-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
U.N. envoy calls on Japan to ban "extreme child manga porn"
- Thread starter ponpo
- Start date
- Status
Silver Arrows
Banned
Good, no need for this 4chan style bush league shit.
KirbYuuYuu
Member
Sound like a famous last words.
Joyful
Member
Silver Arrows just trying to get me banned,its thinly veiled at best
also ive only been banned once thus far and it was a serena williams thread (did my time)
so I think he has mistaken me for another person in his previous posts
Silver Arrows
Banned
It makes sense.
nkarafo
Member
And, if i'm not mistaken, before 1999 you could find photobooks of nude minors legally in Japan.
KirbYuuYuu
Member
Do you want a cake?
eh, I can completely agree with the junior idol books and videos since you can argue it really is exploiting children.
When it comes to anime and manga as they aren't real. Even if it is pretty extreme (I don't personally see how anybody can like that toddler stuff), I'd still rather just avoid it like I do already then to say it should be illegal.
When it comes to anime and manga as they aren't real. Even if it is pretty extreme (I don't personally see how anybody can like that toddler stuff), I'd still rather just avoid it like I do already then to say it should be illegal.
anime avatar, yada yada yada
Crumpet Trumpet
Banned
I like anime but I refuse to condone a lot of the filth that comes out of Japan.
you won't find anyone here who condones it, chinese cartoon avatar or no
Joyful
Member
Crumpet Trumpet
Banned
i believe u tbh. i was just kidding. hope i didnt hurt any1s feelings
SixMachine
Member
Well, I'm willing to say that the scene in that wasn't for titillation. Another scene
Where Griffith takes the virginity of the princess you can argue is titillation, since she basically is a virgin girl being taken by her crush. But story wise it shows how much of a manipulator Griffith is, because he is trying to get into her pants to rise up higher and higher, since everyone is a tool to him.
I basically agree with this. I think this stuff is gross and I don't like a lot of this loli stuff even when it appears in things I like. I even dislike the tame version of this stuff whenever I play something like DFO, some random people playing mage might go "uguu" or some shit, but that's their prerogative and there's nothing wrong with them liking it. But the last thing I want is someone regulating this, I don't trust big brother on this. I know people will point out how we are already regulated, controlled, or what not, even if that is the case, why give them more power? Especially since no one has defined what would be too outlandish, where would the line be drawn? Ages for characters are arbitrary, artstyles may also be seen as subjective, so that basically leaves it to the whims of the plaintiff or whoever proceeds the cases.
So you're saying that people who get off on rape can make do with rape fantasy without getting worse/resorting to the real thing, but people who get off on underage sex cannot? That indulging in a fantasy makes pedophiles worse but would-be rapists better? Got a source for that? Cause it sounds pretty arbitrary.
I'd also like to point out that pedophiles certainly can (in theory) find consenting adults to act out their fantasy. Ageplay is the general term, I believe, although I think I've also heard of dd/lg (dominant daddy/little girl).
My view in a nutshell:
Real life childs ban = OK.
Manga = Not OK.
Reasons:
1. Drawings do not depicts real life children.
2. Thus, no real life children were hurt.
3. It would hit the Japanese manga scene EXTREMELY hard.
4. It would hit the Japanese video game scene EXTREMELY hard. (lol @ Vita support on first page)
Heck, if a 18+ loli manga keeps an actual pedo from getting actual childs, I say it's a win-win scenario.
While they're at it, they should ban most of the mangas with weird (and also IRL illegal) fetishes too. But oh they won't do that coz the subject are legal! It doesn't make sense.
Real life childs ban = OK.
Manga = Not OK.
Reasons:
1. Drawings do not depicts real life children.
2. Thus, no real life children were hurt.
3. It would hit the Japanese manga scene EXTREMELY hard.
4. It would hit the Japanese video game scene EXTREMELY hard. (lol @ Vita support on first page)
Heck, if a 18+ loli manga keeps an actual pedo from getting actual childs, I say it's a win-win scenario.
While they're at it, they should ban most of the mangas with weird (and also IRL illegal) fetishes too. But oh they won't do that coz the subject are legal! It doesn't make sense.
freenudemacusers
Member
1. if banning kiddie porn would kill the scene it should probably die
2. I never got this argument. does heavy use of porno manga with adult characters keep readers from seeking companionship in the outside world?
wait nobody answer #2
Simple. It doesn't because going for companionship is legal and well-seen.
But would-be (intelligent) pedos hide in underaged manga because they know they can't get companionship because of legality. It's the same for rapist, drugs, etc.
Acerac
Banned
In all fairness, if you're masturbating 3+ times daily you're prolly not looking for a relationship.
