little connection to real-life male homosexuality. Matt Thorn (talk) 14:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I reverted an anonymous addition of "Naruto" to a line about the history of yaoi. Since the line refers to things happening a quarter century ago, including "Naruto" makes no sense. Matt Thorn (talk) 01:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe the person misunderstood, thinking it was about series that have been parodied in yaoi doujinshi, and they wanted to add a modern example. I don't really want to add a bunch of examples, unless they are a micro-example of a phenomenon in yaoi fandom(s).  For slash fiction, I think I may have seen (or I want to have seen) people writing something like "if there are male characters, there will be slash." I don't think there's an equivalent, quotable, statement for yaoi.  Incidentally, (I know this isn't really your field), have you heard anything about the assertion that Shonen Jump has tried to attract yaoi fans? -Malkinann (talk) 02:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Re. Weekly Shounen Jump. Oh yeah. I think that's considered common knowledge in the BL community in Japan. I've heard the magazine jokingly referred to as "Shoujo Jump." I've heard speculation that girls and women account for more than half the magazine's readers today. There's a clear pattern in which a story will have a "regular young boy" (usually dumb, always "pure of heart") as the ostensible protagonist, but have him surrounded by handsome young men of various types in supporting roles. The "dumb boy" hero allows young male readers to empathize in a way they couldn't if the hero was older, handsome, and generally perfect (i.e., Superman), and the handsome supporting characters provide endless fodder for fujoshi to play with. Jump's editors clearly do this because that know that "all publicity is good publicity," and having scads of doujinshi being made generates interest in and sales of the original. (BTW, I think Deathnote was the first notable example of Jump forgoing the "dumb boy" hero model in a major, non-comedy title and instead going straight for the fujoshi jugular, so to speak.) I've even heard some fujoshi complain that Jump's attempts to manipulate them are too blatant and actually have the reverse effect of turning them off. I think this whole "Shoujo Jump" phenomenon is important enough to include in this article. I'm sure I could dig up a quotable reference or two for this phenomenon. Just give me some time, and if you don't hear from me about it in a week or so, please remind me. Matt Thorn (talk) 04:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Article assessment

 * From WP:ANIME/ASSESS— Yaoi -Malkinann (talk) 07:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems to be C-class. Substantial cleanup is still required. G.A.S 04:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I recommend citing the article in the same way as Anekantavada is cited. G.A.S 05:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * From User talk:G.A.S—I was wondering if you would be willing to expound upon your reassessment of yaoi at Talk:Yaoi, and give some extra hints as to how it could be brought up to C or B class. (aside from cleaning up the footnotes, I know they're inconsistently styled).  I'm not so sure the citation system at Anekantavada would be helpful, as the "further reading" section in yaoi is used to identify potential sources which have not yet been included in the article, so that the reader of the article can know where to go.  (I believe this kind of a section is supported by the MOS.)  As such, it's different from the system at Anekantavada, where the references listed in the Bibliography are used as footnotes. Hope to see you at Talk:Yaoi soon!  -Malkinann (talk) 21:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
 * By using the said citation style, it is easier to follow citations to the actual printed works; this is the style recommended for current featured articles where there are a few printed works, where each is cited multiple times. (This would be applicable to amongst others, citation 5 and 7 (used 8 times each, but no page references provided), and the others which are used more than three times) As I regard this article to be somewhat controversial, I recommend every fact be cited.
 * Sections for improvement:
 * The lead section should follow the order of the article (being, provide a summary of the facts in the same weights as the rest of the article; currently the lead focus on only a few points, complete sections are not represented in the lead). (See WP:LEAD.)
 * Complete the mergers, if applicable.
 * Work the "further reading" into the article insofar it is applicable (unless they would be too detailed).
 * Do not use paragraphs which are only two lines long; they should be combined with others to create longer paragraphs.
 * Do something about the Japanese BL Magazines and their Imprints list. (refer to WP:EMBED; I recommend the "List with no content" format in this case. (Remove the red links; AutoLink may be used for this.))
 * All of the cleanup (per cleanup templates) should be done before the article can be assessed as B class.
