Forum - View topicNEWS: Tokyo's 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Rejected by Assembly
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
vashfanatic
 Posts: 3489 Location: Back stateside |
|
|||
O_o I can only conclude that you must be American. Most Western countries have more than two parties, most of them have many. We technically have more than two parties, but the electoral college encourages a two-party system at the national level. What's more, Japan has has one party in power - the Liberal Democractic Part or LDP (which is actually conservative) - for most of its history. The current controlling DJP is actually a break-off from it. |
||||
|
||||
Ojamajo LimePie
 Posts: 766 |
|
|||
Only if you consider shoujo manga to be "pandering sex-filled garbage", because that's the main target of this bill. Shoujo and BL are what they're trying to restrict; any otaku-targeted series that get caught up in it are just collateral damage. |
||||
|
||||
RestLessone
 Posts: 1426 Location: New York |
|
|||
|
So, it was all basically a way to sneak in laws against freedom of speech?
I wish Japan would work harder on passing a bill to make possession of actual child porn illegal. I know there is controversy and setbacks surrounding it, but it seems to be a sort of, y'know, important issue. In the end, this was all to further a political party, so... And, yeah, the US does have more than two parties: "third parties". An example would be the Green Party. A lot of the third parties eventually get absorbed into one of the larger ones; I think people expecting the Green Party to be absorbed into the Democratic Party. They basically are created when none of the major parties cover their issues. I believe the only time a third party really made a difference was the Bull Moose party during 1912; votes ended up splitting between that one and a major one.
Was there any confirmation on this? I believe the plans to limit BL were an entirely different matter that were region-specific. Last edited by RestLessone on Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:26 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar  Posts: 16935 |
|
|||
Actually you're half wrong. Most people did not want THIS bill but the premise behind it still has merit. Many of you seem to be under the false impression this was meant to limit what can be made. It was meant to limit WHO material could be sold to. The problem was the bill was so poorly worded and vague it made jumping from one to the other relatively easy. There was way too much wiggle room that could lead to possible censorship issues. I think limiting the sale of sexual material to minors is most definitely a worthwhile topic. The problem is you have to be specific to make sure it ONLY limits the sale to those who should not be buying it without it affecting those who should be able to and also the not censoring the material itself.
Well even if it had passed it would not have stopped any garbage from being made. Sorry to ruin your hopes. It didn't pass though...which again doesn't stop garbage from being made. If the company is determined to make a show that is sex filled pandering garbage they still will. Even if the bill passes they still will. Best to suck it up and just accept it and move on to greener pastures. Besides, it doesn't mean even if a show like that is made that it will be licensed over here anyways. |
||||
|
||||
|
Greboruri
Posts: 378 Location: QBN, NSW, Australia |
|
|||
I cannot see why they can't rewrite this to be far more specific and then ban the possession of real (not drawings) child porn. But I think what we have here at the moment is an odd focus on material that has nothing to do with lolicon and is more mainstream. You also have this Agnes Chan loon who wants to place the focus on drawings rather than real child abuse. It makes me so angry because they’re essentially doing the same stuff that other nutbag groups are doing across the world; using children and child abuse as a way to ban material (that is currently and has always been legal) they personally find objectionable, such as men’s magazines, censoring the internet etc. It’s pretending to care about child abuse to ban something you don’t like, while in the process not having one iota of effect in reducing or helping child abuse victims.
|
||||
|
||||
|
RestLessone
Posts: 1426 Location: New York |
|
|||
|
^
Yes, I believe that's one of the problems. If it's not the government, I think it was the group lobbying for the ban and others disagreeing with it. With a subject like this, the standards can't be so vague. But the topic also calls for groups to work closely together, make some concessions, and do whatever they can to get it passed. If they want to make even more restrictions that no one can agree on currently, they might as well get a basic bill passed. Isn't that thinking for the children instead of political squabbles? I care about real kids... I don't see why people keep trying to tackle drawings when child porn is legal to possess. That's hurting more kids than some drawings ever will. |
||||
|
||||
Haterater
 Posts: 1727 |
|
|||
|
@ Greboruri
That is what I'm fearing. That type of censorship. And that is for already made media. If this bill passes, creators will have to censor their stuff from the start to make sure their products are sold to their target demographics. I don't really like that fear stuff to already ruin a potential work before it even hits paper. I hope it won't affect things too badly, but from what I read from speculation here, it could hit alot of already made manga if it continues to be vague. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group