CNN overreacting and claiming Manga is child porn

Recommended Videos

WWmelb

New member
Sep 7, 2011
702
0
0
Thyunda said:
If you enjoy the drawn images of child pornography, it's pretty much a given that you must find children sexually attractive.
I will have to disagree there. In some cases i'm sure you are correct, but by no stretch of the imagination is it a given. Especially when it comes to Manga.

Enjoying, or being turned on by Loli-porn, or whatever other term is used for it now, is a BIG stretch from finding real children sexually attractive.

The sexualised-childlike or actual children in Loli can be appealing/arousing because they have no real resemblance to children of the real world at all, and because they are sexualised to an absurd level.

I don't mind Loli, some of it's arousing... but do you know what isn't arousing at all? Actual children. Why? Because they inherently are NOT sexual. In fact, i think most of them are disgusting little uninteresting creatures that i can't relate to. What else wouldn't be arousing at all? Realistic drawings of anatomically correct children/young teens. Not in the slightest. It isn't a sexual form in it's nature.

The difference being, child molesters DO (in some cases, in others it isn't about the victims stature at all, just a power/dominance thing) find un-sexualised real children arousing, and banning loli isn't going to change that. It's hardwired into them, not something they have learned from Manga/Anime. They will see real children every day, and will be aroused. Most stifle it, but some don't, and those that don't should be punished to the full extent of the law, and then some.

It's a bloody fucking astronomical difference.

A fetish is a fetish is a fetish, and most people i have met through various fetish sites are way more sexually mature and stable than most people i've had interactions with outside of this.

Contrary to popular belief, most people with a sexual fetish do not have their entire sex lives governed by that single fetish. Once you do, you are heading into OCD realms, and there is cause for concern and you should probably get help.

I have many likes, many dislikes, many fetishes. As does my partner. Neither one of us is into everything the other is into though, which is one of the great things about not having any care at all of sexual exclusivity, we can get our fulfillment from other people without forcing each other into acts we don't enjoy.

Oh by the way, i was told that not being sexually exclusive in a relationship would lead me eventually to bestiality, because.. well.. reasons and perversion.

Go figure that one out.
 

WarpZone

New member
Mar 9, 2008
423
0
0
Julius Terrell said:
Vareoth said:
Thyunda said:
Violence and sex cannot be treated as the same thing. They don't even come close.
Not a BDSM fan I see :p
+100000000000000000000000000000000000000

It's nice to see that someone else is thinking with some reason around here.
Stop that, both of you. BDSM is not violence. It's role-playing between two consenting adults. If what you're doing during sex is something your partner is not okay with, that's not BDSM, it's rape.

You know the fucking difference. Stop conflating the two.
 

Vareoth

New member
Mar 14, 2012
254
0
0
WarpZone said:
Julius Terrell said:
Vareoth said:
Thyunda said:
Violence and sex cannot be treated as the same thing. They don't even come close.
Not a BDSM fan I see :p
+100000000000000000000000000000000000000

It's nice to see that someone else is thinking with some reason around here.
Stop that, both of you. BDSM is not violence. It's role-playing between two consenting adults. If what you're doing during sex is something your partner is not okay with, that's not BDSM, it's rape.

You know the fucking difference. Stop conflating the two.
Hey, no reason to be offended. I happen to know exactly what BDSM entails and I certainly wouldn't make jokes about it if I didn't enjoy a fair bit of paddling and binding myself.

Anyway, it seems we've strayed a bit from the intended source material.
 

JoJo

and the Amazing Technicolour Dream Goat 🐐
Moderator
Legacy
Mar 31, 2010
7,170
143
68
Country
🇬🇧
Gender
♂
PirateRose said:
And in addition, pedophiles are on the same page as rapists. They desire the sexual power and control over a weaker person. They don't care about the actual person they violate and there is nothing to pity about it.

