Forum - View topic
NEWS: UN Human Rights Committee's New Guidelines for Child Pornography Express 'Deep Concerns' About


Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Note: this is the discussion thread for this article

Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sailor Sedna



Joined: 08 Jan 2015
Posts: 812
PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:14 pm Reply with quote
Florete wrote:

If people want to claim that sexual drawings of underage characters are harmful, they need to prove it. They need to link these drawings to real-world consequences. Until they do, criminalizing it is wrong.


https://www.tokyoreporter.com/japan-news/breaking/saitama-cops-man-posed-as-radioactivity-inspector-in-molestation-of-multiple-girls/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Iron Maw



Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 225
PostPosted: Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:53 pm Reply with quote
Sailor Sedna wrote:
Florete wrote:

If people want to claim that sexual drawings of underage characters are harmful, they need to prove it. They need to link these drawings to real-world consequences. Until they do, criminalizing it is wrong.


https://www.tokyoreporter.com/japan-news/breaking/saitama-cops-man-posed-as-radioactivity-inspector-in-molestation-of-multiple-girls/


You could news find articles about regarding videogames and how violence from them supposed influenced real murders, but behavior scientists debunked those claims long ago and noted how skewer those narratives are. I don't see the difference here.

It also doesn't change the underlying logical and legal point. You can't grants rights or claim that some lines on piece of paper born from somebody's is actually hurting anyone or linked real child porn. Obscene? I agree, but there are plenty of sexual acts people find gross that others don't, like furry sex, BSBM etc, but no authority is trying banned them despite causing much harm than somebody's imaginary drawing. Unless you want thought policing what entertainment people are allowed to consume this silly argument.

The U.N. Rights council would better spend it's time dealing more immediate and tangible human rights abuses rather pretending they're doing something by going after something affects almost nothing at all, because they find it distasteful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hakase



Joined: 25 Oct 2018
Posts: 25
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:04 am Reply with quote
This committee is busy protecting lolis than actual human beings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cutiebunny



Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Posts: 1428
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:13 am Reply with quote
Iron Maw wrote:
You could news find articles about regarding videogames and how violence from them supposed influenced real murders, but behavior scientists debunked those claims long ago and noted how skewer those narratives are. I don't see the difference here.


I agree. You can find news stories that can prove anything is harmful, but that shouldn't be applied across the board. That's like saying all teachers are bad because one was featured on the local news for sleeping with their students. There are bad apples everywhere. That doesn't mean that liking something or a working in a certain profession causes everyone in it to act a certain way.

I know people that like anime lolis but they'd never hurt a real child. They draw the line when it involves real children, and I suspect that the majority of people that enjoy lolis, shouta, etc. are in this boat too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
EleutheroMaster



Joined: 15 Aug 2011
Posts: 82
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:06 am Reply with quote
Meanwhile, the UN is botching up efforts to stop sexual attacks against real women and children...

https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/opinion/2019/11/26/car-sex-abuse-op

Worse, even Antonio Guterres, the head honcho of the UN SCREWED UP!!

http://www.innercitypress.com/unprs28guterrescoversrapes112619.html


Last edited by EleutheroMaster on Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:19 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luisedgarf



Joined: 02 Oct 2004
Posts: 435
Location: Guadalajara, Mexico
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:09 am Reply with quote
Hoppy800 wrote:
Ah the UN, the masters of the following:

-Being completely useless and a money pit.

-Not having scientists take the stage at the climate summit despite being in a time when they are being shafted and suppressed hard by both sides of the spectrum, even the left has science deniers now.

-Ignoring real issues like Saudi Arabia having social policies that aren't even late 19th century compliant and focusing on non-issues (these guidelines being one of these non-real issues)

-Having Saudi Arabia heading the human rights committee, where women's rights are still not even in the mid 19th century much less the 20th or the 21st and it's worse for homosexuals

These guidelines need to be ignored and the UN needs to be defunded and disbanded, the money could be used for a lot of better things like universal healthcare or that money could be used to forgive student loan debt that so many people want.


Yeah, and returning back to the era when all international problems were solved by either war or intimidation, especially between the big countries vs smaller ones.

A good example of this is the Clipperton Island, when my country Mexico lost in a very unfair way against France thanks to the ''mediation" (for calling it in a kind way) of the Italians, who had many reasons to help the French, and without having to shooting a single bullet.

Had the UN existed in that era, the whole thing should had been resolved in a more fair way.

You can read the whole thing here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipperton_Island
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Meongantuk



Joined: 03 Jun 2016
Posts: 195
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:04 am Reply with quote
Lactobacillus yogurti wrote:
Before you guys accuse me of being a feminazi, I'm a feminist, yes, but I ask this out of curiosity.

How many of the people here that defend shota and loli are men, and how many of them are women? I think that could say something about the matter.


Surprisingly a lot of women likes them too. Shota type character is pretty popular trope in Otome targeted stuff. Also, stuff like Yu-Gi-oh, nintama, and inazuma eleven has massive fujoshi fanbase. Naturally, they usually don't make aged-up doujinshi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SilverTalon01



Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 2079
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:29 am Reply with quote
EleutheroMaster wrote:
Meanwhile, the UN is botching up efforts to stop sexual attacks against real women and children...


