Virtual Child Porn

<< < (3/6) > >>

The source of the fuss:

Figures show an alarming increase in demand for child pornography in Japan. Last year, 304 children under 18 were identified as victims, police said, up more than 20% from 2006 and the highest total since records began in 1999.

While police prosecuted 25 child pornography cases in 1999, the figure had risen to 585 cases by 2006.

Criminalising possession has widespread public support amid a slew of media reports about men offering money to girls in return for sexually explicit photographs via mobile phone dating sites.

A survey last year found that about 70% of adults were in favour of banning possession, while almost 86% said manga and other illustrations should also be covered by the revised law.

Sexually explicit comics account for a sizeable chunk of Japan's 500bn yen manga market. Many feature schoolgirls or childlike adults being raped or engaging in sadomasochism.

Manga belonging to the popular "lolicon" - Japanese slang for Lolita complex - genre are likely to escape the ban, as MPs are concerned that outlawing them could infringe on freedom of expression and drive men who use them as an outlet for their sexual urges to commit more serious offences.

Other critics of a far-reaching ban say the characters depicted in scores of lolicon titles are fictional and so are not being harmed.

Apparently, the fuss in not as groundless as it seems from the UN link, and if the country with one of the lowest scores in (overall) sexual crimes is alarmed, it is perhaps about something serious they don't see right. As far as I can see, they don't plan to chop off the whole child-related entertainment activities, unlike some other countries, regarding all forms of visualisation of implicit and explicit child sexual activities and their possesion and distribution via~ prohibited by law. And unlike any other part of the pornography (in terms of specific activity), abstract or actual, the problem comes from the fact that the object of interest is the child. I don't believe that the reputation of person A or B should cover for possible perpetrators, neither I do believe that all consumers of lolicon (as in "slashable") would end up as pedophiles in real life. What we believe doesn't count as much, and if the measures include research, would be the best. More than 10 years ago, the venting effect produced positive results, but if there's a tendency to become reverse (due to the specific content and the means of distribution), with children filling the venting demand with a paid supply, if not the Japan government or UN-Japan, I believe their parents would have something to say on the subject, at least till their children aged 18.
Probably Japan would be the best one to give a clue on the link b/w the animanga child porn distribution and perpetrators, because of its unique cultural background and the fact that just one case of child sexual abuse is enough to invoke fuss about it.

Loli/shota has always been there in Japan and as long as there is a demand for it, there will always be existing stuff of it. Thats how things work. The problem is that people lump things together too often. Animation is very far and different from the real thing. Though I don't support real life child porn, I just find it funny that there are some legal loopholes of it. For one thing, lets say for example, when I sell my pics of me naked back when I was 12 years old, would I be prosecuted as a child pornographer although its my own pics I'm selling? And also, it isn't only in loli and shota that you can found animated kids naked with genitals displayed. You can find a lot of them in Western Art too. So where am I going with this? Western morality influenced by Judeo-Christian ethics and whatnot hurting their sensibilities. They should stop imposing their moral standards to other societies. As long as something is a part of its culture, as an outsider to that culture, you have no moral authority to impose your standards and whatnot.

The underage brothels of Bangkok are (or have been) notorious. I doubt even UNICEF can claim with a straight face that they only exist because of shota and loli. Japanese salarymen may go there on sex holidays, but they're far from the only ones.

I understand the Thai government has been cracking down on this lately, but it's apparently a long tradition there. It even has apologists. And I don't mean to single out Thailand either; it's just the first place that sprung to mind.

Lol, coffee is striking me again. I maybe derailing this thread and whatnot.
But anyway, here's a study saying that amount of lolicon reduces child abuse. I don't know if people from the UNICEF are aware of this.


Quote from: Milton Diamond/Ayako Uchiyama

Within Japan itself, the dramatic increase in available pornography and sexually explicit materials is apparent to even a casual observer. This is concomitant with a general liberalization of restrictions on other sexual outlets as well. Also readily apparent from the information presented is that, over this period of change, sex crimes in every category, from rape to public indecency, sexual offenses from both ends of the criminal spectrum, significantly decreased in incidence.

Most significantly, despite the wide increase in availability of pornography to children, not only was there a decrease in sex crimes with juveniles as victims but the number of juvenile offenders also decreased significantly.

That part can be found in the discussion area. Just read the whole thing if you want to understand it better.


For one thing, lets say for example, when I sell my pics of me naked back when I was 12 years old, would I be prosecuted as a child pornographer although its my own pics I'm selling?

I don't want to go through all the stories, just pick one.  There is a precedent for what you said, at least in some states in America.

As to my position on this issue, I think it's wrong to talk about outlawing virtual depictions of anything, for the same reason it would be wrong to outlaw depictions of violence in media.  When you say it's okay for the government to outlaw a victimless activity on the basis that it might encourage someone to commit a crime that might have a victim you open up a Pandora's box of 'preventative' safety measures.  First it's loli hentai because it might encourage child abuse which actually has victims.  Then it's violent video games, because they might encourage people to commint violent crimes, which will actually have victims.  Then fast forward a little bit and the world is a drab rigid society with nothing even remotely divisive, as any lack of uniformity could encourage negative emotions which could lead to violence of some sort.

You can't have a free world if people aren't allowed to be tempted and make decisions for themselves.  Making laws to outlaw temptation is like saying, we don't think people are capable of behaving properly in society if they're tempted to behave badly, so instead of trying to address the issue of peoples lack of self control we're just going to try and remove all temptations.  It's ridiculous, it's just like the old band-aid on a broken leg analogy.

@ Psychster
Before you whatnot-me, I wish you to read what I write. Otherwise, the whole thing reminds me of the parable of the aquarium fish, which once freed in the ocean, continued to make rectangular loops in the wide open.

First the article. I will read it profoundly when I go home, but I am already aware of Milton Diamond's point of view, published in 1999. Read above. And his point of view is not the only one available.

The Japanese and non-Japanese go to Bankok for sex vacations, meaning ... sex vacation for having sex with children? If not, it is unrelated to the topic, if yes, we might have a link b/w major consumers of animanga porn in japan and doing it for real by taking advantage of the longlasting poverty in a country, because child prostitution became unquestionable by anyone (local government, world organisation, etc.) tradition, .... since lately. The salarymen could be japanese or not, but if so, shouldn't be actually more countries involved in discussing this issue? I'm thinking now, if those bankok children had a choice but to put their family well-being not as a priorty to survive, would they choose to prostitute. If people think normal for a child to provide for his or her parents with sex, I'd say two things - it is the most disgusting thing in the world I can think of, and society that would object help or reality fearing possible external cultural influences more than the quality of children health and welfare, deserves a full package of brainwashing. Because my country has similar problems, I would agree that helping fight poverty comes first, but I wouldn't agree that children should be left and forced (though they do not object and as if they will succeed in it) to sell themselves till the state comes back to its feet again. It would be too late.

The Western art. Do you honestly believe that every (children) nudity in art equals pornography and its purpose is to show explicit child sex scenes.

@ Yukimura
Unforunately, the law is the most effective measure to achieve self-control and self-restriction. (Not that it help that much in realising that somebody has gone beyond of the informed consent of a tempation).

Lorall that you would say that puts pretty much everything you say into a dangerous perspective.  If you think that it's preferable to give governments the power to criminalize any potential temptation for a crime in order to reduce the occurrence of that crime you might as well just march the whole world into jail cells and let the robots manage things.  What you're talking about is taking away peoples social responsibility to control themselves and placing it on the governments shoulders to control them.  That's what dictatorships do.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page