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
I was wondering about this just now. If I was an extremely talented artist and one day I just started drawing a bunch of questionable photos and someone came into my house and saw them, would I be arrested for it?
I see the point about making them illegal, but you have to wonder about the people making the content. Are they guilty? I could see banning the sale of the manga, but the artist could still distribute their work somehow. It wouldn't necessarily need a publisher. I don't see how they can arrest someone for drawing something. I can see arresting someone for viewing it in public or showing it to minors.
Could they scan someone's hard drive and find their own work and prosecute? That guy in Missouri had his wife call the police, but what if he drew them himself?
I see the point about making them illegal, but you have to wonder about the people making the content. Are they guilty? I could see banning the sale of the manga, but the artist could still distribute their work somehow. It wouldn't necessarily need a publisher. I don't see how they can arrest someone for drawing something. I can see arresting someone for viewing it in public or showing it to minors.
Could they scan someone's hard drive and find their own work and prosecute? That guy in Missouri had his wife call the police, but what if he drew them himself?
ZombiePlatypus
Member
Uh... WTF kind of patents/guardians are consenting their kids to star in shit like that?
marimorimo
Member
The UN call for a ban and the majority of posts on this thread are all cultural misappropriation.
Why don't we get to the root of the "problem" first:
1) Japan's standards of beauty and obsession with youth
2) The increase in the number of younger people shunning companionship (This includes your stereotypical otakus and your regular people who just plain don't want to have sex/love life. They are not that many but are increasing in number.)
I believe #1 is the reason why an overwhelming majority of media from Japan depicts characters in high school settings (or younger). Youth as an ideal permeates the culture in every level, such as women (as old as in their thirties or forties) speaking in a cutesy, high-pitched way. This gives the speaker an air of innocence, cuteness, playfulness, and youth. I do the cutesy talk occasionally myself when speaking in a light-hearted way to my Japanese hubby. It may sound weird to non-Japanese but it's a perfectly normal way of speaking here.
Anyway, my point here is that youth, innocence, and cuteness are revered in Japan. These attributes are as appealing as hourglass figures, big boobs, and wide hips are for Westerners.
There was (is still?) a problem with REAL child pornography in the past, and that needs to stop. But banning FICTIONAL works is reaching too far. 99% of anime characters don't look a day past 16, no matter their official age. It's basically telling the Japanese "Your preference in fiction doesn't match ours. Deal with it."
For #2, believe it or not, hentai and dating sims are not the cause of the phenomenon of an increasing number of young people shunning relationships. The stereotypical Japanese otaku who marries a Love Plus character is an exception and only part of a minority sub-culture. The proliferation of pornography and dating sims is rather a symptom of a larger cultural issue.
Japanese relationships are inherently stressful. It's embedded into the culture itself, with its labyrinthine hierarchies and thousands of unwritten rules. "Human relations" in Japan is a BIG DEAL, and frankly, quite tiring to navigate. I'm not surprised an increasing number of people think "to hell with that" and decide not to enter a romantic relationship at all, full stop. If you're at all socially impaired, you're in even worse luck (remember the thousand unwritten social rules that you're supposed to know and do).
nkarafo
Member
This makes sense. I mean this is a sexual urge/preference matter and people can't help it. Banning everything won't magically change their sexual urges. Doesn't work that way. There has to be something out there for them to relieve/offload these urges without someone else getting hurt. And fictional characters or "real" sex dolls don't get hurt.
This may seem like i actually defend pedophiles. You should watch that movie Nymphomaniac to see a different approach on the matter. There are many more pedophiles out there than you might think but only a very small percentage actually touches a real child. 99% of them are keeping their urge under control and try to offload by other means. This is a sexual urge, nobody chooses what to be attracted of and it can be hard for some to resist. Pedophiles are just unlucky enough to have the one sexual urge that actually makes someone else hurt and can also lead them to jail. I mean, even necrophiles, scat, or animal lovers don't have such a hard time relieving themselves...
So, instead of taking out your pitchforks and wishing every pedophile for his painful death or something, try to feel sorry for them first. I'm not talking about child rapists of course. I'm talking about the majority who try to keep their urges under control.
Sun Bather
Member
It's not just Japan, you can still to this day on amazon if you really desire. Jock Sturges with those weird coffee table books.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
It makes sense, but its almost certainly false. I'm not arguing strongly in either direction in this thread but this particular claim, that it "acts as a release valve so they don't act in real life" isn't really backed by anything and there's evidence that the opposite may be true, that exposure to fictional pornography doesn't inhibit urges. Its just not a good point to use in this argument, I don't think
CharminUltra
Member
LOOOOOL
Shouta
Member
It's definitely not a good argument because it could be said that it just further promotes it. You wouldn't give an alcoholic more alcohol, for example. Unless we know the reasons for this attraction, that argument has potential bad side to it and that's not a good thing in practice.
stump sock
Member
I think a more accurate analogue here would be "do non-alcoholic [wine, beer] prevent alcoholics from relapsing," which is a topic of debate. There's still a lot of study that needs to be done to determine if a near-substitute deters or encourages such behaviors.
Shouta
Member
That works.
Lol
plenty of active rapists still "intelligently" watch legal shit. like, this idea that they're not going to act on their sick urges because there's rape scenes in film for them to fap to is ridiculous and clearly not true.
hipbabboom
Huh? What did I say? Did I screw up again? :(
This analogy really captures the nuance well.
Still, I would be in favor of any laws that can make TRASH not exist
This analogy really captures the nuance well.
Still, I would be in favor of any laws that can make TRASH not exist
Isn't all porn trash really? Not saying we should ban porn, or that there aren't some types of porn that are more reprehensible than others but I don't think the that porn is trash and this porn not argument is a strong one.
I'm really confused how this shit works. For example I was in Books-a-Million today browsing through the manga and saw some series called something like Dance of the Vampire Bond, I open it and literally the first thing I see is a naked detailed loli. No shrink wrap, no nothing, right there in a US book store for sale. So clearly this shit isn't illegal here? Yet I hear stories of people getting arrested for loli manga on news sites and shit. Like I said, it is really confusing.
hey yo vampires don't count. says so right here.
Looked it up, it's actually called Dance in the Vampire Bund and yep, she's an "older" woman in a 9-year-olds body. XD This is literally the blanket excuse. The amount of characters on that list has to be huge.
KirbYuuYuu
Member
From what I read about this series, this was initially going to be released censored, the anime at least. But in the end, it didn't. The unedited version in the UK was also rated 15 by the BBFC.
So *shrugs* That's as far as I know about this since this is the first time I've heard of this series.
Re: grooming
Yes, grooming is terrible, and drawn CP may be used to groom. But it's unrealistic to think this ban will mean less grooming. Here's why:
1) The sheer quantity of existing content. There's a figurative ocean of material out there already, and it's still growing, even in countries where it's been "banned".
2) They're drawings. Anyone (including groomers) with a modicum of talent in either illustration or photo editing can create new CP with an hour or two of effort, with no real way to trace it back to them. They can then distribute it anonymously using...
3) The Internet. Tor, proxies, and free public WiFi mean anyone who doesn't want to get caught probably won't be, and anyone who wants more drawings will be able to get them fairly easily. If there's a country where virtual CP isn't banned, offending material can be hosted there.
4) Enforcement. Police already have no time to pursue possessors of REAL cp, choosing instead to focus on distributors. I highly doubt they'll devote any of that time to going after drawings.
Banning drawn cp will not hinder grooming. I think what we need to fight grooming is education for children and parents.
Yes, grooming is terrible, and drawn CP may be used to groom. But it's unrealistic to think this ban will mean less grooming. Here's why:
1) The sheer quantity of existing content. There's a figurative ocean of material out there already, and it's still growing, even in countries where it's been "banned".
2) They're drawings. Anyone (including groomers) with a modicum of talent in either illustration or photo editing can create new CP with an hour or two of effort, with no real way to trace it back to them. They can then distribute it anonymously using...
3) The Internet. Tor, proxies, and free public WiFi mean anyone who doesn't want to get caught probably won't be, and anyone who wants more drawings will be able to get them fairly easily. If there's a country where virtual CP isn't banned, offending material can be hosted there.
4) Enforcement. Police already have no time to pursue possessors of REAL cp, choosing instead to focus on distributors. I highly doubt they'll devote any of that time to going after drawings.
Banning drawn cp will not hinder grooming. I think what we need to fight grooming is education for children and parents.
Paracelsus
Member
I wonder if the guy who dons an extreme child manga porn avatar here even knows where it is from, or he just saw it on
as a reaction picture and made it into a sad looking avatar.
4chan
Admiral Woofington
Member
Have you ever noticed that people with Nintendo avatars tend to like Nintendo?
I think that shit was even on Netflix once. NETFLIX. Oil slathering scene and all. Oh, I knew it would be lecherous, based on the cover... and I had caught myself briefly, staring at the highlighted selection on the screen, wondering, how such a nefarious title slithered its way into my God-loving American video streaming service. I was just about to turn myself in to the police for having some curious thoughts about the contents, when my wife sat down next to me and started playback of the selection adding a rather ho-hum "whacha watchin?". She seemed wholly undisturbed by the ensuing onslaught of obscenities, and remained seemingly unshaken for the duration of those tormenting 22 minutes. Perhaps, because, she herself is a ticking time bomb needing to be locked away for eternity, or because what we watched was just a cartoon... I'll never be sure.
