Talk:Tentacle erotica

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Merger[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Why should this article be merged with rape? It seems to be different enough to warrant its own page. KrJnX 18:13, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)


The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Fetishses?[edit]

Should "rape fetishses" be changed to "rape fetishes," or is "fetishses" a real term? --LostLeviathan 03:24, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Seems like a typo.

Spelling[edit]

As much as I am repulsed with the whole concept with tentacle rape, still...

The correct spelling is, in fact, "octopuses". The word "octopus" comes from "octo", meaning eight, and "pus", meaning leg. I don't remember the correct Latin plural for "pus" but it sure as heck isn't "pi". The form "octopuses", however, is completely acceptable in English.

'pus' is not a word stem, neither in Greek nor Latin as far as I know. 'pod' and 'ped' are respectively. The original nominative singular for that was 'pods' and 'peds' respectively if I'm correct. But it contracted to pous and pus. Which explains the highly irregular forms there. They contractions. Corpus comes from corpers, effectively. Or at least, that is what I read somewhere so no source and just an anecdote, do not use this somewhere as fact Niarch (talk) 14:19, 5 May 2008 (UTC).

I also corrected "euphism" to "euphemism" and "to chose" to "to choose". JIP | Talk 20:16, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The plural of "octopus" can be either "octopuses" (lower register) or "octopi" (higher register) in English. In Latin I believe the plural is "octopodes" (a 3rd declension noun), but that was lost in the borrowing, and the "authentic" plural was later re-analysed as "octopi" by analogy with other Latin-derived nouns ending in "-us" (most of which are 2nd declension). So, "octopi" isn't correct in Latin, but it is correct in English (and saying "octopodes" would just make people look at you funny). Gwalla | Talk 01:01, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Interesting, as the sources I've seen cite "octopi" as wrong. However, if "octopuses" is correct, I'm happy at that. I'd hate to get into an edit war on an article about such a repulsive subject. JIP | Talk 06:18, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Actually, I seem to be wrong about the precise derivation of "octopi", but not in a way that matters (it wasn't Latin in the first place, it's Greek; it just looks like Latin). The octopus article has a section on pluralization. Gwalla | Talk 08:33, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yeah, octopus is from the greek so the correct plural is actually octopuses.
From Wikipedia's 'octopus' entry:

Fowler's Modern English Usage states that "the only acceptable plural in English is octopuses", and that octopi is misconceived and octopodes pedantic. Octopi derives from the mistaken notion that octōpūs is a second declension Latin noun, which it is not. Rather, it is (Latinized) Greek, from oktṓpous (ὀκτώπους), gender masculine, whose plural is oktṓpodes (ὀκτώποδες). If the word were native to Latin, it would be octōpēs ('eight-foot') and the plural octōpedes, analogous to centipedes and mīllipedes, as the plural form of pēs ('foot') is pedes. In modern, informal Greek, it is called chtapódi (χταπόδι), gender neuter, with plural form chtapódia (χταπόδια).

Changing it to octopuses.

It has changed back to 'octopi' now. As much as I hate 'octopuses' and 'octopi' even more. We're still working on consensus here so I shall change it back. By the way, a lot of people will look at you as someone who knows his or her stuff when you use the plural 'octopodes', when you use 'octopi' those same will look upon you as ignorant and if you use 'octopuses' as someone who doesn't want any trouble. Also, octopus is not strictly from Greek as it is from Latin which borrowed it from Greek. The problem with Latin borrowing words from Greek is that how much of the original declension remains is completely arbitrary, effectively making them all irregular nouns. If it were Greek the plural would be in -es. And Latin in ēs. The problem is that neither languages at that time marked that difference. (Much like we are heading to today with the internet: 'HILOLURSOHOT'), which sparks the debate if that Latin word which was borrowed from Greek has as plural octōpodēs or octōpodes, or even if this was homogeneously adhered to. Which is the problem with how to pronounce it in English, the last 'e' long or not. I myself say /ˌɒkˈtəʊpədiːs/ but I have no idea if /ˌɒkˈtəʊpədəs/ perhaps is more correct.

"This is hot!" ~ Y. Link Addict on Tentacle Rape —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.58.200 (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Two other films on this theme[edit]

205.217.105.2 21:40, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I would also like to add another film, one that represents the extreme ends of tentacle hentai-Mahou Shoujo Ai.

