Forum - View topicNEWS: USA, Japan Propose Limits on Explicit Online Material
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| minakichan Posts: 877 |
|
|||
| GEORGE BUSH IS GOING TO OUTLAW LOLICON GUYS LETS ALL START A PETITION TO GET HIM IMPEACHED.
I actually doubt that anything's really going to happen, virtual child porn-wise. Yes, real child porn might get slashed, but somehow I don't believe that lolis and shoutas will really be affected; there are just too many people who don't believe that that actually leads to pedophilia. It's pretty much akin to the argument that watching regular porno leads to rape-- whether YOU personally believe it or not doesn't really matter, but most normal people don't. But if it did happen, I will laugh-- all my Prince of Tennis yaoi fan friends will throw a fit. |
||||
|
||||
hentai4me Posts: 1312 Location: England. Robin is so Cute! |
|
|||
I too in general am not too bothered, Futanari; my particular poison; doesn't usually include underaged characters...but the legal age is 18 and plenty of futanari, yaoi and similar hentai takes place between characters in Japanese high schools so ages from 16-18. Hence my confusion as to what material they are policing here. Will your high school BL characters be suddenly illegal material as they aren't 18 and thus viable for porn, will my Futa's be similarly illegal? |
||||
|
||||
| ArielTsuki Posts: 176 |
|
|||
Yes. What US considers child porn is with anything with at least one sexual partner under the age of 18, no matter what the law of consent is in the state. For example, New York age of consent is 17, but if that makes a porno of that 17-year old, even if that person is legal to have sex with, that porno is labeled as child porn. No exceptions. So, it won't effect just lolicon, but basically everyone who reads explicit or suggestive material with anyone who is/appears under 18. Crazy, I know. That's why this bill will be stuck down by the Supreme Court, who in 2002 and 2006, said any fictional sexual depiction with minors shouldn't count as a criminal act because it doesn't harm a real person (unless in the case there is proof that it did use some modeling of some sort). I admit I read alot of BL with young characters although I rarely dip below the 15 year old range (unless it's Prince of Tennis or Hitman Reborn, it helps they look older than they are, although nothing is going to make me like Ryoma pr0n though, ugh.). It's not shota since they're not 12 and under and I don't have any desire for real guys under 21 really (real high school boys are not cute, ugh.) Last edited by ArielTsuki on Sun Dec 09, 2007 4:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
| GATSU Posts: 8407 |
|
|||
Daemon:
Not to mention children in military families struggling to get by, after losing male and/or female parents to the Iraq War... |
||||
|
||||
Ghiblix2 Posts: 38 Location: San Diego |
|
|||
| This stuff just really displays how American thought likes to spiral down into chaos by embracing facallies and slippery slopes.
If "fake" child porn gets imported then it will promote sexual desire for them and they will in turn move on to the harder stuff which is the realy child porn etc. But this argument isn't entirely without merit. Still, if I start seeing Japense mosaics over my media I'm going to be really really pissed. Nevertheless, this ban really doesn't affect me all too much. I never really understood lolicon and all that kiddy garbage but hey, to each his own. The fact that it's rampant in Japan really reflects on them as a society though. Lolicon to me is indeed basically animated child pornagraphy, a bit or a lot of resritiction on that couldn't hurt anyone but the pedos. |
||||
|
||||
| relentlessflame Posts: 21 |
|
|||
Somehow I'm reminded of the principles that have long been common in the Japanese adult game industry. "All characters in this work are 18 years of age or older", and "middle schools" and "high schools" are just "academies" or "schools". The "any apparent" word of this latest proposed act would then become debatable -- "it appeared to be under 18" // "but apparently not, since it says right here 'age 18'..." In the end, because of this, they'd only ever use the law to go after the really "serious" or "blatant" stuff where "most everyone would agree"; otherwise, it'd just be silly and endless. That's if this whole aspect of the bill doesn't get thrown out (or the entire bill for that matter). |
||||
|
||||
| hentai4me Posts: 1312 Location: England. Robin is so Cute! |
|
|||
| Well to a degree I agree on the whole lolicon =/= paedo. But as we know from genshiken; hentai works by stimulating the mind, your brain takes the image and 'fills in the blanks' as it were which is why it works as pornographic material. Drawing =/= porn, drawing + brain = porn.