 * G.A.S 05:44, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for following up on this. :)  Please forgive me if this sounds ungrateful, but are there any other methods of individually page citing?  I don't like that method, I find it very annoying to read.  I'm interpreting  WP:CITE to mean that I do need to cite pages for books, but don't need to cite pages for academic articles unless I'm quoting.  Is this interpretation correct?  I wonder if rp would be a valid method of putting in the page numbers if so.  The lead does need rewriting, that's a task that I think is usually best left till the end.  Merge discussion has actually generated some conversation, which is good.  I have been working the "further reading" into the article as I've read it, aside from Mizoguchi, which was added by someone else.  Do you have any thoughts on what could be done with the pronunciation section?  It used to have (sourced) information about how American fans mispronounced it, but that was removed as being perhaps confusing to the reader.  Could you please apply any other cleanup templates you consider applicable to the article, and assess the validity of the current cleanup templates? (I do like the morefootnotes, though.  it kind of keeps me motivated to read more, lol.) Thanks again for the review. :) -Malkinann (talk) 10:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Citations with page numbers are required when you refer to a specific passage in the text. It seems to me that this is the case, as you are sourcing individual sentences to texts (WP:CITE).
 * The templates allows for interlinking the citations to the specific texts, I cannot recall an example where this is done, though.
 * rp seems to be used elsewhere, but I do not know whether it is used in featured articles. This should not be an issue in B class or GA class articles. The important thing is to show the page numbers of the text, where applicable; then it will always be able to change the format thereof at a later stage, if required.
 * Regarding pronunciation: The best way is to state this in the lead, e.g. Paris ( in English; in French) is the... .
 * It seems that all of the cleanup templates require sourcing. These can be removed once citations are added. The expert tag seems redundant, as it was added at a time the article had no sources (At that time it read "This article requires authentication or verification by an expert. \ Please assist in recruiting an expert or improve this article yourself. See the talk page for details.").
 * Let me know if you require more information.
 * The current guideline for B class is "Decent structure, proper lead, fair amount of information for each section."
 * Regards, G.A.S 11:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I still think that's an overly strict interpretation, but I'll assume good faith as you are trying to improve the encyclopedia, and I'll give some page citing a go. I believe the template you're thinking of is Harvard citation or closely related to it.  I'd still find a templated Harvard and footnote mix to be annoying to read. So, WP:LEAD, add more references, clean up the references, finish up the merge, reshuffle the article, do something about the format of the list of BL magazines. -Malkinann (talk) 23:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced stuff
This is all stuff that's been unreferenced for yonks and I can't find any references. Putting it here for safekeeping, and hopefully future referencing. -Malkinann (talk) 01:55, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

From Seme and uke: Other examples are that some of the anthologies published by Biblos feature stories on themes such as "younger seme" or "ribariba/reversables." The "height rule," the rule by which the taller character is the seme, is also sometimes broken. There is also the term "gekokujō" referring to when the character with more uke characteristics (be it physically or emotionally) actually plays the seme role in the sexual elements of the relationship. The term means "lower slays higher" and comes from feudal times when a servant would slay his lord in order to gain power. He (the uke) is usually less experienced with romance or sex and his interactions with the seme often make for his first homosexual experience.

From Publishing, about Biblos: (from the mid 90s) was once the most commercially successful publisher of yaoi in Japan, and (their folding) provided an opportunity for competitors to take up a larger share of the professional yaoi and BL manga market.

