Go Back   the Magicball Network > Forums > MBN Main Forums > Off topic
Buy LBA1/Relentless from GOG.com Buy LBA1/Relentless from DotEmu Buy LBA2/Twinsen's Odyssey from DotEmu Buy LBA2/Twinsen's Odyssey from GOG.com Buy Little big Adventure from GOG.com or DotEmu Buy Little big Adventure 2 from DotEmu or GOG.com

Welcome to the Magicball Network.

You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Off topic General off-topic chat goes in here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #101  
Old 2012-01-06, 21:56
Lightwing Lightwing is offline
.
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,963
Send a message via ICQ to Lightwing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axx View Post
There is a study on pedophiles somewhere about the web (google it, i'm at work so I cant) that found that 40-50% of pedophiles had actively viewed and collected cartoon child pornography, which is quite a significant. Imagine then if we were to poll non-pedophiles what the percentage would be (<5%, <2% ?).
Imagine is all you can do since no proper study on the subject exists. Its theories are as unfounded as the equally "logical" presumption that viewing cartoon pornography creates an outlet for pedophiles and lessens their desire for actual child abuse.

There is no data for either side, both of which are equally "logical," and the statistic you provided should not be used to prove, or indicate the possibility of, an inverse relationship. For example:

40% pedophiles view cartoon pornography, therefore X percentage of viewers of cartoon pornography are pedophiles. This would be a groundless conclusion. The only conclusion one can draw is that pedophiles like depiction of child porn. Well, yes. Big surprise.

It is of course necessary for parents to protect their children. I wouldn't leave my child with a stranger regardless of whether he's a lolicon or the Pope himself. You don't leave kids with strangers.

But the common sense you are talking about (viewing lolicon = viewer is likely a pedobear) is fallible and is another thing entirely. It represents a point of view that played a part in putting people in prison for viewing imaginary content in which no person, let alone children, were harmed.

Both UK and USA have a law that criminalizes possession of obscene content based on the absolutely unproven theory that exposure to this content promotes and encourages child abuse. We are talking 5-20 years in prison for receipt of virtual imagery which is less realistic than what your mind could imagine.

I am not saying you support these laws. I am saying that your point of view is in line with that of the majority, which when combined together, has caused politicians to spam laws of legislature in order to get your vote. Unfortunately this point of view does not extend into criminalizing film makers of "Hostel", "Saw", or "Kill Bill." Otherwise a lot of people would wake up and remember why burning the flag has been permitted as a freedom of speech.

Last edited by Lightwing; 2012-01-06 at 22:04.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 2012-01-06, 22:01
Battler's Avatar
Battler Battler is offline
Welcome to Zirla!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Koper, Slovenia
Posts: 5,322
Send a message via ICQ to Battler Send a message via AIM to Battler Send a message via MSN to Battler Send a message via Yahoo to Battler
Quote:
In brief, viewers of such material most likely do have pedophile tendencies, and therefore it would be wholly irresponsible, perhaps criminal, to leave one's child in their care.
Quote:
There is a study on pedophiles somewhere about the web (google it, i'm at work so I cant) that found that 40-50% of pedophiles had actively viewed and collected cartoon child pornography, which is quite a significant. Imagine then if we were to poll non-pedophiles what the percentage would be (<5%, <2% ?).
Quote:
Imagine then if we were to poll non-pedophiles what the percentage would be (<5%, <2% ?).
No, we should do the opposite of the study you cited and ask consumers of lolicon and shotacon, whether they have paedophile tendencies. That would be much more relevant as the question here is not whether the majority of paedophiles consume lolicon or shotacon (they obviously do) but whether the majority of consumers of lolicon and shotacon are paedophiles.

Anyway, I did quote citations from Wikipedia about a lot of lolicon/shotacon consumers actually NOT being paedophiles, at least in Japan. And considering such media IS prevalent in Japan as compared to the rest of the world, speaks for itself.
You dismissed it as unreliable without even bothering to follow the reference the Wikipedia article provides for it and doing some research on it and gather facts that support an assertion of unreliability.

This is one of the experts that was quoted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroki_Azuma
A PhD in Culture and Representation at University of Tokyo.

Other cited works include:
^ a b c Shigematsu, Setsu (1999). "Dimensions of Desire: Sex, Fantasy and Fetish in Japanese Comics". In Lent, J.A.. Themes and Issues in Asian Cartooning: Cute, Cheap, Mad and Sexy. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press. pp. 129–130. ISBN 9780879727796.
^ a b Ito, K. (1992). "Cultural Change and Gender Identity Trends in the 1970s and 1980s". International Journal of Japanese Sociology 1: 79–98. doi:10.1111/j.1475-6781.1992.tb00008.x.
^ a b Shigematsu, Setsu (1999). "Dimensions of Desire: Sex, Fantasy and Fetish in Japanese Comics". In Lent, J.A.. Themes and Issues in Asian Cartooning: Cute, Cheap, Mad and Sexy. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press. p. 138. ISBN 9780879727796.

