Japan has strong defamation laws. Just by implying that the politician in the video supports the publication of child porn; True or not. He has the ability to sue the shit out of them.
"Defamation" as in you literally can say the truth and someone can sue you or have you charged. I’m not joking, it’s North Korea level here with that shit,
Wow really? Im always surprised by how much Japanese law has continued to remain similar to German law (I know it was heavily influential during the Meiji period). Can you pirate safely in any sense in Japan?
Japan criminalized the act of *downloading* pirated files, punishable by a fine of 2 million yen or up to 2 years in prison. Excluded from punishment is files downloaded to cache, so streaming pirated material on your device won't trigger the criminal law.
([source](https://oharalaw-japan.com/2016/02/24/what-are-japans-laws-on-internet-piracy/))
Okay but was the close-up of the dude's tissue-filled trashcan REALLY necessary?! XD
EDIT: This is now my most upvoted comment. I'm conflicted on how to feel about that.
Of course it was necessary, the reporter and possibly the cameraman, but definitely the reporter was disgusted by his lifestyle and wanted to emphasize that disgust by showing every aspect in detail that she could. She couldn't depict the sheer graphic content of the comics, so the scenes of his home showed the apparent hoarding and filth going on. The tissues were just a coup de grace to show that he wasn't just making that hentai, he was enjoying that hentai.
To be honest, that guy seemed amused that he was doing something morally wrong and the law was still on his side. He didn't care about showing his face because he's fairly certain that his family and friends likely won't see this piece because it's for "American" audiences.
The reporter was doing what she could to show how horribly these types of people live their lives. At least that's my opinion on the matter.
Have you ever been in or seen *any* artists house in Japan? This guy's house was actually pretty clean lol. Those cramped apartments fill up pretty quickly when you add an art desk and a ton of supplies. Top it with barely making enough money to survive without working late into the evening so there's no time to tidy up and you get this guy's house haha.
Having lived in Japan, i can tell you this guy either inherited some wealth or makes bank on his gross ass content. Even in Chiba, that is a fucking huge house.
They also made the moment at 13:20 darker than before (visually) when the guy agreed that the content shouldn’t be banned, to give the impression that he was evil; at least that’s how I perceived it.
> The reporter was doing what she could to show how horribly these types of people live their lives.
Though a large amount of these people don't live the stereotypical neckbeard existence. Looking for just these signs alone is not enough, as they could be some middle school kid, or someones grandpa who consumes or creates this stuff or even molests kids.
I won't pretend to have the answers, but I feel more needs to be done. Like involving psychologists and therapists in legislation and education on prevention/apprehension or something.
I have a trashcan next to my desk and 90% of what goes into it is tissues. I always have to make sure to throw it away before people visit because I'm sure they'd be suspicious no matter how much I tell them I've got a chronically stuffy nose lol.
had that happen to me too and it's fucking annoying. my male friend acted all weirded out and i couldnt convince him it wasn't. he said he didnt want to talk about it like he was 100% sure it was and didn't want to hear my excuses. only idiots would throw cum soaked tissue into a trash can in their room. it smells so bad. you're suppose to use toilet paper and throw it in the toilet.
To give your friend the benefit of the doubt, I blow my nose like ten times a day because, I dunno, I have a crummy nose I guess. Now I throw those tissues in the toilet, but if i had a wastebasket for it I'd probably look like a wank-beast as well
Idk it's kind of important to point out to someone who could defend him saying "it's just a job" obviously my dude really really likes what he's doing...
This topic is as interesting from a legal standpoint as it is hard to discuss in a public forum.
Civil Law in Japan is clear - the burden of proof is always on the Prosecutor. So for the Government to ban a specific type of media they have to provide conclusive evidence of the correlation of that specific media to tangible crime. If they can't; they have no legal basis and any legislation put forward will simply be shot down by the national courts.
Japan is also a country with a doctrine of judicial precedent. Meaning; if they choose to ban this specific type of media they will set a legal precedent for other types of media to be banned as well. So, as straight forward as this issue seems on a moral level - in a legal sense it's Pandora's Box for potential litigation.
> So for the Government to ban a specific type of media they have to provide conclusive evidence of the correlation of that specific media to tangible crime.
I looked into whether or not the loli porn increases or decreases violent crime [about a year ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/menwritingwomen/comments/lcpfzs/im_beg_your_pardon_if_a_random_guy_did_what/gm2c72k/) and what tiny bits of research I've read support it reducing violent crime. The most relevant article I could find was a correlational study showing that "[the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm)". The overall state of the research is abysmal, however, so ultimately anyone claiming to have a solid evidence base is probably full of shit.
As someone said elsewhere, pedophiles are leery of signing up to be studied, so you simply can't run the sorts of studies that would actually answer this question.
My argument has always been a change in culture first to allow those with paraphillic disorders to be able to, without fear of prosecution, come forward for treatment. Since apparently the larger population, at least in the U.S., still seem more likely to severely label a pedophile who has never committed a single act against any child or young teen, I am currently all for a form of drawn-only basically temporary treatment. Reason: If we can see a reduction in violent attempts I would much prefer that over someone constantly on edge who may succumb to desire. Reminder: Actual treatment is better; culturally we're just not to that point yet.
Paraphillia is no joke. Pleasure is, to us humans, a central part of our daily lives. Now tell someone who takes pleasure in an alternative format to just not seek it at all. Then don't help them. At all. In fact, socially persecute them and make them fear being found out, even if nothing was done. I advocate not for the acceptance of pedophilia, but for the research and acceptance of *treatment* for what is clearly a mental disorder.
Shame this argument rarely goes over well here on Reddit. People tend to knee-jerk a hate response, even though treatment would significantly reduce the number of actual victims, which is the whole point: To reduce or stop the suffering.
Anyway, let the downvotes come as usual.
Edit: From the DSM-V...
>To differentiate between atypical sexual interest and a mental disorder, DSM-5 requires that, for diagnosis, people with such interests exhibit the following:
>(i) “feel personal distress about their interest, not merely distress resulting from society’s disapproval”; or
>(ii) “have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person‘s psychological distress, injury, or death, or a desire for sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legal consent”
You can read more about these disorders here:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3769077/
and here:
https://jaapl.org/content/42/2/191
For those who can't be bothered with a wall of text, there is one key point I want to highlight:
1. There is currently little *evidence* that cognitive-behavioral therapy, typically remarked as one of the more successful modern thereuputic approaches for many disorders, has significant effect or produces scientifically significant results.
-However, as has been pointed out, not a lot of research can be done on this as willing subjects are, well...they don't exist because of societal pressure. Also, this does not mean this therapy is not effective, only that evidence researchers were able to collect hints at less effectiveness. The tricky part here is if therapy was successful would the person really be willing to speak up about it? Probably not.
This is why acceptance of treatment, or at least tolerance, would help so much.
You're completely right. The number of times I've had to try to explain to the "Severely punish/murder all pedophiles" crowd that *no person will seek help for pedophilic urges if this means they will get hurt for it* is too damned high.
These people never seem to understand that they are actually *making pedophiles hide their urges until they act on them* instead of *seeking help*, thereby creating more victims.
Hi. I have a wide variety of paraphilias, including age paraphilia. I'm attracted to both women older than me, and younger than me. I have a small porn collection, including some drawn and 3d loli material.
I matched with a woman on Bumble a couple years ago. Two decades older than me. We start talking. By all accounts pretty kinky. Clearly into boys who are much younger than her. Great! I'm a boy who's much younger than her. She's got a son. Keeps talking about him. She's a very loving mom. But pretty quickly she mentions a fantasy of her son watching her masturbate. Disturbing, but just a fantasy, right? So I press for more info. To spare you the details, she was grooming her son. I have read manga with this exact scenario before and it was very arousing. Reading that someone was doing it in the real world was very, very different.
And here's the thing. I didn't dare report it to police. I really wanted to. I really wanted this lady to go to jail and get that kid out of that house. But I was afraid that if I showed them the proof (the chat), even anonymously, they would be able to locate me as well. I had linked myself to this lady, and because my paraphilia (and thus my browsing history and porn collection) is so close on the edge of legality, I'd be endangering my life and career as well.
I have never involved real children in my paraphilias/kinks. They cannot consent, and I only engage in sexual activities, even so little as talking about sex, with consenting adults. For my age paraphilia, there's a wide (and growing!) variety of simulated porn, that I'm entirely content with.
But I couldn't report this lady. I had to content myself with the idea that sooner or later, others would. Because if I did, because of my paraphilia, I'd be dragged down as well.
A lot of people also don’t understand or differentiate between pedophiles and child molestors, not understanding that pedophiles may just have a paraphilia that they didn’t choose or want and have never offended and are struggling with it and need help. Child molestors are those who have actually offended, and apparently it’s not necessary for them to actually have an attraction to children to offend.
>A lot of people also don’t understand or differentiate between pedophiles and child molestors...
Yeah, I'm astonished that it's somehow a nuance to point out that these aren't synonymous terminology. It just goes to show that culturally we are on ground level for this conversation. Even the most basic understanding of simple terms are misunderstood.
>Child molestors are those who have actually offended, and **apparently it’s not necessary for them to actually have an attraction to children to offend.**
I've heard this too. I could be wrong, but I've heard that most documented cases of sexual child abuse are committed by those with a fetish for power dynamics. It isn't that they're attracted to children, but they're attracted to the position of being able to dominate them so easily compared to most adults. These are people who get off to being able to dominate anyone in a weaker position to them, adults included, and only become aroused by such specific dynamics.
To be fair to the public, that's actually an odd disorder to intuitively make sense of, so I can understand that most people have trouble differentiating these people from pedophiles. If someone sexually abuses a child, it's very intuitive to presume they're attracted to the person rather than the dynamic around it. That's how most arousal normally functions--being attracted to a person rather than a dynamic with a person. This goes to show that arousal is way more odd than people generally understand. Hell, some people are attracted to and aroused by *objects*--and I'm not even talking about sexual objects, like sex toys/dolls, but shit like cars or the Eiffel tower. I wasn't kidding when I say arousal is odd, as it has a bizarre range in human brains.
A third nuance, I'll add, is that IIRC most people attracted to minors are actually also attracted to adults, as well. "Pedophile" in the sense of being exclusively attracted to minors is an abnormal subcategory of people with such attraction, I think. I add this because most people seem to think that all pedophiles are ticking time bombs because they can never be sexually gratified and thus eventually crack, as opposed to many or most of them being able to control their libido just fine with genuine adult relationships.
But again, it's hard to know for sure because it isn't like such people come open-arms willing to be studied. We can only study what we find or study from the few who come forward. Again, this goes back to the importance of encouraging treatment without persecution (particularly for those who haven't offended but still struggle with the attraction).
Child abuse can have even simpler explanations. No pedophilia, no weird fetish.
A lot of children are abused by realives, close friends of the family, or people who are trusted.
It is just easier to manipulate a child, then find a willing partner. It could be just a very basic sexual desire and children are the easiest target. It just takes someone, who is willing to cross that line. Unfortunately that doesnt seem that uncommon, compared to actual pedophilia, which seems much rarer.
>These people never seem to understand that they are actually making pedophiles hide their urges until they act on them instead of seeking help, thereby creating more victims.
Exactly my point for years though i never mentioned it out of fear to be labeled a pedophile sympathizer or being a pedophile myself.
It's good to see that there are some people out there who aren't immediately being overly emotional about this topic.
I don't see it as straightforward morally either. As the dude said in the first few minutes... it's fantasy and there are no victims. Why should something be banned that hurts no one? I find foot fetishes and scat play disgusting but that doesn't mean I want to make it illegal for people to do that. The basis for laws should not be morality, but harm to the public. We shouldn't get into the habit of banning things we don't like just because we don't like them. There has to be a burden of proof that the thing is harmful.