Rewrite of intro
I took the liberty of rewriting the intro, which was riddled with errors, inconsistencies, and contradictions. Hopefully it is more clear now. The definition of seme and uke was wildly wrong. The seme can be and often is younger and more "feminine," and the uke is often older and more "masculine." That is a major part of what makes the dynamic intersting, right? If it was just masculine older boys/men going after feminine, passive, younger boys, it wouldn't be very interesting at all. I have no idea where the definition in the previous edition came from. Also, as I wrote earlier, the zokugo dictionary is extremely unreliable as a reference. I think any references to the zokugo dictionary should be replaced with more reliable sources. Matt Thorn (talk) 03:37, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Forgive me if this sounds cheeky, but do you have any suggestions for alternate, more reliable sources for the definitions or the variations in the seme/uke relationships? Even the stuff about the "height rule" being breakable (which I think is fairly common knowledge amongst yaoi fans) has lain uncited for months. Unfortunately, I don't have access to the US-Japan Women's Journal, and Mizoguchi's paper in particular seems like it would be very useful for identifying relationship variations.-Malkinann (talk) 04:46, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Not cheeky at all. The problem is there are no definitive resources, in Japanese or English, and anyone who tells you "This is definitive" is just proving their ignorance. You should hear Japanese B.L. fans argue about seme and uke and pairing and everything else under the sun. But if you would offer the definition of seme and uke that I deleted to Japanese fans, 95% of them would say, "That's completely wrong." Then ask those same people, "All right, define the terms for me, you'll get a wild argument that ends in no consensus, beyond the fact that the seme is the aggressor and the uke is the "aggressee." (Too bad there's no good antonym for "aggressor" in English.) Actually, I was just looking at the Japanese "Boys' Love" page, and was amused to see the same puzzling definition of BL as a sub-genre of "yaoi." Then I looked at the discussion page, and guess what? The article's being written by guys. I mean, I'm a guy, too, but I've been doing this for twenty years. Wait, I don't mean "doing" in that sense. Not that it would be a problem if I was. Some of my best friends "do that," really. I mean I've been studying the genre for 20 years, and have talked with literally hundreds of Japanese fans of the genre, not to mention artists and editors. (One of my colleagues was the editor who created Juné. Another is Keiko Takemiya, who arguably invented shounen ai.) Um, where was I? Oh, yeah. The point is that the Japanese Wikipedia is seriously underdeveloped, and you end up with articles like that one being written be people who have only fragmented and sometimes distorted knowledge of what they're talking about. There are, however, several books (all in Japanese) and many academic papers (some in English, like mine) on the subject that can be used as references. I'll go check my bookshelf and see if I can find attempts to define the genre and technical terms. I know I have at least three books there that should be helpful. To be honest, I'm not all that familiar with the English-language literature anymore. I find most of it exasperating, so I stopped reading it years ago. I find that even a lot of the Japanese nationals who write in English on the subject have a shallow knowledge, and seem to think they can get away with writing what amounts to an off-the-cuff essay just because they're Japanese. I don't know if that's true of Mizoguchi. Sorry to rant. Matt Thorn (talk) 06:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Definition is one of my least fave things to do - I'm much more interested in fan activity. There's a slight problem now with the lead in that the "Usage" section contradicts it pretty comprehensively.  Looking forward to seeing some additions to the further readings from you.  I'm aware of Dru Pagliassotti being a fan and a scholar, recently she's written an essay on terms, but I'm not keen on using it because it's forward-looking rather than grounded in tradition, including all depictions of male/male romance/erotica for females by females. -Malkinann (talk) 12:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm. I just read the "Usage" section, and I don't see it contradicting my rewrite of the intro, but maybe I'm missing something. It's not a very well organized section, and probably contains some unnecessary trivia, but the only thing that struck me as misleading was at the very end, where it says "shounen ai" used to refer to pedophilia. The correct term would be "ephebophilia", since sexual attraction to prepubescent boys has never been socially acceptable in Japan, or anywhere else I can think of. There's a big difference between pedophilia and ephebophilia. I'm going to change the word. If anyone has any objections, let's talk about it here, but I recommend that you first read the article on ephebophilia, which is quite informative. Matt Thorn (talk) 13:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

http://fujyoshi.jp
Has anyone else seen this? I was searching for pages (in Japanese) that talk about BL and are actually written by BL fans (known as "fujoshi," or "rotting girls," in case you didn't know), and though there are countless pages in which fujoshi discuss particular works, pairings, etc., they are very few that talk about the phenomenon on a "metaphysical" level. This has been true as far back as I can remember. It always seems like the people who want to analyze BL as a phenomenon are not fans themselves. Anyway, here is a rare site that, to some extent, talks about the genre on a meta-level. Predictably, much of it is tongue in cheek, but the "glossary of fujoshi terminology" is both amusing and informative. Take the definitions of uke and seme: Uke: In a work dealing with love between men, the character who, during sexual intercourse, is penetrated. Example--"This uke is like a chihuahua, he's so cute!" Seme: In a work dealing with love between men, the character who, during sexual intercourse, penetrates. Example--"The seme in this story is totally my type!" No ambiguity here. (^_^;) There are so many hilarious terms defined here, but most of them are terms fujoshi actually use. (I know, since I spend a lot of time around fujoshi, and they seem to forget that I'm not a fellow fujoshi but a middle-aged man.) But while a lot of his site is tongue-in-cheek, it is the real deal, created by real BL fans, and therefore in my opinion is more "authoritative" than 95% of scholarly work on the subject (including my own). Matt Thorn (talk) 08:33, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Cute! I can't read it, though.  If one interprets the external links guideline liberally, it's okay, because it's related to the subject, and has unique information that isn't on here. -Malkinann (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry! I misspelled the URL. It's "http://fujyoshi.jp", not "fujoshi." Matt Thorn (talk) 04:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussing the appeal in the article?
As I've been merging in shonen ai, I think I've kind of got most of what will be useful. I plan to use a Merged-from so that everyone can easily find the old page should they want to. The last little bits I'm unsure of are what to do with these referenced sentences: "Many enthusiasts say they are drawn to the beauty and distance of the characters, as well as the idealistic depictions of male love. Some argue that because shōnen-ai excludes females from the relationship, it is sexually non-threatening to its female audience while still allowing them to identify with its characters.(ref) Others would argue that it is perfectly natural for women to be attracted to the idea of love and sex between males.(ref)"  It's a bit of a delicate issue, especially as if a discussion of the appeal isn't exceptionally well-written, it runs the risk of saying that fans are psychos. And then there's the idea of how much weight we should give any discussion... Thoughts, please? -Malkinann (talk) 22:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * There are any number of sources that could be referenced here. In my own Girls and Women Getting Out of Hand, I reference several Japanese writers who have written on the subject (Chizuko Ueno, Yukari Fujimoto, Keiko Takemiya, Shihomi Sakakibara), and also my own theory based on fieldwork, and include quotes from fans. I also refer to at least three scholars who have written in English about the appeal of Slash (Camille Bacon-Smith, Henry Jenkins, Constance Penley). I could have mentioned at least one or two other writers, as well. I think it's possible to present a number of theories without making fans sound like psychos. I think it's important to include something on the appeal, because the uninitiated who first encounter BL/Slash almost invariably react, "WTF? Are these women perverts?" By the way, until recently I had only an excerpt of my article on my web site, but the other day I uploaded the entire thing. I figure it's not going to harm sales of the book. About the Takemiya essay, unfortunately I cut it out without noting the publication information (this was almost twenty years ago, when I was just starting my research and didn't think about such details), and Takemiya herself has no recollection of where it was published. (-_-;) Matt Thorn (talk) 06:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Howzat for starters? And yet, the uninitiated would also go "Hm, Lesbianism in erotica?  Boys will be boys, ha ha!"  Damned double standards... -_-  Could it also be possible that Takemiya's essay dates from 1996?  She's quoted as saying something similar in this paper by Lunsing, who uses the quote from something written by Satou. -Malkinann (talk) 12:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No, the Takemiya essay is much older. Maybe 1989 or even '88. I have a scan of the whole thing, and somewhere I must have the original that I cut from the magazine, but I didn't notice the lack of publication information until it was too late. I could really kick myself for that. And the ironic thing is that Takemiya, who is now a colleague of mine, has no recollection herself. As for the double-standard, this is probably straying from the topic, but Setsu Shigematsu (a Japanese-Canadian scholar) wrote one of the few English-language essays I really like and agree wholeheartedly with titled "Dimensions of Desire: Sex, Fantasy, and Fetish in Japanese Comics" (In Themes and Issues in Asian Cartooning: Cute, Cheap, Mad, and Sexy. J.A. Lent, ed. Bowling Green, Ohio: Popular Press, 1999). I summarize her argument in my "Out of Hand" paper. Although her writing style (at the time) was over-the-top academese, it's still worth plowing through all the name-dropping and jargon. When I first read it, I thought, "Yeah! That's it! Why didn't I think of this!?" (haha). Anyway, I think the current "Appeal" section, though badly in need of copy-editing, is a good start. I'd also like to include Sakakibara's controversial theory that yaoi fans are "gay men born into women's bodies," as well as I my own pet theory, which is--well, you can read it in great detail in my "Out of Hand" article. Matt Thorn (talk) 15:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I would recommend against a large appeal section (a little one should be okay) because it could end up very opinionated and one-sided. It could also result in edit wars, as a person stumbling upon the article might see one of the theories and think, "That so doesn't apply to me!" and remove that theory.  Also, a lot of those theories seem to be written by people who aren't into yaoi and they make a lot of assumptions about women's sexuality, which can be very rude.  And even with references, a large appeal runs the risk of being full of original research, and if the editors have a lot of biases, the kinds of references used might reflect that.  Those are my two cents.  MayumiTsuji (talk) 16:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)MayumiTsuji
