Forum - View topicNEWS: UNICEF Japan Continues Push against Virtual Child Porn
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||||||||||
Indeed it is wrong which is why I said nothing of the sort. If you're just going to straw-man, you're as good as talking to yourself. Please either don't put words in my mouth or don't bother posting your private little conversation to which I am apparently not invited.
Of course, there is a larger group of shut-ins who can be found all around the world and in many different groups besides anime fans in Japan. However, just because not all NEET are Otaku does not necessarily mean all Otaku are not NEET.
I think you might be over thinking things a bit. A social outcast as I and most people probably would define it would be someone who is cast out in a social setting. For example: has few or no friends, rarely or never socializes, etc.
Let me again ask then: What is your basis to claim we are wrong? Do you have some manner of empirical or even anecdotal evidence to the contrary that says that the majority or even a large group of otaku are actually reasonably normal and socially accepted people?
Should it really...question mark. If you're going to advocate censoring or limiting of people's freedom you damn well better have more than punctuation to back it up.
Darn those corrupt politicians in the pocket of big anime. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Labbes
 Posts: 890 |
|
|||||||||||||
I can only answer this for myself, but hear me out. I have my moral views, and if I think something is wrong, then I will speak up (most of the time). I also abstain from certain things, for example buying stuff from certain corporations, because what they do/their business philosophies do not work together with my moral views. I will give you this famous quote/poem:
While of course, this is a poem from a rather extreme situation, I still think that speaking up is very important. If you look at Germany, the USK who does the ratings (In the US, this would be R,T a.s.o.) will give a game with red blood an 18-year-old rating, while giving the exact same game with green blood a 16-year-old-rating. I think you will agree that this is rather ludicrous. Fact is that the moral views of most people are rather twisted*, and since politicians react to the "most people" part, there is often the need to speak up. Even if I have never played Doom 3, I will speak up when the USK tries to ban it. I hope you understand me now 
*I can say this for Germany, at least. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Daemonblue
 Posts: 701 |
|
|||||||||||||
IT might not be directly related to the banning of CP, but in 2005 the FBI did create an obscenity task force, and not just for CP, but for stuff with consenting adults in acts such as beastiality and SM. I can't give you a direct link to the article, but it's in the regarding the guy getting charged for having those manga and anime that was posted a few days ago. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Some Guy
 Posts: 135 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I was waiting for someone to bring that back up.
I wrote this last night but never posted it:
The first argument is flawed. Child porn was banned (child porn being pre-pubescent kids) because it creates psychological trauma and involves no consent. "Adult porn" hasn't been because it's between two consenting individuals. (or perhaps a consenting individual and a willing animal....) The connection between child porn and violence in movies is virtually non-existent. The only connection between violent movies and child porn is that they can both be considered objectionable. This just takes me back to the original, and well proven argument, child porn is banned because of the fact that it involves real people, doing real unmentionable things, with a real child. A violent movie, is all special effects, no-one (outside of accidents) is hurt physically or emotionally during the filming (short of an actor not having a big enough trailer). So the third argument is based off of the already flimsy arguments presented above, and this argument is itself flawed in comparison to the other two because it is comparing two virtual things to each other. Again, I come back to the leprosy model, this time the the separation is between healthy and unhealthy and, virtual and reality. Your first two arguments each compare two very different things. Your first compares something that is known to create long lasting problems for the people involved to something that doesn't. You cant compare a sickly leper (child porn) to a healthy adult ("legal porn"). The second argument is comparing reality to virtuality, the same argument from above holds true here. The third argument is comparing two virtual things. The entire idea behind this thread is that they are trying to ban virtual child porn because the real thing is banned. The reason a ban isnt in place now is because it is virtual, if you start banning one virtual thing you can start banning other virtual things. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
burzmali
Posts: 143 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I have to point out that there are 3 grades of child pornography in play:
1. Child pornography made with real children 2. Virtual child pornography made in a computer 3. Explicit drawings of child found in anime and manga Now, (1) is illegal, (2) is illegal in the US but maybe not Japan, and (3) is illegal in the US if obscene and not in Japan. This article refers to "Virtual" child porn, but I can't read japanese well enough to make the determination where or not they mean (2) or (3). The logic behind (2) being illegal in the US is because it was becoming the standard defense for people charged with possession of CP to claim that the picture was virtual and hence not "real" CP. Since, at the time, possession of virtual CP wasn't a crime, they would walk. The PROTECT act of 2003 closed that loophole in the US. Is it possible that UNICEF is simply trying to close the same loophole in Japan? |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
yblees
 Posts: 165 Location: New Zealand |
|
|||||||||||||
I completely agree with this sentiment - and thank you for reminding be about that particular poem. I have kids & images of children in sexual situations turns my stomach. I even found Kodomo do Jikan too disturbing to read past the first few chapters. But, particularly with something like Virtual porn, I will definitely defend the right of others to read it if they so choose. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Thought Police
Posts: 1 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
Since there don't seem to be any people so far, I decided to give my viewpoint.
I read lolicon doujins, watch My Pico, etc and enjoy them greatly for what they are, i.e. fantasy. From my perspective I can see absolutely no harm that arises from my enjoyment, the creation, or the existence of loli and other such erotic material. Since the differences between something which is purely imaginary and actual people being subjected to sexual abuse are so vast as to be utterly incomparable. Being able to appreciate something as erotic in fantasy doesn't always mean that a person would like it in reality, and even if they did, a sane person would realise that real children are not sexual beings and should not be treated as such. Here is where most of the misunderstanding arises imo. The people who are so horrified by lolicon are those people who are seemingly incapable of separating fantasy from reality, thus cannot understand why there would be no link between the two. So far, nobody has been able to give any evidence to suggest a link between lolicon and real life abuse, and afaiac they never will, since there is none. I for one am disgusted by the shameless attempts of these people to ban a medium of entertainment that harms nobody, simply because they find it distasteful. It's slippery-slope crap and should be stamped out by anyone intelligent enough to recognise that even if they find something distasteful, they have no right to ban it. These moral high-horse turds will always exist, to try to stamp out any originality or deviation from what they consider as valuable, and they cannot be allowed to get away with it. Not unless you want to be living in a society with microchips tracking everything you do. Laugh if you will, but is that the kind of world you want for your children? P.S. The boys depicted in My Pico, Pico & Chico, etc are not children, as should be obvious to anyone who has actually watched it. Sexuality does not begin at 18, or even 16 as some people would like to believe. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
abynormal
 Posts: 427 Location: Louisiana |
|
|||||||||||||
I really enjoy it when people keep pushing moral boundaries, claiming it's okay as long as there are no victims. Then they turn around and claim everyone who disagrees is a fascist and wants to dismantle the bill of rights and make 1984 look like a vacation. Sorry, that's just not the case. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
enurtsol
 Posts: 14808 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
So basically, what people seem to be saying is:
"People who enjoy lolicon are not criminals. They're just creepy." 
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Mohawk52
 Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||||||||||||
|
UNICEF in Japan is still upset about the Miyazaki (no relation to Hayao) serial murders is all, even though the authorities finally hung the paedo prev a few months ago. Though I applaud their stance, I doubt it will gain much influence in the Japanese Diet, unless it becomes an embarassment to them outside of Japan.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
jr240483
 Posts: 4388 Location: New York City,New York,USA |
|
|||||||||||||
No kidding.It's just another case of people overreacting.They should just leave well enough alone and let them release it. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
jr240483
Posts: 4388 Location: New York City,New York,USA |
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
Mohawk52
Posts: 8202 Location: England, UK |
|
|||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Mr. sickVisionz
 Posts: 2173 |
|
|||||||||||||
|
I think the idea is that people interested in virtual child porn probably have an interest in real child porn... to the point where they are engaging in virtual child porn.
Its funny that so many people are against this ruling when all it is is saying that you can't show like toddlers and 11 year olds... and then they turn around and get up in arms when theres a news story about an article that generalizes anime fans as pervs and people into looking at underage girls. |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
dangerwhat
 Posts: 187 Location: Central Florida |
|
|||||||||||||
|
wow, I get to post on two child porn topics in one day xD what is the world coming to? Morally, MAYBE there is something wrong here but I'm not so sure. Really, I feel that virtual child porn as its called here, is victimless - no real people are depicted and the fans can enjoy it safely at home. Real pedophiles either whouldn't be satisfied by this anyway, thus virtual child porn has little to do with pedophiles, or it does instead satisfy pedophiles and keeps them away from real children.
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group