Support NeoGAF

[not psycho]

yes and extending that defense to drawing naked kids is creepy as fuck.

True, but that's kind of the point isn't it? If you want to defend free speech you are going to have to be creepy as fuck sometimes. Otherwise what, you only defend things that don't make you look like a creeper? Only defend things that people like?

As Neil Gaiman put it, the law is a blunt instrument. There are tons of examples of the law criminalizing things I don't think should be criminal, failing to make distinctions, being abused by politicians. I don't trust it to make fine distinctions about which art should be criminalized. That doesn't mean there is no art out there which I personally would want banned if I could have magical assurance that the distinction would always be made in a way I agreed with. But I have no such magical assurance. So as of now I don't support banning drawings.

 

[Smiley90]

Is this the end of third party Vita support?

amazing post

 

[dity]

The problem with this is it could be literally applied to anything that could "trigger" people. When I was 14, I was uncomfortable whenever suicide was mentioned in movies/tv/games/whatever because my best friend had killed himself that year. Of course, it would be unreasonable for me to want to ban mentioning suicide, or more relevant here, in a comedic sense.

And I do mean literally anything can be "triggering" if you have a bit of imagination.

This isn't about some sort of comfortableness with the content, this is about deep emotional scarring and the aspect of communicating that the content is inherently "ok".

Talking about suicide is not banned, but what about showing suicide in a positive light? You'd be hung-strung to find a piece of media promoting suicide (that isn't medical-assisted euthanasia within serious situations). Media will have suicide in it, but it's a sad damning thing usually with lessons about life, social interaction, and suicide causes and stuff.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

Is this the end of third party Vita support?

Lmfao, thank you for this.
But yeah, ban it pls.

 

[NHarmonic.]

Is this the end of third party Vita support?

Dead.

 

[SixMachine]

If you're doing a dark story though, it's rather easy to imply rape, without actually showing it though.
I mention the anime specifically for Berserk, cause it managed to imply all this without actually showing it. I don't need extended scenes of the characters going through that, because I've seen what I needed to see to understand.
Even Game of Thrones, save a half dozen scenes, usually stops short of showing you the actual happenstances.
I mean honestly, I think it's great something like Berserk, which can be so horrifying, yet be really deep and a great piece of art in it's own way can exist... but even so, even if this law actually critically effects things like it, and I don't think it will...
Maybe it's still worth it if we can clean all that other sludge away.
Because Fap porn with kids is a hell of a lot more common in manga than works as good as Berserk, that's for damn sure.

I do agree you can imply many things and still get a dark story across, but showing and implying gives 2 very different effects to the viewer and does effect the shock value and thought process during the scene. During a lot of implied stuff, it's pretty much mostly mental from the reader stand point. Usually there is only clues and hints that something happened when something is usually implied. But the really interesting with the readers when implication happen is that different people imagine and re create what they think they would see in their head, and some people even make a denial scenario for what possibly might not have happened based on the context clues.

With something explicit, it is much more direct, and the shock in this case is not only mental but visual too. Usually there is no denying what just happened on the screen (weird cases where it's a dream or what not aside), so in way, the viewer has to accept what they see in front of them, which may be extremely uncomfortable. Not only that there is the squick factor. For me, I do like the horror genre, something like reading about someone getting tortured or killed, makes me run a million scenarios in my head and what it could possibly look like, but I won't deny that watching a movie where someone gets grotesquely stabbed in the eye, would give me more cringe than someone describing get stabbed in the eye because I have a visual reference.

edit: I'm just coming from the standpoint of using extremes within the medium to sort of convey something on screen or on panel. I honestly don't like lolicon or stuff like that, but if that gets hit, I think it would be an unfortunate waste if it affected the extremes within entertainment mediums too.

 

[Aske]

I defend the right for anyone to think and draw whatever they want. Yes that's the hill I want to die on.

