Forum - View topic

NEWS: Australia Fines Man for Importing Pornographic Anime

Because Neo-Nazi has a constitutional righ to publish whatever drivel they publish, sing or whatever. Hell, they even let an organization called Man-Boy Love exist because it is within the people of that organization's rights. It's okay under the eyes of the law as long that they don't incite a riot.

Quote:

Because Neo-Nazi has a constitutional righ to publish whatever drivel they publish, sing or whatever. Hell, they even let an organization called Man-Boy Love exist because it is within the people of that organization's rights. It's okay under the eyes of the law as long that they don't incite a riot.

Exactly. The First Amendment isn't absolute; when a person uses his/her freedom of speech to promote or encourage breaking the law, then it's unconstitutional and needs to be stopped. Lolicon is morally wrong, but if it can't be proven that it encourages people to harm real children, then you can't just deprive someone of their freedom to read it. That's a box that shouldn't be opened, because it gives the government too much power. Think about it, if the U.S. government decided to ban lolicon because they deemed it harmful, not many people would complain, right? Most pedophiles would be too ashamed, and proponents of free-speech would be in the minority. What would happen if they used the same logic for banning lolicon (it encouraged actual rape or something) to ban violent content from video games? You'd think there's no way it could happen in reality, but I wouldn't be so sure.

Quote:

Real or imagined, censorship is wrong.

So it's okay for neo-nazi's to publish their hate material and violate the rights of others? Why not let child porn be legal if animated child porn is okay. There isn't a difference, seeing as people are jerking off to the animated children. Animated or not loli-hentai is child pornography.

In Canada, lolicon is illegal and no one has complained. Also, violent video games like GTA aren't banned. In fact, when it comes to movies/TV we are more liberal than the neighbours to the south. We have laws, but we haven't been ban happy when we banned lolicon.

EDIT: to child of Lilith:
Most child molestation cases the molester did have child pornography. If we catch the paedophile, then we can protect future children from being harmed.

But you don't have evidence claiming lolicon keeps paedophiles from preying on children.

Actually, hate material is illegal in many places. http://www.out-law.com/page-5901 Please stay relivant to the converstation.

Usually, eh? So all paedophiles know the difference between fantasy and reality? Pornography may be a fantasy but that still doesn't mean there is a difference between the morality of real child porn and loli-hentai. Paedophiles have their fantasies by watching child porn. If drawn images are more avaiable to suit their desires then they would go after the drawn images. Still means they want to see children having sex, just it's drawn. Is there really a difference if paedophiles got off on drawn children than real children? They all want to become aroused at seeing children. Like I said before, if we allow people to watch animated children having sex, why not allow paedophiles to see real children having sex?

Actually, I didn't say 'well the adult is of legal age.' You're right it is a serious crime, do we need to promote it through our media?

There is a difference between fictional adult rape and fictional child rape simply because of something called the age of consent.

You realise not everyone is from the US. In Austrialia, (getting on-topic) it is illegal to own loli-hentai. Takign away those who find it arousing to look at children having sex drawn or real is the perfect way to protect children.

Exactly. The First Amendment isn't absolute; when a person uses his/her freedom of speech to promote or encourage breaking the law, then it's unconstitutional and needs to be stopped. Lolicon is morally wrong, but if it can't be proven that it encourages people to harm real children, then you can't just deprive someone of their freedom to read it. That's a box that shouldn't be opened, because it gives the government too much power. Think about it, if the U.S. government decided to ban lolicon because they deemed it harmful, not many people would complain, right? Most pedophiles would be too ashamed, and proponents of free-speech would be in the minority. What would happen if they used the same logic for banning lolicon (it encouraged actual rape or something) to ban violent content from video games? You'd think there's no way it could happen in reality, but I wouldn't be so sure.

EDIT: to child of Lilith:
Most child molestation cases the molester did have child pornography. If we catch the paedophile, then we can protect future children from being harmed.

In Canada, lolicon is illegal and no one has complained.

