Man faces life in prison over anime child porn

[Noriko Takaya]

General news from the Anime News Network:

New child porn law applies to cartoon and could send previously convicted individual back for life

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A convicted sex offender, who pleaded guilty to receiving child pornography in 1999 and is due to be released from prison on April 1st, could spend the rest of his life in prison for downloading anime that depicted children having sex. According to a report on Richmond based WRIC channel 8 News, the man downloaded at least 20 images of anime pornography involving children being forced to have sex. The images were downloaded on a computer at the Virginia Employment Commission.

Provisions of the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA), a 1996 law that banned virtual child pornography, were thrown out by the US Supreme Court in 2002 on freedom of speech grounds. However WRIC reports that this individual is the first to be charged under a new child pornography law that can apply to cartoons. The report did not specify whether this was a federal or state law, however the US Attorney's Office was cited as being involved. If convicted, he could face life in prison.

Well, I'm not going to condone what this maniac did, but the idea comes to mind as to what will happen to a lot of the anime we watch. I am not a fan of hentai, but some of the anime we watch which isn't does happen to involve characters which are below the age of 18. If indeed some law was passed which we do not know about, that could potentially make anyone out there who owns a Macross DVD guilty of kiddy porn because of Minmay's shower scene. So, I know I am being Chicken Little here crying the sky is falling, but I wonder if there will be any repurcussions in the industry here which distribute anime in this country. Could the road to anime censorship finally be coming back? I did not want to start something political, but I did want to share this story with you out there. Feel free to alleviate my paranoid fears.

[Solscud007]

Uh I think you are getting ahead of yourself in terms of censorship of what is child porn and what is not.

First of all if you are getting "excited" by the shower scene in Macross DYRL, then you need to analyze yourself. and take a cold shower.

The key component in that report, from my interpretation, is the sex issue. The anime children were "forced" to have sex. Now if the anime depicted consensual sex, while still disturbing, may not fall under teh same guidelines. But in the case of nudity, it is not the same as porn. Here is why, pornography is a genre that solicits an emotional response. While similar in thsi aspect to horror films, comedies, drama, romance movies. . . porn elicits a different emotion. Albiet the way in which to elicit that emotion thru the depiction of basically raping children is not right.

Take a look at other forms of censorship. those death videos of people dying or something distasteful like bum fights. these are action/horror/drama type films but are banned. So its not that they are blanketing all anime as porn. they are just adding anime child porn into the realm of banned and incriminating evidence for prosecution of being a pedophile

If the people convicting pedophiles are getting the torches and pitchforks ready over some brief nudity in an anime then they need to grow up. Its like "Oh no girls are showing ankles!!!!!!" cmon its just nudity. so what.

Now little children "forced" to have sex is wrong. and I accept that.

Edited March 28, 2005 by Solscud007

[Dobber]

Uh I think you are getting ahead of yourself in terms of censorship of what is child porn and what is not.

First of all if you are getting "excited" by the shower scene in Macross DYRL, then you need to analyze yourself. and take a cold shower.

He never said he was excited by that seen, child porn is not just sex, it is nudity of a minor also.

Chris

[the white drew carey]

Solscud is completely right here. The article, as posted, gives extremely broad generalizations in just about every aspect. Journalism is notorious for this.

If you're curious, you should look more into this law- is it federal or state? What are the specifics of the law?

Don't get excited, get informed.

[shiyao]

As far as I know, the CPPA was a bill tagged on at the last minute to legitimize the RIAA-lobbied anti-piracy acts that went with it. Downloading music, whatever, but downloading kiddie (even cartoon) porn, bad! You know people, they're like that.

I didn't know they were *that* serious about the CPPA.

[yellowlightman]

Bullshit.

I thought the Supreme Court ruled that drawn child pornography counted as freedom of speech? Either way, going to jail over cartoons is just stupid.. regardless of content, it's a CARTOON.

[ComicKaze]

There was recentely an article in a Canadian newspaper about the police arresting a man for "importing illegal pornographic material" and he was basically a manga importer from Japan and there was hentai manga in there. Somebody at the customs office reviewing incoming parcels called the police.

The journalism editorialized a bit and went to the point where it said: "animated underage characters in pornographic situations - often called anime" (or something like that).

I think the article was later recanted but it was pretty bad, still this guy was arrested for possessing hentai manga which by nature of it's medium cannot possibly be animated.