But with Lolicon and Shota (and rape, guro, scat) what blanks is your brain filling in? Is it taking the childlike image and twisting it into a consenting adult? Or is it doing something else entirely? As far as I know we can't know the answer to this but it is entirely possible that Loli/Shota is tapping into paedo mindsets or it could not be. Research must be done! I know you could secure funding for it, just tell people it's an investigation into how to neutralise paedo's before they strike...any company will throw money at you just to get their brand name associated with fighting the 'ultimate scourge'... |
||||
|
||||
fxg97873 Posts: 172 Location: Houston, TX |
|
|||
It is indeed a slippery slope of restrictions and exceptions. The First Amendment states and leaves no room for exception, but by pure social peer pressure, exceptions are constantly made and upheld by all three branches (how lesser laws can override the highest law of the land baffles me to no end). In the area of media and imagery, first it was Child Pornography, then it was "Virtual" Child Pornography, then it was "drawn and animated" Child Pornography...where do unconstitutional exceptions end? What's next? I mean, we could do the same for violence in general (if not already there). First would be banning real-life Violent Imagery. Then it would be banning virtual Violent Imagery (there goes my Fridays at the theater). Then it would be drawn and animated Violent Imagery. Where do these exceptions end? It always starts with getting rid of things everybody disagrees with but then it continues with things that "mostly" everybody disagrees with and then with stuff that most of the "majority" disagrees with and so forth. All in the name of protecting the same people who will likely end up in jail due to these laws when they become adults. Unbelievable. p.s. If people really want to make Child Pornography illegal, then get serious about it and pass a constitutional amendment. Don't belittle and ignore our Constitution, the highest law of the law, because it is inconvenient. mk2000 |
||||
|
||||
| quartears Posts: 46 |
|
|||
| good thing they're are trying, but what can they do? It's the Internet. | ||||
|
||||
KyuuA4 Posts: 1157 Location: America, where anime and manga can be made |
|
|||
My goodness -- this could be the end of hentai as we know it.  
Oh well. Nice to have built up a personal archive already. |
||||
|
||||
| fxg97873 Posts: 172 Location: Houston, TX |
|
|||
Well guys, let's not give up so easy. Write your representatives in the House and Senate and let your objections be heard. http://www.congress.org is a good place to easily find the contact info. To quote one of our reps: "Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy. A few have, and others will continue to do so, but too many—both in and out of government—close their eyes to the issue of personal liberty..." - Ron Paul This is what I sent myself:
mk2000 |
||||
|
||||
| grgspunk Posts: 131 |
|
|||
| To me the question isn't really whether the two laws get passed or not, but whether they can actually be enforced if they do pass...
...I highly doubt it.  A lot of this law covers material considered to be "obscene", and most 'mainstream' porn can be considered obscene and therefore illegal... Not to mention there's all sorts of other sites out there that have reeeeeeally sick content (RL beastality, RL scat), yet nobody raids them for breaking any obscenity laws...
I don't think I'll lose sleep over this. Plus, if you're too much of an idiot to view ANY sort of porn in public (this focuses on public Wi-fi hotspots) with everybody watching everybody, you know people are going to freak out, legal or not. Now if the US talks about internet filtering, THAT is a different story. If that is the case, there will be hell to pay for itreading on net neutrality. *BTW, you spelt "matter" wrong on the thread title* |
||||
|
||||
The Xenos Posts: 1101 Location: Boston |
|
|||
That's a pretty brilliant way to put it. That helps separate fiction from the real stuff. The real stuff is evidence of a crime, of sexual abuse of children. No one here should defend that utter s---. We need to take down the bastards behind s--- like that. The real crime they should be going after is actual child pron and the sexual abuse of actual children. Not only is going after fiction questionable, it's a waste of time and distraction against going after the real crime of actual child abuse. |
||||
|
||||
Samurai-with-glasses Posts: 628 |
|
|||
Bingo. Blatant moralizing is such a fashionable thing to do. A Representative who voted for it can now go out and say: I voted to protect children from online predators.
Ron Paul, of course, can instead say: I voted to protect American Freedom and gain extra points with his libertarian base. Unfortunately though, unless somebody sues, the Supreme Court might just ignore its responsibility and let the bill pass unchallenged. It's a "reactive" system for the most part and initiatives from Supreme Court members in these kinds of issues are rather rare. This trend of heavy monitoring and ridiculously high financial penalties for online/media issues will only push more and more people into piracy, IMO, and it will make that action more and more legitimate. |
||||
|
||||
ikillchicken Subscriber Posts: 2501 Location: Vancouver - Go Canucks Go! |
|
|||
| So hey, before we march on Washington, perhaps it worth considering:
- It would still need to pass the Senate and be signed by the President before becoming law so this may not even actually happen. - This bill makes no change to what is actually illegal. - This bill makes in no way gives ISPs "permission" to do anything they were not already allowed to do. - This bill does not even force ISPs to monitor for this. - All this bill does is require them to report this stuff if they should discover it in the process of some monitoring they are already doing. I agree that the vague definition is unwise which is probably be why it will be kicked out by the Senate. However, I expect the reason for the vague definition is because lolicon and what-not isn't even on their radar and isn't even being considered. In my oppinion this law really is just a fairly minor thing that has overlooked something and made its definition too broad. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Anime Castle
Robert's Anime Corner Store
AAA Anime Distribution
Big Bad Toy Store
