Well... here we go. Obscenity in Manga trial.

[Nimbus]

Some sexual fetishes are incurable psychological conditions, similar to Homosexuality, it's not a disease, it's a part of their psyche. If they're not actively looking to harm people by either the consumption of the exploitative and harmful real stuff, or you know, actively engaging in said horrific activities, then some of them are being judged and persecuted for something they can't control.

What about the people who choose to watch this stuff?

 

[Balgus]

The specifics of the case need to be known. Are we talking about a few risky scenes? Or an entire series filled with 12-year-olds being raped? We can't start effective discussion about this until we know where the battle-lines have drawn.

And why does one guy take the fall for it? Why not the artist? Or the publisher? Or the distributer? Or the censors who let it get by them? If you're able to buy something through ordinary means, you have the right to assume that it's legal.

seconded, if you can buy it through legal means this its natural to assume its the content is legal.

 

[The Wooster]

And why does one guy take the fall for it? Why not the artist? Or the publisher? Or the distributer? Or the censors who let it get by them? If you're able to buy something through ordinary means, you have the right to assume that it's legal.

He imported it I believe. The American government can't prosecute a Japanese artist or publisher.

 

[joystickjunki3]

While I think that even illustrating child pornography is disgusting, I do not think that this man should be reprimanded w/ anything. The most I would ever give him, if he actually likes this kind of stuff in a sexual manner, is counseling.

I think that sexual action w/ a minor is morally wrong, but as far as I know he hasn't participated in any molestation or the like; so he's innocent in my book, legally speaking that is.

EDIT: I mean, who am I to judge someone's sexual preferences if no one is actually harmed and everyone is consenting. Even portrayal of rape, while i also find that a bit disgusting, is fine w/ me as long as everyone involved is consenting.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Some sexual fetishes are incurable psychological conditions, similar to Homosexuality, it's not a disease, it's a part of their psyche. If they're not actively looking to harm people by either the consumption of the exploitative and harmful real stuff, or you know, actively engaging in said horrific activities, then some of them are being judged and persecuted for something they can't control.

What about the people who choose to watch this stuff?

Well it's strange (even when people can't control it) but it's still not hurting anyone and this whole thing screams of moralizing rather than reality.

i.e. This has NOTHING to do with protecting children, they mostly want to prove a point about the nature of Sex and Obscenity.

 

[TheDean]

While I'm a huge manga fan and I've read more than my fair share of horrific hentai I'm perfectly willing to admit that not only is a large portion of the medium complete dross there's quite a few elements that don't appeal even to hardcore sexual deviants such as myself.
Now it seems manga containing those elements has finally fallen into the hands of someone with a badge and, rather than just bitching about it on the Internet like I would have done, they're trying to put, Christopher Handley of Iowa, the guy who bought it, away for twenty goddamn years.
Carl Horn, manga editor for Dark Horse Comics waxes lyrical about the subject here [http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/editorial/2008-12-11/christopher-handley/carl-horn]. He makes a few good points but he stays away from addressing the specifics of the case (perhaps because of a legal obligation to do so) instead choosing just to ratchet up the outrage to eleven. Following a few of the links in the article I still couldn't find exactly which manga Mr Handley is supposed to have ordered. In fact, now that I think about it, Mr Horn doesn't as much avoid the subject as much as swerve around it at high speed.

Some of these manga contain images that are supposedly, according to the prosecutor, "obscene." But we'll put aside what kind of images they are claimed to be for the moment, because that isn't being decided anywhere but in this court case. And although we can debate it, there's no practical point in doing so here, because debating their content on ANN won't, and can't affect the outcome.

However a few links on I found the law brought into question was the following.

section 504 of the PROTECT Act to prohibit distribution or possession of "a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture
, or painting," that

(1)(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

(B) is obscene; or

(2)(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and

(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;

Ah... child pornography.

While the Mr Handley's lawyers managed to get the second and third parts of that law ruled unconstitutional this still gives us an idea of why Mr Handley is facing this predicament.

I appreciate the idea that if we let other people decide what is 'obscene' rather than choosing for ourselves we're starting down a slippery slope and I'm generally against censorship in all of it's forms. It's childporn. Yes, I appreciate no actual children were harmed in the creation of a manga and that allowing people to deem a collection of lines and scribbles 'obscene' could destroy art as we know it. On the other hand it's child porn.

I'm honestly unsure where I stand on this. I've read books and seen movies that handle child abuse in a very graphic manner and I wouldn't call myself a criminal for owning them. (For example I've seen far too many movies where Kevin Bacon molests children. Worrying) On the other hand, sexual attention towards children is, in my opinion, morally wrong and while I appreciate the pragmatist's argument that while people are (ugh) using media with that kind of content they're not actually out doing the deed I still think reinforcing that behavior or normalizing it by producing products designed to cater to people with these kind of urges is an equally slippery slope to that of excess censorship.

I can't help think that for all their shrieking about censorship and fascism the manga community is very hesitant to address the issue directly. Even the term used, Loli, Lolicon and it's variants have always been a sugar coated way of refering to pornography that depicts minors, sometimes horendously young minors, engaging in sexual activity.

One thing I can agree on though is that 20 year is insane. My girlfriend pointed out that people get less for actually raping someone. Madness.

ANN member Vashfanatic is a bastion of common sense in a sea of idiocy. While everyone around him is shrieking about freedom of speech he says the following.

There are two equally bad ideas at work here coming from both sides of the issue. The first is that if you read something with violence, rape, etc. you're more likely to go out and actually do it. If that were the case, given the kind of violent material I read and watch, I'd have a large body count to my name. Sometimes this stuff is the escape valve you need for inappropriate feelings.

The other flaw is that somehow depiction of children being raped is perfectly all right so long as it's just illustrations. While I don't think that Mr. Horn is likely to go out and be a child predator simply as a result of reading it, there's an issue here of what he's using it for. Is it for the storyline? Or is he whacking off? To me, that's what defined porn, not "obscenity."

The problem, of course, is that the government can't determine what he's using it for, whether it effects his views on children, or any of the complex inner workings of the human mind. Hence fairly legislating the issue is nigh impossible. Obscenity and pornography laws are notoriously vague, functioning on the "I know it when I see it" principle (and perhaps most of us do know when we see it, but it makes for bad law). At the same time, more specific rules about depiction of genitalia and pubic hair (as they have in Japan) can be just as ridiculous as artists find loopholes to get around them.

From scanning, i get the idea you don't like hentai invloving children. THere is this one hentai video i watch from time to time where some girls (who i think are not the 18) are being raped by a large part woman part spider thing on a web. I guess you think this is also wrong, well, perosnally, i enjoy it.

Nothign hould be censored, ever, and no one was harmed so it's all good.

 

[DarkRyter]

No matter how disgusting that hentai may be, isn't twenty years is a bit much?

 

[Aardvark]

The underlying rationale for this is, "If he gets off on drawings of children getting raped, he'll go out and look for the real thing". So it's a preventative punishment that borders on the wrong side of unconstitutional. You're taking someone that, while showing clear signs of deviant behavior, hasn't actually harmed any children and probably has never even thought of it before. Gaol for 20 years is going to destroy an otherwise harmless citizen. Hell, even gaol for one would do it. It solves nothing, it makes nobody safer, but it does allow neglectful parents sleep a little better at night while the actual paedophiles are busy molesting their children.

 

[electric discordian]

Wow another knee jerk reaction from a bunch of stupid people, it's not child porn not even slightly. They are pictures, I would if I were a judge ask to meet the parents of the children involved, if the prosecution can't then the case is to be thrown out.

This would have one of two outcomes, one they realise that fictional art doesn't have parents or if the prosecuter is a smart arse they get the artist in the court discussing how he wishes to press charges


Stupidity in action yet again

 

[The Wooster]

From scanning, i get the idea you don't like hentai invloving children. THere is this one hentai video i watch from time to time where some girls (who i think are not the 18) are being raped by a large part woman part spider thing on a web. I guess you think this is also wrong, well, perosnally, i enjoy it.

Nothign hould be censored, ever, and no one was harmed so it's all good.

Well 'from scanning' you missed the point. Try reading.

And actually the main argument against such products isn't that they cause people to become slobbering pedo monsters. Every idiot knows that isn't true. The argument is that they normalize illegal behavior and help build a community based around said behaviors.