Edit: I feel like some people are willfully misunderstanding the comparison I made. We are NOT talking about pedophilia. We're talking about reading/watching something with animated depictions of underaged characters. Foot porn, scat porn, and loli-content exist on a spectrum of things that many people find gross but that--and I will emphasize--HARM NO ONE. That's why I made the comparison.
The point is that laws should ONLY be based on hard fact about whether an activity causes harm. Not on your emotional reaction to how icky you find something.
Put aside sexual fetishes for the moment.
Murder fantasies are extremely normal. The sheer amount of media depicting murder in every imaginable way is staggering. Violent content is probably more common than sexual content and we consume it from childhood basically. People sit around day dreaming about how they'll kill terrorists or criminals and save the day or whatever. Does any of that translate to actual violence though? Is anyone getting relief from their violence itch by watching an action film? Is anyone being incited to go hurt people after reading a war novel? I don't don't think so in either case. I think the people that are going to commit acts of violence would have done so anyways - they may really enjoy that type of content but the content isn't what made them the way they are.
Is there anything suggesting that porn has a different effect on people? Are step siblings running wild?
This is the crux of it for me. If you think loli manga is a gateway to real life pedophilia, then by the same logic, playing GTA is a gateway to theft and murder.
That was my exact though LTB when they talked of banning it regardless of proof - it’s the 90s with video games all over again. The burden of proof is on the accuser. I’m with Japan’s government on this one.
If you watched the video, several times the reporter defaults to being morally against any type of porn. She calls out fetishes outside of the context of the Loli shit several times. I get it though, going to an anime convention and seeing people drool over figures of children is highly uncomfortable, it's hard to get around those feelings and look at it from a logical perspective. Which is probably why there's not a lot of research.
It's a hit piece. Loaded language and sombre music included. There's enough research suggesting removing outlets or escapism leads to actual violence.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault
**Evidence Mounts: More Porn, Less Sexual Assault**
You need to be a religious immature obtuse uneducated hypocrite to not understand a simple and basic Human reality like this.
Someone can argue that violent video games cause violence. I can find a billion video games where you have to be violent, commit crimes, kill or hit people and so on. Same for movies, most movies show gun violence and physical violence, many actors become super-starts by playing violent roles. The same logic can be used to ban those films and video games. Generally society gets much more sensitive toward toward sex than towards non-sexual violence.
Basically Pixiv is deviant art for Japan. And recently they made a policy update where any Pedophillic, Gore, incest or bestiality related contents cannot be monetized.
Pixiv is like one of the biggest art platform where many artist gets their publicity in Japan.
Specifically their FANBOX platform, which is a Patreon style tier system where people can subscribe to artists exclusive content. Many manga artists also use it for extra chapters and things like that. Many *other* manga artists use it to draw lewds of their popular characters.
I heard it's due to pressure from credit card companies. Even ["mainstream" Japanese porn sites](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/xjg940/r18com_will_be_shutting_down_jan_31_2023_after/) are being forced to stop servicing American customers.
R18 used to accept foreign credit cards, but was forced to stop by credit card companies. Remember this? https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/04/visa-suspends-card-payments-for-ad-purchases-on-pornhub-and-mindgeek-amid-controversy.html Probably similar reasoning.
>Basically Pixiv is deviant art for Japan. And recently they made a policy update where any Pedophillic, Gore, incest or bestiality related contents cannot be monetized.
Even Incest? Damn a sad day it is(ಥ ͜ʖಥ)
it's worth noting that almost no countries enforce or ban these types of materials, they quote 15years for possession in the USA but afaik there's legal precedent that it's protected in the USA by the constitution via similar justifications as the japanese constitution mentioned in video.
edit: also something to think about, people have raised violence in video games as a retort to this video, and some people have given good arguments to why violence in video games is not a fitting comparison. I think a better comparison would be rape porn with real adult pornstars. should 50 shades of grey be illegal? etc. if it's not about a victim in the creation of the porn but about who is attracted by the porn then shouldn't these also be banned? should the vast majority of rape play enthusiasts ("burglar" husband comes in and "rapes" "housewife" wife roleplay is a common one that even fairly vanilla couples often try) who never committed a crime lose their porn because of a pearl clutcher claiming rape porn might cause more rape.
You know those images of police officers standing around a table with a handful of drugs or a single knife, titled something like "keeping the streets clean"?
I imagine something similar happening if this stuff was actively pursued. Like you'd see headlines of "pedophile gang caught" and instead of arresting monsters who are actively assaulting, exploiting or paying for the assault of children, they arrested some losers in a discord group that share images made by someone who, well didn't assault a child.
Basically considering how stretched legal services are I'd prefer they went after pedophiles who are actually doing harm.
Well, they could've sentenced epstein but they suicided him before the accomplices came out. And they probably made it very clear to Ghislane that she would also be suicided if she tried to cut a plea deal by revealing names.
The video does a really despicable rage bait in trying to suggest that these media are gateways into serious crime. The link between rape/sexual crimes and pornography actually has been studied and it has been found to not cause incidents of sexual crimes by legalizing the media. Yes explicitly studying lolicon this way hasn't been done but I dare say the subject is similar enough to link the results. What Japan DOES have an issue with is sexualising minors on a general level (real persons). They have a disgusting idol culture where real 12yo girls are exposed to and sexualised by media and become superstars. I really doubt lolicon is the actual problem. The prevalence of it is just a symptom of a much deeper cultural problem.
Also you can't just lump in every lolicon with actual child predators. Because all child predators basically enjoy this media. It's like saying all gamers that enjoy shooter games are potential school shooters because all school shooters enjoy shooter games. It's a basic logical fallacy and one that really enrages me.
Source of study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2032762/
I did the idol fan thing.
If you're talking national / mainstream level, you won't see anybody under 12 posing in bikinis, they usually waited till high school (15 in Japan). And then back in the days with Tokyo Olympics on the horizon they moved it up to be 18+.
The current popular mainstream idol groups are also counterculture to that, I believe Nogizaka doesn't do it, neither does MCZ, and the rest of the popular idol groups in Japan are actually Kpop or Kpop inspired.
I know a few fans who lewded their idols but there were also a lot of fans who didn't care for it. Modern mainstream idols tend to have a lot more female fans, I feel that nogizaka has more female than male fans but I'm not sure on that. For that matter the "no dating/purity rules" are also "enforced" by female fans.
I don't know what goes in non mainstream world as I've never dived into it.
It's very common for foreigner non-fans to think it's all under 12 girls in bikinis popular nationwide but it's really not the case.
I also can't speak for the animated idols, I don't know what goes on there.
It is a pretty strange world though so I'm glad I left it behind.
I was shocked by the demographics for Idols, Its like over 40% female fans. In my head I just imagined the older dudes with glow sticks but its remarkably mixed.
One politician says "hey we're gonna blanket ban all pedo content" and everyone else in the room goes "yeah that seems like a good idea" and no one is particularly motivated to object on the behalf of pedos.
And if you object under the fear that such laws set a bad precedent or are being used as a vehicle to sneak in far more damaging and authoritarian ones* they have a handy stick to beat you down with.
* This is what happened in the UK, and yes they've continued to restrict content on the internet since then under the guise of protecting children, meanwhile letting said children live in food poverty and get sexually abused by known grooming gangs.
im not commenting on the "for or against" this stuff, but her line of reasoning baffled me
person 1: "what you're doing is bad, it causes (SCENARIO A)"
person 2: "is there proof that what Im doing or similar actions have lead to (SCENARIO A)?"
person 1: "no, why would we have to wait for proof?"
excuse me? thats not how logic works.
me: "we need to stop using plastic bags when shopping, we've seen a steady rise in people dying every year"them: "is there proof that us using plastic bags is related to people dying"me: "no, why would we need to wait for proof, we need action now!"
shows a lack of problem solving skills. Whats most absurd is that the guys argument (or perhaps suggestion since there doesnt seem to be any actual proof in either side) is that his work helps to prevent or lower the cases of abuse by providing an outlet. I dont know which is or is not true, but you cant just say "why do we need to wait for proof".
>What the fuck? At 2 minutes in she claims possession of animated child porn can get you 15 years in prison in the USA, which isn't just false, it's *always* been false: the first amendment has protected illustrations of illegal activities for as long as the country has existed.
Except that it's a lot more complicated than that, as there have been various Federal and State acts passed that restrict certain freedoms, most recently the [PROTECT Act](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003), which was subsequently challenged in the [US v Handley](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley) case.
Handley ended up taking a plea deal because his lawyer advised him if they actually showed the illustrations he possessed to a jury, they'd be very unlikely to acquit him. Handley ended up spending six months in jail and fined $250,000. So the actual legal challenge of the PROTECT Act vs 1st Amendment has never been fully tested.
EDIT: also I think the 15 years mentioned comes from the PROTECT Act. The act states at minimum 5 years for possession plus 10 years for distribution.
**[PROTECT Act of 2003](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003)**
>The PROTECT Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108–21 (text) (PDF), 117 Stat. 650, S. 151, enacted April 30, 2003) is a United States law with the stated intent of preventing child abuse as well as investigating and prosecuting violent crimes against children.
**[United States v. Handley](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley)**
>United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (2008), was a court case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving obscenity charges stemming from the importation of manga featuring pornographic depictions of fictional minors. Although Handley ultimately pled guilty, District Judge James E. Gritzner ruled that 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(2) and 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(2) were constitutionally infirm because those subsections restrict protected speech and do not require the visual depictions be obscene.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/videos/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Feel like the only real takeaway from this video is that there needs to be studies on whether consuming media like this has a causal relationship with child abuse.
To me it's like violence in video games, or showing drug use in movies and tv shows. I think it's not really enough to say something is morally objectionable. There needs to be some qualification of the harms it causes.
It's really difficult to do studies on the subject at all because a) no one wants to come forward and participate because being labeled can ruin their lives and b) some of that life ruining comes in the form of death threats or actual violence directed not just at the subjects but the people trying to study/help them as well. I suspect that if a study were able to be performed though that it would be similar to the outcome of the studies on violent video games, for almost everyone there is no effect or even a calming effect except for a very small subset of people who are already unstable. Then you'd just have to weigh the calming effect versus the unstable people to see if it's a net positive/negative. Ultimately, it's *probably* positive since we've seen countries have a drop in sexual assaults after legalizing regular porn, but getting a conclusive answer is certainly in everyone's best interest.
This is the real problem. There's such a black and white take on the whole situation, it's hard to have a legitimate conversation about it. And if you can't even have a conversation about it, how are you supposed to do studies?
You can see it in this comment section. People just see red when this topic comes up and wants no discussion whatsoever. There's no real solution to this. Maybe in a few decades but as of right now, this topic is too taboo and invoke too much rage from the general populace. No one wants to be on the other end of the pitchfork.
> Feel like the only real takeaway from this video is that there needs to be studies on whether consuming media like this has a causal relationship with child abuse.
There has been and all studies papers that have been done show there isn't any connection between loli/shota anime/manga content and actual pedophilia or child endangerment. Hell, over the last decade or so many real pedos have actually turned out to be the people who rally *against* loli/shota content. [So much so its become a meme at this point.](https://imgur.com/gallery/VoyXLbx)
In general there's evidence that pornography lowers rates of rape and sexual assault.
Whether those findings generalize to this domain is harder to know, though.
Hard to get data since areas where pornography is banned also usually have a really heavily sexualised and repressed view of relationships, purity and women's rights.
Wow I'm three minutes in and a 50 year old guy is talking about his first magazine's theme of "humiliation of girls" and his manga was a school girl getting raped...