Also, Alien from the Darkness has three sister films involving tentacles as a major theme, made by the same company:

128.120.186.130 23:15, 10 October 2005 (UTC)djflipstarx

What about Alien? The creature basically rapes the face of the astronaut to lay its eggs in his stomach. Palm_Dogg 02:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, but Alien isn't animated, and as far as I can tell, it doesn't involve tentacles. 128.120.186.9 06:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC) djflipstarx

Image appropriate?[edit]

As much as I dislike censorship, this image does present a semi-graphic image of a pornographic subject. Is the article enhanced by having it immediately visible on the page, or would it be best if we were to obfuscate it somehow - eg, through an outside link?

It's a well-known image, and Hokusai's work is widely regarded as fine art. I think it's fine. If it was a still from a sex scene in Urotsukidoji, that'd be a different story. Gwalla | Talk 04:30, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Honestly, who would be looking for TENTACLE RAPE without already have experienced the wide variety of tentacle rape available out there, let alone doing so without knowing even that it existed :). 23:25, 20 February 2008 (UTC) m0u5y —Preceding unsigned comment added by M0u5y (talkcontribs)

People I redirect to this page after they ask me on fora what the hell I just talked about. Niarch (talk) 04:27, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

How do you say Tentacle Rape in Japanese?[edit]

What's the actual Japanese term for this phenomena? Just curious... Kitty 07:22, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

The Japanese page on tentacles in general mentions a "tentacle genre" of anime and uses "触手" for tentacle. Franzeska 21:33, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Requested move 2005[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

why "rape"?[edit]

Since "rape" - forced sex - is a subset of "sex", why is this page specifically "Tentacle Rape" redirected from "Tentacle Sex" and not the other way around? Some tentacle sex is consensual, you know. Well, so I hear anyway. Ahem. wikipediatrix 19:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I think it should be changed as well. Objections? Jack Leaf 14:21, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree and changed the article title.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 13:26, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
I never heard this term before. Usually it's called "tentacle porn". I was just annoyed by this freshly invented label, because I couldn't find the Urotsukidōji article right away anymore. This isn't rape nor sex - it's pornography. Of course the term "tentacle sex" is often used on web sites for obvious SEO reasons. 91.16.223.154 (talk) 13:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

this page sucks[edit]

s'ly

That's fine, dear. --Isequals 08:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I think she or he is talking about the things on the appendages of the octopodes. Niarch (talk) 04:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Weebl and Bob[edit]

I find it inappropriate to link to an episode of Weebl and Bob in an article unrelating to the actual cartoon series itself and since many people in fact do not like Weebl and Bob and would not wish to see a link to it on an article that has no affiliation with it. I don't beleive this has any place in this article. If you were to link to a cartoon that had a little tiny bit to do with any article there would be cartoon links everywhere, and we don't want to inspire that. --Isequals 08:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

..Bwahahaha. Okay. I'll be honest. I just hate Weebl and Bob. --Isequals 08:50, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because your OP wasn't transparent enough. 66.229.182.113 09:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

What happened between 1820 and 1987? nothing???[edit]

First of all, let me say that the woodcut print is an absolutely amazing historical image. But, given that this article has no substantive information on the history of tentacle rape between 1820-1987, isn't it possible that this remakable woodcut's relation to modern tentacle rape depictions is incidental at best?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 18:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Tentacle Rape vs Tentacle rape[edit]

I think the Tentacle Rape page should be replaced with Tentacle rape. Doesn't that better follow the naming conventions?

US influence[edit]

The 1981 Hollywood film "Galaxy of Terror" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082431/) features a tentacle rape by a giant alien worm. Not sure who influenced who here but I thought it was worth noting.

the x-files:fight the future[edit]

in this film,near the end,Fox Mulder(David Duchovny)discovers his partner Dana Scully(Gillian Anderson)imprisoned aboard an alien spacecraft along with many other humans.They are kept frozen inside cryogenic chambers with an alien tentacle forced down their throats.When Mulder awakens Scully by injecting her with a vaccine both she and the tentacle come to life.Some kind of biological fluid is seen going down the tentacle into her body.When the tentacle is pulled out of her throat she's seen coughing up some thick,semi-clear liquid much like in the tentacle-rape/oral-sex scenes.And since the purpose of this is to in essence impregnate the humans with a gestating alien organism this heightens the parallel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cobraxus (talkcontribs) 18:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC).

Inappropriate links???[edit]

There are multiple links in the body of this article that go directly to outside websites, some apparently pornographic in nature.

All are clearly described as explicit in their descriptions, I see no problem with them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.169.232.11 (talk) 03:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Citation Needed Challenge[edit]

This is in regards to the statement:

Much of the genre also consists of domination/humiliation and bondage fetishes, since the victim typically is restrained by the appendages.

This statement is denoted with "citation needed" at the end. I previously removed the tag, commenting on the need, but it was restored with "no original research" as the justification. Thus the point of this discussion. ^_^

I am questioning the logic. One need not ask for citation on something so obvious when the source material is seen. By its very nature, tentacle rape is domination and bondage. Restraint of the victim (and the byproduct of humiliation and spirit breaking) is the norm rather than the exception. As tentacle rape is not a major sociopolitical or behavioral study, one will not find a scientific panel review study on the subject. There are Japanese articles which discuss tentacle rape (eroge hobby magazines) – however Wikipedia has guidelines against foreign language source; and this poster's translation of material could/would be given some sort of Wiki tag against it. This said: it is simply easier to use Primary Sources as "proof" to the sentence.

Primary sources: the entire range of tentacle rape titles. Anime includes Legend of the Overfiend or La Blue Girl. Manga includes "tentacle rape" chapters from titles released by Crimson Comics and Hellbunna (two adult manga lines that are found on illegal download sites; used only due to greater ease for English speakers to find them). Games can be located from the catalog of "specialist" publishers such as Black Cyc and Tinkerbell. List goes on and on.

Verifiability: Within reason, tentacle rape titles can be acquired by individuals of legal age. Japanese direct titles can be ordered from importers such as Himeyashop. Translated titles can be ordered from companies such as Peach Princess and G-Collection. Review of said material, will prove statement is factual. No different than if someone said, if you go outside and look at typical healthy grass, it will be green.

I am a "fan" of tentacle rape material – and although I do not produce such titles or write news articles in game magazines (although no such English publication exist) – I do consider myself knowledgeable. Of some relation: I also keep tabs on the eroge market and have a vested interest in it. I only state this, to point out that I'm not an insane random vandal. ^_-

The removal of the "citation needed" is not original research. Original research would be this poster, calculating a percentage of how much tentacle hentai is tentacle rape. What I am pointing out, is that the statement in question is: obvious to the topic when tentacle rape is seen with regularity, will not have a professional research citation from a credible institution (one could argue such a thing is beneath them), and is highly unnecessary. Please prove me otherwise. Nargrakhan 14:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Leaving aside the fact that the "Much of the genre" portion of the claim needs sourcing, your statement that "One need not ask for citation on something so obvious" is fatuous. What tentacle rape "is" is not a fact, but an opinion. Valrith 21:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Of course one can say that about almost anything that's not breakable into raw numbers or elemental figures... say... "rape" is an opinion and not fact, since the exact definition deviates from culture to culture. But that would be poisoning the well, and just side tracking... so ignore it. Furthermore, doesn't the term define itself? Tentacle rape requires: (1) tentacles and (2) rape - or vice versa. However it remains to be said: asking for citation on something that has no "grand body of experts" (at least outside Japan) to draw upon is rather innate in of itself. There is no sourcing, other than that which can be taken from those who collect/watch large amounts of tentacle rape. Of course such a thing WOULD be original research. It's circular. As for what "is" tentacle rape: in the West there are no standards. However in Japan, there is. Sites such as Getchu and EGS immediately come to mind, since eroge is a cornerstone of sex anime. However there are publications such as Tech Gian which make frequent categorizations. Furthermore, the genre of eroge and hentai anime are often labeled on Japanese packaging for shelf organization in stores (Akihabara has it most in my encounters). However - going circular again - I can't refer to such sources due to the need of English verification for Wikipedia. Seriously... how many actually heard of "Tech Gian" in America? I could practically make up a fictional article, lie about it being in an obscure copy of the publication, and no one would be the wiser unless they were as insane about tentacle rape as I was. Tech Gian - despite it's huge popularity - doesn't print back issues unfortunately. And just for the record: I didn't write the sentence that I'm arguing about... Not to poison the well - and I DO NOT want this next comment to be used as ammo against me (this is just an offhand observation formed from puzzlement rather than logic): but I just find it exceeding strange that anyone who has seen the bulk of tentacle rape products, question the validity. One does not need to "citation needed" on a statement that claimed, "in most eroge games the player is a male character." Anyone who played more than a handful of "niche" titles would know that. Nargrakhan 01:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Yuck![edit]