It is almost like the entire point of that council is to deflect from the legitimate human rights abuses committed by many of the countries on the council by pointing at a bunch of irrelevant stuff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marshmallowpie



Joined: 22 Sep 2009
Posts: 197
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:30 am Reply with quote
Can't believe how disappointed with the comments in this thread and how one-sided they are... but it's difficult, because some of you are talking about ecchi scenes in shows where the characters could pass for 18+ if they didn't wear school uniforms, or Megami Magazine pin-ups (I feel like Madoka really didn't get anything lewder than swimsuits) and some of you are talking about straight up hentai involving characters like Kanna or the Mitsuboshi Colors, and then still are a bunch of posts where it's not clear at all what you're defending, so I'm just gonna have to assume the worst. You can argue it's all the same thing under these guidelines but I think "explicit sexual activities or any representation of the sexual parts of a child for primarily sexual purposes" sounds pretty clear-cut, at least the first part. The latter half could apply to some things which it maybe shouldn't apply to, but I still don't think it's a
really that bad.

Also, the big point it seems like everyone's missing is "in particular when such representations are used as part of a process to sexually exploit children." Maybe the word "existent" should be placed in there, but I guess whoever wrote it thought it was obvious? But in the case of fictional content, even if it is a stylised drawing, especially if it's a stylised drawing, it can be used to make children think these acts are appropriate for someone their age, whether they're shown this content by a predator, or if they find it on their own. But something with adult-looking large-chested high school characters isn't really going to do that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
jl07045



Joined: 30 Aug 2011
Posts: 1483
Location: Riga, Latvia
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 7:55 am Reply with quote
marshmallowpie wrote:
But in the case of fictional content, even if it is a stylised drawing, especially if it's a stylised drawing, it can be used to make children think these acts are appropriate for someone their age, whether they're shown this content by a predator, or if they find it on their own. But something with adult-looking large-chested high school characters isn't really going to do that.


Showing some visual material and providing the context you want is not particularly hard. I could show a kid Titanic and convince them that this is why they should never go anywhere by ship.
The material is meant for sexual gratification, whether for pedophiles or just people with appreciation for lolicon art. Bringing up the limitless possibilities of using something for 'educational' purposes as a reason to ban it is unproductive.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
AkumaChef



Joined: 10 Jan 2019
Posts: 393
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 10:16 am Reply with quote
marshmallowpie wrote:

Also, the big point it seems like everyone's missing is "in particular when such representations are used as part of a process to sexually exploit children." Maybe the word "existent" should be placed in there, but I guess whoever wrote it thought it was obvious? But in the case of fictional content, even if it is a stylised drawing, especially if it's a stylised drawing, it can be used to make children think these acts are appropriate for someone their age, whether they're shown this content by a predator, or if they find it on their own. But something with adult-looking large-chested high school characters isn't really going to do that.


I think you raise a good point there, but I'm not sure I agree that the point is what you think it is.

"Sexually exploiting children" is already illegal. That's child abuse. Sexual assault of a child. It's already punished harshly in just about every country in the world, for good reason. There is no need or point in inventing yet another layer of law to deal with that problem because the law already addresses it.

If someone possesses drawings involving sexual content and minors then that may well be distasteful, but there's no harm done to anyone. No victim, no harm, no crime. If someone uses those same drawings to exploit real children then that's obviously harmful and is already illegal under extant law.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tatakau88



Joined: 02 Dec 2019
Posts: 2
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:25 pm Reply with quote
A study says internet pornography can make crimerate lower:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm

If this is true, and they can really make Hentai BS less accessible that can make actual crimerate higher.

Looks like this UN group didn't have proper study to prove why hentai so bad they almost write this down like a random troll from the internet, or did they consult sexologists or criminal psychologist? Because i read somewhere they are also dont want to make art illegal.

Also with this strict thought crime criminalizing guidelines even not just mainstream animes, but even Shakespeare drama Romeo and Juliet can be illegal, because Juliet was age 13 and Romeo was somewhere between 16-19 ... at least in countries who take this BS too serious.

What is more a so called "freespeech platform" gab first ban loli, now porn in general -> this is how censorship works: first they censor less only censor what most people can accept, later they censor more and more. People are ignorant, and politicians only care about winning the next election.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ryomanagare



Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 57
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 1:27 pm Reply with quote
Personally I have no problem with lolicons getting knocked down a peg, but the UN Human Rights Committee are the wrong people for the job. That committee hosts and protects a lot of abusers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message My Anime My Manga
mrsticky005



Joined: 06 Nov 2008
Posts: 96
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 2:27 pm Reply with quote
How about protecting ACTUAL children instead of imaginary ones?

Oh wait this is the UN. Nevermind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DavetheUsher



Joined: 19 May 2014
Posts: 188
PostPosted: Mon Dec 02, 2019 4:41 pm Reply with quote
marshmallowpie wrote:
You can argue it's all the same thing under these guidelines but I think "explicit sexual activities or any representation of the sexual parts of a child for primarily sexual purposes" sounds pretty clear-cut, at least the first part. The latter half could apply to some things which it maybe shouldn't apply to, but I still don't think it's a
really that bad..


"Explicit sexual activity" is pretty vague, actually. Groping is a sexual activity, as is voyeurism, both are considered federal sex crimes and require registering as a sex offender if found guilty of them in an American court. Both are also pretty common fanservice tropes, especially in shounen series where the cast are usually minors. If they wanted to limit the law specially to something like outright genital penetration, they'd have specifically wrote that. But they didn't, because obscenity laws are written to be vague on purpose so they can encompass or exclude whatever the courts want with enough wiggle room. The Miller test shows us that already. .

That's kinda why people are against it even if they don't like loli and shota stuff. Vague definitions and weasel words are kinda dangerous
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Anime News Network Forum Index -> Site-related -> Talkback All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group