| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
fighterholic
Joined: 28 Sep 2005
Posts: 9194
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:15 pm |
 |
|
| fxg97873 wrote: | | Well, I think during the post WWII occupation it was the American occupation authority that pushed for Japan to ban pornography as a whole. This is why most commercial adult products will always have a mosaic on them for genitalia. |
On the contrary, that law has been in effect since the Meiji period, way before the American occupation. |
| Back to top |
|
|
rinmackie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Posts: 340
Location: in a van! down by the river!
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:22 pm |
|
|
I remember reading a book back in 1993 that in Japan, one must be at least 18 to be in a live action porno. I guess that's why they never got around to passing more specific laws until recently. Of course, I never knew possession was not illegal.
As for anime/manga CP, it's not my bag, so I'm not overly worried. But if they do make any laws regarding it, I think they should take in consideration such things as context and intended audience. |
| Back to top |
|
|
BellosTheMighty
Joined: 27 Nov 2007
Posts: 760
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:28 pm |
|
|
I agree with the idea that you can't call it child abuse if there's no actual children involved, and the Supreme Court apparently agrees, though I don't remember the case name and thus can't find a link.
Lolicon still needs to go, though. Not because it's immoral, but because it gives otaku everywhere a bad reputation. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Goodpenguin
Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 457
Location: Hunt Valley, MD
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:35 pm |
|
|
fighterholic wrote:
| Quote: | | On the contrary, that law has been in effect since the Meiji period, way before the American occupation. |
While I can't speak to the the exact nexus of the 'genital obscuration' trend, fighterholic's right in that Japanese censorship is not a byproduct of the US. That's an old meme that I can remember back to when when I first saw hentai, and owes more to Nipponophile sentiments then reality.
Also, in general, the excluding of hentai manga/anime from the proposed law reflects the fact that legally banning 'virtual' expression can often invite a whole chain of legal challenges/headaches beyond the original scope, rather then any monetary concerns. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Mohawk52
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 3862
Location: Celebrating Lindsey Hawker murder suspect arrest, in Basingstoke, UK.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:39 pm |
|
|
This is just a proposal, a talking shop, not a law written in the books and used in court as a defense. So everyones joy is a bit premature. With global organisations like UNICEF urging then to include virtual porn in the ban, I'm sure there are other organisations not mentioned that will be voicing their concerns as well. As a parent I also urge them to think just what this will do to their "Cool Japan" global image that they have been trying to monopolise of late. "Japan? you mean that country that has legalised child porn images in their comics? " Oh yeah, real cool if you're a paedo perv. Nice one.  |
| Back to top |
|
|
calawain
Joined: 11 May 2007
Posts: 192
Location: New York, NY
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:48 pm |
|
|
Just fyi, the American laws in this area were not aimed at comics. When they say "virtual child pornography" they mean computer generated images that are meant to look like they were real people. The argument was, if you can't tell that it's not a real person then it should be treated like it was real. Anime and manga is not generated to look like real people in that way.
The Supreme Court smartly realized that such a standard is untenable, the law was vastly overbroad and vague. The one currently on the books, as TFA indicates, is once again in litigation before the courts. My prediction is that once again it will get struck down, thankfully. |
| Back to top |
|
|
Top Gun
Joined: 28 Sep 2007
Posts: 1195
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:50 pm |
|
|
Wait...possession of actual child pornography hasn't been illegal in Japan up until this point?
Just...what the hell.  |
| Back to top |
|
|
Monster in a box
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 474
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:59 pm |
|
|
Thanks for giving me a heart attack for no reason at all. If nothing happened, nothing happened, and there's nothing to report. Seriously.  |
| Back to top |
|
|
Dorcas_Aurelia
 Subscriber
Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 3075
Location: Philly, PA; stupid Yankees.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:06 pm |
|
|
| Monster in a box wrote: | | Thanks for giving me a heart attack for no reason at all. If nothing happened, nothing happened, and there's nothing to report. Seriously. |
We live in the information age. The possibility of news is news itself. |
| Back to top |
|
|
sargon
Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:17 pm |
|
|
IIRC in countries (Germany?)where animated child porn is illegal, law enforcement doesn't prosecute when the only crime is possessing animated child pornography--probably due to vagueness of the law or free speech protection. In the few cases where they have charged someone with possessing animated/virtual CP it is only because they arrested that person for possessing "real" CP and police found that person happened to have animated CP. I may be wrong here though...
Personally I find all lolicon stuff to be repulsive. IMO anyone who likes that stuff is not much better than a pedophile. That may not be a fair statement since said individuals don't go out and lure young children into their van. I want to believe that lolicon fans aren't as bad as I make them out to be but until someone can convince me otherwise I'll always view these people this way. I don't think this makes them criminals though. In short, it doesn't bother me if someone happens to like loli stuff since its not affecting or hurting someone.
And fighterholic is essentially right about the censorship thing. It's the strangest censorship law/standard I've ever seen.
If you make the unfortunate enough to stumble upon Japanese scat porn, you'll find that, besides being traumatized for life, vaginas and penises are still blurred while everything else is okay...Thats a big WTF! |
| Back to top |
|
|
daxomni
Joined: 08 Nov 2005
Posts: 2422
Location: The morally challenged land of cheap guns and expensive health care.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:25 pm |
|
|
| calawain wrote: | | Just fyi, the American laws in this area were not aimed at comics. |
Actually at least one person has already been charged and convicted for accessing drawn images of fictitious characters that appeared to be drawn to look young. This was in addition to charges of possessing real or indistinguishable CP (which you seem to be referring to).
| calawain wrote: | | When they say "virtual child pornography" they mean computer generated images that are meant to look like they were real people. The argument was, if you can't tell that it's not a real person then it should be treated like it was real. Anime and manga is not generated to look like real people in that way. |
You seem to be confusing two separate issues here; anime and manga with CP themes run afoul of current law until such time as it is struck down. A lot of CP-like content never shows up in R1 for this very reason. Personally I think it would probably sell moderately well if it did, but there are few publishers and retailers who are willing to take the risk of virtual CP.
| calawain wrote: | | The Supreme Court smartly realized that such a standard is untenable, the law was vastly overbroad and vague. The one currently on the books, as TFA indicates, is once again in litigation before the courts. My prediction is that once again it will get struck down, thankfully. |
I don’t think you’ve been keeping up with long term picture. The Supreme Court that struck down the previous law was not the ever more right-leaning Supreme Court that now sits atop our justice system. Ronald Reagan helped start a new anti-pornography movement back in the 1980’s and every Republican administration since then has sought to actively prosecute the creators and distributors of conventional pornography involving consenting adults. Every administration, regardless of affiliation, seeks to actively prosecute CP, but to attack even conventional pornography with no CP angle and with no CP theme seems a bit much to me. For extra credit read up on what John Ashcroft was doing just prior to 9-11. A vote for a Republican is a vote against all kinds of sexual content, even those many of us assume are protected.
| Top Gun wrote: | | Wait...possession of actual child pornography hasn't been illegal in Japan up until this point? Just...what the hell. |
Japan is not the only country that never created a law specifically addressing possession outside of the creation and distribution (or intention to distribute) of CP. However, it’s hard to see how you would ever come into possession of CP without either creating it or having it “distributed” to you at some point.
Last edited by daxomni on Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:33 pm; edited 1 time in total |
| Back to top |
|
|
eviltimes
Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 113
Location: Callisto
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:33 pm |
|
|
| sargon wrote: |
Personally I find all lolicon stuff to be repulsive. IMO anyone who likes that stuff is not much better than a pedophile. |
You got that right. |
| Back to top |
|
|
fighterholic
Joined: 28 Sep 2005
Posts: 9194
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:34 pm |
|
|
| sargon wrote: |
And fighterholic is essentially right about the censorship thing. It's the strangest censorship law/standard I've ever seen.
If you make the unfortunate enough to stumble upon Japanese scat porn, you'll find that, besides being traumatized for life, vaginas and penises are still blurred while everything else is okay...Thats a big WTF! |
Absolutely right. I had the unfortunate opportunity to stumble onto that myself while back in Japan. Clearly a sickening thing, how some people can get off to it, I just don't understand, nor do I want to |
| Back to top |
|
|
sargon
Joined: 10 Feb 2007
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:39 pm |
|
|
This is a little off topic but...
| daxomni wrote: | A vote for a republican is a vote against all kinds sexual content, even those many of us assume are protected.
|
Yes because as we know, all republicans vote the same way . Does this also apply to a vote for someone like Ron Paul, a republican?
In all fairness though your statement rings true for the majority of republicans. |
| Back to top |
|
|
fxg97873
Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 172
Location: Houston, TX
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:51 pm |
|
|
| daxomni wrote: | A vote for a Republican is a vote against all kinds of sexual content, even those many of us assume are protected.
|
The funny thing was that it was a Republican who was the ONLY one not to vote for the PROTECT Act of 2003.
For Ron Paul, your constitutional right to Free Speech come first before notches on his political career belt.
It took a lot guts.
mk2000
EDIT: Still trying to look up voting records for each representative except that only 8 were opposed in the House (although 0 opposed in the Senate)
Last edited by fxg97873 on Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:09 pm; edited 1 time in total |
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Anime Castle
Robert's Anime Corner Store
AAA Anime Distribution
Big Bad Toy Store
