
I’m not sure if this was directed at me or Shindere, but you’re right that it’s foolish to continue. I was trying to end the discussion, but I should at least clarify my motives to an observer. I wanted to discuss how definitions are derived and to question any single person’s claim that one definition is unequivocally superior without foundation. Though Shindere may suggest otherwise, acknowledging uncertainty is not verifying any position and should not be reinterpreted that way. Our arguments underscore the extent to which we think and discuss ideas in a rational, constructive way. Shindere is dismissing the credibility of other sources and perspectives without reason while neglecting to develop or substantiate his/her own arguments. Any questions I ask about specific points or examples are summarily dismissed as stupidity and treated as hostile attacks, no matter how I rephrase the questions. Shindere claims to teach others, but it’s impossible to learn from such an approach, which results in the death of civil discourse as we’ve witnessed here. How we defend or explain our perspectives is more important than trivial definitions. Unfortunately, attempts to discredit others or delegitimize their efforts without justification are not limited to this discussion. For that reason, our arguments have broader implications, even if this particular exchange has become a joke. Of course, trying to engage an unreceptive audience is futile. I was stupid to reply, but that's what it was about (for me, anyway).

It's not a matter of agree or disagreeing. To disagree and to agree calls for opinions. The things I've said are not opinions. Facts are facts regardless of whether you agree to it or not. There is nothing to agree or disagree about. Unless you can somehow prove it wrong, which no one has yet to, there is nothing to talk about.

There is something to discuss if you want to convince others that your definitions are meaningful. I abandoned this discussion a couple weeks ago because you didn’t acknowledge counterarguments or the questions people raised. That doesn’t mean such questions or issues with the examples you used to justify your claims don’t exist. In fact, I have something new to add after I just realized Zankokuna Kami ga Shihai Suru (A Cruel God Reigns), one of the three examples you gave of shonen ai, was published in a josei magazine called Petit Flower. Since the intended audience is women and the manga has mature themes, don’t your definitions suggest it’s yaoi, not shonen ai? How does this example support, not refute, your definitions?
While I'm at it, I should point out that your other two shonen ai examples are as debatable as the three yaoi examples I questioned in earlier posts. One Thousand and One Nights is a manhwa (South Korean comic) published by Seoul Munwhasa. I can’t read Hangul, but the English publisher Yen Press ( http://www.b2c.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/none/one-thousand-and-one-nights-vol-4/9780759528741/?yen) gives it an “Older Teen” rating and uses broad genre classifications (e.g., “General” initially and “Gay & Lesbian” for later volumes), so it’s not clear why you think it’s shonen ai or how your definition applies. Omamorishimasu, Dokomademo is published in Chara, a “Boys love comic for girls” ( http://www.chara-info.net/). Chara is well known for what most manga sites label Yaoi, though shoujo or BL might be better labels. If such sites are labeling Omamorishimasu, Dokomademo differently from other manga published in the same magazine, is it really because the age or maturity of the intended audience is different? Also, does Omamorishimasu, Dokomademo have a sex scene? The last few pages imply the main pair is about to consummate their relationship, but is there more?
In other words, your six examples raise more questions than they answer and do not show that your definitions are superior to any other definitions presented in this thread.

This is where you are stupid. Somehow, you're under the notion that I'm trying to convince people of my "opinion." In fact, I'm not doing that at all. I'm informing people. Go back and read what I said at the beginning people. I don't need to convince. The thing I said are indisputable facts that no one can disprove. The fact that you yourself can't disprove it.
Petit Flower are notorious for Shoujo manga as well along side Shounen Ai. Just because they have a few Josei manga doesn't mean that they cater towards the specifically. Unlike other publisher, Petit Flower is pretty broad so stop with your stupid assumption.
As for One Thousand and One Nights, it is for older teens you idiot and not for young adults. Meaning the age of 13 - 17 and not 18 - 21 which are Seinen and Josei. Get your demographics right you idiot.