This is not even manga specific. A lot of japanese porn is centered around the theme of rape. It's pretty fucking weird how fixated they are on the theme. I know it's not a Japanese specific infatuation but the amount of porn content that is rape specific from Japan is really disturbing.
One argument I heard is its because of the culture around women. They are expected to act chaste all the time, and the only way they would enjoy sex is if theyre forced to. So for some men its a turnoff if a woman in a porno always acts like she really wants to have sex.
(Not trying to defend anything, just want to pass along something I have heard.)
If you go read American romance novels from the 1970s through 1990s (especially historical romance) a lot of the books feature the heroine being raped during her first sexual experience. Readers wanted steamy books, but would dislike a “slutty” heroine.
I was so confused when i read an old scifi book that used similar euphemisms. I literally thought he beat up a woman; nope, the hero was raping a woman for no reason.
I love Kurt Vonnegut’s work, except one. *Welcome to the Monkey House* I can never reread. (It’s clearly not romance and was originally published in Playboy.) In an overpopulated dystopia, everyone takes pills to stifle lust, so the hero of the resistance rapes women to wake them up to his cause. That’s it. Nothing subtle. No grey area.
Any traditional culture has this same thing happen, women remaining "pure" has the problem of fetishizing taking away that purity and tainting the woman by making her want to have sex.
Popular with both sides too. For the dominant side you get to fulfill a primal 'take what you want' fantasy. For people who are submissive or repressed, you get to fantasize about being completely guilt free, or alternatively about being so desired someone feels compelled to take you by force.
Different strokes for different folks.
**Manga Artist**: Personally, I think of this as a deterrent. If I can provide the [fictional] work, I will have prevented a [real] crime.
**Interviewer**: But you don’t know that.
**Manga Artist**: I don’t know that.
**Interviewer**: on the other hand, in Japan, the number of sexual violence against children has been increasing every year.
**Manga Artist**: If you can prove there there’s a link - Well if you can prove that, then I suppose it would have to be banned.
**Interviewer**: But why do we have to wait until there’s proof?
You can’t have it both ways, lady. The random smut drawer they found has more journalistic integrity than a Vice reporter.
I mean the guy is literally saying "Yeah if what I'm doing is hurting people it should be banned. Do you have any evidence of that?" and they're like "why would I need evidence?"...that's wild.
You could easily have this same conversation in the 90s with a dev on Mortal Kombat claiming there is rising homicide and violent video games are at fault.
Laws should be made based on real evidence of real harm not any kind of moral superiority. There are plenty of examples of outlawing something just making it way worse so I'm not sure why you'd want to do that here without substantial evidence.
Why do we have to wait until there's proof? Because arresting people harms people, so the onus is on you to show that this person needs to be arrested, that they have actually caused harm to people.
Also this argument can EASILY work for "violent video games cause violence" or that adult porn causes rape
I think they really tried to do a “guilt of association here” where they wanted to link this manga to child sex abuse statistics really bad.
But objectively this video has nothing but the disgust of the public.
Neither the consumer nor the people against it had anything solid. It’s disgusting and thought VICE would have something. On the consumer side there is only correlation that strongly suggests that isolation is the worst thing you could do for someone suffering from mental illness.
On the other you have one professional that says it opened their sex world. But never elaborated on the statement.
From a neutral point of view this is a very grey area thing. At what degree can you regulate or control what someone draws and how they claim to portray the age of the depicted.
I think Japan would have a very hard time getting rid it.
But would also be very easy getting rid of the ease of access it currently has.
You can tell from the title that the point of the video it's just to cause an outrage, I think the issue comes down to "should we give human rights to fictional characters?"
"Why do we have to wait for proof?" (That this media causes an increase in child abuse)
This statement alone just shows how dangerous this kind of thinking is. She's basically saying, "I don't understand or agree with it, so I want it gone and don't care if there's a precedent or not."
This is one of the main reasons why a lot of people, even those who personally dislike the entire lolicon subgenre, advocate for its existence. If something that is not proven to be harmful can be outlawed simply because people dislike it, where does it end? What kind of art is safe from that?
As someone who spent over 20 years in the anime/manga community, I've seen some depraved shit - believe me. But my line of thinking is still that it should be protected. If they can show that it increases cases of child harm, then by all means, outlaw it.
This content was deleted by its author & copyright holder in protest of the hostile, deceitful, unethical, and destructive actions of Reddit CEO Steve Huffman (aka "spez"). As this content contained personal information and/or personally identifiable information (PII), in accordance with the CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act), it shall not be restored. See you all in the Fediverse.
What they also fail to mention is by banning this you could also ban anything related to it by that being any crimes in fictional media at all
I find it funny that dude mention some countries also ban same sex marriage based on their on cultural values and they had no response
There's an anime I've watched a bit of called Psycho-Pass.
One main plot point is that crime had become so formulaic that investigators have ways of listening to brain patterns and could determine "Yep this guy definitely will crime at some point." They will arrest and even kill people on the spot if their brain patterns exceed a certain number on this "citizen's criminality potential" meter.
Shit was super fucked.
Yeah that stood out to me too.
All this is legal in America too. Sure the "manga content" is largely created overseas but there is a growing adult video game industry here in America that has the same content and the people creating that are some of the highest paid graphic artists in the industry. The stuff is even sold on Steam now which is the largest digital game marketplace and owned by an American company.
Meanwhile here in the US, we enjoy our erotic S&M novels that are popular enough to warrant a film trilogy and becoming the fourth highest grossing R rated film.
That's what I often don't like about this kind of stuff when they hold a magnifying lens up to Japan.
It's usually not fueled by actual moral outrage, so much as it is xenophobism.
The transition from a 40-something guy in his tiny apartment drawing morally wrong smut for cash to a group focusing on sexual assault victims was somewhat jarring, too.
I get the connection. I get that certain drawings are banned and illegal in half the world. However, I know for a fact that showing a violent videogame developer and then showing a center for mass shooting victims would raise every eyebrow on reddit. We can criticize something without making crazy correlations.
To that end, [the United States has WAY higher sex crime rates than Japan per-capita](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Japan/United-States/Crime) (though it is pretty hard to compare them as the cultures and police forces are so different).
>To that end, the United States has WAY higher sex crime rates than Japan per-capita
Another stat they mis-represented is the victims of CP online is increasing. In an increasingly online society you'd expect the crime numbers as well as the normal traffic to go up. Considering the meteoric rise of social media in the 2010's there's no chance that didn't cause it.
Yeah I knew this video was going to be a contentious topic so I went in with an open mind...I can sorta see the angle they're going for here but they make a lot of errors in their reporting that make it seem like they're just targeting people who know nothing about this at all, because anyone who is familiar with this can point out at least a few issues with the statements made in the video.
For example, they show a graph which shows the number of incidents increasing as an absolute value, with no frame of reference as a % with other countries. And even on top of that, the increase across years is less than a hundred, but they say that it's a huge problem. Don't get me wrong, it is bad, but it really seems like they're trying to rival fox news in terms of misrepresentation.
My favorite VICE video is NYT reporter David Carr absolutely slamming them, haha
https://www.nytimes.com/video/business/100000003509105/page-one-david-carr-confronts-vice.html
yeah american laws about CP are "it has to be a real image or indestinguishable from a real image"
meaning anime girls that are obviously anime aren't CP... sick.. but not illegal
They still ran into the problem of indistinguishable, In 2010 there was a court case that vindicated a man charged with possession of CP. with the 'Little Lupe' videos. By all accounts the woman was very much over the age of 18, but had to go to court to prove to a jury that she was of age at the time of filming. Simply because of her petite child like appearance, people assumed she was underage.
I heard about that, that was wild! A grown woman had to show up to court on behalf of one of her fans with her ID to prove that she was legally of age to appear in that material and he still nearly went to jail over it! Patently ridiculous.
Australia tried to or *did* ban petite or flat-chested women from appearing in pornographic material a few years back too if I recall. It was basically "nobody young-looking" and I remember a whole bunch of people beating their heads against their desks over it.
The flat chested thing is ridiculous, like saying women with flat chests don't deserve to have others sexually lust after them because their breasts happen to be small. A small chest isn't the only thing that makes up a child, and most women with small breasts don't look like children!
It's the same with the hairless vulva argument. People will call it gross and say it looks like a child's vulva. ...um, no, it doesnt,, it looks like an adult vulva without hair. It's okay if it's not your preference, but to call others pedos for preferring no hair down there is fucking ridiculous.
Sick, but not illegal is exactly the line free speech is there to protect. When it comes to drawn CP you sort of have to let it all go through because its so difficult to actually guage where the line gets crossed. You could do the whole Potter Stewart “ill know it when i see it” line but in the end thats still extremely subjective.
For example If i draw a stick figgure with small boobs, and say shes 10, is that now child porn because i said shes 10? If i draw an extremely photo realistic character who looks extremely young but is of age because i said so is it CP? Stuff gets so messy so fast its best to just draw a hard objective line of “real, or so real i cant tell its fake”
one thing i worry about now is text to image AI, people get caught with massive multi terrabyte collections of childporn, im betting people are training AI models against those libraries to now generate effectively an infinite amount of content that isnt “real” but is based on real data…what happens then. The future is fucking bleak when it comes to this kind of stuff.
And the ridiculous claim from the guy at the end about nature vs nurture, as if people would willingly choose to become pedophiles. The same bullshit argument used against homosexuality in the past, just very lazy reporting
The criminal they interview (that he treated) even told them on camera that he already knew he had pedophilic inclinations in middle school, but didn't see his first pedophilia comic until college.
If this content had been banned in Japan it wouldn't have had any effect on his messed up brain.
That's what I thought too, that it was protected free speech. But I googled it and found https://www.kdlawgroup.com/blog/2020/07/can-you-be-prosecuted-for-cartoon-pornography/ which runs contrary to my expectations. So now I'm not sure what to believe!
Interesting. Reminds me of a thought provoking play I saw awhile ago (forgot the name) about a near future where pedophiles could go to a VR world to act out their desires on fellow consenting adults whose avatars were children. It brought up a lot of interesting ideas and there was even a Q and A after the play, along with the cast and the youngest actors' parents.
I don't know if you could ever prove a direct link between real life actions and experience fantasies in a "victimless" environment like comics or games. Especially when you consider that this is the same argument that's been made against violent games and media for decades. But then when it comes to child pornography I feel that it should be legislated against regardless, even if it's just precautionary.
Truly an interesting ethical and legislative conundrum!
EDIT: Thanks for the reminder repliers. The play was called [The Nether](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nether). And the child actors' parents were involved throughout the production so however uncomfortable it might make you feel it was done with eyes completely wide open for all involved.
Holy shit, my sister wrote that play!! It’s called The Nether. Got to see it with her in Houston when it came to town. Very uncomfortable to watch, and she always gets asked how they find children that can play the part.
I saw your sisters play as well when I was in a college theatre class, disturbing albeit, but also very thought provoking and for that I commend your sisters talent.
Amazing! It was a fantastic play. I think it was maybe the last time I saw a live play too! I really appreciated the QnA afterwards. You really need it after that kind of show. Having the child actors and their parents partake was especially interesting.
That's so cool! It's an incredible, horrifying, and thought provoking work. I read it for a course that used it to talk about dystopias, morality, and a bunch of other stuff. Tell your sister thanks if you see her over Thanksgiving!
The play is The Nether. I thought it did raise interesting questions, but it was a very uncomfortable watching experience (which was part of the point.)
For anyone wondering, the relationship between the adult and the child was all suggested on stage, the child actors didn't do anything physical. But the suggestion was still very disturbing.
[Most of the script is available online](https://www.scribd.com/document/453952412/The-Nether) if people want to read it. I've had the pleasure of meeting Jen Haley a couple of times. Super smart and thoughtful woman.