Who ever made this article needs to promptly remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.188.149 (talk) 07:43, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Could you tell the reason why this should be removed? The proper venue for suggesting article deletions is by this.--A (talk) 19:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Might as well delete every single page about sex. Seriously, don't be a pussy.69.224.43.78 (talk) 01:55, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

If we remove this we should definitely remove the article about birth. I mean ugh! :) 23:27, 20 February 2008 (UTC) m0u5y cakes —Preceding unsigned comment added by M0u5y (talkcontribs)

We should remove the article about pop celebrities without make-up too, oh wait, already done. Well let's remove this one then.
You have no taste in art. To quote Drapnol Stalker: 'Hmmyes, I truly dare say that any man who cannot fathom the intricate sophistications of beautiful and exotic Japanese art which depict the sexual gratification a prepubescent child may receive from being ocularly raped by huge tentacles surely misses a degree of development in art.', Barbarian. Niarch (talk) 00:50, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

C. L. Moore[edit]

It is conceivable that "Shambleau" is parallel to this, but I see no source that Moore is part of it; her source is Medusa, as is clearly stated in the story (and her comments in the Best of C. L. Moore), and her changes from the classic image are more likely to be indebted to the Laocoon than to Hokusai. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 17:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move to Tentacle erotica based on the discussion. In addition, I have created redirects utilizing all of the other proposed Google search suggestions. JPG-GR (talk) 19:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Since the discussion header wasn't created, I'll start it. I support the move to the new name, as judging from the article, not all pictures of this seem to be rape. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters(Broken clamshellsOtter chirps) 22:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Support erotica, which is grammatically more applicable than eroticism. Tentacle sex could just be about people having sex with tentacles. The article is clearly about tentacle sex as a form of erotica, so the move is appropriate. Google hits notwithstanding, the article title should clearly define the subject. This article would still come up under a google search for any of these titles, so I don't think that should be a factor. ~ JohnnyMrNinja 08:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

They're not tentacles[edit]

They're arms! See the article on tentacles . 72.192.216.234 (talk) 17:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Broken/Missing Links[edit]

The link to the gallery on this page is broken or nonexistent. If somebody could repair or replace the links and add references, that'd be great. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.169.232.11 (talk) 03:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

TRP?[edit]

I've heard this topic referred to frequently as "tentacle rape porn" or "TRP". Perhaps it would be appropriate to have this article listed in the disambiguation of "TRP"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.107.56.57 (talk) 19:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Should the 2nd futurama movie be put in media? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.122.215.64 (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Tentacle erotica outside of Japan[edit]

From 1892 New Orleans newspaper.

Are there known earlier examples of "tentacle erotica" or "tentacle rape" in the West? Wondering, Infrogmation (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Live Action[edit]

Should this page also include references to live-action tentacle-rape type materials? There is definitely live action (i.e. real person) with tentacle special effect films being produced. Centerone (talk) 01:58, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Does the Gender Studies section serve a purpose?[edit]

After reading the gender studies section, I wonder why it hasn't been removed yet. The author makes no cited reference to tentacle erotica at all, instead going on for three paragraphs about general feminist porn debates. Furthermore, what the author does say about tentacles is not only uncited, but unresearched. For example: "The increasingly violent depictions found in tentacle porn might be correlated with underlying misogynistic trends in pop culture." As a Japanese Studies major myself, this is just flat-out untrue. Unless someone can find proper citations and rewrite the section to have more to do with tentacle erotica rather than general feminist debate, I vouch for its removal. 69.243.144.145 (talk) 04:05, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

