Talk:Harem (genre)

DO NOT RESTORE UNSOURCED CONTENT OR ORIGINAL RESEARCH

This is the third time I've removed the lists because not a single entry on the lists are verifiable and without sourcing, the lists are pure original research. Per WP:BURDEN, Please do not restore the list or any items on the list without providing third party sources. —Farix (t | c) 11:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi Farix, is the following link qualified as a good third-party source? http://www.anime-planet.com/tags/harem/anime Zanetu (talk) 07:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

What is the point of a genre page with no list of shows. I saw we get a list together or just do away with the page. Shows like Hayate the Combat Butler are listed as harems on respected site. is it okay to start a list if you use things like that, if not then this page serves no purpose.

Yes, yes that's true, but listing all Harem genre anime here only make this article looks bad, for the purpose of making an example of Harem genre anime, only listing some of them are good enough. Listing them all? Nope, that would only destroying this article. If you want to make anime recommendation it's better to do that on Anime website, but not on Encyclopedia.--AldNon^Ucallin?☎ 15:56, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Questionable Content

Harem Anime have been around for a long time now and there has never been a lack of what the second paragraph of the introduction has. There have always been Harem Anime surrounding men and there have always been Trans characters in them, saying things like removing gender identity seems to be stating that Progressivism is entering Anime and that is a downright falsehood. Titles for the "diverse" nature (or as they're called Reverse Harem) include Ouran HS Host Club, Fruits Basket, Uta No Prince Sama Maji love 2000%, Hana Yori Dongo, Dance With Devils. There are plenty more but the idea that this is a new thing is definitely wrong and should be removed from the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.128.224 (talk) 12:46, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Agreed -- there appears to be a user (or users) who continue to revert the page to remove references to same-sex relationships, as well as cross-dressing and transgender characters. May request that page be locked to only allow edits from logged-in users, as many of these changes and reversions appear to come from anonymous IP addresses. AmityCity (talk) 17:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Harem (genre). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091116035437/http://www.animenation.net/blog/2009/04/17/ask-john-what-distinguishes-harem-anime/ to http://www.animenation.net/blog/2009/04/17/ask-john-what-distinguishes-harem-anime/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:56, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Claim: Love Hina as the origin of harem genre

It is objectively false to claim that Love Hina is the origin of the harem romantic comedy. Tenchi Muyo and Ranma 1/2 both predate Love Hina, as do a few other series included in List of harem (genre) anime and manga. This claim included 2 references which are Japanese-language opinion pieces. For a statement of opinion to be considered a reliable reference, the citation should clearly state that the statement is an opinion as per: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Statements_of_opinion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.187.190.118 (talk) 07:02, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

As further evidence to support this point, the Japanese page does not make the asinine claim that Love Hina is an especially noteworthy example of the genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8802:1800:2BA:A165:EB4:573E:C6DA (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Some cleanup likely needed

There's some good info in this article, but it's pretty basic and there are some significant issues with both NPOV and also just missing the kind of info that people would likely come to the article to look up. For instance, how did "harem" specifically become the term for this kind of anime? It's interesting to me that anime would use a term for another society's version of something that existed in its own form in Japanese history (ooku) — there is probably some interesting stuff to examine here about Japanese cultural perception of Middle-Eastern cultures, or something along those lines. That is what I came to this to see if it answered, but there is nothing discussing the origins of the term's application to anime and video games. Contrast this with, say, the article on yaoi, which has a detailed section about the term's origins.

In terms of NPOV, I agree with previous entries that the "criticism/controversy" section could use some help there, and it's good that it has sources but could use some better ones as well. It also seems to be unhelpfully conflating issues with video games that use dating sim/harem elements and anime that do that, where the protagonist usually has a more profound relationship with, at least, the character they end up with—and also seems to be largely a criticism in Western journalism about the genre (supported by the examples given), which the text does not clarify. There were also some serious issues with the parts describing same-sex harems that I fixed: an unregistered user had edited out a bunch of language relating to "LGBT" under the, frankly, completely untrue assertion that that's a completely unknown concept in the anime industry. They instead replaced it with language that reinforces the heteronormativity the section was originally intended to criticize — like using "traditional" to mean "cis and heterosexual." Along with this being particularly strange in a Japanese cultural context (where there were cultural traditions around same-sex relationships that predate Western contact), that is not an unbiased framing. I would actually agree that "LGBT" isn't the best term here considering that it refers more to personal identity than just the gender dynamics of fictional romances where characters usually don't use specific labels; however, it is possible to use different language that is more neutral, like "same-sex" or "same-gender" or "non-heterosexual," without reifying the idea of heterosexuality as the only "normal, traditional" relationships.

I also am not sure it is accurate to describe harem anime as polyamorous. Most harem and reverse-harem present all the different love interests as options, but the protagonist ultimately ends up with just one of them in the end. The term polyamory refers to simultaneous romantic/sexual relationships with multiple people, and explicitly rejects the idea that you need to "choose one." So I think that terminology and phrasing is misleading.

Lastly, there were some significant grammar issues I fixed in that section that seemed to come from editors who are not familiar with English-language grammar, and there may be similar issues in other parts of the article. Beggarsbanquet (talk) 06:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I've tried to revamp the article by cleaning up a lot of the grammar mistakes and non-NPOV sections. Additionally, you're absolutely correct that harem works don't universally (or even normally) appear polyamorous per se; I've updated the article to be more specific on that front. SophieAmity (talk) 09:36, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Preserving WP:NPOV and WP:No queerphobia

There appear to be multiple historic edits and reversions to this page made to remove references to same-sex couples and transgender or cross-dressing characters, frequently coming from anonymous IPs. These edits are typically low-effort, and also commonly restore or introduce significant errors in content or form; indeed, the last one claimed it was restoring a "version that isn't plagued with politicised woke ideology." This article may need to be locked to anonymous IP edits to prevent vandalism or violations of WP:NPOV and WP:No queerphobia. AmityCity (talk) 17:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)