Forum

I admit that I haven't read Ranma, so perhaps I I fingered it as being offensive when it wasn't. I am sorry. But from what I have read Sukeban Deka did depict make reference to girl who was drug dealing being sexually assaulted and then left on the train tracks, at least according to this link http://neojaponisme.com/ search on that page for sukeban and you will find what I am referencing. I was merely making the point that racy children's comics are a problem that's 30 years old, from what I understand a lot of the Go Nagai series were considered over the top when the came out, including Cutie Honey, and are considered to be predecessors of the current stream comics that the PTA screams about. But anyways, yes, I am going to agree with the opinions of the PTA, since if you are gong to complain about offensive comics then at least complain about the ones people read. I don't think most children pay attention to Comic Lo, but they certainly pay attention to ones like you just posted about.

Quote:

but whether it was malice or incompetence that resulted in such a broad definition, I couldn't say.

If you look at the two political parties behind this bill (Dan Kanemitsu's twitter mentions that they're the LDP and NKP, which doesn't surprise me one bit), it's pretty obvious it's a bit of both.
NKP has always been little more than a shell used by religious conservatives to side-step the constitutional separation between church and state. NKP is "malice". The LDP is no longer the invincible powerhouse it once was, and has made a devil's bargain with the NKP in hopes of shoring up their waning political fortunes. LDP is "incompetence".
Now I usually don't like making comparisons between Japanese and American politics because they're usually quite different, but in this one case it's very similar to the American situation where the Republican Party in the USA has been slowly losing influence, so they've grown more dependent on the support of far-right religious conservatives.

I know that their religious tendencies are often considered cult like. I understand that their main religious sect, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sōka_Gakkai Soka Gakkai, forbid the use of ordinary Shinto Amulets or the Attendance of Shrines at one time.http://www.sokaspirit.org/soka-spirit-update/president-toda-and-the-shinto-talisman That doesn't mean that there aren't many members of the LDP who would want this legislation as well, including Honest Abe.

Anymouse wrote:

I admit that I haven't read Ranma, so perhaps I I fingered it as being offensive when it wasn't. I am sorry. But from what I have read Sukeban Deka did depict make reference to girl who was drug dealing being sexually assaulted and then left on the train tracks, at least according to this link http://neojaponisme.com/ search on that page for sukeban and you will find what I am referencing. I was merely making the point that racy children's comics are a problem that's 30 years old, from what I understand a lot of the Go Nagai series were considered over the top when the came out, including Cutie Honey, and are considered to be predecessors of the current stream comics that the PTA screams about. But anyways, yes, I am going to agree with the opinions of the PTA, since if you are gong to complain about offensive comics then at least complain about the ones people read. I don't think most children pay attention to Comic Lo, but they certainly pay attention to ones like you just posted about.

OK, apparently my edit of my previous post was irrelevant.

Well, that description of Sukeban Deka, and the Amazon product description, at least outwardly looks to be an example. The anime is apparently more extreme than the manga or even tamer live action stuff, going by ANN's own age ratings. On the other hand, the anime, an OVA, was probably not targeted towards minors either.
Ranma probably isn't an example either, even if by virtue of its classic status.

Go Nagai is a good example, as many of his works had the same sort of reaction from PTAs. Of course, his extreme stuff is comparable to very tame modern works, though still included in this ban. And the PTA failed to stop his works, and their successors.

Well, it's a moot point anyway. As you said, no one will willingly restrict their freedom, except of course if they believe there is greater harm in not restricting it. Since there's no obvious harm in racy shoujo manga except to parents' naive beliefs about their children's innocence, the ban will be strongly resisted.

Paploo wrote:

NGK wrote:

Hold up...

So the motivation for passing this Tokyo bill is to curb shoujo manga that contains lots of fanservice??? If that's the case then I guess we're giving seinen mangas such as lolicon a wee too much credit and coverage then. Seinen lolicon mangas are clearly labeled and marketed to adults only, and I doubt store owners will proudly display "COMIC LO VOL 123538756837 on sale NOW!!!" and sell that stuff to minors.