I find it incredibly disgusting anyone would try to compare them to homosexuals. You might as well attempt to compare pedophiles to straight people.
You're conflating paedophiles and child molesters. Paedophilia is just the attraction, there's no requirement for them to have actually victimised someone, I assume most of us are pitying the ones who can keep their pants on around kids. The comparison with homosexuality is that neither choose their attractions, and that comparison does work equally well with heterosexuals too, or any sexuality really.
 

Fdzzaigl

New member
Mar 31, 2010
822
0
0
I see a lot of people moralizing about what Japan should do. However, it's up to the people of Japan to decide what they expect in terms of sexuality and laws around that, not us.

Sexuality and the attitude around nudity differs greatly throughout cultures. Even ones that are relatively close to each other.
For example: in many places in Germany, if you go to a hotel with a pool / sauna, it will be very common for people, men / women and yes, even sometimes children, to walk around in the nude. No one finds this shocking or an invitation for rape etc.

It's simply a different way of looking to this and perhaps even a better way.

Japan has also been known throughout the ages for it's progressive points of view regarding various forms of sexuality and its bathing culture probably means that seeing the nude isn't exactly a world-shocking event.

So I find it a very nonsensical thing to speak about "child porn" in general when just some nude drawings are being shown in a Japanese comic. Especially because the other manga talked about, Love Hina, is about college guys / girls, not children.
 

Thyunda

New member
May 4, 2009
2,955
0
0
Zira said:
Thyunda said:
Zira said:
The comparison to violent videogames falls apart ENTIRELY where sexuality is concerned. If you're turned on by men, you're probably not going to enjoy lesbian porn. If you're turned on by women, you won't watch gay porn. What you entirely miss here is that everybody has violent urges and those urges can be carried out - not everybody views things as sexual unless those things are sexualised. Why do you believe that somebody who finds themselves attracted to cartoon children won't be attracted to real children? When that attraction can be fed, it can flower, and if an attraction to the same sex flowers, some consensual sex is had. If an attraction to a child flowers...nobody benefits.

Violence and sex cannot be treated as the same thing. They don't even come close.

Indeed? Then tell me: I don't mind "shota" manga and I could read "loli" manga too if the story is good: am I a pedophile, then?
Furthermore, a friend of mine, she's got an entire collection of explicit shota manga for girls. Is she even more of a pedopile than me, then?
I don't know what those words are. You will have to explain them.


WWmelb said:

Well you know the rules, if you're not sexually exclusive, you're not Christian. And do you know who else isn't Christian? Animals. Incidentally I read on the Internet that humans are naturally non-monogamous, which shouldn't really come as a surprise to anyone.

On your actual topic though, this is where I get confused. Why sexualise a child character if there's nothing childlike about the art? I just think it renders itself completely pointless. I don't believe for a second that the story would be worse with either the children or the sex taken out (or even just implied), so I don't really understand why everybody is leaping to defend the idea of manga dealing with such concepts. I don't believe all manga is child porn. I don't believe all manga that features sexualised children is exclusively child porn. I just cannot work out how anybody can justify sexualising children in such a blatant and fetishistic manner, especially when it is totally unnecessary.

You know one of the major issues people have with porn is that it unrealistically portrays sex? (These ARE people that have problems with porn, so don't expect too much logic). There is some ground to that claim. If you're exclusively reading the kind of stuff that glorifies and sexually idolises children, it'll start messing with your outlook. I'm sure that most of you here who're into it aren't exclusively into it to the point where you can start doing damage to yourself, but we know people get obsessed, and I just don't think it's worth the risk to permit the graphic depiction of children involved in sexual acts for the 'sake of story' or whatever justification you can put out, when you know that there are some people who will take it more seriously than intended. If all the risk was that somebody might react violently to having it taken away, or that they might become addicted, I wouldn't care so much, but we both know that's not what's at risk.
 

VVThoughtBox

New member
Mar 3, 2014
73
0
0
We need to talk CNN. If you want to take an exclusive look at hentai in Japan, I respect your decision. I just ask that you please do us all a favor and do it in private. You can't show that stuff on TV, there's children present. P.S: get yourself some manga, it's embarrassing to know that a major news network is interested in moe-stuff.
 

Relish in Chaos

New member
Mar 7, 2012
2,660
0
0
If you want to ban illustrated child porn, then you?ll have to ban violent video games as well. Both of them depict events that would be illegal in real-life, after all. But of course, video games are a lucrative industry and many of us play them, as opposed to ?lolicon? being a relatively niche genre where no-one (at least, in the Western world) would admit to being into it.

Talk about slippery slopes. There have been no studies that definitively prove a connection between fictional events fostering an ?acceptance? for their real-life counterparts. Not to mention, a lot of the people that are on their high horse about this subject don?t seem to really understand Japanese culture. They do have their issues concerning sexism and women (although people who lives in glass houses shouldn?t throw stones; you could make the equally false argument that Western men who watch porn of adult women dressed in schoolgirl outfits, a popular and relatively accepted fetish, could then go on to rape actual schoolgirls in the real world), but it?s not as bad as some people claim.

What would you rather? Paedophiles that have no outlet for their sexual impulses and feel so stigmatised by society?s lack of empathy that they end up kidnapping and raping a little girl, or paedophiles with a fairly effective solution to their frustration through a harmless media of entertainment? Not to mention, not all lolicon fans are necessarily paedophiles, and vice versa. I mean, I?m into watching anal sex porn, but I?m very doubtful I?d ever let someone put anything up my arse. And therapy to treat sexuality is both ineffective and unethical (as has been shown with homosexuals ? and please don?t blow your top by interpreting that as ?comparing homosexuality to paedophile?).

Finally, I want to mention that these fictional children, like the women in adult porn, are always idealised. As in, they?re a fantasy version of children. Just like not all schoolgirls are miniskirt-wearing nymphomaniacs and not all gay men look like Tom of Finland-style models with amazing butts, most 10-year-old girls aren?t going to have a bust the size of a woman twice their age. And most people that read/watch that kind of thing aren?t going to think that, unless they have an actual mental disorder that makes it hard for them to differentiate between fantasy and reality, like schizophrenia or something.

Thyunda said:
Everyone has violent urges - they're not caused or propagated by violence in media. Violent videogames can be cathartic and serve as an outlet. The difference between violence and sex is that you can get violence out of your system in one cathartic load. Sex, on the other hand, the more you have, the more you want.
No offence, but you have nothing to back that up. It depends on the individual, and it depends on the sexual experience. When someone jacks off to porn and they ejaculate, that's it. It's over, their hormones drop, and they likely don't want sex for quite sometime. It only becomes a problem when they get addicted to it, and "addiction" is the real issue. Not simply the free existence of particular fap material.

Plus, you can get violence out of your system by beating someone up in real-life, in a similar way you could in video games. But most people don't do that, and it's not just because of the laws. Why?
 

youji itami

New member
Jun 1, 2014
231
0
0
Lil devils x said:
Samsont said:
tilmoph said:
they really need to stop trying to sex up 14-16 year olds
The legal age of consent in Japan is 13 years old so you know
It should be noted, however, prefecture law overrides federal law, raising the age up to 18. So the idea that 13 year olds are legally able to consent in Japan is false as the age is raised in all provinces in Japan via prefecture law.

ALSO "legal" age of consent does not mean they are physically an adult. In fact a 13 year old is more likely, not less than a 10 year old to have lapses in judgement due to the impaired prefrontal cortex at that stage of development in puberty.
31 states in the USA have the age of consent as 16. In the UK a 13 year old is being tried as adult so is the UK backwards for this? or should they just put him in a home as 13 year old 'can't make rational choices'.

Also have you seen the DancingWithYT you tube channel if that's not sexualizing children I'm a goldfish (8 year olds 'dancing' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyhl4cWHXaQ )
 

Julius Terrell

New member
Feb 27, 2013
361
0
0
WarpZone said:
Julius Terrell said:
Vareoth said:
Thyunda said:
Violence and sex cannot be treated as the same thing. They don't even come close.
Not a BDSM fan I see :p
+100000000000000000000000000000000000000

It's nice to see that someone else is thinking with some reason around here.
Stop that, both of you. BDSM is not violence. It's role-playing between two consenting adults. If what you're doing during sex is something your partner is not okay with, that's not BDSM, it's rape.

You know the fucking difference. Stop conflating the two.
I was only agree with the first part of his/her post. I don't know how to just take single quotes and use just those and I do like BDSM a little myself.

Just saying.
 

Lil devils x_v1legacy

More Lego Goats Please!
May 17, 2011
2,728
0
0
youji itami said:
Lil devils x said:
Samsont said:
tilmoph said:
they really need to stop trying to sex up 14-16 year olds
The legal age of consent in Japan is 13 years old so you know
It should be noted, however, prefecture law overrides federal law, raising the age up to 18. So the idea that 13 year olds are legally able to consent in Japan is false as the age is raised in all provinces in Japan via prefecture law.

ALSO "legal" age of consent does not mean they are physically an adult. In fact a 13 year old is more likely, not less than a 10 year old to have lapses in judgement due to the impaired prefrontal cortex at that stage of development in puberty.
31 states in the USA have the age of consent as 16. In the UK a 13 year old is being tried as adult so is the UK backwards for this? or should they just put him in a home as 13 year old 'can't make rational choices'.

Also have you seen the DancingWithYT you tube channel if that's not sexualizing children I'm a goldfish (8 year olds 'dancing' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyhl4cWHXaQ )
Of course they are backwards for this, as both brain scans and testing have shown that a 13 year old is more likely to answer the same questions they got right at 10 wrong, and take longer to do so due to their prefrontal cortex shutting down. Basically during puberty the part of the brain that controls judgement is impaired and barely functioning while the brain develops other areas.

Laws should match the science behind them rather than someone saying "well, I think they should be mature by this age so that is how it is."
 

tilmoph

Gone Gonzo
Jun 11, 2013
922
0
0
Fdzzaigl said:
I see a lot of people moralizing about what Japan should do. However, it's up to the people of Japan to decide what they expect in terms of sexuality and laws around that, not us.

Sexuality and the attitude around nudity differs greatly throughout cultures. Even ones that are relatively close to each other.
For example: in many places in Germany, if you go to a hotel with a pool / sauna, it will be very common for people, men / women and yes, even sometimes children, to walk around in the nude. No one finds this shocking or an invitation for rape etc.

It's simply a different way of looking to this and perhaps even a better way.

Japan has also been known throughout the ages for it's progressive points of view regarding various forms of sexuality and its bathing culture probably means that seeing the nude isn't exactly a world-shocking event.

So I find it a very nonsensical thing to speak about "child porn" in general when just some nude drawings are being shown in a Japanese comic. Especially because the other manga talked about, Love Hina, is about college guys / girls, not children.
First point; yes, it is other people's concern if Japan's (or any other foreign nations) cultural views are demonstrable harmful to the innocent. Just as it's ok for other nations to protest China's oppression of speech and expression, or the Middle East's tendency to throw acid at women's and girl's faces, if other nations and citizens of those nations perceive Japan as being child porn friendly, they are more than allowed to express those views and try to rally others to their way of thinking. Of course, it probably won't do too much good, but there is nothing wrong with it. Cultural relativism has a limit, and it is up to each individual to try and convince others of where that limit is.

Second point; There is nothing innately wrong with nudes in and of themselves. The West for a time often showed children nude in photos and paintings, since they were seen as innocent. I don't think that nudity in the arts, in and of itself, is what people are objecting to here. I know it's not what bothers me. What's drawing ire is the sexualization of that nudity. The depiction of children, clothed or bare, engaging in blatantly sexual poses and actions. That's what the issue with lolicon and shotacon and the like is. Just wanted to clarify the point of objection.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
20,519
5,335
118
irishda said:
From the CNN article:
Shihoko Fujiwara runs Lighthouse, a nonprofit for exploited children. She told CNN she once worked on a case where a predator used a cartoon to convince a child that sex abuse was normal. "So the pedophiles might bring the animation and say 'this is how you practice with adults,'" she said.
A predator could use regular porn for that just as easy. A kid has no real knowledge of sexuality so if anyone shoves this type of material in front of them they won't know what to make of it. Children are easily influenced.

And in this case that would mean any cartoon that shows explicit behaviour should therefor be banned, since children may take it the wrong way and assume it's normal. I guess that means South Park, among many others, should be held accountable for giving child molesters ammo.
 

Nickolai77

New member
Apr 3, 2009
2,843
0
0
Whilst I think there is no disagreement that actual child porn should be illegal, I think drawn/written depictions of cp is a different matter because the act of creating such material and viewing it doesn't create a victim nor demonstrably causes harm to anybody.

The arguments I've seen in this thread in favour of banning loli appear to revolve around this idea that it normalises the sexualisation of children and encourages "unhealthy" sexual appetites, which I'd like to address.

With regards to the latter point, anyone with any familiarity with the internet could tell you that there's a lot of "unhealthy" sexual appetites out there (perfectly legal) that are catered for: Rape fetishism, BDSM, scat porn, fury porn etc. Now, all these fetishes are unhealthy in the sense that they represent harmful acts to people and animals, but does it mean that those who get their jollies off to these kind of things are more likely to commit such acts in the real world?

Strictly speaking the answer is we don't know. I have not seen any convincing evidence that jacking off to lolicon causally makes you a child molester, or having a wank over some hot yiffy action is going to make rape the local fauna. Obviously though, there are some people who are going to be inclined towards forcing their fetishes and desires on other people, but that doesn't mean that the porn they watched on the internet caused or even encouraged them to do that. Lets not forget that people were sexually abusing children, raping others and having sex with animals centuries before internet pornography became available.

You can't really disagree that these sort of fetishes are unhealthy and undesirable, but just because we find something disgusting or reprehensible doesn't mean we have a right to ban it- and besides, what we find disgusting and reprehensible changes over time. Fifty years ago, we'd have been saying that homosexuality was an "unhealthy" sexual desire. Morally speaking, I believe you only have the right to ban something or prohibit a behaviour if you can prove it causes unconsented harm to others.


As for lolicon "normalising" the sexualisation of children, I feel this is a stronger argument than the point which argues that loli should be banned because its "sexually unhealthy", but it still faces issues. There is still the assumption though that creating and viewing this sort of pornography changes your views of children, making you see them in a more sexualised way. Again though, I'd like to see proof of this because at the moment it's just an unproven assumption. I would also point out though that proving such a suggestion would be very difficult given how society sexualises children in a perfectly legal way already, looking at the societal pressures young female adolescents have to face due to way the media portrays girls.

The bottom line is that I believe that the law should be guided by the principle that something should only be illegal if you can demonstrate it causes unconsented and unreasonable harm (or risk of harm) to others. I don't believe lolicon, or any other of the aforementioned sexual fetishes, cause this sort of harm to others in a drawn/written context.
 

tilmoph

Gone Gonzo
Jun 11, 2013
922
0
0
Zira said:
I am taking a bet and saying you're American. It's funny how I can tell by someone's opinion that this person is probably American.
It's Americans the people who usually think they have all the right to intrude into other countries'culture and actions, because they're good and civilized while the other cultures are little more than monkey savages. How would YOU feel if China decided to intrude into YOUR country, because America is a twisted and cruel country were people and even kids have easy access to guns and often go on killing sprees, where there's a sick and dark culture of unhealthy food and women objectification, where they make it an habit to intrude into other countries and dictate their rules to them, etc.?
They already do that. American is frequently criticized for many things about it's culture and foreign policy. I'm ok with that. Why the fuck wouldn't I be? It's not like I live in a magical land of milk and honey, what with the rampant poverty and awful access to health care and rather distressing tendency to dump huge amounts of cash we don't have on half baked military adventures that have, at best, a .500 success rate. Way less when accounting for covert operations Oh, and all the fat people. Can't forget fat people. And the crappy way we handle the 2nd amendment, where the only proposals people with power ever consider seem to be "start the bannings and never stop" vs "everyone owns 12 bazookas! MURICA!" Regular folks have some fairly nuanced views on controlling access to the things, but that's what you get with a two party system. Oh, and the shitty way we handle higher education i.e. making it expensive as hell with a high risk of total failure on investment. That's not very good either. Does help explain the rampant poverty thing, though. Feel free to point out any I missed. Sure, I probably won't agree with all of them, but I'll disagree with your assessment, not your right to, you know, notice things and ***** about them. That would be pretty damn arrogant.

Zira said:
Americans, in my opinion, have a perception that their culture is open and good, while other cultures (especially the distant, Asian ones) are wrong and closeminded.
See, perfect example. We have tons of people who are absolutely convinced that Japan in particular, is just the greatest thing ever. Lots of admiration for what the Chinese built up (more iffy on the modern PRC, but we are competing with them, after all. And they still sometimes get respect for how well they've pretty much entered superpower or damn close to it status). You get the same admiration for Scandinavian countries (mainly the social welfare policies), the Middle East (you would not believe how frequently I've been told how great the Medieval Mulsim world was compared to Europe of the time. Always seem to forget the Byzantines when they say that, but so does everyone else)

Zira said:
I would never say that living in Korea would be better than living in the USA.
Why not? Go for it. North Korea says that all the time. Knock yourself out.
More seriously, you could make the argument that South Korea is weird and has plenty of baggage and oddities in their culture (so much worse than the US with cosmetic surgery, and we're pretty awful with it), but I'm pretty sure the average South Korean isn't stuck in some backwater, nightmare realm hellhole.

Zira said:
But before pointing fingers, it helps to stop and understand. Mostly, to understand you are a foreigner and they do not like you intruding into their affairs any more than you would like if they intruded into yours. And yes, the point applies even if the country in question is an evil dictatorship.
At least this is how I see things.
Define "intrude". You mean bombing the hell out of them, maybe occupying, er, "liberating" them. Yeah, fuck that, except in extreme, no seriously, you're committing genocide cases. Still shouldn't be just the US going in to stop that, but f it has to be, then it has to be. Also, no one is calling for the bombing and occupation of Japan based on a few really disgusting manga out of a giant pile of really cool manga. Just pointing that out.

Do you mean criticism in general? Umm, dude, your example fails. Like I said, the US and everyone one else of any importance in the world is going to catch shit for things they do, both domestic and foreign. That's how humanity works. Thinking social species and all that. Like to gather information, process, make decisions, and share the product and process of those thoughts with others. can't end judgment without ending thought.

Oh, and most people don't like being criticized. By anyone, foreign or fellow national. Don't know why the main thing I'm suppose to understand is "they don't like other people's opinions on things the share with the world". Seems like a rather minor point. Better ones might be "why are they ok with this thing, how widespread is it, and is it as bad as you think?".

Zira said:
Now, to return about the real subject of this thread: I have manga that sexualize underage kids. I read them. Tell me, am I a pedophile?
Well, that's definitely a bit creepy, no lie. As to are you a pedophile; are you aroused by the sexualized children, or to something else? Or do you feel no sexual arousal at all? If the former, yes, yes you are a pedophile.And that is wrong. Stop indulging that urge. It's not healthy or right, at all. If it's one of the latter two latter, what is it? And can you find it in something that isn't comic book kiddie porn? Is it just a really deep story? Do there need to be pictures then? Is it something about the way the characters are presented? Again, isn't there non-kid fucking doodles that have it?

Now, more generally; as much as lolicon and shotacon creep me out and disgust me, and as harsh as I am on pedophiles (see, we need to perform consensual, ethical experiments and research to cure this, because it's a desire to rape kids, acted upon or not), I don't want this awful smut banned or made illegal to produce or own. There aren't any victims in it's production, and it's entirely possible that the people that read this won't go running out and rape kids. Does it disgust me? Oh by the gods yes! A thousand times in a thousand tongues yes! But so does hate speech. Chick tracts, the SCUM Manifesto, Mein Kampf, all kinds of awful things that offend sensibility and any kind of decent morality is made and produced. I'm not about to nuke the highest right (freedom of expression) without damn, damn good cause. "Pictures of little kids fucking each other or adults or squids or whatever disgust the holy hell out of me" does not rise to that level. Actual, physical child porn, yeah, that's at that level. Ban it, hang the makers, and toss any consumers into the darkest pit we can find, if we can't just hang them to. But that's because of the actual victims. producing it and producing the incentive to make actual victims is far more egregious than , in this limited and narrowly defined and strictly controlled circumstance, infringing on such an important right.
 

lucky_sharm

New member
Aug 27, 2009
846
0
0
Daystar Clarion said:
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks likes a duck...


What people get off to is their own business, but if you're trying to legitimise tossing off to cartoon pictures of young girls with 'Oh, it's okay, she's like, not human and hundreds of years old!'

Yeah, sorry, you're just lying to yourself.
True. Can't disagree there.

But I don't think drawn cartoon porn is as big of a deal as real life CP. It's not as if fictional characters have their own Bill of Rights in our realm of reality.
 

loa

New member
Jan 28, 2012
1,716
0
0
I hope it has been made clear that japan banned ACTUAL cp and that no one here thinks that drawings and real documentation all fall under the same umbrella term because it is pretty important for some especially dense people who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction to keep those 2 things separate.

Speaking of that, if you want to jail people for drawings, we will probably not be friends.
 

Riot3000

New member
Oct 7, 2013
220
0
0
loa said:
I hope it has been made clear that japan banned ACTUAL cp and that no one here thinks that drawings and real documentation all fall under the same umbrella term because it is pretty important for some especially dense people who can't tell the difference between reality and fiction to keep those 2 things separate.

Speaking of that, if you want to jail people for drawings, we will probably not be friends.
Thank you saved me some words.

I think this topic is not even about Japan's child porn laws it devolved as usual to person conviction battle royal live in Madison Square Garden.

There have been talks of automatic therapy for people with "fetishes" that slope is so slippery lets not even begin.

Izanagi009 said:
Ok Izanagi please stop it you are taken the fact that genres's you don't like exist and conflating it into some really overplayed hysteria about the "otaku" and "Neet". You conflating moe with loli is not different than gun violence and action films.
 

Riot3000

New member
Oct 7, 2013
220
0
0
Lil devils x said:
youji itami said:
Lil devils x said:
Samsont said:
tilmoph said:
they really need to stop trying to sex up 14-16 year olds
The legal age of consent in Japan is 13 years old so you know
It should be noted, however, prefecture law overrides federal law, raising the age up to 18. So the idea that 13 year olds are legally able to consent in Japan is false as the age is raised in all provinces in Japan via prefecture law.

ALSO "legal" age of consent does not mean they are physically an adult. In fact a 13 year old is more likely, not less than a 10 year old to have lapses in judgement due to the impaired prefrontal cortex at that stage of development in puberty.
31 states in the USA have the age of consent as 16. In the UK a 13 year old is being tried as adult so is the UK backwards for this? or should they just put him in a home as 13 year old 'can't make rational choices'.

Also have you seen the DancingWithYT you tube channel if that's not sexualizing children I'm a goldfish (8 year olds 'dancing' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyhl4cWHXaQ )
Of course they are backwards for this, as both brain scans and testing have shown that a 13 year old is more likely to answer the same questions they got right at 10 wrong, and take longer to do so due to their prefrontal cortex shutting down. Basically during puberty the part of the brain that controls judgement is impaired and barely functioning while the brain develops other areas.

Laws should match the science behind them rather than someone saying "well, I think they should be mature by this age so that is how it is."
So for the 13 year olds and up who are having sex with each other because this does exist should be under the subject of law? Of course we can say 13 can't consent sex with a adult no argument there but the 13 year olds with each what to do about that. Also laws based on science are not a guarantee for anything because "science" has been used to promote pretty messed up laws plus that just lead to more debate than anything.