VFTF1

And that I will do. Now - I've been wondering: so...why hasn't Doug responded to all the counter-points re: MF = child porn, and why hasn't he posted any answer the the "what's so great about Robotech?" question. And now I understand. It's because, like all great intellects, Doug's writings have an exoteric and an esoteric meaning. We've only been looking at their exoteric form, but we missed the essoteric content just beneath the surface. Doug's silence is actually not silent, but he has simply made his point before I even got around to asking the question. I am truly impressed - but finally I figured it out. If you analyze Doug Bendo's writings, you will see that he writes in code - and that it is possible to extrapolate the secrets of the universe from his work, not to mention answer the question as to why Robotch is so great. I will now proceed to go back and cut and paste various portions of his scholarly dissertations to answer the questions we all want answered: I bet you that these seemingly random compositions of random Doug Bendo quotes will be eerily similar to what he might well write should he deign to visit us with an answer: Why Robotech is Awesome By Doug Bendo Translated by VFTF1 sucks. I can go off of pure downloads if you shup the hell up about robotech Does that sound good to you in the form of nudity like a child perposly made as “human” says an naked girl in the a space battle retarted I shup the hell up about robotech. ok for a MINOR to be naked in japan?! ALL 3 live in the US bunk robotech every chance you get robotech fans did start standing up a total line of bs. Just like the little girl you could care less what any try to denie it because memo and everyone else was there. MW now doesn't mean Ill be any lesson of the robotech fan because the side you took was simply illegal. your crap she is to be implied to be a entity that we are to relate to as “human” ANYTHING great going on because he doesn’t. Now what I find so funny is that you tried to get me band ---------------------------------------------------------------- And that folks - is why Robotech is superior to Macross. Pete

As the old saying goes... You know that. I know that... but does...so-and-so know that? Apprently not But ok - fine. Let's move to a NEW TOPIC. One for which BOTH Doug and MEMO will help perfectly. We have - on our thread, on our forum, in our midst - a legend! The NUMBER ONE ROBOTECH FAN in the whole world! Doug Bendo. So - Doug - please tell us in a detailed post WHY Robotech is great, and why it is better than Macross? Memo - I would love to see you give your reasons too. This is what I've been waiting for a long time now. So - now that we have the top Robotech fans here- let's give them the floor! Tell us guys what is so amazing about Robotech that makes it worth anyone's while and - specifically - why is it better than Macross? I'm all ears - or eyes in this case. Pete

SETO: To quote the master "that's retarted!" If Doug Bendo can admit that the nudity of Ariel "represents" ANYTHING other than what is literally shown - why can't he admit that my arguments that Ranka's nudity represents her breaking free of her doubts and letting her true self shine also holds? Well Ranka was with adults too... But..but... ALL Children who are victims of adult sexual exploitation are with adults!! So - how does he therefore distinguish between what's porn and what's not? It sounds like the answer is as follows: Everything in Macross is pornography. Everything in robot is interesting and metaphorical and intelligent. The problem with even THAT argument is that the nude scenes of Minmey in Robotech are the SAME scenes as in Macross. So - what to think? Basically this: When two people kiss in Macross and a big dude shouts "ALIEN CIVILIZATION!" - it's PORNO. When two people kiss in Robotech and a big dude shouts "FLOWER!" - it's art. ?? Pete

And I'm going to harp on this subject a THIRD time to get my point across because I think it's important. Doug Bendo: Let's take a trip down memory lane. I was 15 years old - If I recall correctly - when I kissed a girl for the first time. She was 16 or 17. A year later - I saw her naked. She was a very lovely red head named Nicole DuSang (which, if you know French, is really poetic given her curly red hair). She was also a good friend of mine in High School and I fondly remember her. So. Tell me Doug - am I a pedophile for having fond memories of kissing and then getting sexually active with an underage girl when I was also under 18? Should I blank out ALL memories from my life as a teenager when I thought of how cute my colleages in high school were? I don't know this woman - haven't talked to her since my first year of college - that was more than ten years ago now. My ONLY memory of her is from when she was 17. Is my memory pedophilia? I hope you realize my question is vastly sarcastic. It is of course not pedophilia, and it would be ridiculous to look at it that way. Just like, if I had an old picture from high school of this girl, and remembered her in a sexual way while looking at that picture - then this does not mean I am a pedophile, child predator or sexual deviant. This is why it really makes no sense what you're arguing - it takes no account of context, intention and specifics. Ranka is a girl in a work of art. She is cute and sexy and erotic. We can appreciate her beauty JUST LIKE we appreciate the beauty of our high school sweet hearts. Doesn't make us pedophiles. Pete

I'd like to add some more please Doug Bendo: I would like to expand on some points I made in my earlier post. I think you have a very narrow and immature view of human sexuality. Nobody who is sane and reasonable will deny that sex exploitation of children (and adults for that matter) is morally wrong and should be criminal. However, the problem is how we define sex exploitation. Let me post the question to you this way: Do you think that children should never be shown in ANY sexual situation in a work of art, literature or fiction in general? Do you think sex should not be discussed with children and children should not be exposed to material with sexual content, under adult supervision, prior to the age of 18 (or whatever other arbitrary criteria you want to choose)? Do you believe that adults should pretend that sex doesn't exist and that sexuality is not part of being human, when in contact with children? And do you believe that children will be better off not knowing anything about sex, sexually transmitted diseases, the extent to which hormonically induced emotions can make their life as teenagers difficult, and the moral, ethical and religious dimmensions of sex? Do you think children will be safer, healthier and better of not knowing anything about this stuff? If you do - then of course you have a right to your opinion - but I think it's flat wrong. Children grow into adults - and that is a process. Allowing them to access all information with no guidance is risky because they can be hurt through inexperience. But, restricting their access to information is also risky because then they will never gain experience. When you talk about child nudity in Macross Frontier - you make it sound like Ranka was giving somebody a blow job. You are blowing it way out of proportion. So she seems to appear naked in the anime for a few seconds? Wow. Amazing. Please explain to me HOW this is pornography? If you are saying that the simple fact of having a naked teenage girl in a cartoon floating in space with mystical spirtual light shining around her is pornography - then I say that you have way waay too broad a definition of pornography. In fact, I would even go so far to argue that there are plenty of OTHER scenes in Macross Frontier that are far more erotic than the one you're reffering to - yet somehow you seem to be fixated on the nudity scene. But again - I ask you: Are teenagers supposed to wear black burkas and never show their faces? Are all teenage girls who dream of being sexy and glamorous supposed to dress like nuns? Are guys and girls never to be allowed to look at eachother? I mean - look - I'm asking you to clearly define for me how you believe the scene from Macross Frontier is porn. When you say it speaks bad of us guys who think there's nothing wrong with it - you make it sound, by implication - like we have nothing wrong with child pornography. What I'm saying is that I think most people would not agree that the scene in question - that ANY scene in question -was child pornography. First of all - there was no sex act. Second of all...well...no - actually - the first reason is good enough... I mean - you're making a pretty big leap, I think, to suggest that men who are mature enough to watch these kind of scenes are pedophiles by implication. I would actually argue, Doug - if we're going to go this route that YOU are a pedophile based on what you say. Why? Here is my argument for why Doug Bendo is a Pedophile: 1) By accusing us of pedophilia because we find nothing pornographic in the scene with Ranka naked, you therefore logically admit that YOU find the scene with Ranka naked to be pornographic. 2) If YOU find the scene with Ranka naked to be pornographic, then this means that the scene obviously has sexual/erotic meaning and connotations for you. 3) We have explained over and over that none of us find this particular scene pornographic and wonder how you could. But you do not accept it - you insist that it is clear as day light that this scene is pornographic and that to deny it implies that one has "no problem" with pedophilia 4) We are able to find a number of other meanings behind her nudity in that scene - as well as in others. Nuditity is often a metaphore for a pure spirit without anything stopping it from reaching its' full potential. Other scenes of a sexual nature in Macross Frontier (sexual is not the same as pornographic remember) explore sexual guilt, shame, shyness, emotional longing, fashion aesthetics. Really Doug - we could have a very very long conversation about the sexual implications of various scenes in this anime - in most fictional works in fact. 5) You refuse to see ANY other meaning behind this scene other than child pornography. 6) A person who insists that this scene is ONLY about child pornography clearly has such a strong pornographic impression based on the scene that no other impression is possible in this person's mind. 7) Ergo - this person is an unwilling Pedophile because he can't find any other meaning behind a picture of a naked person in a fictional story except for "child pornography" Remember too please that the word "pedophile" is mearly a description - it is a lover of children. Pedophilia is not illegal. Sexual exploitation of children is illegal. And rightly so - because you cannot put people in jail for sexual TASTES and EMOTIONS. You CAN put them in jail for HARMING other human beings (including sexual aussault on a minor). Finally: I believe that a sign of being a mature adult is being able to talk maturely about sexual content in works of fiction. It is a sign of sexual and emotional imaturity to scream "pedophile!" and "child porn!" just because for 1 second Ranka is naked in a scene, the context of which, clearly shows that she is finally free of her fears about whether or not she is a good singer, whether or not she did the right thing leaving Frontier to go with Ai-kun - it's the culmination of a 26 part story about this character who had many fears and doubts about her self - and finally is free of them and saves the universe. But for you - it's just child porn. Ergo - you are the pedophile Doug. Pete

Doug Bendo: I agree with Doug Bendo. He has mad macros look retarted. Doug Bendo: It is ok because "putting things in a questionable position" is the whole point of fictional ART. Asking questions and bringing up questionable things is the whole point of fictional ART. I agree with you that is is something people can disagree about, and some people will find it controversial and questionable. But good fictional art is all about making people question things in life. Doug Bendo: Well I just made it an argument. You can believe that it is disagreeable and borders on something worse, but I think you're wrong to say it's always flat out wrong. I believe that children are also human beings. Teenagers date and fall in love and have sex. 15 year old boys sometimes see naked 15 year old girls. 17 year old girls sometimes see naked 16 year old boys. They can have sex with each other. It's their right as human beings. Adult exploitation of real living children is wrong. "Naked children" is not wrong. Pete

And DOUG BENDO IS RIGHT. There are human beings who DO possess the ability to discern each and every detail of something without understanding even ONE spoken word. For example: ME I've never watched a Doug Bendo podcast, but I discern without hearing a single word that's it's a waste of time Therfore- I agree with Doug Bendo. Pete

That's kind of how I interpreted it too. But yeah...we need to see what they ate for breakfast. The Operation was set to start at midnight though - so it had been a while...they probably had SOMETHING random for dinner - but we didn't see it. As for Breakfast - we know that Misato drinks Beer for breakfast, whil Shinji drinks coffee - usually. And they do have a toaster. But anyways - yep...that's why it was - to me - a Macross reference. A nice spin on steak and dying. Eat AFTER the mission - don't try before. Pete

I so wish I could make everybody's life interesting at this point by truthfully revealing that I am Pizza the Hut. Sadly, I always liked Pappa John's and Dominos better - and while the Space Balls character was a nice pun, I wouldn't really use that avatar ... As for Doug Bendo - You know...I misspoke. It's not just America that has that mind set a lot. I mean, heck, here in Poland, theatre plays are getting censored all the time because dudes are walking around stage in their underwear or girls are showing their breasts in some scene or another. In fact- what is really lousy is that due to people who have allergic reactons to human nudity - the sure fire best way to get famous and make money is to put lots of nudity in whatever you do - because it will make you controversial, get you called an artist and by proxy, make you money. I'm personally sometimes just bored with it. I love good erotic material - but sometimes it's just done for the shock value - and the only reason it HAS shock value are because of all the prudes running aroound giving it value by screaming their heads off about it. Case in Point: Doug Bendo. I mean - come on. Macross Frontier featured a little boy (Luca) in a death machine; blowing stuff up. It featured human beings commiting bloody murder (Cathy finding her father's body is a fairly graphic scene). But none of this bothers Doug. That's all good. It's that one time when Ranka is lit up like a fire bug and while we can't say for sure if she's naked or not, she certainly isn't wearing conventional clothing - THAT is the most important point that needs to be addressed in the entire anime, which had no other interesting, let alone mildly controversial aspects to focus on. It's so boring. .... That said.... I've thought up some new issues we can discuss: 1. Rick Hunter vs. Hikaru Ichijo - who would win? (fighting without their VFs) 2. Lyn Minmey vs. Lin Minmei song contest - who sings better? 3. Roy Focker vs. Roy Focker (who's the bigger Fokker?) Please use the animation from Macross and from Robotech: The Macross Saga to draw your comparissons and tell us why you think your view is right. Pete

Pff Typical of the sad state of legal thought in the USA on this subject. Murder and bloody warfare are A-Ok. Sex is bad. Right - got it Pete

Yes - that is true. But that's like saying legal grounds exist for a citizen to take another citizen to civil or criminal court and to file an accusation against anybody. That's ALWAYS true. It's just as true as the fact that Doug enjoys freedom of speech to voice his opinions, which most all of us disagree with. Still - let me put it this way: When YOU OR ME talk about whether naked cartoon character are illegal and pornographic - we quickly not only look to some case law and legal practice, but we get down to some important basic distinctions. Doug just says "it's illegal!" and that's it. At least he did in this thread. But clearly - it's not always and everywhere illegal - for it to be illegal - it has to satisfy a number of circumstances which themselves are questionable and debatable - as we have seen. Now - did Doug Bendo ever make any effort - beyond saying "it's illegal!" to argue...you know...WHY? Pete

Oh - sorry. My bad. Still - as you note - the whole argument still holds since essentially whether it's the "spirit form" from the ending or from the opening, it's the same "form" in question. Pete

Cotinuing this subject - the article you quoted does a great job showing where this new law "Protect act of 2003" is totally unconstintutional: So - let me see: how can somebody that does not "actually exist" have any legal protection? Christoper Robin is a cartoon character in Winnie The Pooh. Behold: My Fictional Story: One day, Christopher Robin from Winnie The Pooh was walking down the street. Then I, Pete, came up to him with a gun and shot him dead. The End So - under the PROTECT ACT OF 2003... I am a murder right? I just murdered a child. True, he didn't exist - but I just wrote about how I killed a fictional character in my one sentence story. Somebody please get the ball rolling to extradite me back to the USA so I can stand trial for first degree murder. Anyways - that one other Judge basically summed up my view: "yeah, you're right. Emails and cartoons aren't porn. But pictures of real kids being exploited for sex are child porn. Go to Jail." If they press on with the other two - they will loose those two arguments at the Supreme Court and that ridiculous sentence (about the law applying to things that don't exist) will be over turned. EDIT AGAIN: FINAL POINT: What do you expect a Federal Appeals court to rule anyways? A Federal Appeals court has to rule based on Federal Law - not on the Constitution. The law is stupid, so they upheld a stupid ruling. When it gets to the Supreme Court, the Court will uphold the jail time for real child porn and strike down the punishment for the hentai and the whole notion that ANY law can apply to people who "don't actually exist." The Constitutional protection to life liberty and property doesn't cover non-existent people at the expense of living human beings. Although I'm sure lots of politicians would love to put real living people in jail and supplement them with people who don't "actually exist" -- but still miraculously rise from "non-existence" from time to time to vote for them. Pete