The page is a mess, but I don't have time to fix it properly... but this is a western feminist take on it. Though yes. "Increasingly violent" Maeda invented the concept and I think its gotten BETTER rather than worse. So probably... I am just stuck with other anime/manga sections so I cannot devote much time to fixing Wikipedia's hentai coverage problems... a lot of is wrong in fact. I'll tag it for now.ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:10, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Seems like a number of original research edits (practically an essay - mostly opinion) from either a sock puppet account, or a new user who doesn't understand how wikipedia works and has a particular axe to grind around a few related topics. He was active for two months and then nothing. Centerone (talk) 05:14, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Doing an in-depth reread of it, I think the first paragraph of it is potentially salvageable, with additional references and a minor rewrite.. the second and third aren't, nor are their references. However, reference 3 looks interesting.. does anybody have access to the full text of: "Meistermann, J. H, Riding the Squid, Blackwold, GA: University of Blackwold Press, 1979"? Centerone (talk) 05:22, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Someone just deleted the whole section claiming that there is no university of blackwold. I don't know if there is or is not, but according to http://www.the-unpublishable.com/2012/02/excerpt-from-tentacle-as-sexual-symbol.html it is a real article. If someone bothered to reference a fictional article with a fictional reference, that is a bit surprising. There may have been a university of blackwold in 1979 that ceased to be, or it may have been a press that was given a made-up name for some reason. Either way, I think the reference at least deserves some research. Centerone (talk) 21:38, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
It sounds like a hoax. There is no "University of Blackwold" or even a town of Blackwold in Georgia. The only Google hits for the supposed book "Riding the Squid" by "Johann Hans Meistermann" relate to either that blog entry or this Wikipedia article. Some of the other references are obviously fake, and the blog is in fact devoted to fiction. It looks to me that we've been had.--Cúchullain t/c 21:59, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by "some of the other references are obviously fake".. I just checked them out and they almost all come up and don't look "obviously fake" to me. Sure, they might not exactly be "reliable sources".. but they are not obviously fake. Yes, the article about octopus wrestling looks a bit jokey, but I can certainly believe that the newspaper articles they print are authentic from the 50s/60s time period goofy and not exactly ethical octopus wrestling trend in the same way that swallowing goldfish was a thing. Centerone (talk) 00:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
The thing is a jokey farrago. For one "obviously fake" reference, the link for the actress "Ursula" contains exactly none of the rather ridiculous material attributed to it. Another cites a supposed 1935 pornographic comic book called "The Cumming of Cthulhu". Etc etc. Now that we've identified several reasons to be dubious of this blog entry and the book it mentions (published by a fake university in a fake town), it would be more productive to hear why we should give it credence, or else just leave the material out.--Cúchullain t/c 03:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
As the author of the blog in question, I can assure you that everything on there is a work of fiction. That specific article is written in a pseudo-scholarly style and mixes real and fictional references. There is no University of Blackwold, no Ursula, and no Cthulhu Tijuana bible. Ancient0History (talk) 13:01, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── As a scholar on the anime aspect, I can tell you that thing has more then a FEW issues with its assertions. So I am calling fake. Let's look at the Maeda source, "There are some peripheral connections, for example Toshio Maeda would include references to the Cthulhu Mythos in Jaseiken Necromancer (1989). (“Manga Artist Interview Series (Part 1),” 2002)" Which references this site. [1] Aside from not even mentioning "Jaseiken Necromancer" the actual origin appears to be here: "In Toshio Maeda's 1989 manga Jaseiken Necromancer ("Evil Spirit Sword Necromancer"), the evil bad guy from another dimension is named Azathoth. So Maeda does know his Lovecraft, and the Overfiend's pseudopods really did have their roots in Lovecraft's seminal stories of unspeakable, slimy, cosmic evil." [2] This is laughable because "Jaseiken Necromancer" is a game which was made a manga by Maeda. JA wiki covers this. [ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/邪聖剣ネクロマンサー] The name of the villain by the game was from the mythos but there was no tentacle sex and Maeda's work is different. But the whole matter is someone's poorly written OR and is entirely unreliable research. Axe it. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:23, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Again, it's not original research, it's fiction. And someone hoaxed us by inserting one of its fake references here (and a credulous Wikipedian discovered the blog without realizing what it was. ) Ancient0History, thank you for clearing this up.--Cúchullain t/c 13:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Source[edit]

martin van maele illustration?[edit]

Someone added the martin van maele illustration without any accompanying reference to it, what it is, what it's from, etc. Perhaps that should be remedied... Centerone (talk) 19:32, 29 June 2017 (UTC)