 * I know I sound like I'm contradicting myself, but I think Mayumi Tsuji has a good point. The only two "theorists" among those I mentioned who are truly into the genre are Sakakibara (who has the most radical theory) and Takemiya (who can rightly claim to be the "mother" of boys' love in Japan). And although my own work is based on observation of and much conversation with literally hundreds of "true fans," I can't claim to be a hardcore fan myself. It might be best to keep it short and simple. But I do think it is important to say, "This writer argues 'A', while this other writer argues 'B'," otherwise we run the risk of portraying "theories" as objective fact. I wouldn't want even my own theories presented that way, for the very reasons Mayumi states. Perhaps an "Appeal" section isn't necessary at all. For comparison, I just checked out the Romance novel article, and at the very end is a short (three paragraph) section titled "Critical attention." The difference in title is significant: instead of asking the unanswerable (and possibly rude) question, "What makes these fans tick?" it points out that the genre has earned serious attention from both academic and non-academic writers and critics. That section might serve as a model for a similar section in the "Yaoi" article. Matt Thorn (talk) 10:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What would a "Critical attention" section involve for yaoi? The romance novel's critical attention section deals with the low-brow stigma of reading romance novels, and ever so briefly touches on the appeal.  Would a critical attention section here involve themes of yaoi, and feminism and yaoi? -Malkinann (talk) 11:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't have a brilliant answer off the top of my head, but it is certainly true that the appeal of shounen-ai/yaoi/BL has been a source of endless fascination among scholars and critics. Apart from the prominent people I've mentioned, they are probably no fewer than 20 less-well-known scholars or graduate students, both in Japan and outside Japan, who have written articles or given conference presentations on the subject. Most are pretty lame, IMO, but it shows there is interest. It might be enough to mention this fact, mention some of the more prominent names, and provide references to what they have written, rather than trying to summarize the content of the material. Does that make sense? Matt Thorn (talk) 12:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * But in saying that there is academic interest in the appeal, it is logical to then briefly cover the main arguments. I'm trying to think of other stuff that could be in a 'critical attention' section in order to balance the focus on 'why'.  In McLelland's 2000 book, he reckons there wasn't much English-language scholarship, and even less in Japanese (p.61) - has there been a "BL boom" in the literature since then? -Malkinann (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It depends what you consider a boom. Mostly it's been conference papers, many quite obscure, or commentary in general-audience books or magazine/newspaper articles. It's been common in Japan since the early 1980s, at least, and in English since the early 1990s, but there probably has been an increase in output in English since 2000, simply because the genre has taken root in the English publishing market. The remarkable thing is that most of this stuff, both Japanese and English, has been written as if the author is the first person to ever write about it, which shows how little research they put into. So they keep reinventing the wheel. Or in this case, "reinventing the Geocentric World View" might be a more apt metaphor, since so many of them reach the highly questionable conclusion that girls like this stuff because they are afraid of adult sexuality. (If they want to escape from sexuality, why create and read comics about guys bonking each other right and left?) I think Fred Schodt was the first to write about the subject in English, in 1983. (See pages 100 and 101 in his still-essential Manga! Manga!.) Hmm. Maybe I can find time to draft a really brief overview of "critical attention. Don't hold your breath, though. And if anyone has the time and motivation to do it, by all means, take a shot. You can use my Sandbox to experiment. Matt Thorn (talk) 23:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Looks like Malkinann and I wrote drafts in the sandbox at the same time. Is mine too long-winded? (Am I too long-winded? Wait; don't answer that.) Matt Thorn (talk) 01:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, you did say "concise"! Mine was intended as a broad overview to the key schools of thought on yaoi, to be expounded upon later, after a re-read of the articles in question. Yours is awesome, although from a Wikipedia editor point of view, the bit on the timeline of BL scholarship needs to be verifiably cited. Not that I think it's dodgy, but it seems to be a little-known fact, and so might need an inline citation. Inline citations seem to help things 'stick' on Wikipedia, especially if they're to stuff that's available freely online (rather than in a book or in a journal article which can't be got at) and if it gels with what's already known on the subject. "The sky is green" wouldn't stick, no matter how many inline citations came after it. -Malkinann (talk) 02:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * You're right about the inline citations. I was just to lazy to do the coding, so I just dumped all the sources in the "References" section. (^^;) BTW, I think I must have found out the info on that Takemiya essay at some point, because one copy of my manuscript on my computer confidently states "1993, p. 80" or something like that. My copy of the book is in my office at school, and I don't know when I'll be able to go get it. I don't suppose anybody has a copy of Fanning the Flames lying around? It's a good book, BTW. Editor Bill Kelly (the one who does baseball, not the other Bill Kelly who does something else on Japan) is one of the few Japan scholars I would classify as Truly Brilliant™ and he made sure the book was good. We all had to rewrite out chapters several times before they passed muster with him. Unfortunately, the publisher screwed up all over the place. (They included the wrong graphic for my chapter! And Bill has never forgiven them for putting a photo of a Yomiuri Giants cap, instead of a Hanshin Tigers cap, on the cover.) Anyway, I'll add the inline citations soon, but if anyone wants to make any changes first, please go ahead. As you can see, Malkinann cited several sources I'm unfamiliar with, so we might want to lengthen (or, alternatively, seriously abridge) the section. Matt Thorn (talk) 04:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous, unsubstantiated edits/additions
I just deleted a poorly written, unreferenced, and anonymous claim that, "lately it's been heard to call these "role switchers" as a "Seuke" an obvious mix between the words seme and uke." The author was "75.71.73.208". I've never heard of "seuke," a search (in Japanese) turned up nothing, and Japanese pages that talk about seme/uke terminology don't mention it. Until "75.71.73.208" comes up with a reference, I'm keeping this out. Matt Thorn (talk) 22:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe it's an English-speaking fandom term? (like the use of shonen-ai to mean "light yaoi")? -Malkinann (talk) 22:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe. Either way, we need something more than "lately it's been heard". The closest Japanese term I know of is "riba" (リバ), an abbreviation of the English word "reversible," which is used to refer to pairings in which either character can plausibly be portrayed as seme or uke. This term is listed in the glossary of fujyoshi.jp. I can't think of a good example offhand. For some reason, the favorite pair of a former student (and current pro mangaka), James Potter and Severus Snape, popped into my head, but it's hard for me to imagine Snape as a seme. Maybe Frodo and Sam? Anyway, the question is, do we really want to go into this degree of detailed terminology? The more detailed we get, the shakier the ground becomes, because there is no "canon" of universally recognized terminology in BL fandom. Matt Thorn (talk) 23:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it would be nice to have something to balance out the focus on seme/uke a bit, and riba seems a reasonable variation on the norm. I can't seem to find a definition of riba on fujyoshi.jp. :(  -Malkinann (talk) 11:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. The glossary is at http://fujyoshi.jp/fujyoshi_kouza0, but to read the definitions you have to sign up (which is free). Here's the definition, in Japanese, with my translation:


 * Matt Thorn (talk) 13:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * BTW, there are other terms for BL that doesn't fit standard seme/uke patterns, such as "Homo yuri" (ホモ百合), in which you have an uke/uke coupling. Revealing term, isn't it? The example sentence given is "I bought a homo yuri book out of curiosity and it was totally great!" The implication is that the average BL fan be skeptical of coupling that isn't seme/uke. Matt Thorn (talk) 13:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the explanation of how the site works... It'll be handy. ^^  That's yuri as in yuri, isn't it?  Wow, that explains a lot. -Malkinann (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that yuri. Found another. Mujaki seme (無邪気攻め, "innocent seme") refers to a character who appears uke-like and seduces the other without seeming to be doing so intentionally. The sample usage is "I think I'll use a mujaki seme setup in my next book." Great stuff. You know what's funny? If you spend enough time with BL fans, and reading BL, you find yourself unconsciously "slashing" everything and everyone, even if you're not really a BL fan. One of my best friends is a young woman who makes non-BL doujinshi, and we sit around watching LOST and CSI together, and almost every time there's a "BL moment" when one of us says something like, "You could make a whole BL doujinshi based just on that brief scene." It's just a habit you pick up. It's one of my favorite pastimes, which may be why rumors that I'm gay persist. Every year I get students telling me, "One of the new students asked me if you're gay. I said no, but she won't believe me." Even the current president of the university once asked a student I'm close to if I was gay, and when she said no, he responded, "No way. He's definitely gay." (^o^) Matt Thorn (talk) 13:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Found yet more terms that defies the seme-masculine/uke-feminine stereotype. "Toshishita seme" (年下攻め, "younger seme") refers to a seme who is younger than the uke. The sample usage is, "It's the classic must-buy of BL, right? Everybody loves a toshishita seme!" Here's another. "Hetara seme" (ヘタレ攻め, "wimpy seme") is a seme who is not very aggressive. "Osoi uke" (襲い受け, "attacking uke") is an uke who suddenly "attacks" the (usually hetare) seme. This is the kind of thing I was referring to earlier. The sample usage is "Don't you think a hetare seme and osoi uke are the ultimate combination?" Matt Thorn (talk) 14:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

There's definitely a continuum of slashability. ^^ I recall watching Blake's 7 with my father and finding a massive subtext - it was kind of awkward when he asked me if I liked the show... ^^;  Does it really sap the fun out of slashing or making BL doujinshi if there's an openly gay character? I'm not familiar enough with shows with gay characters to say so or no. I guess that in canon, an openly gay character would be used to explore important gay issues, which can be a bit of a downer, or else he runs the risk of just being 'the gay one' and not being interesting beyond that. Back to discussing the article... This has just made me realise that the doujinshi section doesn't cover original doujinshi, (original June??) before the parodies came in. Also, should I put in the hetara seme and osoi uke in as a nb for the part where it says 'sometimes the uke is the aggressor'? Something like "This is called osoi uke (attacking uke), usually his partner is a hetara seme (wimpy seme)(reference to fujyoshi.jp)"? -Malkinann (talk) 22:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The continuum is important, I think. I know fujoshi who, just for laughs, "slash" the most absurd things you can imagine, including inanimate objects. (I'm reminded of Jon Stewart's "Brokeback Senate:": "Ted Stevens, I wish I could quit you!") Original doujinshi before the earliest parodies (Captain Tsubasa, Saint Seiya, etc.) might be hard to document. The first comiket was--What? 1975? And in the early years original shoujo manga (including shounen-ai) made up a considerable amount of the content. It would have been called shounen-ai, and maybe later Juné, but now that I think of it, I don't recall ever reading much detailed info about pre-parody shounen-ai doujinshi. I do know that some of the creators (e.g., my buddy Akiko Hatsu) went on to become established professional manga artists. I'll see if I can find some references. As for seme/uke, I would be cautious about such declarations as "This is called osoi uke," since the jargon is fluid, changing often and being used in different ways by different fans. Something like, "For example, the term osi uke has been used to refer to..." would be preferable. (Ouch. Double passive voice. My writing professors would have smacked my palms with a ruler.) Minor note: It's "hetare," not "hetara." If you want to draft something in my sandbox, I'll be happy to edit it. I'm lazy, but I'm a decent copy editor. Matt Thorn (talk) 06:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)