I'm complaining. And I'm also complaining about the banning of sexuality on American TV. Indeed, I'm complaining about every government that passes judgement on any sort of content.

Steroid wrote:

I'm complaining. And I'm also complaining about the banning of sexuality on American TV. Indeed, I'm complaining about every government that passes judgement on any sort of content.

Any content? So we should allow real child porn? Or snuff films? That statement is not only illogical, its completely unethical. I don't like censorship, but there are times when its the lesser of two evils. And sexuality has not been banned on American tv. There are several shows with plenty of sex or fanservice. Flavor of Love, just about any video on MTV or BET, Battlestar Galactica, Lost, the Real World, etc. If anything, American tv has become more sexulaized in the past ten years. Just because they don't show hentai on Adult Swim or Porno on ABC does not mean tv is less sexualized. And have you ever noticed that when a child molester is caught, more often than not his house/apartment is filled with child porn? Please use some common sense here.

There is nothing per se wrong in the existence of child porn, only its creation. Real-life child porn involves parties who are legally and factually unable to consent to participate. If you had an adult who looked like a child and consented to create porn, it would not be wrong. And if you have works created solely by the artists and their tools, with no unwilling or unable subjects, that is not wrong.

In most child molestation cases the molester had a head on his shoulders. If we remove everyone's head, we can protect future children from being harmed. That's just as silly as what you're proposing.

But you don't have evidence it encourage the behavior as well. But there is evidence that porn can satisfy sexual desire somewhat. It wouldn't be different for pedo either.

There is a difference between fictional adult rape and fictional child rape simply because of something called the age of consent.

No, it is not. People will continue to rape children. They had before CP and most definately will after. The only way to really protect children is let the parent take responsbility. While I encourage protecting children's rights and all that jazz, I think we're taking it a bit too far. Criminalizing someone over something drawn? Do you realize how dangerous and stupid that is? Last time I recall, jail time is for people who need rehabitation and learn what they did wrong to ANOTHER PERSON. I mean, in the anime/manga community, we kid on people thinking of characters as actual people and now some countries would throw you in jail over a character? That's inane and insane, my friend.

the only way to really protect children is let the parent take responsbility.

I think it would help everyone out if we just go ahead and define, once and for all, the precise moral boundaries concerning obscenity.

Live Action Child Murder = ok
Live Action Child Violence = ok
Live Action Child Rape = bad (can't film child rape without committing RL rape)
Live Action Child Sex = bad (again, rape)

Animated Child Murder = ok
Animated Child Violence = ok
Animated Child Rape = bad (if you watch animated child rape, you might try real rape. besides, why would you want to watch it anyway, sicko?)
Animated Child Sex = bad (ditto)

Whether you like it or not, people have a right to their their fiction.

If something's illegal, you don't do it.

in anime and manga, in many cases how can you state that a character is too young? Based on the declared age (that can be as far as centuries for a childish looking character)? Based on look (and who is going to be the judge?) ? Based on behaviour?

Kanchide wrote:

in anime and manga, in many cases how can you state that a character is too young? Based on the declared age (that can be as far as centuries for a childish looking character)? Based on look (and who is going to be the judge?) ? Based on behaviour?

This is an excellent point for animated porn. How do you know when a character is too young? It's not even real, the age may not even be stated. Some anime girls which are fairly old still look like children. For example Shana from Shakugan no Shana. Imagine being fined $8000 because you went to the USA and bought a copy of Shakugan no Shana from Suncoast then took it back with you to Japan. (Suncoast also carries real hentai, although I don't know if they carry any loli hentai but who knows what Australia would decide is a loli hentai).

BTW, does anyone know what specific titles (manga/game/anime/whatever) the Australian guy bought were?

Um.. there is a problem with people interested in the idea of children having sex. It may just be porn but they are aroused at seeing children having sex, which isn't normal. Why settle for just drawn images of children having sex, or even just seeing it? It may be a fantasy, but what happens if paedophiles feel it's not enough?

When the child doesn't have an adult body, that's too young.