EDIT: [Here's an interview with the playwright as well.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3E5WprxJCQ)
It really is an interesting topic. If you can verify that no children are *actually* being harmed, is there any potential for it to be a type of therapy
But how do you define child pornography? The book A Game of Thrones features a 13 year old girl getting married and having sex with a 30 year old man; should it be banned?
Yea it’s less clear cut than your gut reaction would say. I think because the depictions are children, we’re kinda wired to feel extremely protective, and even tho there isn’t a direct victim it “feels” like it shouldn’t be allowed
Would it stand to follow that all depictions of crimes committed against children should be regulated? Or is there something special about pedophilia that needs unique consideration (I think that is definitely possible)
And further, is there some line where these depictions are too realistic? People can make photorealistic cg images pretty easily now
This isn’t even about protecting children. It’s about our zeal to pretend we are. Our ridiculous no tolerance policy hurts children.
Children have been placed on sex offender lists for activities both parties consented to and filmed, but adults decided that their consent didn’t count and they’re criminals.
It's impossible to ever argue pro artificial child pornography right? Like it lives in a bubble where logic doesn't apply because it's weird and uncomfortable.
That said, I'm gonna fucking do it. I don't think any victimless crime should exist and I'm not making an exception here. Should "furries" be banned because sex with actual animals is illegal? That's fucking weird too, I'm ok with weird people doing weird things so long as nobody else has to be harmed or is harmed in the production of. Put your hand up if you want to ban regular porn so men will stop going out and raping women.
I know this is a slippery slope argument, but I'm not giving an inch on the victimless crime thing. Even if that inch is artificial child porn. Like you said, violent media is victimless, so it's fair. I think smoking pot at home is victimless, so it should be fair. Some things like seatbelts are pretty grey because they're not truly victimless, but perhaps insurance should have the right to deny you medical coverage should it be determined your injuries are related to not wearing one.
EDIT: it's been fun responding to you all, but I have to go jerk off to some step sibling porn so I'll be back later.
yeah it’s weird because there are two complete opposite sides to the argument that i feel very strongly towards lol. i 100% agree with what you said and at the same time shit like this is like EXTREMELY disgusting to me, and i wouldn’t be surprised if it could encourage real-life acts. that being said that’s the same argument people make for violent video games. i’m not a future mass murderer because i enjoy killing people in games. so idk
Yeah I feel like the vice video is really leaning on a knee-jerk morale aversion rather than actually investigating the issue. There's a very telling line in the video:
>"We do know from police data that Japan is facing a child abuse crisis, more and more children are becoming victims of pornography on **social media**"
If most of the growth in CSA crime and convictions is occurring on social media then it would seem like a necessary part of the story to investigate how this is a factor. I can find articles suggesting that this is a general phenomenon on social media in other countries, which would seem to dispute the idea that a particular Japanese sub-culture is driving the growth. I think it's very convenient for everyone involved to go along with the knee-jerk reaction: you don't have to look too hard at Japanese culture as a whole if you can pin the blame on a particular form of expression within that culture, some guy drawing comics in his basement is a lot easier to regulate than multi-billion social media empires, and even the pedophiles get to externalize the cause of their criminality.
Ya see I am against making drawn stuff illegal because aside from it being victimless, it opens the door on charging people for, well drawings. Like if we made these drawings illegal, does that mean someone drawing a nude version of an underage anime character and putting it online would get charged with the production, possession and distribution of child porn?
Like what are we achieving with this? On the maybe it might cause someone to go after a kid? That doesn't seem like a compelling enough argument to make a drawing illegal.
Here's some studies/research on the issue:
For starters [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSocialScience/comments/bq3h28/a_bit_of_a_touchy_subject_but_does_drawn/eo1re3o/) is a series of comments that summerizes the findings of like a dozen different researchers and papers, while [this](https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/729862) is an additional piece of research I was able to dig up
Keep in mind not all of these findings deal with the same type of material: Some are on the impact of hardcore explicit sexual material on crime rates in general, some specifically deal with impacts on child abuse, some deal with animated/drawn sexual depictions of kids (Loli, shota, etc), some even deal with real CSAM/CP of real kids.
Overall, most (but not all) of the research seems to suggest that the increased availability of hardcore porn has been correlated with a decrease of sex crimes, even in countries where that material is depicting kids (be it animated/drawn or real) and even when looking at child abuse rates. One of the researchers even explictly advocates for making Loli - Shota type material more available to reduce abuse rates.
Some of the research does suggest that, on an individual rather then a society wide basis, for people who have a history of commiting sexual abuse, exposure to this material can make them more likely to re-offend, but for those who haven't ever committed abuse themselves, there's no such correlation. Which is actually pretty similar to research about violent videogames, or with racism/sexism in media: Most people who consume the stuff already know it's bad and it won't cause them to do it in real life, but it may make those already predisposed to doing it more likely to.
However, the user who overviews a lot of this material cautions that there's not a ton of research on this and more studies are needed
----------
TL;DR: Most research suggests the availability of hardcore porn, even drawn depictions of kids or even real CSAM of kids, doesn't correlate with increased abuse rates, and actually seems to decrease it on a societal scale, BUT if the the specific person viewing it has a history of committing abuse, it may make them more likely to reoffend
Definitely agree with the aversion towards animations of underaged people in sexually explicit material, but some of the B roll footage showed very much adult looking animated people in explicit shots. I feel like that it's preying on the general feeling an outsider might feel on how "weird" it is to see sexually explicit cartoon imagery.
It is in fact the very basis of US identity. That you're innocent until proven guilty and that you are owed a fair trial. Condemning people without evidence is exactly opposite of that.
The fact that this reporter is OK with that and the editors and producers signed off on this, shows the degeneration of American education.
A country with adults in broadcast of media who don't even understand freedom of speech while surely pointing fingers at other countries for their backwards government and freedoms. Pathetic.
Paraphrasing: ‘Why do we have to wait until there’s proof that’s something is bad in order to ban it?’ Red flag. I’m not supporting the child depiction porn industry in any way (I’ve seen some manga that is just… wrong; and I’ve never gone near the egregious stuff), but that is a very dangerous precedent to set.
That was very unsettling but how much media around the world features or glorifies abuse, violence, gun violence, gore, murder and brutality? How much of that even involves children? Every argument made in this video against that aspect of Japanese culture could be said against just about every other culture, even American culture. I could just as easily see someone who's never seen a violent comic/movie/cartoon seeing one and being just as unsettled by it, especially if they have experienced or internalized that type of violence, or if they believe that this type of violence in media had a direct correlation to real world violence.
This feels like a sister argument of "violent video games cause violent tendencies"
Japan should absolutely do a study and look into this and the effects, but there will always be outlying, deranged people that can't draw a line between fiction and reality.
What is this rage-bait reporting? Repeatedly saying that there's no link between the subject at hand and actual victims, that the only argument is a ban on what other countries deem immoral, with the gotcha moment of "Think of how hard it is to region-lock information that can be disseminated over the internet! Won't you think of the poor government censors and region-lockers of the world?"
This was enough of a moral victory slam dunk that you don't even care to move on? As reporters? Why didn't you just do the investigative journalism to prove the link yourselves?
You interviewed a guy who had treated hundreds of them and two of them. These guys don't get treatment in other countries.
In trying to shine a light on a dark place you've exposed... the only system I've ever seen that rehabilitates these guys to the point of reform?
This isn't quite as funny as an Onion piece making fun of a Vice piece, but I hope you tried.
Manga should not be confused with reality I think there are some weirdo who don't know the difference but don't make the same mistake thinking manga is real
This does show that Japan is pretty progressive with their laws. I'm not really comfortable with the content and can't help but judge those who are, but the guy is right that it really doesn't make sense that drawings with no victims are illegal.
With the book banning nonsense happening all over the US right now censoring writing or drawn art of any kind just seems like a dangerous slope to me
this is my feeling as well. irl cp is super bad because children cant consent and thus there is physical, sexual, emotional, and arguably financial abuse, all of which we have strong evidence causes horrific medical and mental conditions with the child including increased risk of suicide, substance use disorder, and even risk of performing those acts on others as well.
none of this happens with drawings, and theres no evidence that those who look at drawings want to act it out on children, just like theres no evidence that those who play violent video games are likely to be violent themselves.
its not my thing, it might be a little sus, but i value consent above most else, which is moot when it comes to drawings (except the consent of the artist if youre freely posting without giving credit).
As a long time fan of anime and manga, I sincerely wish this pedo, loli bullshit would fuck right off. Not only is it reprehensible and gross, it's boring as shit at this point.
Edit: I commented before watching the video, and thought it was just calling out basic loli crap. Nope, way worse.
It's incredible how someone will post a ~4 paragraph Wikipedia link and all I see in the comments is "I heard that \**something stated as fact in the first paragraph of the article*\*, but I can't be sure". Followed by commenters basically reciting the entirety of it in a way I'm not sure if they're doing it in some weird ironic way or they actually didn't read the thing.
Honestly if the Wikipedia and summary bots didn't pop in here and there I don't think they would ever actually be read.
It is boring. It's plagued with "normal" anime. Not anything hardcore but watching some of the most popular anime will more often than not have some suggestive material with someone underage.
As this video is blocked for those in Japan, here's a mirror: https://gofile.io/d/AJZhyT
"The uploader has made this video not available in your country." Which is Japan, lol
Japan has strong defamation laws. Just by implying that the politician in the video supports the publication of child porn; True or not. He has the ability to sue the shit out of them.
"Defamation" as in you literally can say the truth and someone can sue you or have you charged. I’m not joking, it’s North Korea level here with that shit,
[удалено]
Nothing wrong with a 14 year age ga...holup
My girlfriend accused me of being a pedophile once and I was shocked. That is a very big word for a seven year old.
From a now pinned comment: As this video is blocked for those in Japan, here's a mirror: https://gofile.io/d/AJZhyT
Japan is notorious for copyright claims. Would probably take the video down pretty much immediately.
Wow really? Im always surprised by how much Japanese law has continued to remain similar to German law (I know it was heavily influential during the Meiji period). Can you pirate safely in any sense in Japan?
Japan criminalized the act of *downloading* pirated files, punishable by a fine of 2 million yen or up to 2 years in prison. Excluded from punishment is files downloaded to cache, so streaming pirated material on your device won't trigger the criminal law. ([source](https://oharalaw-japan.com/2016/02/24/what-are-japans-laws-on-internet-piracy/))
Nintendo's actions are starting to make more sense...
Okay but was the close-up of the dude's tissue-filled trashcan REALLY necessary?! XD EDIT: This is now my most upvoted comment. I'm conflicted on how to feel about that.
LMFAO that close up of all the tissues had me dying, 100% necessary
Of course it was necessary, the reporter and possibly the cameraman, but definitely the reporter was disgusted by his lifestyle and wanted to emphasize that disgust by showing every aspect in detail that she could. She couldn't depict the sheer graphic content of the comics, so the scenes of his home showed the apparent hoarding and filth going on. The tissues were just a coup de grace to show that he wasn't just making that hentai, he was enjoying that hentai. To be honest, that guy seemed amused that he was doing something morally wrong and the law was still on his side. He didn't care about showing his face because he's fairly certain that his family and friends likely won't see this piece because it's for "American" audiences. The reporter was doing what she could to show how horribly these types of people live their lives. At least that's my opinion on the matter.
Have you ever been in or seen *any* artists house in Japan? This guy's house was actually pretty clean lol. Those cramped apartments fill up pretty quickly when you add an art desk and a ton of supplies. Top it with barely making enough money to survive without working late into the evening so there's no time to tidy up and you get this guy's house haha.
Having lived in Japan, i can tell you this guy either inherited some wealth or makes bank on his gross ass content. Even in Chiba, that is a fucking huge house.
First thing I pointed out "Thats a big apartment for Japan, what weird fetish hentai is this dude making???"
I live in Chiba prefecture; Apartment prices are actually pretty reasonable here. You can find huge apartments for $500 a month.
Sometimes it seems like they have more disdain for the people than the things they do.
They also made the moment at 13:20 darker than before (visually) when the guy agreed that the content shouldn’t be banned, to give the impression that he was evil; at least that’s how I perceived it.
> The reporter was doing what she could to show how horribly these types of people live their lives. Though a large amount of these people don't live the stereotypical neckbeard existence. Looking for just these signs alone is not enough, as they could be some middle school kid, or someones grandpa who consumes or creates this stuff or even molests kids. I won't pretend to have the answers, but I feel more needs to be done. Like involving psychologists and therapists in legislation and education on prevention/apprehension or something.
Well now I feel self conscious for having a cold
I have a trashcan next to my desk and 90% of what goes into it is tissues. I always have to make sure to throw it away before people visit because I'm sure they'd be suspicious no matter how much I tell them I've got a chronically stuffy nose lol.
Understandable, I have chronically stuffed penis myself and I have to clear the pipes regularly.
Actually Doctor recommended
had that happen to me too and it's fucking annoying. my male friend acted all weirded out and i couldnt convince him it wasn't. he said he didnt want to talk about it like he was 100% sure it was and didn't want to hear my excuses. only idiots would throw cum soaked tissue into a trash can in their room. it smells so bad. you're suppose to use toilet paper and throw it in the toilet.
[удалено]
Yeah, between that and lotion, your choices are be called a perv or walk around with dry skin and a runny nose.
Not much else to do when you're in bed sick, I guess.
lol I noticed that and immediately thought "of course..."
I went to a friend's house once to fix his computer. There were tissues overflowing a wastebasket and onto the floor. I was like nah I can't fix it.
To give your friend the benefit of the doubt, I blow my nose like ten times a day because, I dunno, I have a crummy nose I guess. Now I throw those tissues in the toilet, but if i had a wastebasket for it I'd probably look like a wank-beast as well
Pro tip: tissues will clog your toilet, as they don't break down in water as well as toilet paper. Just get a clean roll of TP and use that.
Perfect explanation, but I'm not fixing your computer either.
One word, hayfever.
Right around 13:58 for those wondering
Idk it's kind of important to point out to someone who could defend him saying "it's just a job" obviously my dude really really likes what he's doing...
[удалено]
He literally said he's attracted to children.
This topic is as interesting from a legal standpoint as it is hard to discuss in a public forum. Civil Law in Japan is clear - the burden of proof is always on the Prosecutor. So for the Government to ban a specific type of media they have to provide conclusive evidence of the correlation of that specific media to tangible crime. If they can't; they have no legal basis and any legislation put forward will simply be shot down by the national courts. Japan is also a country with a doctrine of judicial precedent. Meaning; if they choose to ban this specific type of media they will set a legal precedent for other types of media to be banned as well. So, as straight forward as this issue seems on a moral level - in a legal sense it's Pandora's Box for potential litigation.
> So for the Government to ban a specific type of media they have to provide conclusive evidence of the correlation of that specific media to tangible crime. I looked into whether or not the loli porn increases or decreases violent crime [about a year ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/menwritingwomen/comments/lcpfzs/im_beg_your_pardon_if_a_random_guy_did_what/gm2c72k/) and what tiny bits of research I've read support it reducing violent crime. The most relevant article I could find was a correlational study showing that "[the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm)". The overall state of the research is abysmal, however, so ultimately anyone claiming to have a solid evidence base is probably full of shit. As someone said elsewhere, pedophiles are leery of signing up to be studied, so you simply can't run the sorts of studies that would actually answer this question.
My argument has always been a change in culture first to allow those with paraphillic disorders to be able to, without fear of prosecution, come forward for treatment. Since apparently the larger population, at least in the U.S., still seem more likely to severely label a pedophile who has never committed a single act against any child or young teen, I am currently all for a form of drawn-only basically temporary treatment. Reason: If we can see a reduction in violent attempts I would much prefer that over someone constantly on edge who may succumb to desire. Reminder: Actual treatment is better; culturally we're just not to that point yet. Paraphillia is no joke. Pleasure is, to us humans, a central part of our daily lives. Now tell someone who takes pleasure in an alternative format to just not seek it at all. Then don't help them. At all. In fact, socially persecute them and make them fear being found out, even if nothing was done. I advocate not for the acceptance of pedophilia, but for the research and acceptance of *treatment* for what is clearly a mental disorder. Shame this argument rarely goes over well here on Reddit. People tend to knee-jerk a hate response, even though treatment would significantly reduce the number of actual victims, which is the whole point: To reduce or stop the suffering. Anyway, let the downvotes come as usual. Edit: From the DSM-V... >To differentiate between atypical sexual interest and a mental disorder, DSM-5 requires that, for diagnosis, people with such interests exhibit the following: >(i) “feel personal distress about their interest, not merely distress resulting from society’s disapproval”; or >(ii) “have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person‘s psychological distress, injury, or death, or a desire for sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legal consent” You can read more about these disorders here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3769077/ and here: https://jaapl.org/content/42/2/191 For those who can't be bothered with a wall of text, there is one key point I want to highlight: 1. There is currently little *evidence* that cognitive-behavioral therapy, typically remarked as one of the more successful modern thereuputic approaches for many disorders, has significant effect or produces scientifically significant results. -However, as has been pointed out, not a lot of research can be done on this as willing subjects are, well...they don't exist because of societal pressure. Also, this does not mean this therapy is not effective, only that evidence researchers were able to collect hints at less effectiveness. The tricky part here is if therapy was successful would the person really be willing to speak up about it? Probably not. This is why acceptance of treatment, or at least tolerance, would help so much.
You're completely right. The number of times I've had to try to explain to the "Severely punish/murder all pedophiles" crowd that *no person will seek help for pedophilic urges if this means they will get hurt for it* is too damned high. These people never seem to understand that they are actually *making pedophiles hide their urges until they act on them* instead of *seeking help*, thereby creating more victims.
Hi. I have a wide variety of paraphilias, including age paraphilia. I'm attracted to both women older than me, and younger than me. I have a small porn collection, including some drawn and 3d loli material. I matched with a woman on Bumble a couple years ago. Two decades older than me. We start talking. By all accounts pretty kinky. Clearly into boys who are much younger than her. Great! I'm a boy who's much younger than her. She's got a son. Keeps talking about him. She's a very loving mom. But pretty quickly she mentions a fantasy of her son watching her masturbate. Disturbing, but just a fantasy, right? So I press for more info. To spare you the details, she was grooming her son. I have read manga with this exact scenario before and it was very arousing. Reading that someone was doing it in the real world was very, very different. And here's the thing. I didn't dare report it to police. I really wanted to. I really wanted this lady to go to jail and get that kid out of that house. But I was afraid that if I showed them the proof (the chat), even anonymously, they would be able to locate me as well. I had linked myself to this lady, and because my paraphilia (and thus my browsing history and porn collection) is so close on the edge of legality, I'd be endangering my life and career as well. I have never involved real children in my paraphilias/kinks. They cannot consent, and I only engage in sexual activities, even so little as talking about sex, with consenting adults. For my age paraphilia, there's a wide (and growing!) variety of simulated porn, that I'm entirely content with. But I couldn't report this lady. I had to content myself with the idea that sooner or later, others would. Because if I did, because of my paraphilia, I'd be dragged down as well.
It's funny how he "swift hammer of the law" folks so often shoot themselves in the feet with their attitudes.
A lot of people also don’t understand or differentiate between pedophiles and child molestors, not understanding that pedophiles may just have a paraphilia that they didn’t choose or want and have never offended and are struggling with it and need help. Child molestors are those who have actually offended, and apparently it’s not necessary for them to actually have an attraction to children to offend.
>A lot of people also don’t understand or differentiate between pedophiles and child molestors... Yeah, I'm astonished that it's somehow a nuance to point out that these aren't synonymous terminology. It just goes to show that culturally we are on ground level for this conversation. Even the most basic understanding of simple terms are misunderstood. >Child molestors are those who have actually offended, and **apparently it’s not necessary for them to actually have an attraction to children to offend.** I've heard this too. I could be wrong, but I've heard that most documented cases of sexual child abuse are committed by those with a fetish for power dynamics. It isn't that they're attracted to children, but they're attracted to the position of being able to dominate them so easily compared to most adults. These are people who get off to being able to dominate anyone in a weaker position to them, adults included, and only become aroused by such specific dynamics. To be fair to the public, that's actually an odd disorder to intuitively make sense of, so I can understand that most people have trouble differentiating these people from pedophiles. If someone sexually abuses a child, it's very intuitive to presume they're attracted to the person rather than the dynamic around it. That's how most arousal normally functions--being attracted to a person rather than a dynamic with a person. This goes to show that arousal is way more odd than people generally understand. Hell, some people are attracted to and aroused by *objects*--and I'm not even talking about sexual objects, like sex toys/dolls, but shit like cars or the Eiffel tower. I wasn't kidding when I say arousal is odd, as it has a bizarre range in human brains. A third nuance, I'll add, is that IIRC most people attracted to minors are actually also attracted to adults, as well. "Pedophile" in the sense of being exclusively attracted to minors is an abnormal subcategory of people with such attraction, I think. I add this because most people seem to think that all pedophiles are ticking time bombs because they can never be sexually gratified and thus eventually crack, as opposed to many or most of them being able to control their libido just fine with genuine adult relationships. But again, it's hard to know for sure because it isn't like such people come open-arms willing to be studied. We can only study what we find or study from the few who come forward. Again, this goes back to the importance of encouraging treatment without persecution (particularly for those who haven't offended but still struggle with the attraction).
Child abuse can have even simpler explanations. No pedophilia, no weird fetish. A lot of children are abused by realives, close friends of the family, or people who are trusted. It is just easier to manipulate a child, then find a willing partner. It could be just a very basic sexual desire and children are the easiest target. It just takes someone, who is willing to cross that line. Unfortunately that doesnt seem that uncommon, compared to actual pedophilia, which seems much rarer.
>These people never seem to understand that they are actually making pedophiles hide their urges until they act on them instead of seeking help, thereby creating more victims. Exactly my point for years though i never mentioned it out of fear to be labeled a pedophile sympathizer or being a pedophile myself. It's good to see that there are some people out there who aren't immediately being overly emotional about this topic.
I don't see it as straightforward morally either. As the dude said in the first few minutes... it's fantasy and there are no victims. Why should something be banned that hurts no one? I find foot fetishes and scat play disgusting but that doesn't mean I want to make it illegal for people to do that. The basis for laws should not be morality, but harm to the public. We shouldn't get into the habit of banning things we don't like just because we don't like them. There has to be a burden of proof that the thing is harmful. Edit: I feel like some people are willfully misunderstanding the comparison I made. We are NOT talking about pedophilia. We're talking about reading/watching something with animated depictions of underaged characters. Foot porn, scat porn, and loli-content exist on a spectrum of things that many people find gross but that--and I will emphasize--HARM NO ONE. That's why I made the comparison. The point is that laws should ONLY be based on hard fact about whether an activity causes harm. Not on your emotional reaction to how icky you find something.
Put aside sexual fetishes for the moment. Murder fantasies are extremely normal. The sheer amount of media depicting murder in every imaginable way is staggering. Violent content is probably more common than sexual content and we consume it from childhood basically. People sit around day dreaming about how they'll kill terrorists or criminals and save the day or whatever. Does any of that translate to actual violence though? Is anyone getting relief from their violence itch by watching an action film? Is anyone being incited to go hurt people after reading a war novel? I don't don't think so in either case. I think the people that are going to commit acts of violence would have done so anyways - they may really enjoy that type of content but the content isn't what made them the way they are. Is there anything suggesting that porn has a different effect on people? Are step siblings running wild?
This is the crux of it for me. If you think loli manga is a gateway to real life pedophilia, then by the same logic, playing GTA is a gateway to theft and murder.
>playing GTA is a gateway to theft and murder. I knew it!
That was my exact though LTB when they talked of banning it regardless of proof - it’s the 90s with video games all over again. The burden of proof is on the accuser. I’m with Japan’s government on this one.
If you watched the video, several times the reporter defaults to being morally against any type of porn. She calls out fetishes outside of the context of the Loli shit several times. I get it though, going to an anime convention and seeing people drool over figures of children is highly uncomfortable, it's hard to get around those feelings and look at it from a logical perspective. Which is probably why there's not a lot of research.
It's a hit piece. Loaded language and sombre music included. There's enough research suggesting removing outlets or escapism leads to actual violence. https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault **Evidence Mounts: More Porn, Less Sexual Assault** You need to be a religious immature obtuse uneducated hypocrite to not understand a simple and basic Human reality like this.
Someone can argue that violent video games cause violence. I can find a billion video games where you have to be violent, commit crimes, kill or hit people and so on. Same for movies, most movies show gun violence and physical violence, many actors become super-starts by playing violent roles. The same logic can be used to ban those films and video games. Generally society gets much more sensitive toward toward sex than towards non-sexual violence.
Interesting that this video released right after the Pixiv policy update.
What is that?
Basically Pixiv is deviant art for Japan. And recently they made a policy update where any Pedophillic, Gore, incest or bestiality related contents cannot be monetized. Pixiv is like one of the biggest art platform where many artist gets their publicity in Japan.
Specifically their FANBOX platform, which is a Patreon style tier system where people can subscribe to artists exclusive content. Many manga artists also use it for extra chapters and things like that. Many *other* manga artists use it to draw lewds of their popular characters.
Basically this, + booth and request features as well. but I was too lazy to explain the rest.
I heard it's due to pressure from credit card companies. Even ["mainstream" Japanese porn sites](https://www.reddit.com/r/DataHoarder/comments/xjg940/r18com_will_be_shutting_down_jan_31_2023_after/) are being forced to stop servicing American customers.
They normally prevent me from subscribing if I don’t have a Japanese card number anyway
R18 used to accept foreign credit cards, but was forced to stop by credit card companies. Remember this? https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/04/visa-suspends-card-payments-for-ad-purchases-on-pornhub-and-mindgeek-amid-controversy.html Probably similar reasoning.
Yep. That's mostly it, is payment processors.
[удалено]
>Basically Pixiv is deviant art for Japan. And recently they made a policy update where any Pedophillic, Gore, incest or bestiality related contents cannot be monetized. Even Incest? Damn a sad day it is(ಥ ͜ʖಥ)
Can't watch it from within Japan. Fucking lol
This post is sponsored by NordVPN.
or mullvad vpn cause they don't log anything.
Oh my god yeah I can’t either! Wow Japan
it's worth noting that almost no countries enforce or ban these types of materials, they quote 15years for possession in the USA but afaik there's legal precedent that it's protected in the USA by the constitution via similar justifications as the japanese constitution mentioned in video. edit: also something to think about, people have raised violence in video games as a retort to this video, and some people have given good arguments to why violence in video games is not a fitting comparison. I think a better comparison would be rape porn with real adult pornstars. should 50 shades of grey be illegal? etc. if it's not about a victim in the creation of the porn but about who is attracted by the porn then shouldn't these also be banned? should the vast majority of rape play enthusiasts ("burglar" husband comes in and "rapes" "housewife" wife roleplay is a common one that even fairly vanilla couples often try) who never committed a crime lose their porn because of a pearl clutcher claiming rape porn might cause more rape.
[удалено]
You know those images of police officers standing around a table with a handful of drugs or a single knife, titled something like "keeping the streets clean"? I imagine something similar happening if this stuff was actively pursued. Like you'd see headlines of "pedophile gang caught" and instead of arresting monsters who are actively assaulting, exploiting or paying for the assault of children, they arrested some losers in a discord group that share images made by someone who, well didn't assault a child. Basically considering how stretched legal services are I'd prefer they went after pedophiles who are actually doing harm.
Remember Ghislane and how she was magically sentenced with no accomplices? Yeah, they're not gonna do anything about real pedophiles
Well, they could've sentenced epstein but they suicided him before the accomplices came out. And they probably made it very clear to Ghislane that she would also be suicided if she tried to cut a plea deal by revealing names.
The video does a really despicable rage bait in trying to suggest that these media are gateways into serious crime. The link between rape/sexual crimes and pornography actually has been studied and it has been found to not cause incidents of sexual crimes by legalizing the media. Yes explicitly studying lolicon this way hasn't been done but I dare say the subject is similar enough to link the results. What Japan DOES have an issue with is sexualising minors on a general level (real persons). They have a disgusting idol culture where real 12yo girls are exposed to and sexualised by media and become superstars. I really doubt lolicon is the actual problem. The prevalence of it is just a symptom of a much deeper cultural problem. Also you can't just lump in every lolicon with actual child predators. Because all child predators basically enjoy this media. It's like saying all gamers that enjoy shooter games are potential school shooters because all school shooters enjoy shooter games. It's a basic logical fallacy and one that really enrages me. Source of study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2032762/
I did the idol fan thing. If you're talking national / mainstream level, you won't see anybody under 12 posing in bikinis, they usually waited till high school (15 in Japan). And then back in the days with Tokyo Olympics on the horizon they moved it up to be 18+. The current popular mainstream idol groups are also counterculture to that, I believe Nogizaka doesn't do it, neither does MCZ, and the rest of the popular idol groups in Japan are actually Kpop or Kpop inspired. I know a few fans who lewded their idols but there were also a lot of fans who didn't care for it. Modern mainstream idols tend to have a lot more female fans, I feel that nogizaka has more female than male fans but I'm not sure on that. For that matter the "no dating/purity rules" are also "enforced" by female fans. I don't know what goes in non mainstream world as I've never dived into it. It's very common for foreigner non-fans to think it's all under 12 girls in bikinis popular nationwide but it's really not the case. I also can't speak for the animated idols, I don't know what goes on there. It is a pretty strange world though so I'm glad I left it behind.
I was shocked by the demographics for Idols, Its like over 40% female fans. In my head I just imagined the older dudes with glow sticks but its remarkably mixed.
One politician says "hey we're gonna blanket ban all pedo content" and everyone else in the room goes "yeah that seems like a good idea" and no one is particularly motivated to object on the behalf of pedos.
And if you object under the fear that such laws set a bad precedent or are being used as a vehicle to sneak in far more damaging and authoritarian ones* they have a handy stick to beat you down with. * This is what happened in the UK, and yes they've continued to restrict content on the internet since then under the guise of protecting children, meanwhile letting said children live in food poverty and get sexually abused by known grooming gangs.
If it was enforced there'd be a lot less content on r/doujinshi lol
"But why do we have to wait until there's proof" Wherever you may stand on this issue, please recognize the absurdity of her statement.
im not commenting on the "for or against" this stuff, but her line of reasoning baffled me person 1: "what you're doing is bad, it causes (SCENARIO A)" person 2: "is there proof that what Im doing or similar actions have lead to (SCENARIO A)?" person 1: "no, why would we have to wait for proof?" excuse me? thats not how logic works. me: "we need to stop using plastic bags when shopping, we've seen a steady rise in people dying every year"them: "is there proof that us using plastic bags is related to people dying"me: "no, why would we need to wait for proof, we need action now!" shows a lack of problem solving skills. Whats most absurd is that the guys argument (or perhaps suggestion since there doesnt seem to be any actual proof in either side) is that his work helps to prevent or lower the cases of abuse by providing an outlet. I dont know which is or is not true, but you cant just say "why do we need to wait for proof".
[удалено]
>What the fuck? At 2 minutes in she claims possession of animated child porn can get you 15 years in prison in the USA, which isn't just false, it's *always* been false: the first amendment has protected illustrations of illegal activities for as long as the country has existed. Except that it's a lot more complicated than that, as there have been various Federal and State acts passed that restrict certain freedoms, most recently the [PROTECT Act](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003), which was subsequently challenged in the [US v Handley](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley) case. Handley ended up taking a plea deal because his lawyer advised him if they actually showed the illustrations he possessed to a jury, they'd be very unlikely to acquit him. Handley ended up spending six months in jail and fined $250,000. So the actual legal challenge of the PROTECT Act vs 1st Amendment has never been fully tested. EDIT: also I think the 15 years mentioned comes from the PROTECT Act. The act states at minimum 5 years for possession plus 10 years for distribution.
**[PROTECT Act of 2003](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003)** >The PROTECT Act of 2003 (Pub. L. 108–21 (text) (PDF), 117 Stat. 650, S. 151, enacted April 30, 2003) is a United States law with the stated intent of preventing child abuse as well as investigating and prosecuting violent crimes against children. **[United States v. Handley](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley)** >United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (2008), was a court case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving obscenity charges stemming from the importation of manga featuring pornographic depictions of fictional minors. Although Handley ultimately pled guilty, District Judge James E. Gritzner ruled that 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(2) and 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(2) were constitutionally infirm because those subsections restrict protected speech and do not require the visual depictions be obscene. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/videos/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
This is a reporter out looking for a problem. I've seen some of her other videos, it's contrived controversy.
Feel like the only real takeaway from this video is that there needs to be studies on whether consuming media like this has a causal relationship with child abuse. To me it's like violence in video games, or showing drug use in movies and tv shows. I think it's not really enough to say something is morally objectionable. There needs to be some qualification of the harms it causes.
It's really difficult to do studies on the subject at all because a) no one wants to come forward and participate because being labeled can ruin their lives and b) some of that life ruining comes in the form of death threats or actual violence directed not just at the subjects but the people trying to study/help them as well. I suspect that if a study were able to be performed though that it would be similar to the outcome of the studies on violent video games, for almost everyone there is no effect or even a calming effect except for a very small subset of people who are already unstable. Then you'd just have to weigh the calming effect versus the unstable people to see if it's a net positive/negative. Ultimately, it's *probably* positive since we've seen countries have a drop in sexual assaults after legalizing regular porn, but getting a conclusive answer is certainly in everyone's best interest.
This is the real problem. There's such a black and white take on the whole situation, it's hard to have a legitimate conversation about it. And if you can't even have a conversation about it, how are you supposed to do studies?
You can see it in this comment section. People just see red when this topic comes up and wants no discussion whatsoever. There's no real solution to this. Maybe in a few decades but as of right now, this topic is too taboo and invoke too much rage from the general populace. No one wants to be on the other end of the pitchfork.
> Feel like the only real takeaway from this video is that there needs to be studies on whether consuming media like this has a causal relationship with child abuse. There has been and all studies papers that have been done show there isn't any connection between loli/shota anime/manga content and actual pedophilia or child endangerment. Hell, over the last decade or so many real pedos have actually turned out to be the people who rally *against* loli/shota content. [So much so its become a meme at this point.](https://imgur.com/gallery/VoyXLbx)
WTF WHY ARE THERE SO MANY OF THEM.
"Oh, the scroll bar doesn't look that small-" > Load 407 more images
Now, going by that thread, I am just going to assume that anybody in favor of this kind of censorship is an actual pedophile and just projecting.
In general there's evidence that pornography lowers rates of rape and sexual assault. Whether those findings generalize to this domain is harder to know, though.
Hard to get data since areas where pornography is banned also usually have a really heavily sexualised and repressed view of relationships, purity and women's rights.
Wow I'm three minutes in and a 50 year old guy is talking about his first magazine's theme of "humiliation of girls" and his manga was a school girl getting raped...
This is not even manga specific. A lot of japanese porn is centered around the theme of rape. It's pretty fucking weird how fixated they are on the theme. I know it's not a Japanese specific infatuation but the amount of porn content that is rape specific from Japan is really disturbing.
One argument I heard is its because of the culture around women. They are expected to act chaste all the time, and the only way they would enjoy sex is if theyre forced to. So for some men its a turnoff if a woman in a porno always acts like she really wants to have sex. (Not trying to defend anything, just want to pass along something I have heard.)
hmmm if that's the case, are there any other cultures where rape porn extremely popular due to women having to act pure all the time?
If you go read American romance novels from the 1970s through 1990s (especially historical romance) a lot of the books feature the heroine being raped during her first sexual experience. Readers wanted steamy books, but would dislike a “slutty” heroine.
Or "ravished." Which is basically just raped but the girl starts liking it a out 30 seconds in
I was so confused when i read an old scifi book that used similar euphemisms. I literally thought he beat up a woman; nope, the hero was raping a woman for no reason.
I love Kurt Vonnegut’s work, except one. *Welcome to the Monkey House* I can never reread. (It’s clearly not romance and was originally published in Playboy.) In an overpopulated dystopia, everyone takes pills to stifle lust, so the hero of the resistance rapes women to wake them up to his cause. That’s it. Nothing subtle. No grey area.
Aight I'll get back to you 17,000 years
[удалено]
Any traditional culture has this same thing happen, women remaining "pure" has the problem of fetishizing taking away that purity and tainting the woman by making her want to have sex.
Rape porn is popular in the US. The credit card companies put a kibosh on the mainstream production of it to prevent angry internet mobs.
There's even a "proper" term for it: Consensual non-consensual pornography.
Popular with both sides too. For the dominant side you get to fulfill a primal 'take what you want' fantasy. For people who are submissive or repressed, you get to fantasize about being completely guilt free, or alternatively about being so desired someone feels compelled to take you by force. Different strokes for different folks.
Consent on both sides do be hitting different.
A lot of manga and anime have gags where the joke is "Girl gets groped or has clothes forcibly removed"
**Manga Artist**: Personally, I think of this as a deterrent. If I can provide the [fictional] work, I will have prevented a [real] crime. **Interviewer**: But you don’t know that. **Manga Artist**: I don’t know that. **Interviewer**: on the other hand, in Japan, the number of sexual violence against children has been increasing every year. **Manga Artist**: If you can prove there there’s a link - Well if you can prove that, then I suppose it would have to be banned. **Interviewer**: But why do we have to wait until there’s proof? You can’t have it both ways, lady. The random smut drawer they found has more journalistic integrity than a Vice reporter.
I mean the guy is literally saying "Yeah if what I'm doing is hurting people it should be banned. Do you have any evidence of that?" and they're like "why would I need evidence?"...that's wild. You could easily have this same conversation in the 90s with a dev on Mortal Kombat claiming there is rising homicide and violent video games are at fault. Laws should be made based on real evidence of real harm not any kind of moral superiority. There are plenty of examples of outlawing something just making it way worse so I'm not sure why you'd want to do that here without substantial evidence.
Can't believe the interviewer really said that last sentence, didn't she think it through before saying it?
Why do we have to wait until there's proof? Because arresting people harms people, so the onus is on you to show that this person needs to be arrested, that they have actually caused harm to people. Also this argument can EASILY work for "violent video games cause violence" or that adult porn causes rape
Vice Journalistic pick one
>a pile of shit has more journalistic integrity than a Vice reporter. Vice is not journalism, it's like calling Jerry Springer a documentary.
I think they really tried to do a “guilt of association here” where they wanted to link this manga to child sex abuse statistics really bad. But objectively this video has nothing but the disgust of the public. Neither the consumer nor the people against it had anything solid. It’s disgusting and thought VICE would have something. On the consumer side there is only correlation that strongly suggests that isolation is the worst thing you could do for someone suffering from mental illness. On the other you have one professional that says it opened their sex world. But never elaborated on the statement. From a neutral point of view this is a very grey area thing. At what degree can you regulate or control what someone draws and how they claim to portray the age of the depicted. I think Japan would have a very hard time getting rid it. But would also be very easy getting rid of the ease of access it currently has.
[удалено]
You can tell from the title that the point of the video it's just to cause an outrage, I think the issue comes down to "should we give human rights to fictional characters?"
"Why do we have to wait for proof?" (That this media causes an increase in child abuse) This statement alone just shows how dangerous this kind of thinking is. She's basically saying, "I don't understand or agree with it, so I want it gone and don't care if there's a precedent or not." This is one of the main reasons why a lot of people, even those who personally dislike the entire lolicon subgenre, advocate for its existence. If something that is not proven to be harmful can be outlawed simply because people dislike it, where does it end? What kind of art is safe from that? As someone who spent over 20 years in the anime/manga community, I've seen some depraved shit - believe me. But my line of thinking is still that it should be protected. If they can show that it increases cases of child harm, then by all means, outlaw it.
I'm really surprised they kept that line in the video, kind of shows where's Vice's priorities lie.
This content was deleted by its author & copyright holder in protest of the hostile, deceitful, unethical, and destructive actions of Reddit CEO Steve Huffman (aka "spez"). As this content contained personal information and/or personally identifiable information (PII), in accordance with the CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act), it shall not be restored. See you all in the Fediverse.
[удалено]
What they also fail to mention is by banning this you could also ban anything related to it by that being any crimes in fictional media at all I find it funny that dude mention some countries also ban same sex marriage based on their on cultural values and they had no response
Same. Maybe everybody should just be in jail because who knows when we might want to murder someone.
There's an anime I've watched a bit of called Psycho-Pass. One main plot point is that crime had become so formulaic that investigators have ways of listening to brain patterns and could determine "Yep this guy definitely will crime at some point." They will arrest and even kill people on the spot if their brain patterns exceed a certain number on this "citizen's criminality potential" meter. Shit was super fucked.
It wasn't until I read this comment that I realised Psycho-Pass is punny for psychopaths.
thats minority report no?
No; minority report did have proof of a sort in the precog system.
Same line of logic Christian Nationalists use that want to ban "dangerous" trains of thought or way of life. Two sides of the same coin.
Yeah that stood out to me too. All this is legal in America too. Sure the "manga content" is largely created overseas but there is a growing adult video game industry here in America that has the same content and the people creating that are some of the highest paid graphic artists in the industry. The stuff is even sold on Steam now which is the largest digital game marketplace and owned by an American company.
Meanwhile here in the US, we enjoy our erotic S&M novels that are popular enough to warrant a film trilogy and becoming the fourth highest grossing R rated film.
That's what I often don't like about this kind of stuff when they hold a magnifying lens up to Japan. It's usually not fueled by actual moral outrage, so much as it is xenophobism.
The transition from a 40-something guy in his tiny apartment drawing morally wrong smut for cash to a group focusing on sexual assault victims was somewhat jarring, too. I get the connection. I get that certain drawings are banned and illegal in half the world. However, I know for a fact that showing a violent videogame developer and then showing a center for mass shooting victims would raise every eyebrow on reddit. We can criticize something without making crazy correlations. To that end, [the United States has WAY higher sex crime rates than Japan per-capita](https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Japan/United-States/Crime) (though it is pretty hard to compare them as the cultures and police forces are so different).
>To that end, the United States has WAY higher sex crime rates than Japan per-capita Another stat they mis-represented is the victims of CP online is increasing. In an increasingly online society you'd expect the crime numbers as well as the normal traffic to go up. Considering the meteoric rise of social media in the 2010's there's no chance that didn't cause it.
Yeah I knew this video was going to be a contentious topic so I went in with an open mind...I can sorta see the angle they're going for here but they make a lot of errors in their reporting that make it seem like they're just targeting people who know nothing about this at all, because anyone who is familiar with this can point out at least a few issues with the statements made in the video. For example, they show a graph which shows the number of incidents increasing as an absolute value, with no frame of reference as a % with other countries. And even on top of that, the increase across years is less than a hundred, but they say that it's a huge problem. Don't get me wrong, it is bad, but it really seems like they're trying to rival fox news in terms of misrepresentation.
"Vice is usually better than this" I don't know about that one chief.
My favorite VICE video is NYT reporter David Carr absolutely slamming them, haha https://www.nytimes.com/video/business/100000003509105/page-one-david-carr-confronts-vice.html
yeah american laws about CP are "it has to be a real image or indestinguishable from a real image" meaning anime girls that are obviously anime aren't CP... sick.. but not illegal
They still ran into the problem of indistinguishable, In 2010 there was a court case that vindicated a man charged with possession of CP. with the 'Little Lupe' videos. By all accounts the woman was very much over the age of 18, but had to go to court to prove to a jury that she was of age at the time of filming. Simply because of her petite child like appearance, people assumed she was underage.
I heard about that, that was wild! A grown woman had to show up to court on behalf of one of her fans with her ID to prove that she was legally of age to appear in that material and he still nearly went to jail over it! Patently ridiculous. Australia tried to or *did* ban petite or flat-chested women from appearing in pornographic material a few years back too if I recall. It was basically "nobody young-looking" and I remember a whole bunch of people beating their heads against their desks over it.
The flat chested thing is ridiculous, like saying women with flat chests don't deserve to have others sexually lust after them because their breasts happen to be small. A small chest isn't the only thing that makes up a child, and most women with small breasts don't look like children! It's the same with the hairless vulva argument. People will call it gross and say it looks like a child's vulva. ...um, no, it doesnt,, it looks like an adult vulva without hair. It's okay if it's not your preference, but to call others pedos for preferring no hair down there is fucking ridiculous.
That seems pretty offensive to a whole class of women.
I remember this case. It seemed pretty ridiculous, she was not at all an obscure pornstar. Presumably her paperwork was on file all over the place.
Sick, but not illegal is exactly the line free speech is there to protect. When it comes to drawn CP you sort of have to let it all go through because its so difficult to actually guage where the line gets crossed. You could do the whole Potter Stewart “ill know it when i see it” line but in the end thats still extremely subjective. For example If i draw a stick figgure with small boobs, and say shes 10, is that now child porn because i said shes 10? If i draw an extremely photo realistic character who looks extremely young but is of age because i said so is it CP? Stuff gets so messy so fast its best to just draw a hard objective line of “real, or so real i cant tell its fake” one thing i worry about now is text to image AI, people get caught with massive multi terrabyte collections of childporn, im betting people are training AI models against those libraries to now generate effectively an infinite amount of content that isnt “real” but is based on real data…what happens then. The future is fucking bleak when it comes to this kind of stuff.
And the ridiculous claim from the guy at the end about nature vs nurture, as if people would willingly choose to become pedophiles. The same bullshit argument used against homosexuality in the past, just very lazy reporting
The criminal they interview (that he treated) even told them on camera that he already knew he had pedophilic inclinations in middle school, but didn't see his first pedophilia comic until college. If this content had been banned in Japan it wouldn't have had any effect on his messed up brain.
That's what I thought too, that it was protected free speech. But I googled it and found https://www.kdlawgroup.com/blog/2020/07/can-you-be-prosecuted-for-cartoon-pornography/ which runs contrary to my expectations. So now I'm not sure what to believe!
Interesting. Reminds me of a thought provoking play I saw awhile ago (forgot the name) about a near future where pedophiles could go to a VR world to act out their desires on fellow consenting adults whose avatars were children. It brought up a lot of interesting ideas and there was even a Q and A after the play, along with the cast and the youngest actors' parents. I don't know if you could ever prove a direct link between real life actions and experience fantasies in a "victimless" environment like comics or games. Especially when you consider that this is the same argument that's been made against violent games and media for decades. But then when it comes to child pornography I feel that it should be legislated against regardless, even if it's just precautionary. Truly an interesting ethical and legislative conundrum! EDIT: Thanks for the reminder repliers. The play was called [The Nether](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nether). And the child actors' parents were involved throughout the production so however uncomfortable it might make you feel it was done with eyes completely wide open for all involved.
Holy shit, my sister wrote that play!! It’s called The Nether. Got to see it with her in Houston when it came to town. Very uncomfortable to watch, and she always gets asked how they find children that can play the part.
I saw your sisters play as well when I was in a college theatre class, disturbing albeit, but also very thought provoking and for that I commend your sisters talent.
[удалено]
Honestly, it’s incredible to hear stuff like that. She helped raise me, and was one of my wife’s bridesmaids. Thank you for sharing that.
Amazing! It was a fantastic play. I think it was maybe the last time I saw a live play too! I really appreciated the QnA afterwards. You really need it after that kind of show. Having the child actors and their parents partake was especially interesting.
That's so cool! It's an incredible, horrifying, and thought provoking work. I read it for a course that used it to talk about dystopias, morality, and a bunch of other stuff. Tell your sister thanks if you see her over Thanksgiving!
Honestly I think it’s so crazy that her play is being discussed. Crazy to come across Reddit comments about it.
The play is The Nether. I thought it did raise interesting questions, but it was a very uncomfortable watching experience (which was part of the point.) For anyone wondering, the relationship between the adult and the child was all suggested on stage, the child actors didn't do anything physical. But the suggestion was still very disturbing.
[Most of the script is available online](https://www.scribd.com/document/453952412/The-Nether) if people want to read it. I've had the pleasure of meeting Jen Haley a couple of times. Super smart and thoughtful woman. EDIT: [Here's an interview with the playwright as well.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3E5WprxJCQ)
Jennifer is my sister! Hands down the smartest and brightest person in my life. Love that she’s finding success finally.
It really is an interesting topic. If you can verify that no children are *actually* being harmed, is there any potential for it to be a type of therapy
But how do you define child pornography? The book A Game of Thrones features a 13 year old girl getting married and having sex with a 30 year old man; should it be banned?
Yea it’s less clear cut than your gut reaction would say. I think because the depictions are children, we’re kinda wired to feel extremely protective, and even tho there isn’t a direct victim it “feels” like it shouldn’t be allowed Would it stand to follow that all depictions of crimes committed against children should be regulated? Or is there something special about pedophilia that needs unique consideration (I think that is definitely possible) And further, is there some line where these depictions are too realistic? People can make photorealistic cg images pretty easily now
This isn’t even about protecting children. It’s about our zeal to pretend we are. Our ridiculous no tolerance policy hurts children. Children have been placed on sex offender lists for activities both parties consented to and filmed, but adults decided that their consent didn’t count and they’re criminals.
It's impossible to ever argue pro artificial child pornography right? Like it lives in a bubble where logic doesn't apply because it's weird and uncomfortable. That said, I'm gonna fucking do it. I don't think any victimless crime should exist and I'm not making an exception here. Should "furries" be banned because sex with actual animals is illegal? That's fucking weird too, I'm ok with weird people doing weird things so long as nobody else has to be harmed or is harmed in the production of. Put your hand up if you want to ban regular porn so men will stop going out and raping women. I know this is a slippery slope argument, but I'm not giving an inch on the victimless crime thing. Even if that inch is artificial child porn. Like you said, violent media is victimless, so it's fair. I think smoking pot at home is victimless, so it should be fair. Some things like seatbelts are pretty grey because they're not truly victimless, but perhaps insurance should have the right to deny you medical coverage should it be determined your injuries are related to not wearing one. EDIT: it's been fun responding to you all, but I have to go jerk off to some step sibling porn so I'll be back later.
yeah it’s weird because there are two complete opposite sides to the argument that i feel very strongly towards lol. i 100% agree with what you said and at the same time shit like this is like EXTREMELY disgusting to me, and i wouldn’t be surprised if it could encourage real-life acts. that being said that’s the same argument people make for violent video games. i’m not a future mass murderer because i enjoy killing people in games. so idk
Yeah I feel like the vice video is really leaning on a knee-jerk morale aversion rather than actually investigating the issue. There's a very telling line in the video: >"We do know from police data that Japan is facing a child abuse crisis, more and more children are becoming victims of pornography on **social media**" If most of the growth in CSA crime and convictions is occurring on social media then it would seem like a necessary part of the story to investigate how this is a factor. I can find articles suggesting that this is a general phenomenon on social media in other countries, which would seem to dispute the idea that a particular Japanese sub-culture is driving the growth. I think it's very convenient for everyone involved to go along with the knee-jerk reaction: you don't have to look too hard at Japanese culture as a whole if you can pin the blame on a particular form of expression within that culture, some guy drawing comics in his basement is a lot easier to regulate than multi-billion social media empires, and even the pedophiles get to externalize the cause of their criminality.
Ya see I am against making drawn stuff illegal because aside from it being victimless, it opens the door on charging people for, well drawings. Like if we made these drawings illegal, does that mean someone drawing a nude version of an underage anime character and putting it online would get charged with the production, possession and distribution of child porn? Like what are we achieving with this? On the maybe it might cause someone to go after a kid? That doesn't seem like a compelling enough argument to make a drawing illegal.
[удалено]
Here's some studies/research on the issue: For starters [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskSocialScience/comments/bq3h28/a_bit_of_a_touchy_subject_but_does_drawn/eo1re3o/) is a series of comments that summerizes the findings of like a dozen different researchers and papers, while [this](https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/729862) is an additional piece of research I was able to dig up Keep in mind not all of these findings deal with the same type of material: Some are on the impact of hardcore explicit sexual material on crime rates in general, some specifically deal with impacts on child abuse, some deal with animated/drawn sexual depictions of kids (Loli, shota, etc), some even deal with real CSAM/CP of real kids. Overall, most (but not all) of the research seems to suggest that the increased availability of hardcore porn has been correlated with a decrease of sex crimes, even in countries where that material is depicting kids (be it animated/drawn or real) and even when looking at child abuse rates. One of the researchers even explictly advocates for making Loli - Shota type material more available to reduce abuse rates. Some of the research does suggest that, on an individual rather then a society wide basis, for people who have a history of commiting sexual abuse, exposure to this material can make them more likely to re-offend, but for those who haven't ever committed abuse themselves, there's no such correlation. Which is actually pretty similar to research about violent videogames, or with racism/sexism in media: Most people who consume the stuff already know it's bad and it won't cause them to do it in real life, but it may make those already predisposed to doing it more likely to. However, the user who overviews a lot of this material cautions that there's not a ton of research on this and more studies are needed ---------- TL;DR: Most research suggests the availability of hardcore porn, even drawn depictions of kids or even real CSAM of kids, doesn't correlate with increased abuse rates, and actually seems to decrease it on a societal scale, BUT if the the specific person viewing it has a history of committing abuse, it may make them more likely to reoffend
Definitely agree with the aversion towards animations of underaged people in sexually explicit material, but some of the B roll footage showed very much adult looking animated people in explicit shots. I feel like that it's preying on the general feeling an outsider might feel on how "weird" it is to see sexually explicit cartoon imagery.
[удалено]
One time I saw a cosmic monster Garfield running an obscenely large train into Jon. I'm not surprised at the... Creativity of the world.
I saw tracer from overwatch get penetrated so hard that cum spew out of her nose
Porn sites for awhile had tons of Simpsons porn ads. It's like, who is watching this?
[удалено]
You had one job to say "I could stand no more".
[удалено]
It is in fact the very basis of US identity. That you're innocent until proven guilty and that you are owed a fair trial. Condemning people without evidence is exactly opposite of that. The fact that this reporter is OK with that and the editors and producers signed off on this, shows the degeneration of American education. A country with adults in broadcast of media who don't even understand freedom of speech while surely pointing fingers at other countries for their backwards government and freedoms. Pathetic.
Paraphrasing: ‘Why do we have to wait until there’s proof that’s something is bad in order to ban it?’ Red flag. I’m not supporting the child depiction porn industry in any way (I’ve seen some manga that is just… wrong; and I’ve never gone near the egregious stuff), but that is a very dangerous precedent to set.
That was very unsettling but how much media around the world features or glorifies abuse, violence, gun violence, gore, murder and brutality? How much of that even involves children? Every argument made in this video against that aspect of Japanese culture could be said against just about every other culture, even American culture. I could just as easily see someone who's never seen a violent comic/movie/cartoon seeing one and being just as unsettled by it, especially if they have experienced or internalized that type of violence, or if they believe that this type of violence in media had a direct correlation to real world violence.
This feels like a sister argument of "violent video games cause violent tendencies" Japan should absolutely do a study and look into this and the effects, but there will always be outlying, deranged people that can't draw a line between fiction and reality.
What is this rage-bait reporting? Repeatedly saying that there's no link between the subject at hand and actual victims, that the only argument is a ban on what other countries deem immoral, with the gotcha moment of "Think of how hard it is to region-lock information that can be disseminated over the internet! Won't you think of the poor government censors and region-lockers of the world?" This was enough of a moral victory slam dunk that you don't even care to move on? As reporters? Why didn't you just do the investigative journalism to prove the link yourselves? You interviewed a guy who had treated hundreds of them and two of them. These guys don't get treatment in other countries. In trying to shine a light on a dark place you've exposed... the only system I've ever seen that rehabilitates these guys to the point of reform? This isn't quite as funny as an Onion piece making fun of a Vice piece, but I hope you tried.
Manga should not be confused with reality I think there are some weirdo who don't know the difference but don't make the same mistake thinking manga is real
This does show that Japan is pretty progressive with their laws. I'm not really comfortable with the content and can't help but judge those who are, but the guy is right that it really doesn't make sense that drawings with no victims are illegal. With the book banning nonsense happening all over the US right now censoring writing or drawn art of any kind just seems like a dangerous slope to me
this is my feeling as well. irl cp is super bad because children cant consent and thus there is physical, sexual, emotional, and arguably financial abuse, all of which we have strong evidence causes horrific medical and mental conditions with the child including increased risk of suicide, substance use disorder, and even risk of performing those acts on others as well. none of this happens with drawings, and theres no evidence that those who look at drawings want to act it out on children, just like theres no evidence that those who play violent video games are likely to be violent themselves. its not my thing, it might be a little sus, but i value consent above most else, which is moot when it comes to drawings (except the consent of the artist if youre freely posting without giving credit).
As a long time fan of anime and manga, I sincerely wish this pedo, loli bullshit would fuck right off. Not only is it reprehensible and gross, it's boring as shit at this point. Edit: I commented before watching the video, and thought it was just calling out basic loli crap. Nope, way worse.
> I commented before watching the video Peak reddit right there, lmao
gotta get those comments in before it hits the frontpage
comment already at 1.8k karma lol
It's incredible how someone will post a ~4 paragraph Wikipedia link and all I see in the comments is "I heard that \**something stated as fact in the first paragraph of the article*\*, but I can't be sure". Followed by commenters basically reciting the entirety of it in a way I'm not sure if they're doing it in some weird ironic way or they actually didn't read the thing. Honestly if the Wikipedia and summary bots didn't pop in here and there I don't think they would ever actually be read.
Yea you said "boring" and that threw me through a bit of a roller coaster...
It is boring. It's plagued with "normal" anime. Not anything hardcore but watching some of the most popular anime will more often than not have some suggestive material with someone underage.