Thank you for actually responding to some of my specific questions.
Petit Flower is listed as a josei magazine and most of what it publishes is josei, including A Cruel God Reigns:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowers_(magazine)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Cruel_God_Reigns
https://www.mangaupdates.com/publishers.html?pubname=Petit+Flower
http://www.mangago.zone/read-manga/zankoku_na_kami_ga_shihai_suru/
This is not coming from me. I looked it up. I did read A Cruel God Reigns a while ago, and it's not hard to understand why the content is classified as adult. I am willing to accept some link or source contradicting this claim, but you denying what I learn from other sources without providing an external reference is counterproductive. In case you want to dismiss my links, I am aware of Wikipedia's limitations. The point here is to show that I am not giving my own opinions. If you want to debate the quality of specific sources, lead by example and provide a few of your own. I am simply pointing out that A Cruel God Reigns is widely considered josei, so you seem to be contradicting your own definition of shonen ai.
I think you missed my point regarding One Thousand and One Nights. I was emphasizing that the English publisher does not actually provide any category label other than the age rating and the General or Gay & Lesbian label. The specific age rating is a side issue (though it could be interpreted as evidence that the manhwa is not considered to have explicit sexual content, since sexual content partly determines the age rating). My main point is that Yen Press does not use the BL label, and it certainly does not use the label shonen ai, since it's referring to a South Korean comic. I question using seinen, josei, or any other Japanese publishing label for manhwa, but that's a digression. I've subscribed to a number of legal websites where I purchase access to translated South Korean webtoons (Lezhin, Netcomics, etc.), and BL is usually used if the focus is on a gay couple's relationship (often with an additional age rating if the content is particularly explicit). This is more of an historical adventure comic and the focus of each volume is on different stories, many of which do not feature homosexual couples, so I tend to think it defies easy categorization. There is more homosexual content in Banana Fish, which was marketed as shojo, not BL or shonen ai. Perhaps it's not worth comparing publishers from different countries, though. (Banana Fish has dark, adult themes, so it's sometimes hard to define the limits of shojo based on mature content.)
Regardless, you have not explained why you think One Thousand and One Nights is shonen ai in the first place. If that label comes from Baka-Updates, for example, that website does not use your definitions, as I have already mentioned ( https://www.mangaupdates.com/genres.html). I can't say anything about Mangago labels, since I'm not sure how those are applied. Still, I'm not sure why Mangago's labels would be deemed more accurate than the publisher's, and I think you would have to demonstrate that Mangago is actually using your classification. It's quite possible the label is based on the lack of explicit sexual content between the main pair, regardless of whether you found a sex scene. Also, this label could simply reflect the opinion of whoever submitted the link or accepted the submission. Again, I'm simply pointing out that your examples highlight additional uncertainties. I would be very interested in knowing how Mangago classifies manga, so feel free to provide links that might enlighten me.

I realized something new weeks after our conversation ended. Interpret that as you will, but aren't you being a bit melodramatic? You make it sound as if I swore an oath, when it's not even clear to me you wanted to end the discussion. That was my own decision because I had nothing more to say at the time. I thought the point about A Cruel God Reigns was worth sharing. You don't need to read more into it than that.

Sigh... I'm sick and tired of talking to a troll who doesn't know shit. I'll give you a glimpse at how much I know to prove to you once in for all how insignificant your pathetic information network is.
First and for most, if you've done your research CORRECTLY, you would have known that Zankoku na Kami ga Shihai Suru is a SHOUJO and a SHOUNEN AI. Under Petite Flower which is sold by Shogakukan, Zankoku na Kami ga Shihai Suru is label as a manga for high school girls. If you want the link, it is right here. ( https://www.shogakukan.co.jp.) The same goes with A Night of a Thousand Dreams which is serialize by Wink Comic. The link to it is here. ( https://blog.naver.com/winkfamily) These are link that came directly from the website that sells it. Not from some third party like yours. If you can't read Japanese and Korean then you shouldn't even be presenting your source material at all. That's why I refuse to reason with you cause I know your source is unreliable and you're a freaking dumb ass to even believe in them.
Secondly, Josei and Shounen Ai are two different things. Josei is a demographic while Shounen Ai is a genre. And if you're too stupid to understand, one is to point out the audience the story and the other is an element of the story. Just because a manga is a Josei doesn't mean that it can't be a Shounen Ai you shit eating ret@rd. The fact that you don't even understand that invalidate everything that you said.
Just from those two points alone, I've already proven to you AGAIN that everything you've done, every research that you partake, all of it are NOT FACTS but OPINIONS. And just from those two points, I've prove yet again that what I say are FACTS and NOT OPINIONS.
My suggestion to you is to stop what you're doing and start reevaluating your life and everything you believe in. If you even have an ounce of belief that you're somehow right and I'm wrong, I suggest that you take a carrot, shove it up your ass, and then take a bite out of it. After this point onward, if you still wish to continue arguing with me, you're no longer be arguing. You'll just be trolling. And I will speak to you as such.

I acknowledged a while ago that the language barrier was an issue and an obvious limitation, which is why I was relying on English sites and sources. I’ve discussed this at length in earlier posts, so I’m not sure why you are ridiculing this weakness now. In fact, I argued this was a big source of uncertainty for English-speaking fans. I welcome corrections to the English sources, but links to magazine or publishers’ homepages I can’t read do not tell me anything new, especially since I already acknowledged the publishers and my references provide similar links as sources.
Perhaps I misunderstood your definition of shonen ai, since I thought you were arguing that the maturity of the intended demographic was the defining characteristic distinguishing Yaoi from shonen ai when you argued, “Yaoi is simply the adult counterpart to Shounen Ai like How Seinen is to Shounen.” That’s why I questioned how a josei manga, which is, by definition, intended for a mature audience, could also be classified as shonen ai according to your definition. I thought I was highlighting a rather obvious contradiction, but you clearly disagree. Ironically, you reinforce my argument about uncertainty with every reference you dismiss. Regardless, we’ve both made our points, so let’s end this here. Good bye.

Sorry, I forgot to mention that the publisher does seem to support your claim that A Cruel God Reigns is marketed for high school girls here:
https://www.shogakukan.co.jp/search/site/%E6%AE%8B%E9%85%B7%E3%81%AA%E7%A5%9E%E3%81%8C%E6%94%AF%E9%85%8D%E3%81%99%E3%82%8B

Also, I should explain that I used my translator after copying and pasting the name of the manga, but my translator is a bit wonky. Matt Thorn and that essay compilation I referenced earlier also use the term shojo to describe A Cruel God Reigns, though they use shojo broadly. That may be why I originally thought all manga by Moto Hagio were considered shojo until I found A Cruel God Reigns classified differently in multiple places. My surprise triggered my latest comments here, but it turns out that the josei/shojo classification is as debatable as everything else.
There is an old discussion over at Baka-Updates about the intended audience of different manga magazines: https://www.mangaupdates.com/showtopic.php?page=4&tid=9924
I don't bring this to your attention to claim the poster is right or wrong. I just thought it was interesting to see how this particular person classified the different magazines using the prevalence of furigana (among other things). (Someone did reply that they consider Flowers, the contemporary incarnation of Petit Flower, to be shojo.) It also shows how those at Baka-Updates might be classifying manga. Given the mixed conclusions one could draw from a basic Google search, I am inclined to accept the poster's claim that "age wise the terms Shoujo/Josei are somewhat subjective terms."
I would expect someone fluent in Japanese to have a better understanding of Japanese genre classifications than someone forced to rely on English explanations. However, for better or worse, others fluent in Japanese have attempted to inform the English-speaking community. You can balk at their efforts, but it's simply inaccurate to claim that manga genre classifications are self-evident to English speakers. Right or wrong, most fans learn what terms mean from a source or multiple sources. I have no problem with relying on the publisher to determine the genre if I can understand the publisher. I also have no problem relying on some simpler classification scheme all fans understand if it's consistently applied. If I point out how your definition or examples are not particularly helpful to someone seeking clarification, I'm not trolling you. I'm being honest. Anyway, this really is my final post, so please do not reply. I apologize for restarting the conversation.

It is not subjective you idiot. Your biggest mistake is assuming that Josei is a genre. If it was a genre then there has to be an element that is consistent with it. But it is not a genre. It is a demographic. As long as the book is sold and cater to Josei fan, it is a Josei. Where as genre, like Shounen Ai, is an element of the story and certain criteria has to be true in order for it to be a Shounen Ai.
This discussion is become even more stupid.
wheres the steamy sex scenes tho....