| And otaku are supposed to be the ones that can't tell fiction from reality lol Also, if these people are not only against pornography (which I imagine includes ecchi, for these people), but any sort of representation of women getting harmed, then they'll be banning a lot more anime than loli anime. “People carrying placards saying ‘kill the Koreans’ are using words which are not three dimensional, but they still infringe the human rights of the entire target group.” lmao Someone said this and thought it made sense. Unbelievable. |
on 
VanishingKira said: Good to know I did :Pzdude18 said: This made my day.P.S. How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb? Trick question: Feminists can't change anything. |
   |
| Yeah fuck them loli's and they're hate speeching ways wait no don't fuck the loli's I SAID DON'T FUCK THE LOLI'S |
Zalis said: Face_Faith said: And which gender uses pornography more, regardless of the gender of the subjects of the pornographic material? That would be men. Attempting to criminalize men for using a product that causes no actual harm to actual people is more about advancing an anti-male agenda than providing any protection or good to society -- in other words, misandry.Veronin said: Feminism: fighting misogyny with misandry. How is this misandry? People were against "2D child pornography". Just one question: Did you even read the actual article and not that made up stuff? The original source article said: 同団体は「生身の少女や女性を用いたポルノは、直接的被害と間接被害の両方があり、二次元ポルノは間接被害があります。前者は被害はあるが後者はない、のではなく、前者は、直接被害も存在する、ということです」 My translation said: So they are claiming that 2D porn causes some nebulous sort of "indirect damage," AND specifying that this damage falls on women and girls. While the "allied groups" label is a little vague, I say again: if it looks, walks, and quacks like a feminist, it's probably a feminist.The allied groups (the ones pushing these laws) say, "Porn that uses flesh-and-blood girls and women* causes direct and indirect damage, while 2D porn causes indirect damage. It's not that the former causes damage and the latter does not, merely that the former also causes direct damage to actual victims. * Underlined since many people may recognize the simple "female" kanji from various anime signs. From reading the article, I think the people thinking fictional characters have rights were more against the production of the material in itself rather than the people consuming and producing it. However, just assuming that pornography is more often used by men than women is not helpful unless you consider the actual numbers and even if they were in the (clear) majority, there are certainly also women who do the same. Aside from that, the consumers are one thing, but the people producing such things might need to take even more responsibility if fictional characters actually did have rights and how many of them are male and female is hardly known... But rather than being against the ones consuming this (which I suppose can be a consequence of the following), there were people pro fictional characters rights. Now if fictional characters would get these rights, the issue would be solved for them and they would be satisfied (well, there are always people who do what they please ignorant of the rights of others...). If they were against men explicitly, I think there would have been better ways to express that and then the article too would be titled differently (!), specifically about the rights of fictional women and girls, but since it isn't, it seems the discussions weren't just about one gender and they were talking more in general. And aside from that, they were talking about the (indirect) "harm" done; if they were plainly against men, there would have most likely been insults and if they were only trying to complain about the consumers of pornography in general, they would have more concentrated on how to get them behind bars or something similar. Oh, and it would be nice if you would at least distinguish between a feminist and a "feminist". It seems to be bothering some other people here as well. The question was directed at the OP... ^^° But even then, you just claimed that there are more male than female people consuming pornography and considering that a lot of research has been done on the subjects of the numbers of homosexual people, most males, and thus the ones consuming pornography, would be heterosexual, increasing the chances of "2D child pornography" material to depict females rather than males. "Lolis" seem also way more popular than "shouta" in general -- so as I said in my post earlier, fictional female characters are more likely to be the subject of this than fictional males are, considering what many western