Of course there is a fairly blurred line when it comes to enforcement, for example I can walk into Indigo or wherever and buy Sundome if I so desire
Crash Station
Member
Who?
Jex
Member
This is an extremely thorny issue. It's long been clear that Japan could and should be doing more to protect children from exploitation and their trackrecord in this regard is woeful, as a cursory read of the Wikipedia article (or any major news story) about the subject, will tell you. This seems to me, perfectly clear. I can't imagine many people would argue against this.
I am extremely sceptical, however, of any attempt or more or call to regulate the world of fiction. Whether it's writing, pictures, videogames or what have you. While it feels distasteful to defend works or people that we feel are immoral or disgusting we have to decide, as a people, what we actual mean by freedom of expression. If we truly wish to pursue this freedom in its purest form we should be willing to step forward and defend those we consider vile and repugnant as long as they are simply creating fictional works. Why?
Well, presumably we value freedom of expression inherently. We see value in being able to explore ideas and concepts which push the bounds of what's considered acceptable. History is littered with countless examples of over zealous censorship policies which seemed to come from a 'good place' but which were used against works we now consider artistically valuable. Some law starts off narrow in scope but, over the decades, it starts getting used outside of it's original purpose and starts being used to suppress works that a state considers subversive, ideas they find dangerous. Even when it doesn't effect works of 'cultural value' it certainly has a chilling effect on artists in general and, presumably, if we value freedom of expression we don't want any restraints on these creators. Therefore when we stand up to defend creators of what you may rightly consider depraved works you are ensuring that, down the line, more 'important' work is being protected from the censors scalpel.
I don't particularly understand why you'd want the state to intervene in this world of fictional material anyway. Because you personally find it disgusting? Yes, that is a valid reason but does it out weigh the ideal of freedom of expression? I feel like you need a far better reason then that to attack such a basic and important freedom. It can't come from emotional arguments and it certainly shouldn't come from flimsy anecdotes.
I am not entirely an extremist on this matter. The most compelling arguments raised in this thread have been those focused on the argument of protecting harm to actual children, those that look at the supposed dangers of this kind of material. Here, I can see the basis of an argument which could hold some weight. Actual harm to actual children is clearly something that needs to weighed very highly, perhaps even higher than the aforementioned freedom of expression. The evidence presented so far, however, has been rather insubstantial. There needs to be far more rigorous studies on this subject before I could possibly consider any kind of ban or restriction on this material
I am extremely sceptical, however, of any attempt or more or call to regulate the world of fiction. Whether it's writing, pictures, videogames or what have you. While it feels distasteful to defend works or people that we feel are immoral or disgusting we have to decide, as a people, what we actual mean by freedom of expression. If we truly wish to pursue this freedom in its purest form we should be willing to step forward and defend those we consider vile and repugnant as long as they are simply creating fictional works. Why?
Well, presumably we value freedom of expression inherently. We see value in being able to explore ideas and concepts which push the bounds of what's considered acceptable. History is littered with countless examples of over zealous censorship policies which seemed to come from a 'good place' but which were used against works we now consider artistically valuable. Some law starts off narrow in scope but, over the decades, it starts getting used outside of it's original purpose and starts being used to suppress works that a state considers subversive, ideas they find dangerous. Even when it doesn't effect works of 'cultural value' it certainly has a chilling effect on artists in general and, presumably, if we value freedom of expression we don't want any restraints on these creators. Therefore when we stand up to defend creators of what you may rightly consider depraved works you are ensuring that, down the line, more 'important' work is being protected from the censors scalpel.
I don't particularly understand why you'd want the state to intervene in this world of fictional material anyway. Because you personally find it disgusting? Yes, that is a valid reason but does it out weigh the ideal of freedom of expression? I feel like you need a far better reason then that to attack such a basic and important freedom. It can't come from emotional arguments and it certainly shouldn't come from flimsy anecdotes.
I am not entirely an extremist on this matter. The most compelling arguments raised in this thread have been those focused on the argument of protecting harm to actual children, those that look at the supposed dangers of this kind of material. Here, I can see the basis of an argument which could hold some weight. Actual harm to actual children is clearly something that needs to weighed very highly, perhaps even higher than the aforementioned freedom of expression. The evidence presented so far, however, has been rather insubstantial. There needs to be far more rigorous studies on this subject before I could possibly consider any kind of ban or restriction on this material
Thatonemoor
Member
Fucking good. That stuff needs to be banned.
superseohyun
Member
people are shallow and emotional. Hard to be rational regarding this kind of topic.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked