Japanese lingerie company Yummy Mart and The Pokémon Company International have collaborated for a limited Pokémon Collection range of lingerie largely inspired by Pikachu. The move is to help celebrate Pokemon‘s 20th anniversary.
Among the items created include pajamas, a poncho, and an eye mask. There is even a bra stuffed with Pikachu plushies. Although the items are not available for purchase, Yummy Mart will be running an Instagram competition in-store. It will run between April 20th and May 8th. If you use the #YM_PIKACHU hashtag, you will be entered into a lottery to win special prizes.
“Yummy mart” what an amazing name for a company about lingerie.
I couldn’t possibly take my girl seriously wearing this.
Who wouldn’t? Probably non-Pokemon fans LOL!
Oh, yeah, umm. I can see where the “yummy” name idea came from. Very mature and tasteful.
For adult’s it makes sense. Maturity and taste are a matter of opinion really. :)
Makes no damn sense because it’s Pokémon.
Why does that matter? Keep the kids out of adult life matters and there’s nothing wrong with it in my opinion.
Since when is lingerie tasteful.
Always, it’s a matter of perception.
I’m completely fine with this! Haha.
:].
Love those Japanese.
Omg the other pictures loaded! Lol, I 100% support this idea!!!
Maybe I should move…
Not even remotely surprised. Lingerie is a fairly large market, and after Nintendo’s partnership with Uniqlo, this was pretty much expected lol
I’m okay with this, as it’s clearly made for adults. However, I don’t understand how someone can be okay with something like this and be opposed to something like a NES Zapper themed gun. Both are made for adults who grew up with a love of their respective video games.
You couldn’t sound more American there, equating a piece of clothing with a gun.
Got a problem with our American-ness?
Not with being American per se, but with the demonization of sexuality and normalization of violence.
I suppose you think we should have something like NICE to encourage us to hand out condoms to underage students.
I have no idea what NICE stands for, but that post sounds like you’re trying to put words in my mouth. You should stop that.
But either way, I’ll humor you. There are only two major problems with teenagers having sex: unwanted pregnancies and STDs. A condom solves both problems.
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. It’s a UK institution. Handing condoms out to minors was an idea they came up with. I mentioned that because you suggested that Americans demonize sexuality when in reality we just want it to be used responsibly.
Also condoms are not 100% effective in preventing either of those things. You know what is? Acting responsibly and not going around sleeping with whoever you want.
So you assumed I am from the UK just because I disagree with that particular American mindset (which is not at all that common in the civilized world, let me tell you) despite the fact that I actually express myself in American English? Oh, and see that last paragraph you wrote? That’s demonizing sexuality. You can’t claim you don’t do that and then type that.
Besides that, condoms, depending on the brand, have a prevention rate that ranges from 97% to 99’83%. Even in a scenario where the condom breaks during intercourse, it s still has an 82% rate of prevention. The margin of error, if used responsibly, might as well not even exist. And condoms DO have a 100% rate of effectiveness when the people using them know how. Teenagers are going to have sex anyway, making sex a taboo only feeds their anti-authoritative nature. As a result, all you get by tabooizing the subject are more teens not being cautious enough. Proper sexual education is the way to go because hey, if they are going to do it anyway, better safe than sorry.
And before you argue in favor of outright banning teen sex, I’d like to point at two things you should be familiar with: the Prohibition Act and fucking gun control, of all things. Those examples should speak for themselves, I hope I don’t have to explain what I mean by bringing them up.
You’re right. I did assume you were from the UK. If you’re not, then my bad. But I don’t see how that statement demonizes sexuality. By that comment, I’m simply suggesting that students should be taught to pick their partners wisely. For instance, waiting until you know that the person you’re with is worth it, rather than hopping in bed with someone the day you meet them. Simply handing out condoms and teaching kids how to use them, isn’t enough.
And I’ve never seen any study that concluded that condoms are 100% effective. If you have, please tell where it is and I’ll reconsider my position.
I’ll try to show you in the best way I can. From your previous post:
“in reality we just want it to be used responsibly”
“Acting responsibly and not going around sleeping with whoever you want”
Correct me if I’m inferring things here, because I’m going to make a lot of assumptions. From these statements (and the “pick their partners wisely” part of this other post), I have to assume that you think being promiscuous is mutually exclusive with practicing responsible sex. This idea can only be attributed to the general perception of sex in American society, which is, indisputably, demonized. You’re not attacking the quality of the sex act (meaning, the precautions taken and responsibility show), you’re demonizing it by the amount of times is practiced.
I can see a kind of logic behind that, since sleeping around more times creates more opportunities for a screw up, right? Only problem is, that statistic is superfluous assuming the people involved are not taking any risks. One single careless one-night stand has more chances to cause an unwanted pregnancy than fucking with your established partner a hundred times, assuming a condom is used every time. This is just common sense and everyday life, some situations are just wildly more risky than others.
Now, with the couple example, assume that instead of a pair of teens in an established relationship we have a teenage girl and one hundred different guys. Assuming that, again, a condom is used every time and they take the necessary precautions involving its use, literally nothing changes. The number of partners is not a factor in these cases. That perception comes from, again, the puritanical attitude of your average American concerning female sexuality. Just take a look at how teen moms are perceived, most of them are unable to shake off the “promiscuous” label, even if they’ve only had one partner during their whole lives.
Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to say parents shouldn’t educate their teens. However, there are a fair amount of topics in which some degree of formal education (meaning sex-ed in this context) helps a lot more than a couple of words at home, especially when hyper-hormoned teens are concerned and when that advice is rooted in prohibition. That’s why I mentioned that when condoms are used correctly they’re pretty damn close to 100% efficacy. Obviously, none can guarantee that chance of success due to the number of variables, but there’s no reason not to accept it outright if the person knows how to use them. And that’s the core problem because, newsflash, most people (and I’m talking adult males here) don’t know how to put a condom on, or don’t know that to make it completely safe you need to change it every time you swap postures. There are a lot of problems concerning teen sex, I am the first to admit it, but anyone that claims the lack of sex-ed is not the backbone sustaining all the others is just blind, sorry to say that.
Another topic for another time:
“the person you’re with is worth it”
This is putting virginity on a pedestal, and it’s one hell of a harmful notion too.
Ok so let me try to clarify what I mean. I’m not trying to say that promiscuity and responsibility are necessarily exclusive. You’re right in saying that a person having sex with someone a hundred times is no more risky than them having sex once with a hundred people, if it is practiced safely. But that’s a big if. An established relationship means that the couple know each other; that they can trust each other to be safe and honest. This is especially important in the example you gave of a girl with a hundred partners. Even if this girl sees every one of her partners use a condom, how can she be sure that they’re being used correctly? If this is just some guy she hooked up with, she can’t know him well enough to trust that he’s been taught properly and knows what he’s doing. I suppose she could carefully supervise him or put it on herself, but let’s be honest, depending on circumstances there’s a good chance she’s not thinking about doing that. Leading up to and during sex, the part of the brain that deals with logic and reason, shuts almost completely down.
Now one might say that that’s why proper usage of a condom is being taught in schools, but that has only been taught since what, the last decade? We’re not at a point where everyone is being taught properly and for that reason, teens can’t just hook up and assume everything is alright.
That’s what I’m saying by being responsible and choosing a partner wisely. That’s why I think teens should be taught to pick someone who’s “worth it.” Not because I’m trying to put virginity on a pedestal, but because by getting to know someone first, you can be sure that they’re being safe and honest.
“But that’s a big if”
“how can she be sure that they’re being used correctly?”
“she can’t know him well enough to trust that he’s been taught properly”
All of these are solved by sex-ed, as you acknowledge. I just want to point that out so as to not repeat myself and run in circles.
“that has only been taught since what, the last decade?”
Depends on the country. It’s been taught since I was a kid here in my country (way past a decade), but it’s not compulsory, sadly. I thought it had been taught for at least a bit longer than a decade in the US, it changes my perspective a bit.
ahem I’ll just leave this here
My point is that they are both fan art made for adults, yet one received a lot of unwarranted negative attention.
Both are Nintendo-related products, but they have very different purposes. They’re not comparable at all.
They’re both made for adults. Obviously nobody would make a gun for a child just like nobody(hopefully) nobody would make for a child.
Nobody is talking about children here, but about the use of each item. Again, one is a piece of clothing, designed to be worn. The other is a tool designed for killing. To say they’re remotely comparable is to be completely detached from reality. Not to mention, the clothing items come from an agreement between the IP holder and another company, and the other is an, as you mention, a “fan-made” product that has not been officialy legitimized in any way, and I seriously doubt it’s covered by fair use.
the chinese girls are really cute,but who’s dumb enough to buy this?
The girls are Martians, and Martians buy this!
They’re Japanese…
I have no words for this.
You have some words… :)
:O
what the fuck
I guess we can “Pikachu” now, ladies.
*slow claps*
Ah, shit I love those panties, so cute. Wish I could buy them.
My future girlfriend must finally know how to impress me now…
Actually, I’m just kidding. Why the hell does this exist?!
The biggest question here is……….Why?
Pikachu blindfold.
Pokemon inspired BDSM starter kits next.
Bulbasaur-inspired, of course. Vine Whip! And because it’s Japan, Octillery’s along for the ‘ride’ as well.
I aprove of this. Too bad you can’t buy those!
Lol maybe Japan has different tastes, but I don’t see anything there that looks appealing.
Are you gay?
Lol I’m assuming that what you’re asking is if I’m attracted to the same sex, rather than if I’m happy. If that’s the case, then no. I’m not.
Don’t get me wrong, the girls themselves are attractive, but what they’re wearing looks ridiculous.
I think that word should make a comeback as meaning happy. For example:
Have you played Animal Crossing: Gay Home Designer yet?? It makes me really gay!!
Or
Do you want to get together later and play Animal Crossing: amiibo Festival and be gay together?
HAHAHA Honestly though, I do really want the original meaning back. I can’t stand when words, or anything for that matter, can’t be used any more because they are assigned a different meaning. A good example is the nazi party using the swastika as their symbol, or rascists rallying behind the Confederate battle flag.
Can always reverse the swastika to point the opposite direction. Then again, too many people are clueless to the fact the swastika has two totally different designs that mean two totally different things. I wonder how many people freaked out over Ichigo’s bankai having a swastika for a hilt.
Don’t know anything about Ichigo, but I do recall hearing about something similar to that a while back.
http://orig11.deviantart.net/f7b0/f/2013/006/6/2/ichigo__bankai__render_by_eternaloblivion96-d5qniet.png
*spits soda on computer and rolls out of chair laughing*
I am going to refrain from making certain comments as this is a Nintendo fan site.. I like this. That is all I can say.
Oh and for the naysayers…when I read Yummy Mart my first thought was edible and THAT may have been too far, but this is fine.
Finally, some news that I give a toss about! I tend to ignore the sales data, eShop stuff and non-newsworthy Youtube videos. I’m a guy and I’d probably wear the Pikachu hood thing. The shirt/skirt combo isn’t too distracting either, though I wouldn’t buy it for myself. That would be strange. I’ll also have whatever that Pokeball is and the eye thing because that looks nice. Wait, that’s everything but the underwear. Oh well, I’ll find someone to wear it eventually.