 

[ffxfriek]

Anyone else find this ridiculous, ITS A DRAWING!

and guess what - the only difference between you and the material above is the level of detail and price

wow....id say it depends on the age but hentai is also very...weird though 20 years? give him maybe 50 hours community service....wow... im surprised video games arent in this to blame as well

 

[Rankao]

Fox News was talking about the case in Australia. They mention a case close to the Simpson case in Australia that went to the supreme court and it was ruled that artistic images does not equal to child pornography. Of course fox people were not happy about that ruling and... well no one cares what Fox thinks. The point is that he can pop the case up to a Federal level and basically get whatever sentence repealed.

Note:Also, I can rob a bank and not get 20 years in Prison.

 

[The Wooster]

Fox News was talking about the case in Australia. They mention a case close to the Simpson case in Australia that went to the supreme court and it was ruled that artistic images does not equal to child pornography. Of course fox people were not happy about that ruling and... well no one cares what Fox thinks. The point is that he can pop the case up to a Federal level and basically get whatever sentence repealed.

Hold on. How are the American and Australian legal systems connected?

 

[KendayTheAbsolute]

i accept you for who you are... freak!

 

[flamehead6544]

Is it just me, or are we discussing art? Lines and squiggles and the like. I don't care how much detail you put into it, if it's a two dimensional drawing on a piece of paper, then why can't the artist claim the characters are all over twenty-seven, well off, and just look like twelve year old's. And if in the manga itself the characters discuss being twelve and sexually active, why does that mean they have to *be* twelve? They can't just be acting like twelve year olds? It's not like they have a birthday. We haven't watched them grow up. They're pictures for God's sake. Leave it at that.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Is it just me, or are we discussing art? Lines and squiggles and the like. I don't care how much detail you put into it, if it's a two dimensional drawing on a piece of paper, then why can't the artist claim the characters are all over twenty-seven, well off, and just look like twelve year old's. And if in the manga itself the characters discuss being twelve and sexually active, why does that mean they have to *be* twelve? They can't just be acting like twelve year olds? It's not like they have a birthday. We haven't watched them grow up. They're pictures for God's sake. Leave it at that.

As I pointed out previously, it's about Enforced Morality, Control and Fear, it has very little if nothing to do with the actual material.

 

[Rankao]

Fox News was talking about the case in Australia. They mention a case close to the Simpson case in Australia that went to the supreme court and it was ruled that artistic images does not equal to child pornography. Of course fox people were not happy about that ruling and... well no one cares what Fox thinks. The point is that he can pop the case up to a Federal level and basically get whatever sentence repealed.

Hold on. How are the American and Australian legal systems connected?

Fox was commenting on it (the Simpson's Porn Case) . There was a trail in the United States Similar situation. the U.S. Supreme Court said that it was not child pornography. Fox was pissed that our system wasn't more like the Australian system. The trail for the case in this post is in Iowa so thats why i mentioned that.

 

[flamehead6544]

Is it just me, or are we discussing art? Lines and squiggles and the like. I don't care how much detail you put into it, if it's a two dimensional drawing on a piece of paper, then why can't the artist claim the characters are all over twenty-seven, well off, and just look like twelve year old's. And if in the manga itself the characters discuss being twelve and sexually active, why does that mean they have to *be* twelve? They can't just be acting like twelve year olds? It's not like they have a birthday. We haven't watched them grow up. They're pictures for God's sake. Leave it at that.

As I pointed out previously, it's about Enforced Morality, Control and Fear, it has very little if nothing to do with the actual material.

If it had little or nothing to do with the material, then how are they building a case to lock a man away for twenty years?

(Edit: Sorry if I sound a little childish, but I really do want to know what the grounds for this case can be.)

 

[Lunar Shadow]

On one hand, hentai never hurt anyone, just like a Picasso never hurt anyone.
On the other hand, you have to wonder about the person who purchases such...things.
If a man is willing to purchase a comic book about children fornicating, what else is he going to do? I'm not saying he's going to go out and rape a child, but what's to stop him from purchasing real child pornography, and eventually becoming a sexual predator?
Child pornography is just, sick. It doesn't really matter that it's just a drawing, it's the fact that one guy has the capacity to imagine someone defiling a naked child. I've said it before, and my high school Japanese teacher agreed: The Japs, are fucking nuts.

Really, when your that sexually repressed (the Japanese) strange shit is usually brought forth.