societies are like today. In articles about things like "sexualisation in media", women are also more often brought up because even though it happens to men as well, it's more often the case that it happens involving women so it's understandable when people just say/write "women [...]" instead (although they often note at the beginning or end that they're indeed aware that it happens to men as well). Or to name a reversed situation, I've seen many threads been made on MAL made by people who seem to assume that there are only (straight) males here, especially in the last few months. And while there is a supposed male to female ratio of 1,3:1 on MAL, there seem to be about 70% or more males active on the forums (according to polls), so I can completely understand when people make threads with titles like this one or that one. That's why I can also understand why they generalised by using females as an example in the article. |
Face_FaithDec 14, 2013 8:56 AM
| Will i hate loli, and don't watch any show with loli in it i love things like usage drop (Show about little kids that not about sex) << that sound weird It just disquieting to see kids in sex stations |
 |
almozayaf said: Well i hate loli, and don't watch any show with loli in it i love things like Usagi drop (Show about little kids that're not about sex) << that sounds weird It's just disquieting to see kids in sexual situations. Whenever anybody makes claims like this, a quick look at their list is usually enough to make those claims laughable. For instance: Face_Faith said: If they're against the production of the material, they obviously don't want people producing it. And what kind of prohibition law doesn't also prohibit consumption of the prohibited object?I think the people thinking fictional characters have rights were more against the production of the material in itself rather than the people consuming and producing it. However, just assuming that pornography is more often used by men than women is not helpful unless you consider the actual numbers and even if they were in the (clear) majority, there are certainly also women who do the same. From what I understand, the main intended audience for male pornographic imagery is gay males, though certainly not all of it. The numbers I've been able to find via google show about a 70/30 to 66/34 male/female divide -- a clear, if not completely overwhelming majority. But do you really think that if 2D "child" porn were outlawed, the legal system would show the same gender ratio in its targets? When it comes to sex crimes involving minors, the arm of the law always comes down harder on men. Male teacher gets arrested for sex with a female student: "Omg lock that pedofile away for a million years and cut off his balls." Female teacher gets arrested for sex with a male student: "Where were teachers like her when I was in school?" Maybe I'm being Americentric here, but it can't be much better in Japan, where they'll sic the police on you for smiling at or waiting on the same train platform as young women.But rather than being against the ones consuming this (which I suppose can be a consequence of the following), there were people pro fictional characters rights. Now if fictional characters would get these rights, the issue would be solved for them and they would be satisfied. If they were against men explicitly, I think there would have been better ways to express that and then the article too would be titled differently (!), specifically about the rights of fictional women and girls, but since it isn't, it seems the discussions weren't just about one gender and they were talking more in general. I don't get the sense that the people pushing these laws are doing so out of a great love for anime/manga or their characters. Giving fictional characters rights serves no purpose other than to further an agenda: to criminalize the production of art they don't like, and to criminalize the media habits of users (men, specifically "soft target" otaku whom politicians can't afford to defend) they don't like. And every time gendered examples are brought up in the article, they're female.Oh, and it would be nice if you would at least distinguish between a feminist and a "feminist". It seems to be bothering some other people here as well. Not entirely sure if you meant me here, but I'll bite: I can respect and get behind the goals of traditional/moderate feminists who fight/fought for things like right to vote, equality under the law (including the realm of marriage), equal pay for equal work, reproductive rights, the end of pernicious attitudes such as "rape culture," and certain protective laws aimed at mitigating physical and social inequalities between men and women. But what I can't agree with are the radical feminists hell-bent on demeaning, criminalizing, and destroying men, whether it's through the adoption of biased laws giving women favorable treatment, insistence on services for women while denying same to men, and cultural misandrist brainwashing through the schools and entertainment/news/advertising media. Though since the moderates never denounce or repudiate the acts or words of the radicals, I can't see them as entirely different. |
