Forum

For some reason I find it very comical to picture the Tokyo Governor sitting down to read the proposed bill and saying, "Nonexistent youths? WTF does that mean?"

enurtsol wrote:

Why are Westerners wanting to interfere with Japanese internal affairs? Laughing

well Japanese internal affairs were already being interfered with since westerners--the US particularly--got its hands involved since the Meiji period. It was a complete 180 degree swing with huge governmental clamp downs on social and cultural affairs from the preceding Edo period in an effort to appeal more to the westerners and western trade. It's the same here. The motivation for this kind of legislation is mostly from outside pressure in order to put on a good "face" and politicians who align themselves with the same ideology.

Quote:

BTW, the age of majority in Japan is currently at 20, with talks of lowering it down to 18.

True, but that mostly applies to things like voting and drinking though. Other age based restrictions are different: age of marriage and consent is lower and varies by prefecture as well. (Interestingly, in a few countries like Brazil and Austria, voting age is 16).

Splitter wrote:

AntiActivist wrote:

This abuse of power happens regularly in Japan, which is why it's rare for rape or molestation crimes to occur there. If a vindictive woman had falsely accused a man of rape because she was angry with him, the police will immediately imprison the accused and label him as a rapist without any actual evidence or investigation. Most of the time they will force the accused to make a false confession from hours of interrogation. Japanese citizens are even unable to find any lawyers in Japan to file lawsuits against the police, because they know they'll lose since judges in Japan will always side with the police.

Suddenly, Rainbow makes a whole lot more sense to me.

It sure is. Allow me to add that between 1880 to 1947, Japanese police had the authority to try infractions (ikeizai 違警罪) without a judge, let alone a jury. While the system had been overhauled in 1947, the image of "police can say you are guilty and/or keep you under detention as long as he likes" still prevails. By the way, Taiwan sort of maintained the system until as late as 1991. Rolling Eyes

dormcat wrote:

It sure is. Allow me to add that between 1880 to 1947, Japanese police had the authority to try infractions (ikeizai 違警罪) without a judge, let alone a jury. While the system had been overhauled in 1947, the image of "police can say you are guilty and/or keep you under detention as long as he likes" still prevails. By the way, Taiwan sort of maintained the system until as late as 1991. Rolling Eyes

Kinda wandering off topic here, but you got my attention on this topic dormcat: How did the system change in '91 and how's it different today from Japan's?

keikanki wrote:

Kinda wandering off topic here, but you got my attention on this topic dormcat: How did the system change in '91 and how's it different today from Japan's?

The law that gave police to detain and/or punish infraction suspects was older (1943) than the Constitution (1947), and as early as 1980 the Supreme Court had a verdict (No. 166) that parts of the law (literally, "infraction punishment act") was unconstitutional. However, for some reason (I'm not from a law school, after all) the law was not revised or abolished until 1991, four years after the martial law period had ended.

The new and current law is named "social order act" and has significantly restricted the discretion of police when dealing with infractions, resulting policemen much less motivated when facing petty criminals.

darksharingan wrote:

I think they should just leave things as they are until they are sure about what their goal is.

Are the regulating the distribution of these works to certain people or are they regulating what should be published altogether?

Really really vague.

No kidding. It really goverments like to do this crap.

They should be spending their time trying to crak down on the fansub groups and illegal streaming sites instead of this.

Last edited by AntiActivist on Mon May 10, 2010 4:57 pm; edited 1 time in total

Comment Deleted.

[Mod Edit: Tinfoil hats, rampant bias, and conspiracy theories aside; you're soapboxing and going off-topic. Politics are global, and if you did half the research you claimed, you'd find every nation tries to influence others, even Japan towards the US. Unfortunately this is irrelevant to this, so stop trying to turn this topic in to your personal podium for all things political. - Keonyn]

You definitely have a "mature" way of handling conversations publicly. I was answering this specific question:

enurtsol wrote:

Why are Westerners wanting to interfere with Japanese internal affairs?

So I gave him my own personal opinion, and it's not a conspiracy theory about the matter. If he doesn't agree with it, then it's his own choice, people have the right to make their own decisions here in case you have forgotten. Besides I'm not forcing my personal opinion or attempting to "soapbox" this conversation as you would like to claim. Which is why I added this comment at the bottom, "But I definitely would like to encourage you to do some research, and form your own judgement of why Westerners like to target Japan."

He was not looking for a generic global answer that you have provided, just a localized answer, so that's how I decided to answer it. If you can't agree with it, then delete it and explain it to me through a private message why you don't want it in the thread, instead of being an adolescent and publicly mocking my opinion, which in result you have begun to soapbox this conversation instead. Your method of handling the situation is how flame wars between moderators and users usually start. Next time learn how to handle things privately and maturely.

configspace wrote:

enurtsol wrote:

Why are Westerners wanting to interfere with Japanese internal affairs? Laughing

well Japanese internal affairs were already being interfered with since westerners--the US particularly--got its hands involved since the Meiji period. It was a complete 180 degree swing with huge governmental clamp downs on social and cultural affairs from the preceding Edo period in an effort to appeal more to the westerners and western trade. It's the same here. The motivation for this kind of legislation is mostly from outside pressure in order to put on a good "face" and politicians who align themselves with the same ideology.

Aren't ya guys commenting here Westerners too (mostly)? Laughing

AntiActivist, this is your soapboxing warning. Stay off of it, please. (Besides, you're more than bordering on spouting conspiracy theories.)

shaggyglasses wrote:

i would appreciate it that they rewrite this bill or make public the guidelines that they use to determine the appropriateness of certain manga/anime. it's difficult to pick a side when the bill is extremely vague.

do it right or don't do it at all.

You took the words right out of my mouth, comrade.

configspace wrote:

Remember, porn is already restricted. This basically tries to expand that restriction into non-porn territory. As for persons under 18 buying it--who cares? We already allow them responsibility of driving and working so why not allow them or their parents to make the decision themselves for something that is decidedly harmless?

It is the parent's job to decide what a child can or cannot possess. However, there's also CPS & the government deciding who is or is not an unfit parent. If you, as a parent allow your child to read porn, you may find yourself dealing with CPS on the issue. For myself, I bought my daughter yaoi when she was 13-14, although I did police her movies until she was 15-16.

configspace wrote:

In addition, it's ironic because it only covers characters who appear or sound under 18 (.. which can never be objectively determined of course ..), but it won't restrict works which includes non-porn/adult sexual depictions of persons who appear or sound over 18!

You expect the people policing the stufff to actually READ it? Good heavens, trying to make them work for the fines they'll collect for violations? Wolfram looks like he's in High School-one has to read Kyo Kara Maoh to learn he's 150 (Not that KKM is yaoi, but it's inspired a lot of doujins.)

configspace wrote:

Actually there's no such restriction imposed by the government and any such attempt to put it into law has always been struck down as unconstitutional. It's the theaters in accordance to the MPAA that does the age checking. Anyone can buy R-rated videos on their own just fine.

I had to buy mature rated games for my daughter until she became legal. Ciggies & Alcohol are law violations. Games & Movies are the seller/movie theater not wanting to deal with angry parents. The local AMC doesn't want a dozen insensed parents picketing their theater about allowing a child into an R-rated movie. Realistically, you can take a 5 yr old into an r-rated movie--you just need an adult to accompany the child or group of children. Mine was 8 when I took her to her first R-rated movie.

configspace wrote:

Nothing against you personally, but I am really tired of this persistent idea (which have been fought against by American founding fathers and many liberty minded persons) that the a group of people or even the majority of society feels so compelled to force, to impose their ideas, their own beliefs about what is or isn't appropriate on another group of people--in this case young adults--who are perfectly capable of making that decision for themselves or with their own families, for matters that affect no one but the willing participant.

Sorry.
That goes back to the Pilgrims.
They came here for religious freedom, but that meant just for them. They'd punish people for behaving outside their moral beliefs, even frowned on singing Christmas carols because Christmas was pagan in origin.
Busybody/telling people how to live is in our blood.

Studio Ghibli announced their opinion.
http://www.ghibli.jp/10info/006216.html

toru wrote:

Studio Ghibli announced their opinion.
http://www.ghibli.jp/10info/006216.html

Which basically says "regardless of whether this bill passes, or not we at Studio Ghibli will carry on as usual." Which translates to "We don't do smut, so aren't bothered either way." Wink

Mohawk52 wrote:

Which basically says "regardless of whether this bill passes, or not we at Studio Ghibli will carry on as usual." Which translates to "We don't do smut, so aren't bothered either way." Wink

Which translates to "We don't do anything interesting, and we won't show solidarity with the rest of the art community because we're giant pansies."

Olivine wrote:

Mohawk52 wrote:

Which basically says "regardless of whether this bill passes, or not we at Studio Ghibli will carry on as usual." Which translates to "We don't do smut, so aren't bothered either way." Wink

Which translates to "We don't do anything interesting, and we won't show solidarity with the rest of the art community because we're giant pansies."

"We just make animated movies that all can appreciate and maybe win an Oscar for". Yeah what pansies? It's not like they have a reputation to protect. Disney would do better, no mistake. Rolling Eyes

Forum - View topic
NEWS: Tokyo Governor: 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Needs Changes

This Week in Anime - So, Is Sound Euphonium Queerbaiting or Not?

Wonderful Precure! Episodes 1-12 Anime Review

That Time I Got Reincarnated as a Slime: The Ways of Monster Nation Manga Ends Due to Artist's Health

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire Dips to #3 in 4th Weekend, SPY×FAMILY Film Debuts at #5 at U.S. Box Office

Dead Dead Demon's Dededede Destruction Part 1 Anime Film Review

Eiyuden Chronicle: Hundred Heroes Game Review

Forum - View topicNEWS: Tokyo Governor: 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Needs Changes

Forum

Forum - View topic
NEWS: Tokyo Governor: 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Needs Changes