But this is stupid, a guy importing manga, illustrated depicitions of sexual situations involving characters that appear to be minors can get arrested and charged with possession of child pornography? Aren't child pornography laws designed to protect against real children being abused and depicted in such things? How does illustration, art, and other media even fall into the same catagory? Or are they being proactive now, deeming that posessing illustrations of minors means that you'll later elevate yourself to real children?

[Solscud007]

Wel a similar argument could be said towards other no so nice things. Like take racism. If some one made a cartoon belittling one race or worse a cartoon somewhat glroifying lynch mobs hanging black people or anyother minority? do you think it would be allowed? well I guess they could plea freedom of speech. But still not cool at all.

I think the major issue is that even in animated form it poses a risk. That could endanger children. I dunno it is a stretch but its not hard to understand. Do we really need actual manga "depicting" pornographic themes towards minors?

[Solscud007]

Uh I think you are getting ahead of yourself in terms of censorship of what is child porn and what is not.

First of all if you are getting "excited" by the shower scene in Macross DYRL, then you need to analyze yourself. and take a cold shower.

He never said he was excited by that seen, child porn is not just sex, it is nudity of a minor also.

Chris

uh care to rephrase that? So if im a father will I get hauled off to jail when I change my kid's diaper or dress my kids? oh no they are naked!!!! cmon seriously also what about the Anne Gedes disturbing baby pictures? naked babies in cherub poses sitting in flowers and what not. THEY ARE NAKED!!!!

This law applies to a very narrow bnad of nudity, when in combination with adult sexual themes. just a picture of a naked kid is nothing.

[yellowlightman]

I think the major issue is that even in animated form it poses a risk. That could endanger children. I dunno it is a stretch but its not hard to understand. Do we really need actual manga "depicting" pornographic themes towards minors?

Better the weirdos spend their time with comics than acting out against real kids.

[JsARCLIGHT]

It is my understanding (and belief) that the true "horror" of kiddie porn is not so much the wacked out perv's looking at the pictures but the fact that some poor kid was exploited to make that kiddie porn. Porn does not just magically grow on trees and get picked by warped porn farmers on the porn ranch. The whole moral issue of porn to me is "was someone exploited to make this"? If the answer is yes then it should be outlawed. Underage (sub 18) and kiddie porn are just that, exploitation. Animated porn, while it may be kiddie porn, has zero exploitation. No actual children are getting photographed or violated. Anime kiddie porn falls into a different strata of porn: "morality porn". Yes, I and most other people feel it is morally wrong to abuse children and minors... but when the "children" and "minors" don't actually exsist in the real world no one is actually getting abused, are they? That is the sick loophole in all of this. Yes it is kiddie porn but it is "clean" if you follow my meaning. Porn without the exploitation.

A few co-workers and I discussed the whole topic of "hentai" a while back and while we were all rather put off by cartoon porn we did agree that the sick "allure" of hentai was that it was make-believe and required no actual participants or exploitation of people to make it. It was the base form of porn, the implied kind. In the end we all sort of chalked them up to be like the old Penthouse forum letters, no "real" sex or nudity per se but all the force and impact as if it was there.

There are tons of twisted freaks out there who just want to look at barnyard pictures, anime kiddie pictures and other such nasty things. My feeling is that if the material exploited someone or abused a person or an animal to create then it is reprehensable and needs to be controlled. The grey area comes in when the questionable material exploits no one but the viewer.

Now if these materials can be proven to encite other illegal acts, such as the whole "kiddie porn leads to child molestation" argument then I say ban all of it... but at that point you are judging a man on acts he may commit and not on ones he has committed.

[Radd]

I think the major issue is that even in animated form it poses a risk. That could endanger children. I dunno it is a stretch but its not hard to understand. Do we really need actual manga "depicting" pornographic themes towards minors?

Better the weirdos spend their time with comics than acting out against real kids.

I agree. Child porn laws are designed to protect children from being forced into sexual situations for those taking the pictures. It's not so much the pictures themselves that are the bad part, so much as that a child was sexually abused to create them. In illustrated images, there is no abuse at any point. It is nothing but a picture.

As for what can be construed as pornography? Well, that really depends on who's performing the witch hunt. I remember a while back a politician (I believe it was a Senator) wanted nudity in all forms removed from museums, on the grounds that children go into museums and can see these "pornographic" images. I think I recall a picture of the guy standing in front of the Statue of David, with a cloth around the statue. This was ages ago, so I may be confusing the details, but you get the idea.

In one of the early Macross Zero threads, when the episode came out with the flashback to young Sara listening to her father talk one of the board members cried, "Child Porn!" and declared himself offended.

[GobotFool]

The 1st thing that came into my head when reading this article was that these were cartoon fantasy pictures this man is getting arrested over. No child was molested or harmed in making these. (unless the artist used live models) If one can become convicted based on what type of fantasy entertainment one watches (no matter how sick) then we are in alot of trouble.

The problem with say "real" child pornography is that a real live individual below the legal age of consent has been exploited. Many other fantasy films use consenting adults, where the acts depicted might be illigal, such as murder, rape, ect, however the participants are legal adult, who without any other form of coercian outside of the money they are being paid, are consenting to performing before the camera and what is being portrayed is nothing more than a performance. I am not talking just pornography here. I am refering to mainstream Hollywood movies where actors portray murder, rape, and other forms of illegal activity.

As distastful as even cartoon portrayals of child porn might be, they are in the end pictures where no real child was exploited. The day we can become convicted based on just our fantasies (no matter how twisted they are) will be a troubling day.

Edited March 28, 2005 by GobotFool

[Noriko Takaya]

He never said he was excited by that seen, child porn is not just sex, it is nudity of a minor also.

Chris

Thanks for understanding what I was getting at.

However:

Yes, it is the same old song and dance story as usual regarding this subject as it has been brought up before, but given the massive influx of puritanical feelings the American government has had of late because of what happened with the Janet Jackson boob flying out of nowhere debacle, it is cause to worry because every Tom, Dick and Harry is worried now because of what goes out on television or radio. Now we have a government agency locking up a man (albeit a creep who deserves it), for life because he downloaded some possible hentai pictures of Asuka and Shinji having a tentacle sexcapade.

All I am saying is that we need to keep an eye on the political as well as moral ramifications of what may occur in the future.

I'm done with this.

[Hikuro]

*starts deleting some of his hentai collection* ladedah joke

[Panzer]

A few co-workers and I discussed the whole topic of "hentai" a while back and while we were all rather put off by cartoon porn we did agree that the sick "allure" of hentai was that it was make-believe and required no actual participants or exploitation of people to make it. It was the base form of porn, the implied kind. In the end we all sort of chalked them up to be like the old Penthouse forum letters, no "real" sex or nudity per se but all the force and impact as if it was there.

you must have a lot of time on your hands at work if you're discussing such retarded #hit.

my whole department is these emo-music-movie nerds who have the most serious conversations about the stupidiest things such as what you said. I don't mean to go off on you but I really hate my fellow co-workers for what they do. they waste so much time conversing about that crap...

[Hikuro]

That's why its sometimes fun to be paid by the hour!

[1st Border Red Devil]

*starts deleting some of his hentai collection* ladedah joke

Hehe, don't laugh but there is some legally made hentai that either is going to be withdrawn from the market or never brought to the States. I can think of several myself: Just about anything by U-jin, the entirety of the Cream Lemon series (which is too bad, it was good hentai for its time), the End of Summer and the F Cubed series among others.

[JsARCLIGHT]

you must have a lot of time on your hands at work if you're discussing such retarded #hit.

my whole department is these emo-music-movie nerds who have the most serious conversations about the stupidiest things such as what you said. I don't mean to go off on you but I really hate my fellow co-workers for what they do. they waste so much time conversing about that crap...

I have round-table lunches at my office... and seeing as I'm the owner of the company I can waste as much time as I like.

Seriously though, my team is a tight knit group and we talk about all sorts of things. We got onto the subject of hentai because it started the same way it always does with anime: the anime fans of the office were talking about people's misconceptions of anime. They said that outsiders and "non anime people" have stereotypes of anime such as "it's all just mindless violence and people getting raped by demons".

As for the retarded s#it angle we have previously discussed such wonderful topics as:

- why would the federation of star trek get killed by the empire of star wars

- what Cobra did wrong and how they could beat GI Joe

- why did people actually like the Partridge Family

- what does a burning ewok smell like

- why Halo sucks but for some reason Halo 2 does not

When you work in an office doing graphic design with many an artist sitting side by side with many a computer and sci-fi dork you get these weird topics of conversation in the lunch room. I like to keep my shop fun... has not failed me yet.

[Panzer]

When you work in an office doing graphic design with many an artist sitting side by side with many a computer and sci-fi dork you get these weird topics of conversation in the lunch room. I like to keep my shop fun... has not failed me yet. 

thats exactly the environment I work in: two graphic designers and myself, a product developer.

I hate listening to them and the endless coversations they have about stuff like that. I guess that stuff is fun to talk about but it all just seems so meaningless... like a bad scene from the movie "Clerks".

I prefer to just keep my nose to the grindstone and just work. I like to talk about that stuff OUTSIDE the office. Guess I don't come off as being the most social guy in the eyes of the nerds but oh frickin' well. atleast I'll have a job at the end of the day because I actually get my stuff done.

Edited March 28, 2005 by Panzer

[Sumdumgai]

Anime isn't real, so this puritanistic bs is really annoyingly stupid. I'm American and I'm living in Europe right now. It makes me laugh a lot, but whenever I see American tourists come here and gasp in shock at posters of ads with nudity in it, I can't help but get annoyed as well.

It's a boob, women have them. Considering a lot of stuff they put on tv with women almost popping out of ridiculous costumes for some retarded show, they sure seem shocked at seeing nipples.

If that law is federal it is a potential problem to the anime industry because of the possibilities of how much that law can be generalised by politicians. Suddenly we might lose some legitimate titles that have no sex with underaged girls, but implies rape: Fushigi Yuugi as an example. I believe the anime version of Tenjo Tenge would count to (haven't seen it and I don't plan to ).

Just because there's nudity in an anime with underaged people could mean trouble. Playboy is considered to be pornography and it's just nudity with no sex; just breasts, legs, and butts. If nudity is considered porn then we lose Ranma 1/2, Tenchi Muyo, My Neighbor Totoro (bath scene), and Akira because there is nudity with underaged people.

I don't watch that many new series anymore, but I get my dvds mainly from the US. It'd really get annoying to have my selection limited because some puratinistic jerk-offs thought that for the betterment of mankind this law should be generlised to encompass all that is "immoral" and with puratinistics that's everything...

[Jemstone]

Hmm... This is a rehashed topic of sorts also using Minmay's shower scene as an example of kiddie porn. There was one about this kind of thing years back over at RT.com. I'm not worried. If the old favorite "Fast Times at Ridgemont High" film is still widely available and nobody's going nuts about taking that off the shelves then I think we're safe. Jennifer Jason Leigh's character was supposed to be just 15 when we saw her in LOTS of sexual situations and a full frontal nude scene that even makes me blush. Yet, nobody's ever gone after it as child pornography. I've seen this applied to soem anime as well. Kite, the REAL directors cut, for a while was being banned. Supposedly all over the world yet it's readily available in Germany to my knowledge.

Still being arrested for having manga or even the hentai for that matter is just stupid no matter how twisted the subject material is.

Edited March 28, 2005 by Jemstone

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

I just saw an uncut version of Kite and an episode of cool devices where this chic who looks pretty young is raped by this old guy who I think is some corrupt cop.

There's also this H doujin where Faye Valentine from cowboy bepop is having a threesome with Edward (the annoying red-haired girl) and Ein (the dog).

I don't know about you, but does watching those hentai scenes count as porn? These sweeping laws are pretty farting powerful! As far as I'm concerned anything that is hand drawn, of characters that are completly fictional should not count as porn since that means I could just create my own cartoons, (no matter how crapily they resemble real people) call these characters little kids, have them be raped by stickmen, who I've called adults, give you the finished work and put you to jail for possessing it. (well maybe I planted it on your pc and named it "barely legal stickmen porn" as a joke when we were swapping files. But it would count as anime if I made the stickmen look real enough)

No matter how bad a repuation some of the animated violence and sex in anime gets in the mainstream press, I would hope people would see the ridiculousness of having sweeping laws that categorise works of fiction with characters that are not real as actual porn, and actually pressure thier government to throw them out.

Pedophiles surely don't need a helping hand to get softened sentences for real crimes they've commited, but they should go to jail only when they've been caught in possession of real porn where there has actually been a victim involved in all of this.

Even if it was illegal I wonder how enforcable something like this would be? For example say if I was a cartoonist and I drew a bunch of pictures for myself (in the style of anime), of characters that were underage, (I decided to make these fictional characters below barely legal age) and had them being raped by some adult woman? ("Cheerleader is raped by hot female PE teacher" scenario? )

Of course the drawing style was really horrible since my skills suck at doing figures but you get the point. I could get arrested for possesing illegal child porn from my own work! There would be no clear distinction between what's real and made up.

There's also the issue of digitally altered images. What if I had uber l33t photoshop skills and edited an image so it looks like a celebrity is doing a little baby from the anne geddis calander? And what about CG porn and 3d models? Holy poo nobody would be safe. With digital technology I can see all kinds of messes when they start introducing sweeping laws categorising fictional characters doing things that would be totally illegal in real life suddenly as "pornographic" material.

I don't care what morals you have, even if you have strict ideas about what is acceptable to be shown in the mainstream media that a majority have no problems with (totally understandable) but surely even those people can see the failure in systems like this one.

On a slightly OT subject does anyone trust disney anymore?:

http://www.anomalies-unlimited.com/Disney.html funny stuff!

^

Now I'm willing to bet the place where lots of pedophiles would go to work, is to work at places where they have easy access to kids. Could pedophiles (possibly working at disney) be subliminally corrupting youth around the world to have sex with them? It seems these days you can't even rely on kids cartoons to provide family entertainment anymore. No wonder there is all this controversy about micheal jackson and his neverland ranch..

I'm American and I'm living in Europe right now. It makes me laugh a lot, but whenever I see American tourists come here and gasp in shock at posters of ads with nudity in it, I can't help but get annoyed as well.

Now, now.. There has to be some limit to what is acceptable. One of the things people forget is that just because you want to bare it all, doesn't mean we all want to have to see it. It goes beyond religion or morals and more a case of: have some dignity. How would you like it if you were living with a fat fugly next door neighbour who you were forced to see naked every morning because suddenly the laws were so releaxed you couldn't do anything about it? And don't say, "just don't look" cause they are going to be in your face all the time.

What I fear are people who shove thier "it's natural so get used to it!" attitude down every one else throats as if they have no consideration for how people of different cultures want to raise thier children. If you want to prance around naked in a forest that's cool, just find a forest where other nudists are while the rest of us clothed people enjoy the freedom to not have to see people's nudity because of laws that are too relaxed. I'm sure lots of people are comfortable with thier own bodies and the beauty of the human form, and I'm fine with that, but that doesn't mean I should tolerate (or even have to be polite to the person) about voicing my displeasure upon seeing your naked grandmother's wrinkled up body which would put me off my breakfast.

Sure nudity is great when you are surrounded by hot sexy women, but it's more dignified for some people when others are forced to wear clothes and cover themselves up. We aren't all living in areas like that depicted in the show baywatch where you never see old, ugly, fat or hairy people around and all the women have great tits, ass, nice skin, are young and good looking etc..

Edited March 28, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Pat Payne]

Wel a similar argument could be said towards other no so nice things. Like take racism. If some one made a cartoon belittling one race or worse a cartoon somewhat glroifying lynch mobs hanging black people or anyother minority? do you think it would be allowed? well I guess they could plea freedom of speech. But still not cool at all.

I think the major issue is that even in animated form it poses a risk. That could endanger children. I dunno it is a stretch but its not hard to understand. Do we really need actual manga "depicting" pornographic themes towards minors?

That's exactly it, Soulscud. Free speech law is a very tricky thing. In my perfect world, the KKK'd be shut down, but so long as they're not inciting (and that's basically putting a gun in someone's hand and saying "kill that person") they can;t be touched for their filth.

First, while the Constitution says that Congress shall make no laws abridging free speech, assembly, press or religion, the courts have ruled often that at times a compelling national or social interest can allow them to bend those restrictions.

The interest has to be weighed as being considerably higher than the risk to freedoms, though to be kosher. For instance,the famed Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes made the famous argument in Schenk v. US, 1919[?] that the government could not condone, and would be within its rights to pass a law banning the shouting of "fire!" in a crowded theater that was likely to cause a fatal stampede (the case in Schenk hinged on a man who was trying to incite draft-dodging during WW1) In the same way, the courts and government can ban what it calls obscenity, or at least not extend to it the full 1st Amendment guarantees of other speech. Child porn fails all measures of the obscenity test curently in use:

a) It is seen as outrageously offensive by nearly any community standard anywhere in the country;

b) It caters not just to a prurient but indeed a deviant interest; (although the test looks at merely prurient interests)

c) In large measure, it has no redeeming social, political, scientific, literary or artistic value (that's why coffee-table books of non-sexual nude minors as well as old paintings and sculpture that depict nude minors are usually cleared).

The compelling interest, often, is that pedophiles not only use child porn to get off themselves (which is icky enough) but also can use it to "groom" children: socializing them into believing that relationships like that are normal and proper.

The Federal Government (with the exception of the FCC) has largely taken itself out of the game of attempting to ban normal pornography (although there are some disconcerting rumblings from certain sides of the aisle recently), although as recently as the 1960s the Post Office was stopping and confiscating copies of "Lady Chatterly's Lover" and "Ulyssees" on the grounds of obscenity (given the test cited above, both of them are blatently not obscenity as the gummint defines it!) Even earlier after a spate of vety racy and violent movies ("Extase" with Hedy Lamarr [1932(?)] which featured full nudity of the star and "Scarface" with Paul Muni [also 1932(?)] which was about as bloody as many action movies today) the Government mulled a censorship board of its own based on ones then working non-stop in Boston and elsewhere. The movie industry, to forestall that, put a man named Will Hayes in charge of the industry's own censorship board, one that lasted until the '60s and the advent of the ratings system.

Further, once we take the Federales (and gladly, kiddie porn) out of it, things become more dicy. The Federal government and most (perhaps all) states have free-speech guarantees in their constitutions, ones that say that they will not restrict free speech. There are, more often than not, no such guarantees in local charters. And some localities (counties, municipalities, cities, hamlets, villiages, etc.) are death on anything that they consider obscene -- and they don't always use the Supreme Court's test. "Night Shift Nurses" is an example. That one, so I've heard, was cut for ... let's just say some unhygenic scenes that ran counter to three localities' laws (I do not know the three, the CPM Rep who mentioned it to ANN refused to say) CPM had to cut those twenty minutes for a reason:

Hypothetically, if you sell something legally pornographic in San Francisco to a buyer in New York, and it passes through certain towns in Tennessee (or Utah, or Kansas, or Nebraska, or Georgia, or Mississippi...), if the postal inspector there inspects the package and sees it, he can (and most likely will) prosecute -- EVEN THOUGH THE PACKAGE WAS NEVER MEANT TO REMAIN THERE MORE THAN A COUPLE OF HOURS. Just the mere fact that it reached that place by the whim of the Postal Service en route to its final destination is enough to violate the law of that town. And they can ask Governor Ahnold to extradite you and your company for obscenity proceedings -- even though the wider community may not have been aware of its existence within the city limits. That's happened a number of times with internet porn companies as well as with videos and magazines.

Now, of course, you yell "Freedom of speech! Slippery slope!" I don't think by restricting the animated kiddie porn of the type mentioned, Kitty Media or Critical Mass are going to be put out of business. That kind of stuff would never be sold legally in this country anyway, not only because it's against the law, but because the market for it is in negative numbers. No retailer would dare put that on their shelf, and no company would risk the slings and arrows for selling it openly here. And, as I said, the government has to meet a high bar for legal pornography before they can ban it, so I'm not losing sleep over this, since it won't affect your right to watch Jenna Ja,meson or Mido Miko.

I am, though, concerned that in some news articles, they've lumped all anime in with that lolicon garbage.

Edited March 28, 2005 by Pat Payne

[Noriko Takaya]

Update

From the Anime News Network:

Additional information concerning this case suggests that the individual was originally convicted on federal charges of receiving child pornography. As a part of his parole, he was prohibited from viewing any pornographic material. As such, the case against this man appears to be due to a parole violation, not a "new child pornography law", as the original article suggested. ANN will continue to follow this story as it develops.

Okay, so the pitchforks and torches are being put away for the time being.

[1/1 LowViz Lurker]

But the argument pat is: should laws like it be changed? The article mentioned this was a new law.

See animation isn't really porn when you take into account they are characters in a fictional world. If you went to prison for merely possessing a manga with some questionable child nudity or child sex (take some of the fan made fictional H-Doujins which may involve young characters) it's a bit harsh to say the person is a pedophile and should go to prison for life isn't it? (in the above article the person was a previous offender though)

If the laws are too sweeping in thier definition of porn it could include anything you make with photoshop, cg art, any hand drawn work etc. Not just anime. Which to me is very surprising to make the link between fantasy characters and real people when for a long time people have seen porn as traditionally real sex acts involving real people with real victims. (in the case of child porn)

I want to see pedophiles behind bars where they belong as much as the next concerned parent, but it's a sad fact that a lot of anime has:

-child nudity

-characters who look young

-underage sex (technically any hentai where a young girl who its hard to justify as being barely legal, not necessarily a child, is doing a much older person could be seen as pedophilia. eg "student does older teacher" sceneario)

It would be similar if say you took a hardcore S & M video and went to jail because the material could be mistaken as the same thing as a videotape of someone really being raped and tortured.

edit: thanks noriko. Clears up the confusion. doh!

Edited March 28, 2005 by 1/1 LowViz Lurker

[Pat Payne]

See animation isn't really porn when you take into account they are characters in a fictional world.

I'm sorry, Lurker, but that argument doesn't hold water. Porn is porn, no matter if it is done with real live models or by moving drawings. It is the depiction of a sexual act for the tittilation or arousal of the viewer.

If you went to prison for merely possessing a manga with some questionable child nudity or child sex (take some of the fan made fictional H-Doujins which may involve young characters) it's a bit harsh to say the person is a pedophile and should go to prison for life isn't it? (in the above article the person was a previous offender though)

That's one reason they went so hard on him. HE VIOLATED HIS PAROLE AFTER HAVING BEEN CONVICTED WITH A SIMILAR OFFENSE. Life may be a bit harsh, granted, for his offense (although for molesters [a different matter in a sense] death is even too good for them), but as I said, and I still stand by it, depicting child sex has been found by the US government and the courts to be obscene and therefore undeserving of 1st Amendment protections. That being said, nobody's saying that we all should go to jail because Minmay's nude for a few seconds in DYRL.

Now, you do have a valid argument if you twist my premise a bit: Another reason for restrictions on child pornography is that a crime (and a heinous crime) is committed when the porn is produced -- the molestation or rape of a child. It is true that that crime does not happen when it is depicted through ink and paint -- then it is merely a matter of the artist's imagination.

Yet, as I mentioned in my earlier post, another use that pedophiles have for kiddie porn is "grooming" -- sexualizing their young victims to make it easier to molest them.

If the laws are too sweeping in thier definition of porn it could include anything you make with photoshop, cg art, any hand drawn work etc. Not just anime.

Let me answer your hypothetical with a question: If we allow animated child porn, what then? Where do we stop? Where is the line to be drawn? (pardon the pun ) I agree that adult porn and adult hentai (even the "wink, wink, nudge, nudge we known she's really 16, but for the purposes of the US release, she's a college co-ed" genre like La Blue Girl) should be allowed. But I cannot agree that patent child porn, even if no actual children were harmed is permissible only because no children were harmed. It is such an abhorrent act -- even by proxy -- that we have put it, almost by itself, beyond all pales of civilization, humanity, decency and tolerance.

Which to me is very surprising to make the link between fantasy characters and real people when for a long time people have seen porn as traditionally real sex acts involving real people with real victims. (in the case of child porn)

It's interesting that you used the word "fantasy." That's one of the problems I see with with it. It seduces some into thinking that having sex with young children is just another fantasy, and sooner or later they attempt to carry that fantasy to reality. I only need point you to the examples of David Westerberg here in the U.S. and Tsutomu Miyazaki in Japan. Granted, you could argue that the same case has been made against violent video games. However, we know of more people who have played Doom, Quake, GTA or other games and not shot up a school than we have of people who have viewed child porn and not had urges to go and have sex with a child.

I want to see pedophiles behind bars where they belong as much as the next concerned parent, but it's a sad fact that a lot of anime has:

-child nudity

That, by itself, is not illegal. There are naked pictures of kids all the time in National Geographic, and nobody has seriously considered pulling NG off of the stands. Context has a lot to do with how the nudity is viewed. A good case in point is the bath scene in Totoro (a more family-friendly anime cannot be found): Both father and daughter are obviously naked, yet there is no sexual subtext either in the movie itself or as "fanservice" -- they're merely doing as many Japanese do, enjoying a hot bath.

As I mentioend before, there is a three-part test used by the courts to determine obscenity:

1) Does the material, when taken by prevailing community standards, tend to be viewed as offensive?

2) Does the material serve a prurient interest?

3) Does the material have any redeeming literary, scientific, political, social or cultural merit?

-characters who look young

You lost me here, Lurker. Sorry.

-underage sex (technically any hentai where a young girl who its hard to justify as being barely legal, not necessarily a child, is doing a much older person could be seen as pedophilia. eg "student does older teacher" sceneario)

That one is harder to justify. I would gamely take a crack at it by saying that unlike works where at least one of the participants is patently underage (such as Kite), a rationalization could be made that since the characters look full grown (and since Japan has a different age of consent than we do -- IIRC, it's 16 as opposed to our 18) that the characters are meant to be viewed as full-grown adults. And even with Fast Times at Ridgemont High -- society has acknoledged that teenagers are sexual creatures. Parents would rather they not be, and if you get into bed with a 16-year-old, and you're 18 or older, you're gonna go to the juzgado, yet there is nothing wrong society-wise with having adult actors play older teenagers (15-16 up), because that is what we kind of expect. It is a double standard, I agree, but it's there.

It would be similar if say you took a hardcore S & M video and went to jail because the material could be mistaken as the same thing as a videotape of someone really being raped and tortured.

Apples and oranges. In an S&M video, all participants are willing and old enough. In child pornography, at least one participant is not of legal age. In live-action kiddie porn, a crime is being committed. In animated kiddie porn, there is no crime behind the scenes, granted, yet, it still serves a purpose as a tool for pedophiles both through "grooming" as well as spurring them to move from fantasy to action.

Edited March 29, 2005 by Pat Payne

[MSW]

Um...the guy has not been CONVICTED yet, he has simply been charged...

Further, anime like Macross are clearly exempt under the "Miller test" (from: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...w/obscenity.htm )

Miller v California sets out the "modern" test for obscenity.  After years in which no Supreme Court opinion could command majority support, five members of the Court in Miller set out a several-part test for judging obscenity statutes: (1) the proscribed material must depict or describe sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, (2) the conduct must be specifically described in the law, and (3) the work must, taken as a whole, lack serious value and must appeal to a prurient interest in sex.

even if convicted, the case will float up to the suprime court level eventualy (which is how they hear cases to preside over constitutional issues)...

And if, in the case of Ashcroft VS Speach Coalition (the case that got the "virtual child porn" bits of the CPPA thrown out) is any indicator (it involved photo real CG models of child porn)...well then styleized drawn artwork like hentai anime will be dissmissed too...

heck the judge will probbly dismiss the case long before it reaches a conviction just on the legal precident established by the suprime court

[Pat Payne]

Thanks, MSW, I'd forgotten about Miller's provision that the acts depicted must be otherwise mentioned by law.

I don't think it'd be thrown out though, only since his crime was apparently violating a court injunction against viewing any porn at all (legal, illegal, or extra-crispy) as part of the terms of his parole (which is also harsh, but I don't know the facts of the case).

IMHO, they won't give him life. They'll just send him back to prison and have him serve out the rest of his term for the original offense of recieving and trafficking in child porn (perhaps with another shot at parole a few years down the line if he's been a good little pervert)

Edited March 29, 2005 by Pat Payne

[1st Border Red Devil]

[Apollo Leader]

Edited March 30, 2005 by Apollo Leader

[MSW]

:opps: Sorry Pat, I had only read far enough into the thread before makeing my post to see some concern about Macross (and other such anime) suddenly being considered child porn because of a shower scene...I should have read the whole thread as it now seems the guy is only being charged with parole violation (I missed that and your posts containing much more reasoned, logical assestment of the situation)

As always there is more to the story then fits into some tiny little news summary...especialy true when even a hint of politics are involved

[Zentrandude]

lol that is the most elite picture I ever seen. something like that jay leno would show.

[Guest Bromgrev]

And it's not exploiting children in any way ...

[Kliqonator]

If indeed some law was passed which we do not know about, that could potentially make anyone out there who owns a Macross DVD guilty of kiddy porn because of Minmay's shower scene.

Not true. The thing about child porn is that it is not considered porn by nudity alone. The child or children have to be engaged or appear to be engaged in a full sexual act. This is why it is technically not illegal to take pictures of children in their underwear, or to take pics of children in the nude.

The technicality is that because they are minors, they cannot give consent to anyone for anything. Technically, the parents are the ones who give consent. This is why you'll hear about people who take naked pictures of children being arrested. They're not being arrested for child porn or the sexual molestation of a child, but they are being arrested for the unconsented exploitation of a child. This is also why it's completely legal for the parents to take naked pictures of their children. Families that live in nudist colonies take nude family pics all the time, and it is completely legal. And I believe that is the family's right, if they choose.

As for anime, I don't get aroused by kids having sex, so seeing it wouldn't do anything for me. Legally, you cannot put an legal age on animated characters, so there is a loophole which can be used for now. So until that loophole is plugged, animators technically have the right to animate children having sex, I would imagine.

EDIT:

If these issues have been addressed already, I apologize for the redundancy. I didn't have the patience to go through each post.

Edited March 30, 2005 by Kliqonator