| Rights for fictional characters? Thats the biggest bullshit ive ever heard. Fictional characters dont need any rights cause they dont exist. Jesus Christ sometimes I wonder how much bullshit one has to have in his brain to think of giving rights to fictional characters. While we are at it, why dont we put the Unicorn under protection because its an endangered species? |
| If Loli's get banned..... i'm really bringing out my shotgun to the next feminist movement event near me. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
| “If we recognize the human rights of fictional people, does that mean they’ll finally get the right to marry us?” YES PLS |
Ryugen said: they already do“If we recognize the human rights of fictional people, does that mean they’ll finally get the right to marry us?” YES PLS http://metro.co.uk/2010/03/09/man-marries-pillow-154906/ |
| Just because you know how to use a torrent does not give you the god given right to pirate. My actual list: https://kitsu.io/users/mattbenz99/library check out my youtube channel for my review: https://www.youtube.com/user/mattbenz99 |
| These people must be utterly ignorant about the vast number of shotacon hentai there is (or they don't really give a shit about it). When it comes to graphic, pornographic, explicit sex, I'd say shotacon yaoi is more common than regular yaoi with adult characters. And there's also a surprising amount of heterosexual shotacon, featuring grown women, often aggressive and dominating (AKA rape), preying on children. |
Red_KeysDec 16, 2013 5:30 PM
 |
Yondy375 said: If Loli's get banned..... i'm really bringing out my shotgun to the next feminist movement event near me. 'Oh my god, I'm so mentally unstable I'll snap if my child porn is taken away!!' Go get checked into a mental hospital. You need some help. Also, read the original article. It doesn't mention feminists just people against 2D child porn. Anyway, just a typical, stupid bait thread complete with a dumb-ass joke in the description! Moving on. |
“Victor can’t be satisfied by anyone but me.”  |
| Oh my god i'm so upset about someone's troll post i'm gonna complain to them EAT A DICK KID. Not in the mood. |
| Dr. Sheldon Cooper " It is no way to make new humans. People coming out of people. Some kind of dirty magic show. |
Kawos said: And again, these "people against 2D child porn" only mention female examples and harm to women allegedly caused by 2D porn, calling it "hate speech" on the level of posting up a placard saying "Kill all the Koreans" -- feminist arguments. If you read about someone advocating the abolition of private property, enforcing 100% equal incomes, and putting the means of production in the hands of the workers, you'd probably call them a Communist whether the source labels them one or not, wouldn't you?Also, read the original article. It doesn't mention feminists just people against 2D child porn. |
| when will all these jackasses stop trying to ban stuff anime related |
| my avatar is the bus driver from Rosario + Vampire |
| LOL What are you gonna fap to now, otakus? |
I luv u |
Jaguer91 said: LOL What are you gonna fap to now, otakus? ecchi? |
| my avatar is the bus driver from Rosario + Vampire |
| Holy bleedin' Hell. Japs just need to ban shotakon & yaoi and see how much of this "feminists" in reality are just some ugly fat virgins that can't do shit besides shlickin' to their oh so kawaii BL art & "protecting" gay's rights online. 0n the side note: all heil great Mother Russia! 'Cause here we've already banned a whole Hell of anime-&-related sites just for hostin' some loli shit like this official pic of "Nanoha A's" (that was the reason we banned Yande.re here, it's even on it's forum) and/or this definitely flat-chested kid (heavily censored to be kinda SFW, the original can be found on Danbooru forum - yes, that's the reason we banned Danbooru here). |
There is such thing as shit taste. Only idiots think that every "work of art" should have the same value. Oil and nuclear are civilisation saviours. Deal with it. |
| They try to ban lolis, But the age of consent in Japan is 13... ಠ_ಠ |
 |
Zalis said: Face_Faith said: If they're against the production of the material, they obviously don't want people producing it. And what kind of prohibition law doesn't also prohibit consumption of the prohibited object?I think the people thinking fictional characters have rights were more against the production of the material in itself rather than the people consuming and producing it. Basically my main point was to say that the people who think fictional characters should have rights didn't just act out of misandry and were talking in general independent of the gender of these characters (<- I already said how that's simply a generalisation for simplicity's sake since you yourself claimed most consumers were male, otherwise the title would be different, though) so I won't discuss about the rest (regarding feminists, though, if they're pro equality, they're feminists, if not, they aren't. That's all there is to it). Concerning that, firstly I wouldn't be sure if the ones involved in the production are mostly male (and whether the ones who believe fictional characters have rights know that is questionable as well), but if they are and they were acting out of misandry, there would be more effective ways to do that. If they truly were misandrists, they'd try to cause more direct damage. If you think that they hate men in general because they want rights for fictional characters which would cause "2D child pornography" to be banned and deprive people -- the majority of them assumed to be male -- of said material depicting (mostly female?) 2D children, then that's as far-fetched as saying they want to ban alcoholic beverages due to health and other issues, because apparently most people who consume them are male... But I suppose if you don't think that's far-fetched either, it's pointless to try to discuss anymore... ¯\_('ツ)_/¯ |
kitsune0 said: That doesn't even make sense. Why would people like them be the "feminists" of this article?Holy bleedin' Hell. Japs just need to ban shotakon & yaoi and see how much of this "feminists" in reality are just some ugly fat virgins that can't do shit besides shlickin' to their oh so kawaii BL art & "protecting" gay's rights online. |
This topic has not been locked and is still available for discussion. |
Kawos said: "Oh my god, I'm so mentally unstable I'll snap if my child porn is taken away!!" Basically this whole thread. |
MrsKotobuki said: Love how criticism of child pornography somehow turns into an excuse for delusional misogynists who think misandry has taken over the world to attack feminists/women in general. What a worthless thread. But this is not about child porn in any form or way, this is about people who can't separate fiction from reality and think that fictional characters, be they underage or not, regardless of gender, shouldn't be used for pornographic material, equaling them to actual human beings, which is ridiculous, as these characters do not exist in real life. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| How about we ban Feminists from doing anything? |
| Gutalala ~~ sudalala "It would be great to live as a human" -Meruem, King of the Ants |
MrsKotobuki said: AO968 said: MrsKotobuki said: Love how criticism of child pornography somehow turns into an excuse for delusional misogynists who think misandry has taken over the world to attack feminists/women in general. What a worthless thread. But this is not about child porn in any form or way, this is about people who can't separate fiction from reality and think that fictional characters, be they underage or not, regardless of gender, shouldn't be used for pornographic material, equaling them to actual human beings, which is ridiculous, as these characters do not exist in real life. It IS child porn in a form, it's just fictional. It's a fictional child being put in a sexual situation, so it is child porn. Also, just because they're not real doesn't mean it's not encouraging pedophilia or desensitization to pedophilia. I'm not for banning lolicon whatsoever, but let's not pretend it's a harmless enjoyment rather than an indicator of something underlying. Nope it is a drawing. In order for there to be child porn there has to be an actual child. |
seikipunch said: How about we ban Feminists from doing anything? *Feminist*.....YOU SEE, YOU SEE, DO YOU SEE?! The patriarchy is once again trying to ban women and rape us all! WE WERE RIGHT! |
| You know, I'm fucking tired of the whole internet war against feminists and whatnot. Seriously everyone is fucking retarded... I think must have been browsing too much /v/... |
Vanisher said: Sounds like you need a new dose of unwarranted, invasive feminism.You know, I'm fucking tired of the whole internet war against feminists and whatnot. Seriously everyone is fucking retarded... I think must have been browsing too much /v/... |
MrsKotobuki said: Mayhap, dear fellow, that you are one of those internet warriors who jumps at all matters gender? I apologise if I've offended your sensibilities.Ckan said: Vanisher said: Sounds like you need a new dose of unwarranted, invasive feminism.You know, I'm fucking tired of the whole internet war against feminists and whatnot. Seriously everyone is fucking retarded... I think must have been browsing too much /v/... When is it unwarranted? When you deem it to be? In this case it's warranted. |
JustALEX said: seikipunch said: How about we ban Feminists from doing anything? *Feminist*.....YOU SEE, YOU SEE, DO YOU SEE?! The patriarchy is once again trying to ban women and rape us all! WE WERE RIGHT! The patriarchy is now using anime and manga to oppress women. Japanese men should really check their privilege. |
MrsKotobuki said: Apology accepted. So glad we've come to an understanding.Ckan said: MrsKotobuki said: Mayhap, dear fellow, that you are one of those internet warriors who jumps at all matters gender? I apologise if I've offended your sensibilities.Ckan said: Vanisher said: Sounds like you need a new dose of unwarranted, invasive feminism.You know, I'm fucking tired of the whole internet war against feminists and whatnot. Seriously everyone is fucking retarded... I think must have been browsing too much /v/... When is it unwarranted? When you deem it to be? In this case it's warranted. And I'm guessing you're one of those fight the power, ~politically incorrect~ dudebros? I apologize for expecting anything constructive from your kind. |
MrsKotobuki said: You read bitter. I'm always available as living stress-relief, so feel free to go another round.Ckan said: Apology accepted. So glad we've come to an understanding. Yeah, lower expectations when speaking to MRAs online. |
| I don't know who I am anymore... what was I doing? Why am I here? Nothing's real. It's all a lie. |
MrsKotobuki said: Ckan said: Vanisher said: Sounds like you need a new dose of unwarranted, invasive feminism.You know, I'm fucking tired of the whole internet war against feminists and whatnot. Seriously everyone is fucking retarded... I think must have been browsing too much /v/... When is it unwarranted? When you deem it to be? In this case it's warranted. Drunk_Samurai said: Nope it is a drawing. In order for there to be child porn there has to be an actual child. Stop making nonsensical rules up to avoid calling it what it is. It's a child, they're in pornography, it's child porn. At least own up to what you're looking at. Its not a child if they are over 500 years old. |
| I still dont get why people view anime characters as human. I never could see them as the same species as us. Even if we get over the thing that they are just drawings, even if I fully immerce myself in the story I can never see them as humans. |
| We have to protect the fictional children!!! We must waste millions of tax yen cracking down on the sexual depictions of anime characters! Drawings have feelings too!!! ....what a joke. Baka Abe, his stupid ass party, these dumb Femenist, and the idiots at UNICEF Japan are hell bent on passing stupid censorship laws. They should read the study ordered by the Government of Denmark about the connection between fictional child porn and actual child abuse. SPOILER ALERT: THERE IS NONE! |
 |
Lolicon said: Heck, it doesn't take a study to know that most abused children are abused by adults they know, including "normals" in positions of trust like teachers/coaches/clergy, and relatives. Not random nerdy strangers.We have to protect the fictional children!!! We must waste millions of tax yen cracking down on the sexual depictions of anime characters! Drawings have feelings too!!! ....what a joke. Baka Abe, his stupid ass party, these dumb Femenist, and the idiots at UNICEF Japan are hell bent on passing stupid censorship laws. They should read the study ordered by the Government of Denmark about the connection between fictional child porn and actual child abuse. SPOILER ALERT: THERE IS NONE! |
More topics from this board
» What are your Anime Nitpicks?StarBloom_64 - 3 hours ago |
4 |
by jacobPOL
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» Waifu War V5 (Anniversary-Edition!) (Round 1) ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Minkalex - Sep 28 |
344 |
by Freshell
»»
13 minutes ago |
|
» The "Backstory" Problemsimonitro - 4 hours ago |
19 |
by PraiseTheWaifus
»»
17 minutes ago |
|
» Upcoming Dubbed Anime ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Kenny_Stryker - Dec 17, 2017 |
3987 |
by anime-prime
»»
20 minutes ago |
|
» What MMORPGs are VRMMO/Isekai anime based on?thewiru - Yesterday |
12 |
by W3TFT
»»
24 minutes ago |