Tachii said: Go ask the Japanese. They love to censor the genitalia, while showing some unique porn that's rarely seen in any other culture. Amazing really. More like they have to, not that they like to... |
Speed is Life - 1st ID... patch on my shoulder. |
tesiga2003 said: I really can't form that conclusion when the West do not (or not often) censor the genitalia in porn. I mean, why does the Japanese have to, and not the West? I can't see this in any other way than some cultural difference, which is why I exaggerated love for a longer phrase to get the message across.Tachii said: Go ask the Japanese. They love to censor the genitalia, while showing some unique porn that's rarely seen in any other culture. Amazing really. More like they have to, not that they like to... |
Tachii said: You seriously dont know about the Japanese censorship laws?tesiga2003 said: I really can't form that conclusion when the West do not (or not often) censor the genitalia in porn. I mean, why does the Japanese have to, and not the West? I can't see this in any other way than some cultural difference, which is why I exaggerated love for a longer phrase to get the message across.Tachii said: Go ask the Japanese. They love to censor the genitalia, while showing some unique porn that's rarely seen in any other culture. Amazing really. More like they have to, not that they like to... |
| Speed is Life - 1st ID... patch on my shoulder. |
tesiga2003 said: Tachii said: You seriously dont know about the Japanese censorship laws?tesiga2003 said: I really can't form that conclusion when the West do not (or not often) censor the genitalia in porn. I mean, why does the Japanese have to, and not the West? I can't see this in any other way than some cultural difference, which is why I exaggerated love for a longer phrase to get the message across.Tachii said: Go ask the Japanese. They love to censor the genitalia, while showing some unique porn that's rarely seen in any other culture. Amazing really. More like they have to, not that they like to... great law, most of the censorship consists only of a small black line across the genitals anyway... |
Jigero said: Drunk_Samurai said: zharnotczar said: The purpose of making real child porn illegal is to prevent minors from being taken advantage of. Correct? I'll admit, I think any form of child porn, real or drawn, is disgusting, but if it's drawn, nobody is hurt. Nobody loses anything. This is one thing that should be left up to the culture to decide, and if there are branches of the culture that enjoy virtual kiddies goin' at it, so be it. Nobody loses anything. Not a single thing. The only problem with your post is calling drawings child porn. If it's drawn it cannot be child porn because it isn't real. Yes and No, if it's a drawing of a real person, then it's child pornography, if it's fictional character then it's not child pornography. If it's drawn it's still a drawing. It wouldn't be child porn regardless. |
| I find it amusing how anything that is even remotely accosiated with sex or sexuality is in danger of being banned, if it hasn't been banned already. I've said something similar to this today, and i'm starting to feel that i'm repeating myself. |
| Trolls. Can't live with them, can't live without them. Because they barge in to every thread YOU can find, that's why. |
| not like anybody would fight against the law. What politician would want everyone to know they like loli cartoons? |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| "Child pornography refers to images or films (also known as child abuse images) and in some cases writings depicting sexually explicit activities involving a child; as such, child pornography is a record of child sexual abuse." If you go just by the look of the character then yes it could be considered child porn but you simply cannot go by looks alone. The problem is that in hentai these characters really don't have a age and are not real so they cannot be called children or child porn by this definition. There is also no abuse in it... either way it shouldn't be banned. Edit wording and spelling |
GogettersApr 14, 2010 4:50 PM
  |
| I'll say what I said in another thread: The reason real child pornography is banned, and rightfully so, is that we as a society have deemed that a child can not properly consent to sexual acts when they are still a minor. We step in to protect them from themselves. With a drawing of a fictional character, there is no consent to be had. There is nobody to protect. Banning fictitious pornography of any kind is not only terribly hard to enforce and a waste of time, but isn't doing anything but censoring art. We don't ban the depiction of child murderers in literature. |
Gogetters said: lol!I shall not allow my lolis to be taken away! D: |
Drunk_Samurai said: Jigero said: Drunk_Samurai said: zharnotczar said: The purpose of making real child porn illegal is to prevent minors from being taken advantage of. Correct? I'll admit, I think any form of child porn, real or drawn, is disgusting, but if it's drawn, nobody is hurt. Nobody loses anything. This is one thing that should be left up to the culture to decide, and if there are branches of the culture that enjoy virtual kiddies goin' at it, so be it. Nobody loses anything. Not a single thing. The only problem with your post is calling drawings child porn. If it's drawn it cannot be child porn because it isn't real. Yes and No, if it's a drawing of a real person, then it's child pornography, if it's fictional character then it's not child pornography. If it's drawn it's still a drawing. It wouldn't be child porn regardless. Not what the law says, if you draw a real child it's still child pornography. (8) “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where— (A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct. Drawings of fictional characters is not child pornography. |
| It doesn't think, it doesn't feel, it doesn't laugh or cry..... All it does from dusk till dawn is make the soldiers die. |
Jigero said: Drunk_Samurai said: Jigero said: Drunk_Samurai said: zharnotczar said: The purpose of making real child porn illegal is to prevent minors from being taken advantage of. Correct? I'll admit, I think any form of child porn, real or drawn, is disgusting, but if it's drawn, nobody is hurt. Nobody loses anything. This is one thing that should be left up to the culture to decide, and if there are branches of the culture that enjoy virtual kiddies goin' at it, so be it. Nobody loses anything. Not a single thing. The only problem with your post is calling drawings child porn. If it's drawn it cannot be child porn because it isn't real. Yes and No, if it's a drawing of a real person, then it's child pornography, if it's fictional character then it's not child pornography. If it's drawn it's still a drawing. It wouldn't be child porn regardless. Not what the law says, if you draw a real child it's still child pornography. (8) “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where— (A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or (C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct. Drawings of fictional characters is not child pornography. Doesn't matter what the law says. The law is wrong. That's the same law that says lolicon is child porn. |
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |