Lolicon to be made illegal in America?
- Thread starter Alzrius
- Start date
I find it far more interesting than any other that, even though GTA:SA had the hidden "Hot Coffee" minigame - which they disabled in the official release, and some tweaker found out how to undo that - another game for PS2, God of War (which is an awesome game!) has much more violence, and much gorier and more graphic violence at that, and has a working sex minigame involving two women, who are "realistically" presented and are seen explicitly topless... *takes a breath*
All that is merely on the first level of the game!
It's gotten rave critical reviews, thus a great deal of exposure (heh heh), yet Jack Thompson and his ilk haven't been alerting the media about it. Hmmm. Curious.
...fucking attention-whore lawyers and "concerned citizens". Hypocrisy reigns over all.
All that is merely on the first level of the game!
It's gotten rave critical reviews, thus a great deal of exposure (heh heh), yet Jack Thompson and his ilk haven't been alerting the media about it. Hmmm. Curious.
...fucking attention-whore lawyers and "concerned citizens". Hypocrisy reigns over all.
Well, technically internet do revolve around USA.
The organization that controls the allocation of IP addresses, DNS, and other internet protocols is in USA. Theoretically it's an independent non-profit organization but it's still under USA government so... :blink:
And about lolicon being made illegal in America? I still wonder why violence & gore is OK over there but a little porn is not. Weird...
The organization that controls the allocation of IP addresses, DNS, and other internet protocols is in USA. Theoretically it's an independent non-profit organization but it's still under USA government so... :blink:
And about lolicon being made illegal in America? I still wonder why violence & gore is OK over there but a little porn is not. Weird...
Well in many ways, violence was greatly criticised a long time ago. Remember the Mortal Kombat controversy? There is a reason why we have a rating in the gaming industry. Thing is, eventually the violence crowd succeeded in winning the 'hearts and mind' of the American public and so, were so utterly desenstized by the violence that most people went 'meh' to violence (it is still censored BTW. Take a look at what 4Kids does to the violence in its shows. And there are talks about 'banning' underage sales of videogames because of violence. But all in all, violence is for the most part accepted).
As for porn? Well, we went a long way again but, well, it is still an easier target I suppose. Not to mention, a clean cut person like Steven Speilburg or Mel Gibson promoting a violent movie looks a lot better PR wise than a dirty old man (Hugh Hefner) or an even dirtier younger man (Larry Flynn).
As for porn? Well, we went a long way again but, well, it is still an easier target I suppose. Not to mention, a clean cut person like Steven Speilburg or Mel Gibson promoting a violent movie looks a lot better PR wise than a dirty old man (Hugh Hefner) or an even dirtier younger man (Larry Flynn).
Okay...well, someone finally pitched the question to John of AnimeNation. He answered it with his usual calm, clear, and in-depth measured response. While by his own admission no legal expert, his answer is by far the most clear that I've seen on the subject.
Simply put, the law doesn't outlaw lolicon material whatsoever - the only art that'd be affected is material so similar to an actual child that you can't tell the difference. The only parts of this law that even apply to art or other images and movies is that any work based off a real person (or containing actual people) must maintain records of the participants' ages and proof of identity, and must have directions for how the public may access them. The part about "simulated" sexual conduct is in regards to pedophiles who "pretend" to have sex with children - I'm not sure what that would be though; dry-humping kids maybe?
The full text of John's answer can be found here: http://animenation.net/news/askjohn.php?id=1367. Hopefully, this will get everyone to calm down, and the lolicon boards at 420chan (and the totality of not4chan) will resume their usual happy perversities.
EDIT: 420chan's lolicon board is already back up and running. Yay!
Simply put, the law doesn't outlaw lolicon material whatsoever - the only art that'd be affected is material so similar to an actual child that you can't tell the difference. The only parts of this law that even apply to art or other images and movies is that any work based off a real person (or containing actual people) must maintain records of the participants' ages and proof of identity, and must have directions for how the public may access them. The part about "simulated" sexual conduct is in regards to pedophiles who "pretend" to have sex with children - I'm not sure what that would be though; dry-humping kids maybe?
The full text of John's answer can be found here: http://animenation.net/news/askjohn.php?id=1367. Hopefully, this will get everyone to calm down, and the lolicon boards at 420chan (and the totality of not4chan) will resume their usual happy perversities.
EDIT: 420chan's lolicon board is already back up and running. Yay!
Huh, John, wow that's wierd, I hadn't even thought of that, ironically enough I live about 15 minutes away from AnimeNations one and only retail store and have actually spoken with John in person before, he's a pretty nice guy though he often lets that damn dog of his run wild throughout the store when he brings it with him. In the store they have a large TV playing anime 24/7 and I used to go down there Saturday morning just watching anime (I could pick anything in the store that I wanted to watch because they had all the stuff on hand obviously) and chatting with the various employees who were about, ah those were the days.
If that is what the law is about, than in some way, I actually agree to it. Why? It doesn't punish say, fanfic writers, lolicon artist, or movies that deal with the subject. Instead, it punishes those that could be child porn, or could not be given that it might be difficult to tell either way. The reason why this is a potentially good thing is, what if it is child porn? This prevents a real pedophile from claiming that 'no, those are not 12 year olds, but 18 year olds that look like 12!' and having no recourse since 'you can't tell'. Now, will this hurt professional photographers? It shouldn't mainly because the hope here is that who they are photographing, is over the age of 18 IF they are done in a sexual pose and so forth. And that's where the proof of age and documentation comes in.
Now there is always a possiblity that someone 'innocent' will be hurt by this law. Than again, this is true for all laws in general. World isn't perfect, and certainly not our justice system. :sweat:
Now there is always a possiblity that someone 'innocent' will be hurt by this law. Than again, this is true for all laws in general. World isn't perfect, and certainly not our justice system. :sweat:
This remins me of a situation that was pretty tense in a city here. Our lovely police decided to clean the sharing programms of licensed stuff. Of course getting inside the community requaiered something to be shared, at which: Surprise surprise, the police shared movies, music and games... nice way to do it. :sweat:
They confiscated over 100 computers and arrested a lot of guys. It was a true witch hunt, and it made the net community pretty mad. There were even rumors that people that had hentai on their hard-disk faced prosecution for distributing pornography. :sweat:
They confiscated over 100 computers and arrested a lot of guys. It was a true witch hunt, and it made the net community pretty mad. There were even rumors that people that had hentai on their hard-disk faced prosecution for distributing pornography. :sweat:
Bah, I bet the police just wanted all that lovely hentai for themselves...
Or you could take a cue from Dilbert and argue that technically, those porn were nothing more than harmless 1s and 0s resting on a magnetic relay. It was those godless heathens(the police) who activated them and made them into the porn they saw... :lol:
So it should be the police who should be prosecuted and not their owner...
Or you could take a cue from Dilbert and argue that technically, those porn were nothing more than harmless 1s and 0s resting on a magnetic relay. It was those godless heathens(the police) who activated them and made them into the porn they saw... :lol:
So it should be the police who should be prosecuted and not their owner...
Well, we do have Police auctions here in the states. <_< So YOU can own what the police have seized. Now, whether it was seized appropriately or not... different story. And... in theory, if you have the cash, you might be able to buy your own stuff back. <_< What a wonderful country isn't it? :unsure:
And then they proceed to confiscate back the very stuff they auctioned off. Why do you think they were confiscated in the first place?
But then that would sure put a damper in their business... :lol:
Same thing happened when my teacher did a raid on my class and confiscated all the magic cards we had on us. We never did get them back, and to this day, I still don't know what happened to them. A lot of them were worth a pretty penny in those days too(we brought our expensive cards to trade with, and our decks contained their fair share of power cards too). For all I know, they might have gone towards her retirement fund... :blue:
But then that would sure put a damper in their business... :lol:
Same thing happened when my teacher did a raid on my class and confiscated all the magic cards we had on us.
We never did get them back, and to this day, I still don't know what happened to them. A lot of them were worth a pretty penny in those days too(we brought our expensive cards to trade with, and our decks contained their fair share of power cards too). For all I know, they might have gone towards her retirement fund... :blue:Had the "confiscation" thing pulled on me back in third grade. My teacher took my Game Boy, which I had accidentally left in my backpack the previous day. I didn't even take it out - she saw it as she walked past my desk.
Her rule was "you can have it back at the end of the year." Problem: She "lost it".
On the bright side, after threats of bringing her up on theft charges, she agreed to compensate me $150 for the system and game (which only totaled $120 in value).
Anyway, on topic.
I still have a bit of a problem with the law. I know it helps protect against child porn, and thankfully it doesn't apply to loli (even though I don't care for the stuff), but this kind of thing discriminates against Asians. It's no secret they're small, and many Japanese AV idols make a career out of looking "schoolgirl age". Even though we, the audience, are well aware that they're over 18, that may not necessarily hold up in court anymore.
Those with an Asian girl fetish may be looking at unforeseen trouble, I think.
Her rule was "you can have it back at the end of the year." Problem: She "lost it".
On the bright side, after threats of bringing her up on theft charges, she agreed to compensate me $150 for the system and game (which only totaled $120 in value).
Anyway, on topic.
I still have a bit of a problem with the law. I know it helps protect against child porn, and thankfully it doesn't apply to loli (even though I don't care for the stuff), but this kind of thing discriminates against Asians. It's no secret they're small, and many Japanese AV idols make a career out of looking "schoolgirl age". Even though we, the audience, are well aware that they're over 18, that may not necessarily hold up in court anymore.
Those with an Asian girl fetish may be looking at unforeseen trouble, I think.
:sweat: We have a lot of 'threats' against our freedom. Of course, we are trying to balance between having too much freedom (shotocon! Not just fantasy. And yes, there ARE groups calling for it believe it or not. Ever heard of NAMBLA? :angry: ) to the other extreme (Facist state. You can't do this, or you DIE!).
Though I will say, I will still live here than say, Cuba. Castro has an approval rating of 100%
"99.9 percent."
"KILL HIM!"
"AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!"
Like I said, 100%!
Also, unlike England or even Canada, we do have the first amendment to help protect our freedoms. Granted, it is under assult constantly, but, unlike England, we are not arrested because of saying something that is considered racist. You might be saying, what's wrong with that? Slippery slope. Some things that weren't considered racist before, do later on (for example, the n-word was not considered racist until the Southern whites used it constantly to degreed blacks. Before, it was just a normal word that was not kind, but not mean either). Also, in a way, banning hate speech (which has the added bonus of being a thought crime. :sweat: ), you might give credence to those ideas. After all, anti-government forces might latch on to the fact that they are banned and say "See? Because the Government banned it, then they must be hiding something that will destroy them. I.e. the 'Truth!" It isn't and is simply hateful, but they could use it as a weapon because, instead of debating it and letting it die, they are simply shunning it, and letting the issue fester.
And before anyones says it, this is dfferent than say, legalizing shotocon or something. After all, there IS a victim there, i.e. the child that has NO idea what sex is, and would essentially be raped by someone. <_< Now you can argue that 18 is too high of a limit given that, someone who is 17 or even 16 should be smart enough to know what sex is, and ability to say 'no'. Of course changing might hit the... ever so lovely slippery slope. I'm sure those NAMBLA people would LOVE it to be reduced to like 5 or even less. :headbanger:
Though I will say, I will still live here than say, Cuba. Castro has an approval rating of 100%
"99.9 percent."
"KILL HIM!"
"AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!"
Like I said, 100%!
Also, unlike England or even Canada, we do have the first amendment to help protect our freedoms. Granted, it is under assult constantly, but, unlike England, we are not arrested because of saying something that is considered racist. You might be saying, what's wrong with that? Slippery slope. Some things that weren't considered racist before, do later on (for example, the n-word was not considered racist until the Southern whites used it constantly to degreed blacks. Before, it was just a normal word that was not kind, but not mean either). Also, in a way, banning hate speech (which has the added bonus of being a thought crime. :sweat: ), you might give credence to those ideas. After all, anti-government forces might latch on to the fact that they are banned and say "See? Because the Government banned it, then they must be hiding something that will destroy them. I.e. the 'Truth!" It isn't and is simply hateful, but they could use it as a weapon because, instead of debating it and letting it die, they are simply shunning it, and letting the issue fester.
And before anyones says it, this is dfferent than say, legalizing shotocon or something. After all, there IS a victim there, i.e. the child that has NO idea what sex is, and would essentially be raped by someone. <_< Now you can argue that 18 is too high of a limit given that, someone who is 17 or even 16 should be smart enough to know what sex is, and ability to say 'no'. Of course changing might hit the... ever so lovely slippery slope. I'm sure those NAMBLA people would LOVE it to be reduced to like 5 or even less. :headbanger: