As crappy a show as Medaka Box is, it has to be admitted that Medaka is good eye candy. I just downloaded the first four episodes and went through them for top rotation candidates. But a couple of them broke my heart. I really want to use them, but I'm not sure whether they're too ecchi.

So I'm soliciting opinions. There are seven images below the fold. Two I can definitely use. One I definitely cannot. And there are four that are really borderline, and might be considered NSFW. You have been warned.

I can't see myself mining the entire series, but a couple more episodes are probably in the cards. I found about 40 candidates in the first four episodes, but I'm not sure how many of them I can use -- and that's the main reason for this post.

These two I can definitely use:

This one I definitely cannot, more's the pity:

And these four are borderline:

Seriously: it's her underwear, but what is she showing that we wouldn't see in a beach episode? I've got a lot of pictures in the top rotation now which are more revealing than these, and in the case of some of the Sekirei pictures, the women have even more spectacular figures.

So can I use these? What do you all think?

Just in passing, Wonderduck didn't mention the easy out: sex sells. Cheesecake is a good way to fill the time when you don't have anything better to post.

Posted by: Steven Den Beste in Cheesecake at 08:42 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

1 In order of most-acceptable to least, I'd rank the borderlines 3, 2, 1, 4. 4 for the O-face, 1 for the melon-mirror. In 2, the head and fan keep the boobs from dominating, and in 3, the dynamic pose and shirt make it a classier pin-up; she's actually doing something, not just showing off the goods.

-j

Posted by: J Greely at May 02, 2012 11:11 PM (2XtN5)

2 Dunno if I should say.  Since I read this at home and couldn't at work anyway, NFSW is not a consideration for me.

Posted by: Mauser at May 03, 2012 12:11 AM (cZPoz)

3 J, I don't understand what you're saying.

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 03, 2012 03:15 AM (+rSRq)

4 I guess I should make clear: I'm not looking for opinions about the esthetics. I'm looking for a straight yes/no: Are they too ecchi to include? Will they get my readers into trouble?

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 03, 2012 03:46 AM (+rSRq)

5 The original version of my post did include something to the effect of "if all you want is hits, post pr0n.  But if you want readers..."

Posted by: Wonderduck at May 03, 2012 04:46 AM (6CHh4)

6 I was trying to think about the three female co-workers most likely to walk in and ask me questions, and how likely each one was to trigger a negative response. By that standard, I think 3 and 2 would pass, and 1 and 4 wouldn't, for the reasons I gave.

-j

Posted by: J Greely at May 03, 2012 06:58 AM (2XtN5)

7 Definitely #4 is no good. #2 and #3 are acceptable IMO.  Since I consider #1 to be borderline I would err on the side of caution and not use it.

Posted by: Doyen at May 03, 2012 07:19 AM (nV9J4)

8 I would feel uncomfortable having coworkers see any of those, to be honest.

Posted by: David at May 03, 2012 07:38 AM (+yn5x)

9

Long, long time ago I remember a Dave Berg cartoon in Mad where a girl at the beach is changing her clothing. The door to the changing room opens briefly and shows her partially undressed, and she screams and pulls it shut again. Then at the end she comes out wearing a really skimpy bikini, which shows far more than anything seen in the previous frame, and she is completely comfortable in it.

That picture has been part of the top rotation ever since I switched to the flash file, and no one has ever objected to it. It reveals far more than any of these pictures here do.

...But it's a swimsuit, not a bra, so that makes it OK. Why?

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 03, 2012 09:14 AM (+rSRq)

10 IMHO, it's the attitude difference between "skin showing" and "showing off skin"; here, Rio isn't engaging the viewer and shoving the goods into the camera.
-j

Posted by: J Greely at May 03, 2012 10:06 AM (2XtN5)

11

OK, that's a good point.

Rats. I really like that fourth borderline one, but I guess I can't use it.

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 03, 2012 10:08 AM (+rSRq)

12 Also, swimsuits are designed to be seen.  Lacy unmentionables (theoretically) aren't.

Posted by: Wonderduck at May 03, 2012 04:23 PM (6CHh4)

13 The argument of "wearer intent" doesn't work in this case, because Medaka definitely wants to be seen in her unmentionables...

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 03, 2012 05:00 PM (+rSRq)

14 For what it's worth, 95% of your readers won't have seen the scene in question (and the other 5% won't care), so you have to fall back on "swimsuit vs unmentionables" again. 

Not to argue it or anything. 

Posted by: Wonderduck at May 03, 2012 05:36 PM (6CHh4)

15 Frankly, how many people can claim a work-related reason to visit chizumatic during work hours?

If you use that metric, then the fact that you're looking at any of this at work could be grounds for dismissal.  The relative states of undress of the girls in the top rotation picture is icing on the cake for the HR types.

Posted by: Mark A. Flacy at May 03, 2012 06:01 PM (Zdi7L)

16

Frankly, how many people can claim a work-related reason to visit chizumatic during work hours?

Pixy, for one.

Posted by: Steven Den Beste at May 03, 2012 10:08 PM (+rSRq)

17 Even for my day job.  Since my work revolves around the analysis of memetic flow in social media, I can claim a work-related reason to visit everything from Lambda the Ultimate to 4chan.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at May 04, 2012 03:39 AM (PiXy!)

18 IMHO?  Use everything but the "boobs only" pic; that one's beyond the pale but the others are fine.

Posted by: atomic_fungus at May 04, 2012 09:49 AM (vq4t5)

Hide Comments | Add Comment