No, that's just other people twisting the wording to suit their paranoid theories. If you guys have links to prove otherwise, why not provide them? Everything I've read has seemed to indicate it's primarly an issue of virtual child pornography and the attempt to ban it.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20090331i1.html It mostly centers on child pornography concerns, not stuff like shojo manga dealing with teen issues. Child porn laws only came into effect in Japan in 1999, and still have major loopholes in them, a cause of concern for many.

http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20090612f2.html And it all started with concern over the game Rapelay, after a foriegn scandal called attention to issues local women's rights groups had been concerned about for years. So shojo manga didn't start this, a porn video game where the player rapes a mother, then her children, did.

Either way, whatever babbling creepy pro-lolicon people do here, it has no affect on Japan itself- this is a law that's being put fourth by people in Japan looking to improve child porn laws in Japan, and the fact that Osaka's now taking on the issue as well is proof it's not just a random event. There's a definite need and desire across Japan for laws like this.

Japan needs laws to ban drawings? That's a new one to me.

Last edited by BitShifter on Sun Mar 21, 2010 8:30 am; edited 1 time in total

There have been some good arguments on both sides of this issue, over the past few weeks, but when anyone considers legislation like this, or obscenity laws, the question I feel must be asked is: How far are you willing to let the government go to enforce that law?

Let's consider what more-or-less happened to Handley for a moment. At some time, a person with a gun and a warrant showed up at his front door, demanding to confiscate his books and his computer, because the post office had reported that he was receiving books that contained obscene drawings of the sexual abuse of fictional minors, and he had been caught picking up the package. Over a thousand books were confiscated (you probably don't fit those in the trunk of a police cruiser--you would need a truck.) He was then arrested, and apparently was asked to submit to a doctor's psychological evaluation and a polygraph test (he cooperated; I'm sure he could have refused). Thousands of dollars probably had to come out of somebody's bank accounts to pay lawyers. Then he plea-bargained and was sentenced to 6 months in prison, and more monitoring and rehabilitation, involving potentially halfway houses, parole officers, doctors, etc. (The particulars were similar to these.) That is the cost of enforcing that obscenity law.

Suppose the post office had messed up the address, and the man with the gun had come to your front door with his empty police truck, demanding you turn over all your computers and your books--by mistake, of course. You don't have anything that you would be ashamed of, do you, citizen? After they haul off everything and pore over it for a few days before realizing their mistake, would you still feel that the whole procedure was justified after you found out it was because your neighbor may have been guilty of "receiving" dirty drawings?

The one thing that always seems to be absent from any debate about legislation is the gun. Because that's what it ultimately comes down to; people don't obey laws just because they are passed into law; otherwise, we wouldn't need police. Laws are obeyed because if you break or ignore them, eventually someone will show up with the gun to enforce the law. Blacks in the 50's didn't attend "separate but equal" schools in the US because they wanted to, they did it because if they defied, someone would show up with the gun to enforce the law. A gun doesn't make the law right, it just makes it "the law".

So before you want any legislation passed to ban visual depictions of sexual situations with fictional minors (nonexistent youth in the Tokyo bill), or verbal descriptions of it, or whatever, you must always ask yourself: How do I feel about the gun, and the way the government must use it to enforce this particular law? If there is a mistake, will the damage to the innocent be able to justify the cost of catching the guilty?

Do you feel comfortable living in a country where we allow the man with the gun to show up at your front door and confiscate all of your fiction books for the words and drawings they might contain, even if it's a mistake?

Nice to see it's not just America that has religious controlled and conservative parties that want to ban pornography. Again, to me, it's not the government's job to police fiction and people's fantasy worlds. Banning fictional porn will not prevent actual crime. Instead of going actual child porn in which actual children are abused, they're going after fictional porn comic books. That's some Jack Thompson logic like stopping Grand Theft Auto prevents actual murder.

m_milburn wrote:

I honestly feel that this "Bill" was influenced by the Western/American culture. After so many years, why did japan finally decide to create this "bill". I honestly believe the "heat" came from American distributors, like Borders who have a hard time categorizing manga age-appropriate books and want Japan to do it for them. Some parents get pissed off that they purchase books that say "16 and older" but have sexually explicit material in it that in America would be categorized as rated "MA/R". What do you think?