The series opening - where she flutters in a beam of flashy light through a triangle into space or something. I guess that's the part Doug defines as pornography. Re: the current law/Ashcroft vs Free speech etc: The Supreme Cout made its' decision in the case you cited. Naturally, there will always be circumstances where people try to give new twists to old abuses. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court case you cited carries more weight than Federal Appeals court - and the two cases are not similar because this Whorley guy was actually into REAL live children in pornos. Sure - you're right - but actually, if you sift through American law - and the laws of most countries - you will find that it is actually illegal to breathe litterally and that there is just about nothing legal any more. The vast majority of these laws go unenforced - until somebody wants to be mean to somebody else and haphazardly enforces them. But this is a problem that is seperate from whether or not something is REALLY illegal. By "really illegal" in the United States I mean unconstitiononal. I don't wanna get into a political debate - but I'm never going to concent to something that is clearly a violation of constitutional free speech bein formally called "law" just because some state house or session of Congress passed it and somebody else enforces it and the Supreme Court hasn't heard the case yet. Most of the laws in America are illegal - they contradict not only the constitution but even themselves; like most laws in most countries. I will bet every penny you want that the "PROTECT ACT OF 2003" is full of unconstitutional stuff. But - let's look at the link you cited: It says: How much you wanna bet that his 20 year sentence has something to do with this? They just tagged on the "cartoons are porn too" offense so they could widen the application of the law. But the Supreme Court in Ashcroft vs. FSC specifically said the 1996 act couldn't do that. So - neither can this one. That doesn't mean they won't continue trying. They just found a guy who happened to like hentai with animated children AND live child pornography and bagged him. And finally - it's not the Supreme Court. It's just a Federal Appeals court that ruled. My guess: If this case came to the Supreme Court, based on prescendence - the court would say: 1) Whorley should stay in jail because he was into child porn with real children. 2) Congress once again is overstepping its' limits by confusing the defense of real children and the freedom of speech. The description of the Whorley case fits that perfectly. So - I say my argument holds. More bad laws will always be passed and prosecutors will continue to try to expand the power of the state to jail you for breathing. Doesn't make it truly legal. Pete

Well - Nekki Bassara would kick all you alls' asses anyways SO THERE!! Pete

Aaaah - ok - now I know why you're mind is playing tricks on you here Dreamweaver. Ritsuko does state that there was an accident when melding a human soul to an EVA, which caused the death of the subject. I think that refers to her mom - or something like that. You might have gotten that confused with Yui volunteering for it. But yeah - Ritsuko does say something about somebody dying when they try to put the soul into EVA...at least that's why my memory is telling me. But like Keith confirms - Yui is indeed voluntary merging. I'm glad you bring up the AT field, and of course your description is correct. However - I am glad of it because note please that the AT field, even though it sounds like some complex scientific thing - is actually a psychological state that afflicts humanity. The anime calls it "Absolute Terror" and defines it as you write. Yes. But in essence then, it's just using a scientific sounding term "AT Field" to describe the psychological condition of angst, of fear of the Other, of solitutde and lonliness which are part of being a unique individual human being. My thesis is that this view can be applied to ALL "scientific jargon" in EVA - not just the AT field. It applies to words and concepts like "Angel," "EVA," "Soul" etc etc That is why I think when we talk about the definition of these words in the anime, we need to look for what they tell us about the human condition. Pete

This is an interesting idea - but the character templates of the cast from Macross zero is not "ethnically" based in any way. That is to say, none of them act in a way that would be reminiscent of any particular nationality or culture. I don't think dubbing them on the basis of their ethnic/racial appearance would be helpful. That would just be a case of over-lapping character traits that were never there in the original. It would also be racist - because if you "fix the words" on the basis of "creed and color" then you basically have to create racial stereotypes for every character's behavior. That's not a good idea. Instead, a dub should, IMO, try to remain faithful to the CHARACTER - not to the color of the character. Edgar does not behave in any way that could be linked to any national, ethnic or racial traits. Edgar behaves like EDGAR. When he speaks he conveys the emotions and thoughts of the character Edgar. The dub should try to do the same. Macross, like most anime actually, does not allow ethnic stereotyping to seep into its' characters. In fact, most science-fiction doesn't allow it because it instead tries to show people as people - not as stereotypes of ethnic groups. That said - hope you enjoy Macross Zero. I personally always prefer watching the original Japanese with sub-titles, and actually I watch all my foriegn movies in the original with subtitles too. Even the best dubs can never replace great acting in a foriegn language. Pete

Don't worry - when you watch it for the one thousandth time - it will still never get old and get better and better. And try to get the mp3s for the music. I just finally found Mina no Peace, but in general the entire music track is worth it. Pete

I disagree with the last part, of course. First of all - nothing is ever lost when people have a dialogue that is civil because all dialogue ultimately leads to either better understanding or one side proving themselves to be dorks and banning the other side. If the first thing happens, then great for everyone. If the second thing happens - to bad for the dorks who resort to banning their opponents. Second of all - if we did not respond, we would not be upholding the MW way of doing things - namely open, civil debate. Thirdly - I realize Doug and Memo are saying the same thing they've said elsewhere. But I think the fact that they are here says something - namely - it says that they recognize that they actually need to be able to engage Seto and us in a dialogue. Why? Because if they don't - then you get a 39 page thread on the internet about why they suck - with NOT ONE PERSON ARGUING OTHERWISE. Meanwhile, on Robotech.com - I think it's hard to find a 39 page thread about anything (unless Seto was writing in it) Clearly then - it is in their interest to actually be able to debate their opponents rather than letting their opponents just write whatever they want at MW. Too bad both Doug and Memo realized this only after first banning their opponents who actually contribued to their websites. There's nothing demeaning about talking to them, though. And as long as they're being civil - then it's fine. NOTE: Being civil and being harsh in your arguments are not mutually exclussive. The mods will determine if the line is ever crossed of course, as will common sense public opinion - but so far, everybody is keeping their cool and arguing the merits. Heated argument - yes. But nothing discourteous I would say. And since this time, Doug and Memo can't just BAN Seto when they don't feel like talking to him any more - then this debate will finally make its way to its' logical conclusion: Either Doug and Memo will learn to get along with Seto and co-exist with us here, or this will descend into a flame war. I am counting on Macrossworld members NOT to be the ones who turn this into a flame war. Finally - if people don't want to talk to them - then don't. Nobody's forcing you. If you think their stuff is ridiculous - don't respond. But look - ultimately in the course of the debate - something will change - it is innevitable - either we will come to some understanding, or the dialogue will end in fiasco and flame war. If it ends in fiasco and flame war because of us - then we suck. Pete

And Harmony Gold can come along and say this: "Oh, but in the Robotech universe, they started building aircraft carriers that were 10 times bigger than the ones we have now in the real world." And fine. Who cares? Let the SDF-1 in Robotech be as long or short as they want. Meanwhile, in Macross, unless I am mistaken, there are official stats. Those stats need not hold true for Robotech. But I just don't see why this is even an issue? I mean - ok - I understand that it's an issue for Robotech fans. If you love Rick Hunter and Lis Hayes, you want to prove that they aren't cramped or something, and that there's plenty of room for stuff - it makes you sleep better to know that the SDF-1 is long enough to...do something or other. Ok. Fine. But for Macross fans to be concerned about this? Who cares what the length in Robotech is? Pete

You do realize that this is the kind of argument 5 year olds have on a playground? And banning Seto is the equivalent of a 5 year old shouting "you poopy head!" ? OF COURSE Seto couldn't win this argument. The argument is pointless - it can either be a fun set of hypotheseses or it can be 5 year olds calling eachother out. The stats for Macross and different than for Robotech. Hell - the stats for Mospedia and Southern Cross (assuming there are any in Japan) are different than Robotech. It's all conjecture. It's like "who would win? Batman vs. Spiderman?" It's a playful question and EVERY possible opinion is just that - an opinion. Meh. If Robotech vs. Macross discussions are at the level of "the Macross version of these cartoon airplanes can blow up the Robotech version of the Mospedia version of those cartoon airplanes and if you don't agree then you're a poopy head and get banned!" then... well... No further comment necessary. Pete

Arguing with Doug Bendo, Part II Because THIS paragraph deserves a seperate reply: Let's go step by step here Doug. 1. Doug says: This sounds interesting. What exactly was the issue here? In any event, it sounds kind of pointless to argue against Robotech using Macross because they are two different things. The only thing that makes sense is using Macross comparatively to say that the original version makes MORE SENSE than the changed version that became part of the Robotech trilogy. Having said that, Robotech fans need to be careful when they try to "prove" things based on "the animation" because remember - ALL OF THIS ANIMATION WAS MADE FOR A STORY CALLED "MACROSS," A STORY CALLED "MOSPEDIA" AND A STORY CALLED "SOUTHERN CROSS." Therefore - the animation - what we SEE is all supposed to tell a story that is NOT Robotech. It's kind of like if I took a page ouf of a Spiderman comic book, where Spiderman is swinging on his web and Stan Lee has the following text in the thought bubble: "I sure do like Mary Jane...I really love her..." And I went ahead and published the page but change the text to: "Man, my ass really itches!! I can't wait to get out of this costume and scratch it!!" And then I argued that "based on the animation - we can see the pain from Spiderman's ass-itch in the way he was drawn - look - it's clear that while swinging in NYC on his web - his ass itches. The animation shows it - and if you're in doubt - the text backs up what is shown in the animation. POINT: Dialogue has a lot to do with how we interpret pictures. But the pictures in Robotech came BEFORE the dialogue. And the pictures were NEVER meant to illustrate the story of Robotech. So using "the animation" to prove a point in Robotech is not that straight forward. Doug says: Um..maybe he was just talking about the SDF-1 in Macross? I agree - in Robotech, it can be a million miles. The animation is not going to tell us anything for the reasons I stated above because the animation is not animation for the Robotech story. It illustrates the Macross story. The Robotech story is super imposed on it. Therefore - in Robotech - the SDF-1 can be however long Harmony Gold says it is. Who cares? Nobody knows what the legal age in the Macross story was because it was never mentioned and it doesn't matter anyways. Most people interpret that since it was made in Japan, where the legal age is X, then the legal age in Macross is X, but it's not a big deal anyways. Kawamorii might have said that Ranka was 16. I don't remember him ever saying "the legal age in the Macross universe is 16." It was never an issue in the stories. I don't understand what you're complaining about here? I do understand your opinion that the legal age for real living children in the real world is different in the USA and in Japan. But I have already pointed out that there are no real living human children in Macross and therefore the law is not applicable. I doubt Seto was saying that there is a cannonical legal age in the original Macross story. He was probably saying that the legal age in Japan is X, the creator says Ranka's age is X, and therefore for the Japanese she's a young girl at the legal age. THAT said - Where in Macross Frontier does Ranka have sex? Where in SDF Macross does Minmey have sex? Where do ANY of the "young" characters in ANY Macross show have sex? In explicit sexual publications in Japan? Yes. In the ANIME? NO. So - this is a non-issue. They are never shown having sex anyways - so who cares what their "legal age" is? Even if Ranka were said to be 8 years old - who cares? Is she shown having sex? No. Now - you MIGHT be making the argument that the artistic style over-sexualizes the female characters. That is a legitamite argument to bring up. But please bring it up. It is an opinion held by many anime and Macross fans about Macross Frontier AND about general anime trends in the world. Open Disclosure: I personally do not hold this opinion and I favor the sexualization of characters because I think hot sexy girls are fun and good. But I'm open to people disagreeing, and I certainly DO agree that it's bad for the story when fan service overshadows plot. But I DON'T agree that the erotic elements of Macross Frontier diminish its' plot. Also - watch episode 4 of Macross Frontier. The anime makes fun of over-sexualization in anime in that episode by confronting Ranka Lee with big boobed models at the Miss Macross contest. So the anime is actually SELF-AWARE about the problem of fan service and the debate about its' place in anime. Again - I don't really understand what you're getting at? Pete

Except the hot girls and super robots. Those are always real Pete

Doug Bendo: News flash: 1) None of the characters in Macross Frontier legally qualify as "minors" under US law because they are not human beings, but rather - cartoon characters. 2) Having minors in the nude for purposes of entertainment is not illegal in the USA anyways - there are plenty of movies where children are shown in the nude. And movies are arguably "for entertainment. It IS illegal to use minors in sexually explicit, pornographic material. 3) "Nude" is not the same as "Pornography." 4) It is not illegal for Americans to watch a cartoon showing characters who are - within the work of fiction labeled as "under age" and appear naked in that fiction, so long as that nudity is not pornographic in nature. 5)No court has ever ruled that the material in Macross Frontier qualifies as pornography. 6) Even IF a court in the USA ever ruled material from Macross Frontier as pornographic it could NOT rule it as "child pornography" because THERE ARE NO HUMAN BEINGS IN A CARTOON. The only place there is child pornography is when there are children. 7) Many works of art show naked children. There are numerous frescos in Churches picturing naked people and naked children and naked little girls. These are not pornography I do not agree that the nude scenes in Macross Frontier are pornography simply because Ranka is shown naked. That would be like saying that doctors who deliver babies practice pornography because they deal with women who open their legs and pull naked people out of them. 9) As the Supreme Court case with Larry Flint showed, pornography is legal in the United States anyways and protected under free speech laws. CHILD pornography is indeed illegal, just like all forms of child exploitation. Macross Frontier is a cartoon and therefore features no children at all. Doug Bendo: It means nothing that Talkshoe thinks the side they took "was simply illegal." Talkshoe is not a court of law. Talkshoe DOES have the right to ban people for whatever reason they want of course. But - the fact is - you are wrong. "Ranka Lee" is NOT 14 or 18 or 29 or 50. She does NOT EXIST. She is a cartoon character. Cartoon characters are not human beings and are not protected by law. You cannot allege child pornography when dealing with cartoon characters. You CAN allege pornography - yes - but not child pornography. But if those are Talkshoe's reasons - fine. That is their right. It's their website. Doug Bendo: There are three seperate issues here Doug: 1) The "Fan War" between Seto and you guys 2) The disagreement over the legal status of Macross in the USA 3) The question of the Macross anime vs. the Robotech anime from a strictly literary, artistic, story point of view (aka - which one is better?) You and Memo and Robotech.com DO make MILLIONS of arguments in subjects 1 and 2. I have NEVER seen any arguments (except the Top 10 list from Toplessrobot) where Robotech fans actually try to take up subject 3 - the issue of which show is better. Personally - I think this third issue is the most important one. Seto mainly seems to be pre-occupied with debunking your theories about the legal debate and proving that robotech.com & Co. are poorly administered and unjustly moderated. When Seto discusses the Robotech shows or novels, he seems fair minded and I've never seen him try to "debunk" anything - because what is there to debunk? Everybody acnkowledges that in 1984, it was a good idea to bring these anime over, that there was no other way to do it, that it didn't work out, and that people who remember the show have fond memories of it, and people who read some of the novels or played the RPG from Palladium have nice memories of it too. But now - when they can watch the original, lots of people don't have any use for Robotech and are sometimes upset that the legal problems mean they can't walk into a video store and rent MF etc. That's all there is to it. Doug Bendo: That's not true. How do I know? Because you and Memo are here. Seto "went away." You guys banned him from Robotech.com, then he gets banned from Talkshoe - you ban him from everywhere you hang out and have the power to do it. So? He "went away." Why did you follow him? Because you realized that banning him is not going to silence him and people will still read him and by banning him you made it impossible for YOUR SIDE of the argument to be heard next to HIS? And therefore you have to come HERE and argue with him as damage control so fans can get both sides of the debate? Great. So - what? You want Seto to just stop writing on the internet and stop posting his opinions? Wouldn't it be a better idea to do what you are doing now - namely just argue with him and write in the same website and debate with him? See - you banned him, but people still read him - and now you find that you have to come here to debunk him. It would have been healthies and better for you if you didn't ban him and let him post all this stuff at Robotech.com and just continued to counter-argue with him there. It would have increased your sites' traffic and showed that you don't fear healthy debate. Unless you really are naive enough to think that Seto will just "go away" - litterally. Like dissapear from the internet? That's crazy. I don't think Doug Bendo and Memo will go away - and I don't want them too. It's fun to disagree and debate. It's not fun to ban people who disagree with you. It's not nice. And it actually hurts YOUR cause more than it hurts Seto. Doug Bendo: Just like I apologized to Memo if he felt offended for making fun of him - I'll apologize to you. And I will say this: Thank you for posting here. Thank you for being willing to debate these issues openly and thank you for not just banning Seto and his friends and isolating yourself in your own corner of the web and pretending opposite opinions don't exist. The fact that you're here speaks well of you. Pete

Accidentally? I could be wrong but I was under the impression she volunteered, and that this was stated in the later episodes of the anime. Pete