ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 1755
Jan 7 15 9:24 AM
Japan is like democratic country and actually - it's in the alliance of democratic nations. However, it's slightly different from that of USA or UK. It is more like totalitarianism”.
So Hide, when he/she said that "everyone knows that child abuse is not a good thing but having that kind of emotion is (free,) enjoying imagining some sexual situation with a child is not prohibited." … ( or not subject to) … censorship or control by a ruler, government, or other authority enjoying civil liberties.
Posts: 17935
Jan 7 15 3:04 PM
Custodian of Castle Anthrax
Molly say:So keep fightin' for freedom and justice, beloveds, but don't you forget to have fun doin' it. Lord, let your laughter ring forth. Be outrageous, ridicule the fraidy-cats, rejoice in all the oddities that freedom can produce. And when you get through kickin' ass and celebratin' the sheer joy of a good fight, be sure to tell those who come after how much fun it was.
Posts: 8931
Jan 7 15 3:30 PM
Sceptical Observer
Posts: 19088
Jan 7 15 5:33 PM
Proprietor
As far as I'm aware, anime and manga never really took off in the west for whatever reason.
Jan 7 15 6:44 PM
As far as I'm aware, anime and manga never really took off in the west for whatever reason but in Japan there are millions who buy it and, by inference, enjoy looking at fantasy children being abused - sometimes violently or horrifyingly, but always sexually.
Jan 8 15 6:05 AM
Jan 8 15 6:16 AM
I agree that thought is impossible to police and am not convinced that we should even try. It's the distribution of material that depicts child abuse and child rape that I am talking about. As far as I'm aware, anime and manga never really took off in the west for whatever reason but in Japan there are
It's not so long ago that a raging debate was going on about whether images of
Jan 8 15 6:24 AM
Macaroo wrote: As far as I'm aware, anime and manga never really took off in the west for whatever reason. I'm guessing it's for the same reason eating live lobsters (and other animals) seems to remain a cultural icon in the east. We sometimes don't seem to actually grasp the same references. I could be getting the wrong message, but it seems to me that sexual matters in Asia are not segregated by age. We find that objectionable, but many Asian cultures don't. In my culture, sex is a matter of negotiation between consenting adults. It appears that's not always the case in other cultures. Frankly, I tend to be absolutely horrified by that.
Jan 8 15 1:30 PM
I believe some US States resisted the raising of the age of consent to what it is today, in line with other countries.
Hawaii The age of consent in Hawaii is 16. There is however a close-in-age exemption, which allows those aged 14 and 15 to consent to sex with those less than five years older.[4] For more on age of consent in Hawaii and the territories in the Pacific Ocean, see: Ages of consent in Oceania#United StatesPreviously the age of consent was 14, making it the lowest age of consent in the United States. Avery Chumbley, a member of the Hawaiian Senate, had made efforts to raise the age of consent.[69] The age of consent was changed to 16 by Act 1, House Bill 236, passed by the Legislature of Hawaii in 2001.[70]
The age of consent in Hawaii is 16. There is however a close-in-age exemption, which allows those aged 14 and 15 to consent to sex with those less than five years older.[4]
Previously the age of consent was 14, making it the lowest age of consent in the United States. Avery Chumbley, a member of the Hawaiian Senate, had made efforts to raise the age of consent.[69] The age of consent was changed to 16 by Act 1, House Bill 236, passed by the Legislature of Hawaii in 2001.[70]
I don't really see the connection between depictions of child abuse, rape, mutilation and murder mystery or broken marriage drama though.
Background In 1922, after several risqué films and a series of off-screen scandals involving Hollywood stars, the studios enlisted Presbyterian elder Will H. Hays to rehabilitate Hollywood's image. Hollywood in the 1920s was badgered by a number of widespread scandals, such as the murder of William Desmond Taylor and alleged rape of Virginia Rappe by popular movie star Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle, which brought widespread condemnation from religious, civic, and political organizations. Many felt the movie industry had always been morally questionable.[3] Political pressure was increasing, with legislators in 37 states introducing almost one hundred movie censorship bills in 1921. Hays was paid the then-lavish sum of $100,000 a year.[4][5][6] Hays, Postmaster General under Warren G. Harding and former head of the Republican National Committee,[7] served for 25 years as president of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA), where he "defended the industry from attacks, recited soothing nostrums, and negotiated treaties to cease hostilities."[4]
In 1922, after several risqué films and a series of off-screen scandals involving Hollywood stars, the studios enlisted Presbyterian elder Will H. Hays to rehabilitate Hollywood's image. Hollywood in the 1920s was badgered by a number of widespread scandals, such as the murder of William Desmond Taylor and alleged rape of Virginia Rappe by popular movie star Roscoe "Fatty" Arbuckle, which brought widespread condemnation from religious, civic, and political organizations. Many felt the movie industry had always been morally questionable.[3] Political pressure was increasing, with legislators in 37 states introducing almost one hundred movie censorship bills in 1921. Hays was paid the then-lavish sum of $100,000 a year.[4][5][6] Hays, Postmaster General under Warren G. Harding and former head of the Republican National Committee,[7] served for 25 years as president of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA), where he "defended the industry from attacks, recited soothing nostrums, and negotiated treaties to cease hostilities."[4]
The Code enumerated a number of key points known as the "Don'ts" and "Be Carefuls":[19]
Resolved, That those things which are included in the following list shall not appear in pictures produced by the members of this Association, irrespective of the manner in which they are treated: Pointed profanity – by either title or lip – this includes the words "God," "Lord," "Jesus," "Christ" (unless they be used reverently in connection with proper religious ceremonies), "hell," "damn," "Gawd," and every other profane and vulgar expression however it may be spelled;Any licentious or suggestive nudity – in fact or in silhouette; and any lecherous or licentious notice thereof by other characters in the picture;The illegal traffic in drugs;Any inference of sex perversion;White slavery;Miscegenation (sex relationships between the white and black races);Sex hygiene and venereal diseases;Scenes of actual childbirth – in fact or in silhouette;Children's sex organs;Ridicule of the clergy;Willful offense to any nation, race or creed;And be it further resolved, That special care be exercised in the manner in which the following subjects are treated, to the end that vulgarity and suggestiveness may be eliminated and that good taste may be emphasized: The use of the flag;International relations (avoiding picturizing in an unfavorable light another country's religion, history, institutions, prominent people, and citizenry);Arson;The use of firearms;Theft, robbery, safe-cracking, and dynamiting of trains, mines, buildings, etc. (having in mind the effect which a too-detailed description of these may have upon the moron);Brutality and possible gruesomeness;Technique of committing murder by whatever method;Methods of smuggling;Third-degree methods;Actual hangings or electrocutions as legal punishment for crime;Sympathy for criminals;Attitude toward public characters and institutions;Sedition;Apparent cruelty to children and animals;Branding of people or animals;The sale of women, or of a woman selling her virtue;Rape or attempted rape;First-night scenes;Man and woman in bed together;Deliberate seduction of girls;The institution of marriage;Surgical operations;The use of drugs;Titles or scenes having to do with law enforcement or law-enforcing officers;Excessive or lustful kissing, particularly when one character or the other is a "heavy".
Resolved, That those things which are included in the following list shall not appear in pictures produced by the members of this Association, irrespective of the manner in which they are treated:
And be it further resolved, That special care be exercised in the manner in which the following subjects are treated, to the end that vulgarity and suggestiveness may be eliminated and that good taste may be emphasized:
Jan 8 15 4:57 PM
Posts: 1133
Jan 8 15 7:04 PM
Ich geh' in Flammen auf....
Jan 9 15 7:01 AM
I read somewhere that no matter what the movies subject or genre, there are only 6 basic plots and all movies, books and drama are variations or combinations of those 6. In the case of this stuff, there is only one = kid gets raped, viewer gets off. Sorry, I sound biased in this case but the more I think about what it actually is, the more angry I feel about it and the fact that this has been ignored for so long.
Theft, robbery, safe-cracking, and dynamiting of trains, mines, buildings, etc. (having in mind the effect which a too-detailed description of these may have upon the moron);
Jan 9 15 9:11 AM
JohnSA wrote:. . . Druid, I have absolutely no idea what you are getting at. Either jump in and make some points or dry up and blow away.
I suppose it is best I refrain from the emoticons until I get a better internet connection or computer figured as inputs are sane when tested and reviewed show in some ridiculous fashion after I post….???
“Jump in and make some points or dry up and blow away.”
But Okay! I guess, if you are too dense to grasp subtle points John IS What right do we assume to have to assert any kind of ban on some other country other than our own. There are many child and porn laws that controls that kind of comic here as I assume it is in the UK???
One other point is made for me at http://www.icmec.org/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_X1&PageId=2338 where it is pointed out that “A new study of child pornography laws in 184 Interpol member countries around the world has produced alarming results: more than half of these countries (95) have no laws addressing child pornography and in many other countries, the existing laws are inadequate.” Seems to me this thread is suggesting we should become global policemen.
I was just wondering what you personally think about bans that censor individual freedoms or perhaps you have something else in mind?
All better?
Jan 9 15 12:14 PM
But Okay! I guess, if you are too dense to grasp subtle points John
What right do we assume to have to assert any kind of ban on some other country other than our own.
However, I do wish to make it clear that I am not saying "if we ban that, then all else will be banned", I am saying that if we ban it, then we need to make sure there is a clear reason, and show that this in fact is causing the abuse, rather than merely reflecting a rather poor ideal of a society.
Anyone caught with drawings or computer-generated images of child sexual abuse will face up to three years in prison under new Government proposals that have been announced. Ministers want to make owning the material illegal to close a loophole which allows paedophiles to dodge justice by turning real photographs or videos of abuse into drawings or cartoons. Justice minister Maria Eagle said the move was not intended to curb creativity or freedom of expression but to tackle images which had "no place in society". http://www.standard.co.uk/news/cartoonstyle-child-sex-abuse-images-banned-as-mps-close-paedophile-loophole-6816284.html
Jan 9 15 12:42 PM
"This is not about criminalising art or pornographic cartoons more generally, but about targeting obscene, and often very realistic, images of child sexual abuse which have no place in our society." Selling or distributing such material is already illegal under the Obscene Publications Act, but owning drawings or computer generated images of child abuse is currently not an offence.
What is a Child avatar? Quite simply, a child avatar is any avatar that attempts to present as a youth. This is not limited to humans, and can include furries (referred to in this instance as "cubs" or "babyfur"), neko, vampires, and other avatar selections. Some doll avatars might also fit in this category. This does not necessarily include fairies (which may be child-like in appearance, as well as smaller than the average avatar), tinies (although human baby-shaped tinies do exist), or those wearing gothic lolita and/or cosplay fashions and styles. ..... Child avatars are allowed within Second Life.[1] A child avatar, even within a mature or adult region (but not participating in adult (in this case, sexual) ) activities is allowed. A child avatar is allowed do everything any other avatar is, with the following exceptions: Child avatars in sexual situations (sexual congress obviously, though it is unclear beyond this) are not allowed and abuse reportable (ARable). Public promotion (classified listing, profile, etc.) of sexual situations with child avatars is not allowed and ARable. [added by me: an AR is an "Abuse Report"] Creating areas for the purpose of sexual ageplay is not allowed and is ARable. This includes having items with sexual content (sexual poseballs or equipment) in proximity to items traditionally associated with children (swingsets, etc.) Indicating that the *real age* of a child avatar (as opposed to a stated SL/role playing age) is below main grid age is not allowed and ARable. Child avatar nudity has been called into question as well. While no language specific to nudity was included in the initial policies, child avatar nudity of the genital or chest regions, including in otherwise non-sexual situations (skin vendors, for example) can be a violation. This also applies to parcel descriptions: nudity or "clothing optional" language can not be included in a parcel description on a kid-specific area. Note that child avatars are allowed on PG, Mature, and even Adult public parcels, provided with the latter that they are adult verified. Note that this does not necessarily apply to private parcels where one has the option to eject or ban as desired. The allowance of child avatars on adult rated land such as Zindra does not invalidate any of the above rules. As with all things, context is key, and err on the side of caution. http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Child_Avatar
Jan 9 15 1:01 PM
Jan 9 15 1:09 PM
However, I do wish to make it clear that I am not saying "if we ban that, then all else will be banned", I am saying that if we ban it, then we need to make sure there is a clear reason, and show that this in fact is causing the abuse, rather than merely reflecting a rather poor ideal of a society. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't depictions of child porn - even in pixel or cartoon form already banned? I believe it is, at least in California, since there was a big argument on SL (which is based there) about whether to ban it. The decision was made by them, I believe, by the courts who banned it. I also believe it is already banned in the UK, I'll have to check that, it may be done on an ad hoc basis. I know there were certainly moves within Parliament to do so.
Plot Miss Carol (Diana Durrell) is an idealistic teacher in a remote one-room schoolhouse. A native of the Ozarks herself, she is determined to stop the practice of child marriage, in which older men marry teen or preteen girls. Her campaign raises the ire of some local men, led by Jake Bolby (Warner Richmond), who one night drag her into the woods, tie her to a tree with the intention of tarring and feathering her. Before they can do this, however, Angelo the dwarf (Angelo Rossitto) and Mr. Colton (George Humphreys) arrive with a shotgun to save the day. Following this, Jake Bolby comes across young Jennie Colton (Shirley Mills) swimming naked. When her father dies, Bolby decides to take advantage of the opportunity to blackmail her mother into letting him marry the girl, threatening that otherwise he will see her hanged for murder. After he "courts" Jennie by giving her a doll, the two are married. It later turns out that this ceremony was illegal, as child marriage had been banned several days prior, but this point quickly becomes moot. Before Bolby can consummate the union, he is gunned down by Angelo. Jennie leaves his house with Freddie Nulty (Bob Bollinger).Cast notes: This was Shirley Mills' first role and she would later appear in The Grapes of Wrath in 1939. She would go on to appear in many films over the next decade, mostly in supporting roles. She quit acting in her twenties to become a singer.This was Bob Bollinger's only film role. According to Mills' website, now offline, the two young actors became friends, and Bollinger later asked her to marry him, which she declined.Angelo Rossitto had a long career in movies, stretching from the 1920s to the 1990s. He is perhaps best known for his role as Master in Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome (1985). The reason he was billed as "Don Barrett" in this film is unknown.[4]Along with Mills and Rossitto, Warner Richmond was one of the few actors involved in this film who had any sort of film career. He appeared in over 140 films between 1912 and 1946, including the Gene Autry serial The Phantom Empire (1935).
Miss Carol (Diana Durrell) is an idealistic teacher in a remote one-room schoolhouse. A native of the Ozarks herself, she is determined to stop the practice of child marriage, in which older men marry teen or preteen girls. Her campaign raises the ire of some local men, led by Jake Bolby (Warner Richmond), who one night drag her into the woods, tie her to a tree with the intention of tarring and feathering her. Before they can do this, however, Angelo the dwarf (Angelo Rossitto) and Mr. Colton (George Humphreys) arrive with a shotgun to save the day.
Following this, Jake Bolby comes across young Jennie Colton (Shirley Mills) swimming naked. When her father dies, Bolby decides to take advantage of the opportunity to blackmail her mother into letting him marry the girl, threatening that otherwise he will see her hanged for murder. After he "courts" Jennie by giving her a doll, the two are married. It later turns out that this ceremony was illegal, as child marriage had been banned several days prior, but this point quickly becomes moot. Before Bolby can consummate the union, he is gunned down by Angelo. Jennie leaves his house with Freddie Nulty (Bob Bollinger).
Cast notes:
Jan 9 15 1:35 PM
Marching into another’s beliefs lead by some religion’s symbol offends me too.
Jan 9 15 1:38 PM
In fact that was the basis for the Movie "Child Bride" which skirted the Hays Office for many years, because they made it as an 'Educational Movie'; about on the same order as "Fox News: fair and Balanced". It had several scenes in which the actress who was 12 years old, was seen in the nude, including an upper, frontal nudity with nipples.
Jan 9 15 3:13 PM
It is just that I thought you just wanted to discuss what the BBC had in mind and while I understand that it gets complicated and is in need of some endeavors to complete, the BBC seems to have a narrow viewpoint… but whatever…
… “I agree and pointed it out as an option in the opening post. Maybe we should just butt out of it politically, but it doesn't mean we can't discuss it.” We can John. So your idea that … any graphical depiction, real or virtual, of children should not include gratuitous violence, abuse or sex. With your suggestion that you “personally think that one person's "individual freedom" ends when it breaks the law.” Okay, I disagree if we are discussing “Individual freedoms” but must add that it is when they actually break the law and are convicted by a court of some criminal act.
Just thinking about restricting such pornographic thought infringes on lunatic scenarios in my mind that takes away the individual freedom afforded to our country’s citizen.
When you say “As pointed out above, at least in the West, depictions of the kind we are discussing are already banned here. As well as it being illegal, I also find it offensive (though that is not sufficient reason for me to want something banned).”
There is a subtle thought mixed in there that has a cryptic value attached …
It suggest to me that you favor banning even some comic’s insinuation are against some law that prohibits the kind of sarcasms shown by the Paris events of the last two days of which you refer to with: “We've seen in the last couple of days attacks upon free speech in France and are likely to see more such attacks. So I'm not advocating banning anything that is not already banned here, just discussing whether countries that allow it should be encouraged to follow suit.”
And I thought the BBC mag. was only concerned with how Japan was in acceptance of the cartoons… and “Why is it banned here if it is only a matter of "taste" or "individual freedoms"?
I stated, using my one great point that, that was because Japan is a democracy but with only one major party. It’s the liberal way or the highway over there. To me Japan is more or less a social Nation because of that one dominating party.
Unlike the USA and the UK where conservatism verses liberalism reigns supreme and where moderates are supposed to emerge, notice I said was supposed to do so, Japan falls under mostly a one man rule of one extreme or the other in my opinion. In the USA we have two party that usually act like only one with subtle differences. I say usually it is hard to distinguish one from the other, other than the conservative/liberalisms features.
Share This
The Out Campaign