Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Futanari

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Majorly 18:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Futanari

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page or group of pages is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

Futanari (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

This article is unreferenced, and has been so since references were requested seven months ago. I have not been able to find reliable references (following an admittedly cursory look, as I wasn't enjoying going through the material), and seems to be comprised almost exclusively of original research. The topic may also be a neologism. Please do not make accusations of cultural bias. Futanari is a portmanteau neologism based upon the Japanese words for 'double' and 'form'. If we had an article entitled an English cultural phenomenon 'doubleform' about pictures of nude women with penises, were utterly unable to provide any references for any of the claims, and the article's sole link was to www.doubleform.com, this would have been deleted within a week of creation. Fails WP:V, WP:RS, WP:OR. Delete. Proto::► 18:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Moreschi ^Deletion! 19:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, not notable, and no sources. Fails WP:V, WP:N, etc. Anomo 20:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep the article I found a reference from a well known futanari artist that defines the concept. I hope it helps preventing the deletion of the article. It's very difficult to get references and sources from a concept created by the hentai artists themselves. Trump's definition of Futanari — Comment added by 217.129.218.198 (talk • contribs).

I found some sites with book references and partial citations (they should be enough to define the concept): The Politics of Androgyny in Japan: Sexuality and Subversion in the Theater and Beyond and The Gender of Onnagata As the Imitating Imitated: Its Historicity, Performativity, and Involvement in the Circulation of Femininity. At least, now we know that reliable sources exist. — Comment added by 217.129.218.198 (talk • contribs).

• Keep. 236,000 Google hits for the Roman spelling alone. Article exists on the Japanese and German and Spanish Wikipedias. What constitutes a "reliable source" is going to vary with context, and for cartoon pornography, examples may have to serve. Some are obviously out there, and some apparently were found; there is no blame for not wanting to look further, but don't then come and claim that the word has no established meaning or that source material identified by this label does not exist. - Smerdis of Tlön 22:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

  So because it's a fairly unusual pastime, we don't have to have reliable sources? The only link is to a blog that collates (as far as I can tell) a single picture from multiple hentai paysites (and to see more, you must, of course, give your credit card details). If the word has an established meaning, great - write a wiktionary article on it. Find reliable sources about the topic. I was not able to (I have tried again with images turned off, it's bloody horrible I tells ya). Proto::► 23:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The blog is not the only link, and not the focus of futanari.org, it is just for news management. The true link(s) are from the now... 160 or so sources of illustrators and doujinshi circles within this genre. (http://futanari.org/links/) 3pyon 11:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep This is fairly common in anime, common enough to warrant an article. I'd say this is a lack of sourcing and not a lack of available sourcing. Also, Futanari.org has put up a plea for people to flock to this article, hence the Not a Vote tag. Cheers, Lankybugger 23:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Neier 00:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Just speaking for the subject itself, it certainly does deserve an article. Numerous H manga and eroge and even Japanese porn videos (oh god, my eyes) have used this concept, and the Japanese word ふたなり has 666,000 GHits. The existence of the phenomenon is clear, and what the article needs is sources, not deletion. _dk 03:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I have about 30 gigs of futanari related doujins. This is a very real phenomenon even if people don't speak of it much. I guess it's just not as controversial as lolicon. But Shonen-ai and shotacon are also unreferenced and no one's suggesting those be deleted. Commercial examples Futanari on Jlist, Futanari on DLSite (526 titles!) (You may have to age verify to get to those links.) The only scholarly article I could find on this is The Gender of Onnagata As the Imitating Imitated: Its Historicity, Performativity, and Involvement in the Circulation of Femininity, east asia cultures critique - Volume 10, Number 2, Fall 2002, pp. 245-284. Sample quote: "It is in this context that futanari were included in Yamai no Soshi [Book of the disease],36 and futanarihira, androgynous stunners, were considered beautiful wakashu. Differently put, in this paradigm futanari falls into the category of disease, along with anal fistulas, pyorrhea, lice, and so forth, whereas futanarihira amounts to a certain aesthetic." 69.174.66.47 04:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

That's one good reliable reference. Well done. If you (or someone else) is able to find another, to satisfy the requirements of WP:RS ('multiple reliable sources'), and include them in the article, I will happily withdraw this AFD. Proto::► 09:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Strange Fates. Sex, Gender, and Sexuality in Torikaebaya Monogatari, Gregory M. Pflugfelder, Monumenta Nipponica Vol. 47, No. 3 (Autumn, 1992), pp. 347-368. On page 359: "Ambiguous bodies surface in the native literature at least as early as the twelfth certury. Yamai no Soshi, an illustrated catalogue of rare afflictions dating from that ero, provides an interesting example. 'Recently there was a man [otoko] who walked the streets of the capital with a drum hung round his neck. He had the face of a male [otoko], but there were things about his form that resembled a female [onna] as well. A certain person was confused [obotsukanagarite] by this. One night when the drummer was asleep, he secretly lifted his robes to have a look. Underneath, he saw both male and female genitals [literally, roots]. This was a hermaphrodite [futanari].'" Futanari seems to have meant "hermaphrodite" then as early as the 12th century. I found more examples for androgyny in Japanese culture as someone pointed out above but I couldn't nail down the word "futanari" to these references. 69.174.66.47 20:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yet another reference, though this one's just in passing:

Jennifer Robertson. "The Politics of Androgyny in Japan: Sexuality and Subversion in the Theater and Beyond." American Ethnologist, 19(3): 1992. On page 424: "Ayame eschewed what he called the prevaling "androgynous" figure of the onnagata, describing it as futanarihira - literally, "double-bodied". BookishAcolyte 04:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Just because it's not perfect, doesn't mean this article needs to be deleted. Stop being such a nazi about it all. It may not be perfect, but it's here, its informative, and it's not hurting you one little bit. -AnimaRytak

  That's not helpful. Proto::► 09:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. This really, really needs to be rewritten and cited, but its honestly a real genre (including at least one Japanses porn studio using trick camera work and digital editing to make "live-action" futanari videos) and so references ought to be out there. I'd help find them, but I'm too busy scrubbing out my brain from forming this !vote. Serpent's Choice 06:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

  What's the studio called? I honestly have been unable to find reliable references, this is the prime concern. Proto::► 09:51, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I think its called Oisinbo-soft[1]. The fact that I don't speak so much as a word of Japanese is conspiring with the reality that there really are topics I've enjoyed sourcing more than this one to make it a challenge for me, too. I'll fully admit that the places I found this discussed aren't ... erm, reliable, so I've got no way to navigate that all-Japanese site to get information (if its the right one...). Back into the fray I go, I suppose. Still no idea where on their site to find detailed material (if that's the production studio and not the distributor, even!), but the series is evidently marketed in English as "Futanari Lesbians" ... 1, 2, and 3 (because porn studios have creative naming conventions). (updated again Serpent's Choice 10:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC))

As far as anime, rather than live-action goes, Pink Pineapple[2] seems to be the dominant production studio, although I'm informed that there are others. And again, I haven't got the foggiest how to navigate their site to get to a sourceable page. You'd be looking for Parade Parade or Stainless Night, that I know of. Serpent's Choice 10:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

In regard to Adult Video studios producing futanari genre specific media, most major studios have jumped on board. TMA, SOD, Aroma-P, Moodyz, Waap. You even have multiple series of AV movies which have multiple volumes, e.g. ふたなりレズ (1-6) and ふたなりズム (1-4). I would link to the complete list, but just google "Live Action Futanari Movies" instead.3pyon 11:52, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. The term gives a couple hundred thousand Google hits and is reported on in six other Wikipedias, so its existence is beyond doubt. The article's current lack of reliable sources is deplorable; it is a reason to improve, not a reason to delete. The AfD process should not be used as a substitute for an article-improvement-drive.AxelBoldt 20:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. Spend 15 minutes at /b/ and you'll know for damn sure that this exists. Klosterdev 04:12, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't know if this is what you need, but if you are looking for proof of the existence of the 'futanari' genre, the following link is to a commercial website selling all sorts of Japanese products. The link will take you to 3 pages of products found by searching for the word 'futanari'... Here's the link http://www.jlist.com/SEARCHES/futanari/ If this is not appropriate or useful, please feel free to delete. 89.242.93.69 21:42, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Although this sort of hentai art isn't my fetish, this concept is prevelant in h-art. Kyaa the Catlord 00:19, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Lankybugger and dk. -- 9muses 01:15, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Because some people either don't like material or fail at google does not mean it doesn't exist. The fastest way would be to go to live journal or go to one of the 'chan's alternative page(4chan, ko-chan, etc). If you have average IQ there are tons of Japanese sites you can browse(just need to press enter and find the relevant sub-page, not hard). For the sake of it all I'll list some of the artists: Behind Moon, Rebis, Agent Orange R, Dusty Heaven, Tiberius - the list goes on. Destorss
• Keep How can one even think about deleting this page, everything said is valid and true. Any number of comic websites such as Jlist and DLsite has direct links to it. Google has over 210,000 hits on the subject. It's true so why delet it??

Big 11:01 (GMT), 14 January 2007

• Keep Article is of extremely poor quality, but doesn't meet criteria for deletion. Fifelfoo 12:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep This article is in definite need of cleanup, and maybe even a rewrite, but by no means should it be deleted. If numerous artists and/or author can make a living off of it, animated adult video can be made of it, and multiple imageboards can exist of it, that's definitely worth keeping. I would like to see the article fixed up after this discussion is over, however. MalikCarr 11:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I can see that it's not well cited, but that's just a cry for people to help advance it, really. It's hard to site anything in this genre, though, as the content is very adult and in a sense animalistic, meaning that it's not normally something to have any structured sentences or thoughts or rationale behind it. I personally believe that the commercialism surrounding the word provided in this discussion is definitely enough to substantiate the fact that it's a legitamate term, as for the content of the article itself, the most plausable way to back them up is with imagery. That being said, you can really see that every word is true just by looking through the pictures yourself. If you have an inability to do that (ex. being grossed out) you do not have the right to call deletion on this article, as you do not have the means to judge it. Wa 12:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Some artists include Agent Orange, Purple Bonus, DTiberius. Agent Orange, and Purple Bonus can be found using the "Return results only in japanese" after searching on google. DTiberius can be found at WWOEC. www.affairanime.com has an entire gallery devoted to Futanari. I'm not sure if these count as sources, but they are *definite* proof that this article just needs to be rewritten and not deleted. Maybe these websites can be used in a rewrite? Mattz1010 16:55, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Found a specialised book on amazon about homosexuality in japan which refers to futanari [3], You can use the "Search Inside" function. --Simon ---80.143.231.60 19:48, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep There is lots of evidence of this paraphilia and is very common. I see no reason for it to be deleted just because there is no referncing to it. Instead of being lazy, why didn't you just refernce it yourself instead? Should have taken an equal amount of time for filing a deletion! Lord Metroid 20:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Multiple 100,000s of Google hits, articles in other language Wikipedias, companies and artists specifically devoted to the subject, mention in scholarly sources... Improve the article. - CNichols 15:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
• Keep I find it remarkable that the OP recommending deletion cites a lack of research, then proceeds to call the term both a "portmanteau" and "neologism." I'm not about to attack the OP for not checking Japanese sources, or for a lack of knowledge of Japanese grammar or etymology, but I believe this article shouldn't even have been recommended for deletion for the OP's complaints without first checking with a person who actually has passing literacy in Japanese.
• keep. along with stern rebuke and disappointment for OP. come on. you don't have to enjoy something for it to be included in wikipedia. I don't enjoy finding original sources for power rangers articles, but we don't expunge them on that reason alone. if you want a public source on futanari, i've written a book on it. ... aa:talk 18:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

  What? Article was unsourced, article is now sourced. Threatening to delete it was, unfortunately, the only way to get this to happen, as the standard request had been ignored for over six months. Proto::► 14:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep as discusting as this subject is, this is an adapitve encyclopedia, and as such must have as much information as possible on it dispite potential moral objections, if anything put a disclaimer on it. but keep it because people need to know it exists so they can make up their own minds about it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.4.23.55 (talk) 05:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

• Keep Just because 3 OPs haven't heard of it/don't like it/don't believe it exists when it most certainly does, does not mean an article should be deleted. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Portside (talk • contribs) 21:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC).

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.