'Senpai ga Uzai Kouhai no Hanashi' Manga Gets TV Anime
Synopsis
Igarashi Futuba's new job would be great if her senpai, Takeda Harumi, wasn't so incredibly annoying! Futuba hates his laugh, she hates how big he is, and she really hates that he treats her like a little kid. Just because Futuba is short and looks young doesn't make her a kid, and just because she spends so much time with Takeda doesn't mean she sees him as anything but an annoying senpai...or does she?! (Source: Seven Seas Entertainment)
Initially published as a web manga on Shiromanta's official Twitter account, the manga began its serialization digitally in July 2018 on Pixiv Comic. Ichijinsha will release the fifth volume on Thursday.
Seven Seas Entertainment is publishing the manga in full-color with the first volume released digitally on May 26. The first print copy will ship on July 7.
Official Twitter: @uzai_anime
Source: Comic Natalie
Senpai ga Uzai Kouhai no Hanashi on MAL
20 of 42 Comments Recent Comments
Also lmao at people arguing about non issues.
He's a hunk. She's petite. That's all ya need to know.
Jul 2, 2020 10:20 AM by FullyCharged
Mostly the tone. Also, people can tell when someone is conventionally attractive or at least average even if that person isn't their type. I believe the original person just applied their biases and labeled this character as ugly when by conventional standards he's at least average. (This is putting aside my general disdain for labeling anyone as 'ugly', which I think is a bad mindset to have).
Yes, people can tell, and the poster did just that. It's a subjective experience after all. As for tone, I'd say it cuts both ways. For example, you just accused the poster of being biased because they don't share the same ideal of male beauty as you.
Again, I would agree with you if the character had a marginalised body type. But you believe he is average looking by 'conventional standards'. In which case, does he really need 'defending'? Especially when we've had an instance of real body type prejudice over at the Anime Discussion section just yesterday.
And yea, the definition technically can be applied, but no one would ever normally call someone fat when they're actually muscular. Big, large, thick (or thicc, if you would), etc would fit, but referring to someone as "fat" conjures a very specific image that this character doesn't fit into.
I did, and the poster you argued with did too. That's two in this topic alone. So I don't think 'no one' applies here. When you talk about image conjuring, you're basically talking about your imagination. How you visualise it in your head. That's your subjective experience. It's your opinion, not objective fact.
Jul 2, 2020 6:38 AM by this_shit_again
You find his physical features attractive, @ysphyr doesn't. Sounds like a simple matter of differing (sexual) tastes. This seems like a non-issue..
I just think it's stupid to define someone as ugly simply because they don't adhere to your extremely specific tastes. It's just plain and simply closed minded and childish.
Except when talking about a person or animal being being fat, they are talking about actual fat cells. You know, the stuff that gets stored or burned? To describe a bodybuilder as fat would just be dumb.
The definition I provided has no context label indicating specific usage, meaning you can apply it to pretty much anything. And if the bodybuilder is bulky, then yes, the definition would fit as well. It's not a question of fat cells. It's a question of physical form.
You are extending the term fat so far that (as you said) every person that we dont find sexually attracrive can be called fat, yes just like i can call fat a skinny person or a bulky person, even tho it could be wrong in such cases. There is nothing wrong not knowing bone structure, muscular system etc and how those relate with genetic makeup, as well not knowing what makes a bodybuilder a bodybuilder and just making silly comments. It would be a very simplistic sentence and in some cases very offending, but you can do it. The big point is that people then can make fun of those silly comments, thats the real "non-issue".
Jul 1, 2020 11:15 PM by anemonespotte
Jul 1, 2020 6:39 PM by Nadechi12
Jul 1, 2020 6:38 PM by Toarujisuru
Jul 1, 2020 4:39 PM by Kuma
I just think it's stupid to define someone as ugly simply because they don't adhere to your extremely specific tastes. It's just plain and simply closed minded and childish.
Do you object to the tone of the poster, or that the poster sees the character as unattractive? Because everyone has preferences when it comes to sexual attraction. I would actually agree with you if the character had a marginalised body type. But that's not the case here, so..
Except when talking about a person or animal being being fat, they are talking about actual fat cells. You know, the stuff that gets stored or burned? To describe a bodybuilder as fat would just be dumb.
The definition I provided has no context label indicating specific usage, meaning you can apply it to pretty much anything. And if the bodybuilder is bulky, then yes, the definition would fit as well. It's not a question of fat cells. It's a question of physical form.
Mostly the tone. Also, people can tell when someone is conventionally attractive or at least average even if that person isn't their type. I believe the original person just applied their biases and labeled this character as ugly when by conventional standards he's at least average. (This is putting aside my general disdain for labeling anyone as 'ugly', which I think is a bad mindset to have).
And yea, the definition technically can be applied, but no one would ever normally call someone fat when they're actually muscular. Big, large, thick (or thicc, if you would), etc would fit, but referring to someone as "fat" conjures a very specific image that this character doesn't fit into.
Jul 1, 2020 4:07 PM by DrHizzle
Jul 1, 2020 2:46 PM by yamiyugi101
@this_shit_again I think this person means muscle fat. My brother in law who was part of the army (veteran currently) who had that exact figure was told he was overweight. I'm not sure if that's a matter of military only, or a general thing of being slightly overweight.
Jul 1, 2020 2:44 PM by ChartTopper60
You find his physical features attractive, @ysphyr doesn't. Sounds like a simple matter of differing (sexual) tastes. This seems like a non-issue..
I just think it's stupid to define someone as ugly simply because they don't adhere to your extremely specific tastes. It's just plain and simply closed minded and childish.
Do you object to the tone of the poster, or that the poster sees the character as unattractive? Because everyone has preferences when it comes to sexual attraction. I would actually agree with you if the character had a marginalised body type. But that's not the case here, so..
Except when talking about a person or animal being being fat, they are talking about actual fat cells. You know, the stuff that gets stored or burned? To describe a bodybuilder as fat would just be dumb.
The definition I provided has no context label indicating specific usage, meaning you can apply it to pretty much anything. And if the bodybuilder is bulky, then yes, the definition would fit as well. It's not a question of fat cells. It's a question of physical form.
Jul 1, 2020 2:38 PM by this_shit_again
Jul 1, 2020 2:25 PM by Genocyber
I'll just assume you're both making your determinations based on pictures of him being dressed.
Yes because he isn't fat at all.
Not according to the dictionary, so your comment can only be seen as an opinion, not as a matter of fact.
Did you check the definitions? I'd say his body type falls under this one.
"a fat cigarette"
He is bulky after all.
Except when talking about a person or animal being being fat, they are talking about actual fat cells. You know, the stuff that gets stored or burned? To describe a bodybuilder as fat would just be dumb.
Jul 1, 2020 12:25 PM by DrHizzle
Ah I see, you're the type of person who can only find thin prettyboys with chins sharp enough to bar them from air travel attractive. How sad.
That aside, calling musculature fat is just dumb.
You find his physical features attractive, @ysphyr doesn't. Sounds like a simple matter of differing (sexual) tastes. This seems like a non-issue..
I just think it's stupid to define someone as ugly simply because they don't adhere to your extremely specific tastes. It's just plain and simply closed minded and childish.
Jul 1, 2020 11:50 AM by DrHizzle
Yes because he isn't fat at all.
Not according to the dictionary, so your comment can only be seen as an opinion, not as a matter of fact.
Can it be 'objectively wrong' if it still falls under one of the many adjective definitions of the word?
He's not fat by any definition of the word. He's just tall and muscular.
Did you check the definitions? I'd say his body type falls under this one.
"a fat cigarette"
He is bulky after all.
Jul 1, 2020 11:43 AM by this_shit_again
but calling him fat is just objectively wrong.
Can it be 'objectively wrong' if it still falls under one of the many adjective definitions of the word?
He's not fat by any definition of the word. He's just tall and muscular.
Jul 1, 2020 11:08 AM by TsukuyomiREKT
but calling him fat is just objectively wrong.
Can it be 'objectively wrong' if it still falls under one of the many adjective definitions of the word?
Yes because he isn't fat at all.
Jul 1, 2020 10:57 AM by Heimur
but calling him fat is just objectively wrong.
Can it be 'objectively wrong' if it still falls under one of the many adjective definitions of the word?
Jul 1, 2020 10:49 AM by this_shit_again
Ah I see, you're the type of person who can only find thin prettyboys with chins sharp enough to bar them from air travel attractive. How sad.
That aside, calling musculature fat is just dumb.
You find his physical features attractive, @ysphyr doesn't. Sounds like a simple matter of differing (sexual) tastes. This seems like a non-issue..
They're allowed to have their preferences, but calling him fat is just objectively wrong.
Jul 1, 2020 10:28 AM by TsukuyomiREKT
LOL
Jul 1, 2020 10:27 AM by ninka22
Related Database Entries
Anime: | Senpai ga Uzai Kouhai no Hanashi |
Manga: | Senpai ga Uzai Kouhai no Hanashi |
Search News
Related News
-
North American Anime & Manga Releases for November Nov 3, 2021 10:00 AM by Aiimee10 Comments
-
Q4 2019 Anime & Manga Licenses [Update 12/19] Sep 27, 2019 4:08 PM by Snow33 Comments
-
North American Anime & Manga Releases for July Jul 6, 2022 5:57 AM by Aiimee7 Comments
-
North American Anime & Manga Releases for January Jan 19, 9:22 AM by Aiimee0 Comment
-
North American Anime & Manga Releases for December Dec 4, 3:13 PM by Aiimee0 Comment
MoreNew Anime
-
Manga 'Takopii no Genzai' Gets Anime
Dec 9, 9:17 AM by DatRandomDude18 Comments
MoreWinter 2025
MoreSpring 2025
Jul 7, 2020 10:46 AM by Fran