<entry id="2147926" stat="A" corpus="jmdict" type="jmdict">
<ent_corp type="jmdict">jmdict</ent_corp>
<ent_seq>2850590</ent_seq>
<k_ele>
<keb>着衣セックス</keb>
</k_ele>
<r_ele>
<reb>ちゃくいセックス</reb>
</r_ele>
<sense>
<pos>&n;</pos>
<misc>&col;</misc>
<gloss>clothed sex</gloss>
</sense>
<info>
<audit time="2021-09-26 07:25:00" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Nicolas Maia</upd_name>
<upd_refs>https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%9D%80%E8%A1%A3%E3%82%BB%E3%83%83%E3%82%AF%E3%82%B9
Many NSFW search results</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-09-26 08:12:31" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>Hm. Rather obvious and not very common.</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>着衣セックス	22</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-09-26 11:37:33" stat="D">
<upd_uid>robin1354</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Robin Scott</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>It gets a lot of hits online but I don't think it needs to be an entry.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-09-27 00:28:08" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_name>Marcus Richert</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I think this is worth having. There's a million ways to phrase this,
服を着たエッチ
服を着たままの性行為
服を着たままセックス
etc. etc.
but this seems to be the most common by far on Twitter.
Should probably have a col tag (I doubt this is how a Jp art historian would describe a 春画 featuring this for 
example)</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>着衣セックス 15 tweets past 24 hrs
着衣エッチ 4 
着衣ファック 7 past week</upd_refs>
<upd_diff>@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+&lt;misc&gt;&amp;col;&lt;/misc&gt;</upd_diff>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-09-27 11:43:04" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>robin1354</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Robin Scott</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I don't think that fact alone justifies its inclusion. "Clothed sex" is probably the most common term for this in English but I wouldn't expect to find it in an EJ dictionary. It's not as though this would be helpful for reverse lookups.</upd_detl>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-09-28 04:38:47" stat="A" unap="true">
<upd_uid>Marcus</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Marcus Richert</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>I disagree, I think it being common, and being obviously more common than similar possible constructs, is why we include any compound noun 
in the dictionary. I don't think it's weird to expect an unabridged dictionary that doesn't censor itself to have an entry like this. I 
don't think it's unthinkable it could be usable for reverse lookups (remember that reverse lookups aren't always exact but happen through 
google which is good at throwing up relevant weblio's ei-wa pages which include our definitions)

http://www.edrdg.org/wiki/index.php/Editorial_policy#Is_it_worth_including.3F
"is it not what someone reasonably proficient in Japanese would come up with when trying to express the English meaning in Japanese?"</upd_detl>
<upd_refs>17 tweets these past 24 hrs</upd_refs>
</audit>
<audit time="2021-09-28 21:13:47" stat="A">
<upd_uid>jwb</upd_uid>
<upd_name>Jim Breen</upd_name>
<upd_email>...address hidden...</upd_email>
<upd_detl>What the heck. May as well include it.</upd_detl>
</audit>
</info>
</entry>