Forum - View topic

NEWS: Japan's Lack of Laws on Virtual Child Porn Criticized

I think there is a deeper agenda though, which is to make japan the same as everywhere else on the planet, where puritanical tentacles worm their way into making the world a better place. Just look how that's worked of for all the big nations.

Seems to be getting like Minority Report everyday, where a thought crime is enough to get you in the slammer.

Somehow, I still don't see this law going through.

I say UNICEF, get a life. There are children in real trouble in the world, concentrate on them, and not the imagined kind that live in japanese entertainment media. Unless you can prove a solid negative problem, waving the 'for the children' banner I don't think will ever be enough. This has been tried with games before to no avail.

Well, no one calls your church problematic, in spite of the fact that it's been hiding its real child abuse for the last century.

Lolicon is just not cool; it's sick and tasteless. If you like to watch little girls in sexual scenes, you are a pedophile; even if you only watch drawing little girls. Freedom implied respect for other people's rights.

What about if I make a comic about black people getting slapped, tortured, mutilated and raped by the KKK? I guess that would be totally cool for you because they are fictional characters.

penguintruth wrote:

Joichiro Nishi wrote: Lolicon is just not cool; it's sick and tasteless. If you like to watch little girls in sexual scenes, you are a pedophile; even if you only watch drawing little girls. Freedom implied respect for other people's rights. Whose rights are lewd drawings of imaginery people infringing upon? The fictional children on the paper?

What about if I make a comic about black people getting slapped, tortured, mutilated and raped by the KKK? I guess that would be totally cool for you because they are fictional characters.

What about if I make a comic about black people getting slapped, tortured, mutilated and raped by the KKK? I guess that would be totally cool for you because they are fictional characters.

What about if I make a comic about black people getting slapped, tortured, mutilated and raped by the KKK? I guess that would be totally cool for you because they are fictional characters.

Loli stuff is absolutely disgusting, and people who enjoy it are equally as disgusting, however, it should not be illegal... HOWEVER, it also shouldn't be defended. You should not stand there and defend someone's right to look at fake child porn. You should remain mum on it, and let it fall under the broad spectrum of freedom of speech in fiction. Leave it to anime fans, though, to do so. (Usually for the wrong reasons.... "don't TAKE MAH CARDCAPTOR SAKURA DOUJINS!!!")

Loli stuff is absolutely disgusting, and people who enjoy it are equally as disgusting, however, it should not be illegal... HOWEVER, it also shouldn't be defended.

The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.

What about if I make a comic about black people getting slapped, tortured, mutilated and raped by the KKK? I guess that would be totally cool for you because they are fictional characters.

Now taking that reasoning, look now at this case. How does, in any way, shape or form, having fictional drawings of child pornography conflict with the reasoning I just mentioned above? What children are abused? What children are emotionally scarred?

grgspunk wrote:

And I don't think they'll underestimate the Japanese otaku's spending power either. They may have no life, but the sheer amount of cash (that room alone has got to be at least worth $30,000) that they spend is actually the reason why lots of people are able to have jobs. I doubt that even the most conservative politicians in the Diet have actually forgotten that.

But you should remember that Japan are NOT in a position for defending against such claims due to the fact that Japan was one of the countries who lost in WW2 and many countries (especialy the U.S.) pays lots of money just for keeping the Japanese "in line" with the rest of the Western countries.

Repeating what I said before, the majority of people never actually think past a law or try to level with it.

If you ask some random person on the street: "Why is it illegal to drive over the speed limit?" The majority of the time they will probably say something along the lines of "Because you can get a ticket."

Obviously, that isn't the reason why there is a speed limit.. there is a limit because going too fast dumbs down your senses as well as requires faster reflexes to avoid accidents. It's a safety issue, not whether or not you get caught and go to jail.

It's the same with these sorts of laws and many others similar to this. It's just that after a while people slowly adapt to what is and make that the standard and then never look back as to why it is the standard. If you don't understand what I mean, I'll put it another way:

Child porn may have started small and then gradually been given consequences for its action, but only after the first few dozen cases, there starts to develop a form of "mental system" that people will start thinking away from the reasons why it is illegal in the first place. Meaning, people will, instead of seeing how harmful it is to children and putting that reasoning behind why there are laws against it, start to forget that it's harmful to children and instead just look at the people guilty of such crimes and just say "You're under arrest because you're a disgusting weirdo."

...err I know I talk in ways that is hard to understand... but what ever, the bottom line is this:

Laws aren't just made for the sake of being made or for the sake of limiting you for no reason. Laws are put into place for reasons. Instead of judging someone is guilty or not of doing something just by referencing the law, you should judge a person guilty by referencing the reasoning behind a law.

That is why this case is ridiculous. The reasoning behind the laws against child pornography are simple: It harms the children who are involved and is considered child abuse which can cause damage on the child's future.

Now taking that reasoning, look now at this case. How does, in any way, shape or form, having fictional drawings of child pornography conflict with the reasoning I just mentioned above? What children are abused? What children are emotionally scarred?

Don't give me "well it plants the seeds in someone's mind that it is ok to do this" because that is a desperate attempt to aid a failing argument. If it makes people want to really do it, would they be buying MANGA versions of it? If they really wanted to do it with real children, wouldn't they at least posses ACTUAL child porn?

And that's even besides the point... if you think about it logically, possessing child porn without having a hand in aiding its creation can only serve to lower the urge for people to actually go out and do such things. The same can be said about violent video games and movies. It's an emotional and physical virtual output where it is perfectly safe to input your feelings into, and is preferred as well because no one is really getting hurt.

Would you rather a child molester sit on a street corner picking up kids to kidnap and molest and hurt or rather him sit at home, alone, with a fictional manga of drawings of child porn?


If it isn't hurting a kid it shouldn't be illegal.
If you aren't aiding in hurting a kid then you shouldn't be liable for any problems concerning the crime.


Just my thoughts on the matter. (Sorry I'm a bit hard to follow... :V)