Well said. I'll add that I'm totally opposed to ruining someone's life over some cartoons; I don't care how young the subjects are, or how many vaginas are squirting not-urine on them.

Protecting people from bad laws is a worthy hill to die on in my book, no matter how degenerate those people may be.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

Shit is gross and creepy as all hell, but who and what is being exploited in fully fictional, drawn/animated works?

I'm all for banning anything featuring real life children in this subject matter, but if they enforce laws on fictional manga and anime, I have zero faith that politicians won't also arbitrarily ban legitimate works.

This is a really bad precedent.

 

[Log4Girlz]

This thread made me wonder about Opiate's input, as he has shown interest in pedophilia on an academic level. I searched for his last few posts as I haven't seen him in a while, didn't realize he was de-modded

 

[Doctor Doom]

Yeah, this, hence my stance of heavy regulation. Right to draw isn't right to sell, right?

That might not be a problem if we had basic income but as it stands drawings take time and effort and people need to earn a living, so it is effectively censorship. Censorship is wrong.

Besides like hatespeech freedom of expression should not be curtailed for the problems of a few. If one of picassos paintings happens to produce violent urges in a small portion of the population we dont ban picasso.

 

[Fenderputty]

It is. The extent to which it is, is still in dispute, with the Mayo Clinic suggesting somewhere between 30%-80%. Part of the issue with researching pedophilia/child molestation is that the majority of subjects we have to question are/or have been in the criminal system. So selection bias is inevitable in the studies.

Here's an interesting paper, that has links to a fair amount of the research, concerning the same issue when it was dealt with in the U.S., while Ashcroft was running Justice:
http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1040&context=student_scholarship

Basically, the arguments come down to 1) child pornography doesn't inhibit and may exacerbate a pedophile's need to molest and 2) child pornography(drawn and real) is used by pedophiles to draw in children for predation.

You may not agree with those, of course, but there is some available science to suggest the first, and the second is undeniable, as we have multiple records of child molestors using child pornography to attract children.

Bans like these are tricky, because you get over eager enforcement causing problems, and creatives who want to push the envelope, so court cases tend to come hot and heavy for a few years, before they settle down and people accept the new standard. It's not like Japan doesn't have a history of this, and dealing with evolving standards of obscenity. They already have laws about mosaics and what you can and can't show legally. This would be an extension of those existing laws.

Hmm ... I was in the creepy as fuck but better than real kids camp, but this kinda has me rethinking

 

[Condom]

Hate speech might implicitly promote violence against some groups yet many will defend the first amendment rights to express it.

I don't. I happely live in a country were hate speech is illegal.

 

[dity]

That might not be a problem if we had basic income but as it stands drawings take time and effort and people need to earn a living, so it is effectively censorship. Censorship is wrong.

Besides like hatespeech freedom of expression should not be curtailed for the problems of a few. If one of picassos paintings happens to produce violent urges in a small portion of the population we dont ban picasso.

Draw something else for a living? Draw loli/shota sex in your own free time?

You're boxing it in like it's the only artistic output option.

 

[Raiden]

Yes, but what does it mean?

That you have an avatar of a girl that looks 15 with big tits.

 

[ZombiePlatypus]

It is. The extent to which it is, is still in dispute, with the Mayo Clinic suggesting somewhere between 30%-80%. Part of the issue with researching pedophilia/child molestation is that the majority of subjects we have to question are/or have been in the criminal system. So selection bias is inevitable in the studies.

Here's an interesting paper, that has links to a fair amount of the research, concerning the same issue when it was dealt with in the U.S., while Ashcroft was running Justice:
http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1040&context=student_scholarship

Basically, the arguments come down to 1) child pornography doesn't inhibit and may exacerbate a pedophile's need to molest and 2) child pornography(drawn and real) is used by pedophiles to draw in children for predation.

You may not agree with those, of course, but there is some available science to suggest the first, and the second is undeniable, as we have multiple records of child molestors using child pornography to attract children.