Japan is finally following onto the recommendations of the United Nation's Third World Congress against Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents.

http://digital.asiaone.com/Digital/News/Story/A1Story20081204-105512.html

I doubt the heat came from american distributors- they don't license this sort of material (all the assorted cases we've seen recently regarding virtual child porn involving anime/manga have involed either imported books, or materials accessed online), and as the animevice article indicated, in the case of adult publishers like Icarus [who publish hentai manga], they will edit imagery or leave out shortstories of collections to avoid legal problems here. This is done with the participation of the original artists and publishers [just like an edits done to non-adult manga]. Book stores simply choose not to carry material that they believe is inappropriate [the main reason why Kodomo no Jikan was dropped, asides from the fandom ire against it]

The AsiaOne article linked to above seems to indicate it's a worldwide movement against Japan's choices regarding this material, and Asian countries look to be a key factor, which may also be a reason why this is going forward in assorted regions of Japan

That was a good article to point out. A noteable quote from it of someone within Japan, apparently a Human Rights lawyer-

""On this occasion, the congress has made clear a consensus among the international community that images depicting the sexual abuse of children in manga and anime is a form of sexual exploitation, as it infringes upon the human rights and dignity of children," said Akihiko Morita, professor in international human rights studies at Tokyo Institute of Technology.

"The situation in Japan needs to be urgently addressed because it falls short of international standards [with regard to regulating child pornography]," Morita said."

enurtsol wrote:

m_milburn wrote:

I honestly feel that this "Bill" was influenced by the Western/American culture. After so many years, why did japan finally decide to create this "bill". I honestly believe the "heat" came from American distributors, like Borders who have a hard time categorizing manga age-appropriate books and want Japan to do it for them. Some parents get pissed off that they purchase books that say "16 and older" but have sexually explicit material in it that in America would be categorized as rated "MA/R". What do you think?

Japan is finally following onto the recommendations of the United Nation's Third World Congress against Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents.

http://digital.asiaone.com/Digital/News/Story/A1Story20081204-105512.html

Drawings are not children therefore cannot be exploited.

Drunk_Samurai wrote:

enurtsol wrote:

m_milburn wrote:

I honestly feel that this "Bill" was influenced by the Western/American culture. After so many years, why did japan finally decide to create this "bill". I honestly believe the "heat" came from American distributors, like Borders who have a hard time categorizing manga age-appropriate books and want Japan to do it for them. Some parents get pissed off that they purchase books that say "16 and older" but have sexually explicit material in it that in America would be categorized as rated "MA/R". What do you think?

Japan is finally following onto the recommendations of the United Nation's Third World Congress against Sexual Exploitation of Children and Adolescents.

http://digital.asiaone.com/Digital/News/Story/A1Story20081204-105512.html

Drawings are not children therefore cannot be exploited.

Yes, but they promote children as sex objects to adult males. Given how many people learn about stuff from porn, that's pretty dangerous. I honestly think ANN should close this thread, because the constant promotion of child porn as somethign acceptable in this thread is deeply disturbing. I think we should have rules against this sort of discussion. It's incredibly offensive, especially since there are likely many minors browsing these forums- how do they feel about adults defending their right to look at underage porn? Even if it's drawings, it does cross a disturbing line.

Paploo wrote:

Yes, but they promote children as sex objects to adult males. Given how many people learn about stuff from porn, that's pretty dangerous. I honestly think ANN should close this thread, because the constant promotion of child porn as somethign acceptable in this thread is deeply disturbing. I think we should have rules against this sort of discussion. It's incredibly offensive, especially since there are likely many minors browsing these forums- how do they feel about adults defending their right to look at underage porn? Even if it's drawings, it does cross a disturbing line.

You're precious. I think you should forward a list of unacceptable discussion topics to the mods. Make sure to point out all the child porn proponents and likely NAMBLA members to them. Show them your collection of straw men. For the children.

Paploo wrote:

Yes, but they promote children as sex objects to adult males. Given how many people learn about stuff from porn, that's pretty dangerous. I honestly think ANN should close this thread, because the constant promotion of child porn as somethign acceptable in this thread is deeply disturbing. I think we should have rules against this sort of discussion. It's incredibly offensive, especially since there are likely many minors browsing these forums- how do they feel about adults defending their right to look at underage porn? Even if it's drawings, it does cross a disturbing line.

I have no idea what you mean by "the constant promotion of child porn as somethign [sic] acceptable". Most of this thread is me arguing that you're all wrong about what the bill is banning, and the rest is either supporting freedom of speech regardless of of how disturbing it is, or support for banning any depictions that represent teenage sexuality as normal to teenagers.

That tired old argument over fictional child porn is not very interesting... It always devolves into a shouting match, and no one changes their mind or even refines their own beliefs. I'm glad the discussion is not about what you think it is.

Though... I would not be against an admonition against discussing the treatment of fictional child porn. It's a waste of time and a good way to start a flame war.

We need to make this thread 40 pages long, we need to do what previous posters couldn't do.

Strategy: Get to page 4, repeat ourselves 10 times.

Last edited by CCSYueh on Sun Mar 21, 2010 1:32 am; edited 1 time in total

Anymouse wrote:

Precisely, Gamen. There is actually very little benefit in targeting lolita fetish pornography, because the only people who read it are lonely and weak men who don't do a whole lot except buy pornography. The major problem are the vast amounts of risque and degenerate children's comics, especially girls comics, which target and corrupt the future of society. Those comics will be tolerated because people are unwilling to ban anything which restricts their freedom. It doesn't matter that premarital sex is glorified and encouraged, or that rape is turned into entertainment, it only matters that mainstream consumerism marches on. Everyone can make themselves feel better by complaining about people who buy creepy porno.

Interesting take.
Both the Japan Times article from 3/31/2009 & the one from 5/12/2009 are not about the smutty shojo manga clampdown from a year or so back & I really don't think all these manga artist would be all that worked up over keeping adult material out of the hands of children.

Quote:

"Politicians listen to some Japanese who think anime does not victimize anybody because no one is videotaped or photographed in it. But those people overlook the right of children who are forced to see what they do not want to see or the right of parents who want to prevent their children from seeing such material on the Internet," said UNICEF Japan official Hiromasa Nakai."

How on earth does UNICEF get the concept that anime & manga are an affront on the dignity & human rights of children because these real children will somehow get their hands on these anime & manga? Pretty much all the offensive anime is either titles one must buy (OVA's as opposed to on tv) or air at times children should be in bed. Yesm they can dvr, but that's where the parental units are supposed to enter the picture, isn't it?
Children are not forced to see these images.
Are there not tons of product out there that parents who care to police their children on the net can buy to protect their young units' virgin eyes?
I do not know what moral environment you were brought up in, but if a child has not learned pre-marital sex is a no-no by age 12, isn't it sort of late to be worrying about it? If a child has not learned drugs are bad by age 12, do you honestly think one can stop them from using when their friends say they're cool?
My mother trusted her parenting skills & didn't censor my reading because she trusted me to do as I had been taught. I took my daughter to museums & allowed her to see nude art so that it was no big deal to her while her cousins would giggle & point at the replicas for sale at the Museum Store.

Gamen wrote:

Does no one read the bill? It's a ban on the distribution of sexual depictions of minors TO MINORS. Hentai, whether lolicon, shotacon, or your mainstream high school fantasies, is safe. Stores in Tokyo would just have yet another reason to not sell those goods to minors Very Happy

Racy shoujo manga, on the other hand... Well, suffice to say, the bill is doomed, whether in Tokyo or Osaka, precisely because it is targeting popular, mainstream works, not easily marginalized ones.

That's not what I'm seeing in the article wording from ANN. Are you suggesting the people running this site can't read Japanese well enough to tell the dif between what thewy believe is a bill banning virtual porn & your interpretation which sounds like that crack-down on shojo smut? Paploo's links at least refer to the bill that everyone's been talking about the last few days. The political types in Japan did say they were going to study the issue about a year ago.

Paploo wrote:

Yes, but they promote children as sex objects to adult males. Given how many people learn about stuff from porn, that's pretty dangerous. I honestly think ANN should close this thread, because the constant promotion of child porn as somethign acceptable in this thread is deeply disturbing. I think we should have rules against this sort of discussion. It's incredibly offensive, especially since there are likely many minors browsing these forums- how do they feel about adults defending their right to look at underage porn? Even if it's drawings, it does cross a disturbing line.

Yes, by all means healthy debate is wrong. God knows the men who founded the US didn't believe in debate & set up a government where everyone has to agree 100%.
I'm sorry, but I happen to believe in freedom.
A drawing has no age beyond what its creator makes. A drawing has no rights. Real live children have rights. Real live children can be harmed by being sexually abused. Charlie Brown is not real. Miley Cyrus is real.
Can you understand the dif?
The disturbing issue is this is moving into thought police. The disturbing issue is it's trying to reshape human nature. Whether people on the ban side understand it or not, children are very hedonistic creatures (this is actually one of the concepts in LeVey's Church od Satan-that a child & an animal are the personification of Satan on earth-they want what they want & take it until they are trained differently). It is a parent's to teach a child not to run naked in the streets (mine sure tried), to learn patience & not seek instant gratification, etc. I don't know about other parents, but I read my share of parenting books that pointed out children DO play with themselves & the parent should not teach the child the act is bad, but teach the child that should be done in private & of course that no adult should ever touch the child in their private areas.
So the issue is banning everything doesn't exactly teach self control, does it? Isn't it better to teach children to control their lusts & desires than just keep it all out of their hands?
If 95% of adults can view the latest teen idol vamping her way around a music video simulating sex or whatever, should we ban the act because 5% are affected, or should we deal with the 5%? Doesn't Japan have a pretty low crime rate? So if a majority of guys in Japan who play the rape games have the ability to discern reality from a video game, doesn't that prove there's no real harm? If a majority of the people in Japan who see such anime as Ranma & other fan service anime (hell, how many times did we see Goku's naked ass in DB/Z?) manage to grow up to become productive adults, how is it a threat?
For my money, people who support banning virtual porn have a basic lack of faith in their fellow humans. Made up characters having sex doesn't affect real children. If a real child's adult supervision is allowing the child to see such stuff, that adult unit needs to be punished. How does this not make sense?
On the other hand, as Frank Zappa pointed out at the PMRC hearings, it really isn't the place of some guy in an Washington or New York office somewhere to decide what toys his could play with, much less slapping a stupid parental warning on a cd. If a parent believes their 14 yr old can handle an R-rated movie, that parent has the right to take the child to it. I took mine to her first R-rated movie when she was 8. That didn't mean I allowed her to see every R-rated movie. There were PG-13 movies I didn't allow her to see. I made that choice.
Whether you think it's sick for an adult to pleasure him or herself to a drawing of someone who doesn't exist in reality, it's really not your place to complain unless the law is broken. Why create criminals when jails & prisons are full to the brim? If said adult never, ever, ever touches another human being forcefully, where is the harm? Yes, if the image were of a real person, there can be harm to the person in the photo. There is no indication that Chris Handley would ever have committed any acts upon another real person, so how was he harming anyone?
I always thought it was an ideal basic to Americans, but maybe it's more the Wild West, but pretty much I always thought so long as no one/nothing is harmed, Americans pretty much believe in freedom. My 6th grade teacher put it as my right to swing my arm ends where it might connect to your person, so I need to consider my actions to respect your rights as well as exercise my own.

Forum - View topic
NEWS: Tokyo's 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Officially on Hold

Scott Westerfeld's Leviathan Alternate-History Novels Get Anime Series by Orange in 2025

Your Anime Rankings - Best of Spring 2024, May 27-Jun 2

This Week in Anime - Why Was Code Geass Such a Big Deal?

Kengan Ashura Season 1 Part 2 Anime Series Review

Mr. Osomatsu Anime Gets 4th Season

Re:Zero Anime's 3rd Season Unveils More Cast, Theme Song Artists, 90-Minute 1st Episode With Theatrical Run

The ANN Aftershow - Why You Should Watch Dead Dead Demon's Dededede Destruction

Garouden: The Way of the Lone Wolf Anime Series Review

We Ranked the Official KONOSUBA Cocktails

Mysterious Disappearances Volume 1 Manga Review

This Week in Anime - A Tale As Old As Time: Subs or Dubs?

My Hero Academia Enters 'Epilogue;' Author States Manga Will Continue for 'A While' as it 'Returns to its Title' (Updated)

A Returner's Magic Should Be Special Season 1 Anime Review

Ghibli Park's Newest Area Brings Howl's Moving Castle and Kiki's Delivery Service to Life

Forum - View topicNEWS: Tokyo's 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Officially on Hold

Forum

Forum - View topic
NEWS: Tokyo's 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill Officially on Hold