Bans like these are tricky, because you get over eager enforcement causing problems, and creatives who want to push the envelope, so court cases tend to come hot and heavy for a few years, before they settle down and people accept the new standard. It's not like Japan doesn't have a history of this, and dealing with evolving standards of obscenity. They already have laws about mosaics and what you can and can't show legally. This would be an extension of those existing laws.

This is a really good post. It's awful to see that the research suggests that the fictional material seems to be used to enable real life abuse.

Politicians are gonna wanna look like they're vigilantly on top of this, so non offending manga and anime undoubtedly are gonna get hit by this.

This is gonna be like when pedophiles ruined Swapnote for everyone.

 

[Aske]

Talking about suicide is not banned, but what about showing suicide in a positive light? You'd be hung-strung to find a piece of media promoting suicide (that isn't medical-assisted euthanasia within serious situations). Media will have suicide in it, but it's a sad damning thing usually with lessons about life, social interaction, and suicide causes and stuff.

An enormous amount of media - particularly music - glorifies suicide. No one has sought to ban it since hand-wringing parents (mistakenly) went after Ozzy Osbourne in the 80s.

 

[Crash Station]

It's about damn time they do something about this! It's way beyond sick!

They're not doing anything about it. It's just a suggestion from someone.

 

[Condom]

A good compromise someone already suggested is making the sale of this stuff illegal.

 

[Opto]

First they came for the lolicons and I said nothing because I was not a lolicon.

 

[dity]

An enormous amount of media - particularly music - glorifies suicide. No one has sought to ban it since hand-wringing parents (mistakenly) went after Ozzy Osbourne in the 80s.

...Really? I've run into it a lot and it's sad stuff, rather than being like "oh hey suicide is cool go kill yourself".

 

[Doctor Doom]

I don't. I happely live in a country were hate speech is illegal.

I would say sadly. All that you tweet or post something that offends, have to watch what you speak in private, you re facing jailtime, thats fascist stuff.

Draw something else for a living? Draw loli/shota sex in your own free time?

You're boxing it in like it's the only artistic output option.

He should draw something else most of the time? Dont you see how thats a form of censorship?

Why shouldnt he be free to monetize fiction?

 

[Ri'Orius]

Sounds good. While we're at it, can we ban depictions of rape? Starting with porn videos with simulated rape/humiliation, but of course moving on to literary depictions (like Fifty Shades of Grey and I expect a number of other romance novels with unclear consent; 'bodice-rippers' and the like), and eventually to roleplay. I mean, people who get off on dominating a submissive partner and inflicting punishment and pain: that's just fucked up. And probably correlated with actual rape, not to mention triggering for real victims.

After all, if it's weird and makes me uncomfortable, it should be illegal, right? Oh man, once we're done with all this sex stuff, we've gotta ban pineapple on pizza! That's just the worst!

And nothing of value was lost.

 

[BladeoftheImmortal]

Before you guys go hog-wild on the implications, recall that the UN votes to condemn the trade embargo against Cuba basically every year

And I agree with that!

I think he's trying to say that the UN can't enforce a damn thing. So it doesn't really matter what they are saying right now.

 

[Northeastmonk]

I've been disgusted by a few anime pictures that have been on social media sites. I've seen some manga that was questionable. They go pretty far beyond what's popular right?

They go into the bad zone and deal with it without fantasy, am I right?

I enjoy Japanese art, always have. There are amazing artists in Japan and around the world. I don't get it.

For a few years I think chibi and so forth are just glorifying youth. Being young is magical (non sexually speaking here). Then I think about all those predators out there or pedophiles.

I think some artist in the world should use their talents elsewhere. I don't see why they would be caught up making such filth.

 

[Envelope]

animegaf on sudoku watch

 

[Replicant]

That 1000 Year-Old Witch now has no choice but to inhabit another body.

 

[sonicmj1]

When I used the site MyAnimeList I encountered a lot of people who refused to acknowledge "lolicon" as a substitute for real child pornography. They were convinced that the depictions do not represent what children look like, thus they didn't share any similarities with pedophiles. If that's the case and lolicon fans and pedophiles share no similarity, they won't reach for real child porn and actual molestation right?

Or are those people just full of shit and lying to themselves? I honestly don't know these days.

The last time one of these sorts of threads came up, I thought I'd try to figure out if there were any numbers out there indicating how much that magazines carrying erotic lolicon pornography sold in Japan. I figured that getting a sense of the size of that market could give us a sense for how niche the audience was for this material.

Shockingly, Japanese magazine publishers don't make their porn magazine circulation numbers easily accessible. I couldn't find any hard, reliable data.

The only number I found was a blogpost that was itself reposting a BBS post containing a bunch of magazine sales numbers from December 2010, which said that one particular lolicon magazine had a circulation of approximately 550,000 that month. Japanese commenters found that number alarmingly high.

If that number is accurate, it suggests to me that there's a sizable audience who consumes this stuff without being criminally-compulsive pedophiles (the alternative is horrifying, so I hope that's the case). But that readership almost certainly includes those with a strong sexual attraction to real children as well.

I have generally felt that drawn child porn could be legally permissible, since its creation doesn't harm actual children. But I'm kind of horrified that I hadn't considered earlier how it could be used to mislead and entrap victims. It's something I can very easily imagine now, and I hadn't really thought about it before.

 

[dity]

He should draw something else most of the time? Dont you see how thats a form of censorship?

Why shouldnt he be free to monetize fiction?

Because it's their right to freedom expression, not money?

Like, you don't see regular porn in book shops. But you see it sold directly to customers or in specialised r-18 shops. Why not treat this stuff the same?

The last time one of these sorts of threads came up, I thought I'd try to figure out if there were any numbers out there indicating how much that magazines carrying erotic lolicon pornography sold in Japan. I figured that getting a sense of the size of that market could give us a sense for how niche the audience was for this material.

Shockingly, Japanese magazine publishers don't make their porn magazine circulation numbers easily accessible. I couldn't find any hard, reliable data.

The only number I found was a blogpost that was itself reposting a BBS post containing a bunch of magazine sales numbers from December 2010, which said that one particular lolicon magazine had a circulation of approximately 550,000 that month. Japanese commenters found that number alarmingly high.

If that number is accurate, it suggests to me that there's a sizable audience who consumes this stuff without being criminally-compulsive pedophiles (the alternative is horrifying, so I hope that's the case). But that readership almost certainly includes those with a strong sexual attraction to real children as well.

I have generally felt that drawn child porn could be legally permissible, since its creation doesn't harm actual children. But I'm kind of horrified that I hadn't considered earlier how it could be used to mislead and entrap victims. It's something I can very easily imagine now, and I hadn't really thought about it before.

Holy shit, 550,000? That's more than double my city's population. I'm just... wow.

 

[Odrion]

It is. The extent to which it is, is still in dispute, with the Mayo Clinic suggesting somewhere between 30%-80%. Part of the issue with researching pedophilia/child molestation is that the majority of subjects we have to question are/or have been in the criminal system. So selection bias is inevitable in the studies.

Here's an interesting paper, that has links to a fair amount of the research, concerning the same issue when it was dealt with in the U.S., while Ashcroft was running Justice:
http://scholarship.shu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1040&context=student_scholarship

Basically, the arguments come down to 1) child pornography doesn't inhibit and may exacerbate a pedophile's need to molest and 2) child pornography(drawn and real) is used by pedophiles to draw in children for predation.

You may not agree with those, of course, but there is some available science to suggest the first, and the second is undeniable, as we have multiple records of child molestors using child pornography to attract children.

Bans like these are tricky, because you get over eager enforcement causing problems, and creatives who want to push the envelope, so court cases tend to come hot and heavy for a few years, before they settle down and people accept the new standard. It's not like Japan doesn't have a history of this, and dealing with evolving standards of obscenity. They already have laws about mosaics and what you can and can't show legally. This would be an extension of those existing laws.

Well this is good to know, thanks.

 

[Arkeband]

Yep. It would apply to stuff like Berserk, when it should be focusing on weird ass shit like Hot House.

Berserk has no sexualized children, though there is a lot of rape of adults.

 

[Northeastmonk]

I have generally felt that drawn child porn could be legally permissible, since its creation doesn't harm actual children. But I'm kind of horrified that I hadn't considered earlier how it could be used to mislead and entrap victims. It's something I can very easily imagine now, and I hadn't really thought about it before.

I have been thinking a lot about this myself. I wonder about how the animated or drawn porn influences porn searches.

A. There's hentai and you just think it's animated porn and that's it
B. You're looking up specific hentai or manga with the this questionable content
C. You think every anime girl is drawn to look the way they do, age doesn't matter
D. You probably shouldn't be searching for these pictures because it's causing your search history to trickle.

I do see the "extreme" side as being a problem. You'd also be putting a lot of people in jail for their nude centerfolds of anime girls if you made it all illegal. A lot of anime girls are 16 to 17. You could bump that age up to 18 or 19 and it's still the 16 or 17 year old that was drawn naked in Japan. It's weird.

 

[Doctor Doom]

That 1000 Year-Old Witch now has no choice but to inhabit another body.

Presumably one day aging will be cured, and also if we continue advancing on tissue engineering and computer assisted surgery, 1000 year old adults inhabiting ageless synthetic teenage bodies might not be something out of the ordinary.

 

[Doctor Doom]

Because it's their right to freedom expression, not money?

Like, you don't see regular porn in book shops. But you see it sold directly to customers or in specialised r-18 shops. Why not treat this stuff the same?

.

Oh, so now it's just to restrict to adult section. Isn't that already done? Wasn't the issue with whether to completely restrict any sale at all?

 

[Miracle]

A good compromise someone already suggested is making the sale of this stuff illegal.

This.

To me, that's definitely the best course of action to take for both sides of the spectrum. You can draw anything you want, but selling shit like this like you're selling just another comic book should be a no-no.

 

[dity]

Oh, so now it's just to restrict to adult section. Isn't that already done? Wasn't the issue with whether to completely restrict any sale at all?

No, it's not. Some quite explicit material that doesn't necessarily involve penetration or showing genitals is sold at regular old retail in Japan. They get around in the same way shops used to get around child porn laws by use of "Junior Idol" or "Junior Gravure". Extremely sexual, but covered.

I'd still rather see sale of it at retail nuked completely though. Doesn't mean it's banned, it just means you can't walk into some random shop in Akihabara and it's just there in the open sitting there.

I still think you're overstepping the boundaries to "freedom of expression" though by saying that getting rid of sales is censorship and it's somehow killing someone through them not getting money anymore.

 

[Aizo]

Sexualized images of children aren't postered all over Akihabara but if one wants to go buy a junior idol dvd of some preteen in a bathing suit posing it's still possible.

This is what I wanted to say. If one hasn't spent much time in Japan, they have no idea how creepy it can get with this kind of stuff.

 

[Doctor Doom]

I still think you're overstepping the boundaries to "freedom of expression" though by saying that getting rid of sales is censorship and it's somehow killing someone through them not getting money anymore.

It's not killing someone but full restrictions on sale could force artists to reduce or alter most of their content to more easily make a living.

As for partial restrictions, in the USA, at least locally prior to redbox, the video rental places many did have adult sections, so something similar could be done with regards to manga. Of course such would be labelled properly and presumably would require id.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

Someone I know who was raped as a child was re-victimized because a local creeper used them as a model for their naked children art because they thought said victim "would enjoy it because they were sexually awoken and deserved to have their sexuality celebrated".

Victims of childhood rape tend to see no value in depicting children in sexual acts, no matter the medium, because some idiots want to view us as objective but-my-free-speech "collateral damage" bullet points instead of people with emotions and experiences. There is zero, none, nada, zilch, complete absence of any benefit of depicting someone that is a child in a sexual situation. Ban it and arrest those involved in the production. There is no "idea" to it. Drawn, ASCII art, I don't give a fuck. Burn it all. There is no "other view point". There is no debate to be had. Stop defending child rape in any form and improve the world for everyone and harm nobody in the process.

You type this like the restriction of free speech is NOT something that has a high degree of potential for negative reverberations moving forward. I'm absolutely on board with Monocle's post earlier in this thread - banning despicable but victimless and optional-to-engage-with forms of expression does nothing but give a blunt instrument to censors yet to be born. The law does not and cannot exist to protect emotional well-being and contentment in the same way it protects person and property.

 

[JDSN]

Berserk has no sexualized children, though there is a lot of rape of adults.

OMG I FORGOT THERES A NEW BERSERK.

This thread made me wonder about Opiate's input, as he has shown interest in pedophilia on an academic level. I searched for his last few posts as I haven't seen him in a while, didn't realize he was de-modded

Read his last posts and you will see why his input is worthless.

 

[Uhyve]

there is one store in Akihabara in particular (that used to be a games store) that is so off the charts dodgy i don't even know where to start.

Stocking dvd/br of 8 year olds sucking bananas is one thing - having meet and greets from the people in the dvd/br is a whoooooooooooooooole different level.

I mean, I saw a Vice documentary that claims it's pretty much an industry there:
Schoolgirls for sale

 

[encephalon]

The problem with the drawn variety is that it's out of control. It's pervasive. It's as if it's generally viewed as permissable.

 

[Zaptruder]

You type this like the restriction of free speech is NOT something that has a high degree of potential for negative reverberations moving forward. I'm absolutely on board with Monocle's post earlier in this thread - banning despicable but victimless and optional-to-engage-with forms of expression does nothing but give a blunt instrument to censors yet to be born. The law does not and cannot exist to protect emotional well-being and contentment in the same way it protects person and property.

public decency laws...

 

[Jb]

Didn't know that was even still a thing :/

 

[Boney]

They should do like the UK and ban face sitting porn because it's aberration, amarite guys?

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

It is bizarre in a world with so many real issues of free speech being forced out, pretty much the only time Free Spechers are willing to dedicate time to a thread is when it involves child porn or bigots being paid money to insult minorities.

 

[IDKAboutThat]

Yes, please. Children shouldn't be sexualized by anything. This is an almost universally accepted fact. Censorship is incredibly bad and the free exchange of ideas is awesome, but this is the one thing on the planet that we should actually be censoring. Literally the only thing, though. Everything else is fair game.

 

[rpmurphy]

The junior idol/child model industry really needs to go away, since it really doesn't serve any public good. It is purely exploitative in every sense. Although you could make the argument that there is a line that the government can draw as to what is considered acceptable for child modeling/fashion, the industry in question here in its current state is not anywhere close to where you could say that it falls into a grey area.

 

[1st Course]

Is this the end of third party Vita support?

Gold

 

[anaron]

The problem with the drawn variety is that it's out of control. It's pervasive. It's as if it's generally viewed as permissable.

yep and it's not ok. But leave it to anime avatars to turn it into an argument over censorship when it's about simply not sexualizing children.

Is this the end of third party Vita support?

fucking amazing.

 

[dity]

It's not killing someone but full restrictions on sale could force artists to reduce or alter most of their content to more easily make a living.

As for partial restrictions, in the USA, at least locally prior to redbox, the video rental places many did have adult sections, so something similar could be done with regards to manga. Of course such would be labelled properly and presumably would require id.

Yes, they'd probably need to alter or change the content they actually sell to consumers. But they could still make loli/shota stuff in their free time.