I'd gladly obtain the works myself but most likely they're in Japanese so that would per se be a hurdle for me to read it as my Japanese isn't that good, especially at reading/writing level. That, and I don't have a stable monthly income at the moment as I'm unemployed and looking for a job so I can't really afford any literature at the moment.

But alas, I'll see if I can find an online copy of said literature that's viewable for free. Lib.aldebaran.ru might have it though it's not certain.
Edit: Not on lib.aldebaran.ru, will try to do a Google search then.
__________________
Join #doki-doki on irc.ringoflightning.net for some nice chit-chat about anime, manga, and other aspects of Japanese culture now!

Last edited by Battler; 2012-01-06 at 22:27.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 2012-01-06, 23:09
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
"Its found that 100% of murders drink water, therefor...."

You have to be very carefull with statistical relationships.

Its not impossible that one thing cause's or encourages the other - but exactly like with videoganes and violent films - its hard to proove. Most studies are small, flawed, or clearly bias to an existing belief or, even the best, are normaly miss-represented by the press.
---
What might be possible, I guess, look at general sexual videos to see if they encourage higher levels of sexual activity. Or if it decreases the likelyhood as people get "satisfaction" from them enough.
I havnt a clue what the average results of this would be.

Regardless though, if your going to ban owning fictional images of obscene sexual things, you should certainly first ban those disturbingly young beuty pagents in the US. ("Little Miss Sunshine" etc).
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 2012-01-06, 23:44
Axx's Avatar
Axx Axx is offline
The return of
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightwing View Post
Imagine is all you can do since no proper study on the subject exists. Its theories are as unfounded as the equally "logical" presumption that viewing cartoon pornography creates an outlet for pedophiles and lessens their desire for actual child abuse.
But therein exists the problem. In the absence of a study, which itself would be quite difficult due to the private and controversial nature of the subject, we have to make the most logical decision on whether to allow such people to remain in the presence of our children based on our own life experience.

My conclusions are derived, as previously pointed out, from the motivation of different demographics for the explicit material they view. Straight men tend to watch straight porn, gay men watch gay porn, and so on... Extrapolate these cases onto that of child cartoon porn viewers and you end up with a probable theory.

Quote:
40% pedophiles view cartoon pornography, therefore X percentage of viewers of cartoon pornography are pedophiles. This would be a groundless conclusion. The only conclusion one can draw is that pedophiles like depiction of child porn. Well, yes. Big surprise.
But that also means that the person who views cartoon child porn now makes up a demographic shared by pedophiles, which is why I would personally quite instantly be far more weary of them.

Case example. Company A releases a product targeted at children. There are 5 production lines. 2, or even 1 of the production lines are found to contaminated with toxic elements that are very harmful, and may even be lethal. All products are identical, and their source is untraceable. Do you buy that product? Change the odds to 1 production line in 100, would you still consider buying the product?

I would imagine the answer is no.

Quote:
It is of course necessary for parents to protect their children. I wouldn't leave my child with a stranger regardless of whether he's a lolicon or the Pope himself. You don't leave kids with strangers.
Agreed.

Quote:
Both UK and USA have a law that criminalizes possession of obscene content based on the absolutely unproven theory that exposure to this content promotes and encourages child abuse. We are talking 5-20 years in prison for receipt of virtual imagery which is less realistic than what your mind could imagine.
The UK and the USA, like all countries, have reactionary laws. Laws created in response to public opinion and not necessarily in the best interest of justice. Until an actual crime is committed I do not support state sponsored punitive measures against individuals.

Quote:
I am not saying you support these laws. I am saying that your point of view is in line with that of the majority, which when combined together, has caused politicians to spam laws of legislature in order to get your vote. Unfortunately this point of view does not extend into criminalizing film makers of "Hostel", "Saw", or "Kill Bill." Otherwise a lot of people would wake up and remember why burning the flag has been permitted as a freedom of speech.
I am not responsible for the decisions of politicians. We shouldn't be made to shed our beliefs, mute our opinions, or discard our responsibilities because it may or may not result in politicians enacting new excessive laws that infringe on the rights of their subjects.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 2012-01-06, 23:49
Axx's Avatar
Axx Axx is offline
The return of
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkflame View Post
first ban those disturbingly young beauty pageants in the US. ("Little Miss Sunshine" etc).
They really are messed up. Both for the 'sexualisation' of the young girls, and the quite terrible example of parenting on display.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 2012-01-07, 06:04
Lightwing Lightwing is offline
.
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,963
Send a message via ICQ to Lightwing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axx View Post
My conclusions are derived, as previously pointed out, from the motivation of different demographics for the explicit material they view. Straight men tend to watch straight porn, gay men watch gay porn, and so on... Extrapolate these cases onto that of child cartoon porn viewers and you end up with a probable theory.
By that logic, you would not leave your 18 year old daughter in the presence of a heterosexual man. I'm assuming the answer is the opposite, though. In which case, shall we assume that a viewer of lolicon is more likely to commit rape than a viewer of "Xtreme Bondage Pussycats (18+)"?

The truth is that those "weirdos" are no more likely to rape children than fans of Sadomasochistic Bondage. Pornography, no matter the type, does not necessarily make you want to be a rapist. Child porn is illegal not because people watching it might flip out and rape kids, but because the kids in it have already been raped and watching the material promotes more distribution of it. Since 2003, US says it's no longer the case based on the opinion that simply possessing virtual material makes you a promoter of real child abuse. Just like being a fan of Heist movies makes you a promoter of bank robbery. Or, you know, Slasher films a promoter of teen murder.

I guess my argument is strictly based on principle since we both agree on never leaving kids around strangers. Still, I am perplexed regarding the discrimination in your logic. True logic means that when there's no date, you don't assume one unproven thing over another unproven thing. As I said, it sounds equally logical to say that potential child rapists calm down by watching hentai. But with lack of scientific findings, I'll be quiet about it.

As an aside, I want to point out that I never suggested that anyone mute their beliefs in order to avoid excessive legislature. But you've clearly indicated that, putting the "children alone with strangers " argument aside, viewers of underage hentai nearly automatically indicate child abusers, which is an opinion that an unconstitutional stature like § 1466A fully supports - by giving people jail time for purchasing obscene material.

I have another logical decision in mind. It would seem logical to assume while looking at countless media reports, that all Muslims are terrorists. Granted there's no data, logic still dictates it's a good theory. I only wonder what kind of legislature that type of widespread thinking might support. For the time being, all Muslims or Arabic looking men, or Indians who are easily mistaken to be Muslims even though they are everything but, have been stopped and humiliated at every Airport in America by Border Customs patrol. My friends included. Thank god for logic.

Last edited by Lightwing; 2012-01-07 at 06:45.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 2012-01-07, 14:02
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
lightwing is making the most sense here, just saying.

people are such hypocrites, pretty much everybody has some fetish or other he would never admit to in public.
it doesn't matter if your thing is hentai, or if you like "mature" porn, bondage, gay, or whatever. everybody has a thing.
so i don't see the fucking point on picking on just one of those fetishes and calling them "weirdos" and "perverts".
i'll bet most people here have at some point viewed a sexual video they wouldn't exactly want others to know about.

sure pedophelia is a digression from the norm, but so is homosexuality, or people who get off having their nipples pinched.
it's true that out of these pedophilia is problematic because of the children being exploited, but you can't just go to a person and say
"hey, your specific fetish is problematic, you have to switch fetishes!"

it obviously doesn't work that way.
so what are you going to do? prevent these people from reading lollicon or whatever that's called?
and that's supposed to stop them from...what? being pedophiles? they already are pedophiles.

saying that forbidding pedos from viewing kiddy hentai will reduce the chances of them having sex with a kid is like saying that withholding porn from a hetero would reduce his will to have sex with women.
(in fact, the opposite is probably true, if pedos have lollicon to fap to that keeps their sexual needs in check, and it acts as a substitute for what would otherwise be having sex with actual children).
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.

Last edited by Reek; 2012-01-07 at 14:19.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 2012-01-07, 16:24
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axx View Post
They really are messed up. Both for the 'sexualisation' of the young girls, and the quite terrible example of parenting on display.
Take it a step further and look at one of the most infamous murders in recent U.S. history, that of Jon-Benet Ramsey. Given that the murder remains unsolved and the finger has been pointed at just about everyone (from her parents to her teenage brother to a random guy who confessed and then it was proven his DNA did not match the crime scene whatsoever), it remains that she was in an industry that attracts pedophiles and she was raped either shortly before or after she was murdered.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 2012-01-07, 16:29
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battler View Post
Then inform the media better.
I'm really confused here. And I'm being totally honest, Obras. You're claiming the media is misrepresenting information, right? But then, when a situation where neither we (as in we the 'people') nor the media have access to, say, sealed court documents (just as an example, iirc we're referring to evidence in a case where the defendant plead guilty), where does the responsibility fall? You say "then inform the media better," but who is supposed to inform the media?

Isn't the burden of investigative journalism half the job of the media (the other being reliably reporting their findings)? Maybe I'm just misreading what you've said. And far be it from me to not be critical of the media. But like I said before, if no one has access to it, and barring some unethical leak from someone inside the court system, how can we rebuke the media in this scenario?
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 2012-01-07, 16:31
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anakin View Post
saying that forbidding pedos from viewing kiddy hentai will reduce the chances of them having sex with a kid is like saying that withholding porn from a hetero would reduce his will to have sex with women.
(in fact, the opposite is probably true, if pedos have lollicon to fap to that keeps their sexual needs in check, and it acts as a substitute for what would otherwise be having sex with actual children).
Disagree. Masturbation doesn't make me want to stop tappin' hoes any less. Just sayin'.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 2012-01-07, 16:31
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightwing View Post
Double-J, for example, perfers you as his ultimate sex partner, but that doesn't mean that he's going to rape you when you two are alone in the same room.

[Goes to check with Double-J if this is true]
I'd assume that he's not only expecting it, but would be disappointed if the first thing I didn't do upon entering his room was jumping his bones.
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 2012-01-07, 17:15
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-J View Post
Disagree. Masturbation doesn't make me want to stop tappin' hoes any less. Just sayin'.
imagine a situation in which you are forbidden to have sex with women (this is analogous to the predicament pedophiles face), and now there are only two courses of action:
1)despite being forbidden to fuck women, you can still fap and dl porn
2)even fapping and watching porn is not allowed

in which of the two scenarios do you think you're more likely to break down and just go rape someone?
i think the answer is clear.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 2012-01-07, 17:15
Battler's Avatar
Battler Battler is offline
Welcome to Zirla!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Koper, Slovenia
Posts: 5,322
Send a message via ICQ to Battler Send a message via AIM to Battler Send a message via MSN to Battler Send a message via Yahoo to Battler
Quote:
I'm really confused here. And I'm being totally honest, Obras. You're claiming the media is misrepresenting information, right? But then, when a situation where neither we (as in we the 'people') nor the media have access to, say, sealed court documents (just as an example, iirc we're referring to evidence in a case where the defendant plead guilty), where does the responsibility fall? You say "then inform the media better," but who is supposed to inform the media?

Isn't the burden of investigative journalism half the job of the media (the other being reliably reporting their findings)? Maybe I'm just misreading what you've said. And far be it from me to not be critical of the media. But like I said before, if no one has access to it, and barring some unethical leak from someone inside the court system, how can we rebuke the media in this scenario?
With "inform the media" better, I'm pointing at the guys at DoJ who make press releases about the cases. They could simply mention the titles of the work, it'd be enough for at least the manga/anime fans to figure out what the incriminated stories were about and how graphical they were.

As the cases was reported, we don't know what works were incriminated, so we can't judge how graphical the works are.

Also the fact every person working in the prosecution for this case was someone with no knowledge at all about Japanese culture, even had its adverse affects. I mean, for God's sake, when the guy was given the pre-trial release, he was forbidenn to view any manga/anime at all, regardless of content. And when he dared visit Anime News Network, he was accused of violating his release conditions even though ANN hosts no manga or anime on their server, just information of it. Hell, he might have simply gone there to read what people there said about his case.
This to me just smells of the people handling his case having no idea what anime or manga are and simply assuming all of them were lolicon hentai.

But then, having people with no idea on the subject a case is about handle the case, has a long history in the US. Let's just remember the US inquiry about the sinking of the RMS Titanic, where they appointed mostly people with little to no nautical knowledge to handle it. And that was 100 years ago (it was in 1912).
__________________
Join #doki-doki on irc.ringoflightning.net for some nice chit-chat about anime, manga, and other aspects of Japanese culture now!
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 2012-01-07, 17:19
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anakin View Post
imagine a situation in which you are forbidden to have sex with women (this is analogous to the predicament pedophiles face), and now there are only two courses of action:
1)despite being forbidden to fuck women, you can still fap and dl porn
2)even fapping and watching porn is not allowed

in which of the two scenarios do you think you're more likely to break down and just go rape someone?
i think the answer is clear.
Fallacy: rape still exists even for those who have 'normal' sexual outlets.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 2012-01-07, 17:21
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battler View Post
With "inform the media" better, I'm pointing at the guys at DoJ who make press releases about the cases. They could simply mention the titles of the work, it'd be enough for at least the manga/anime fans to figure out what the incriminated stories were about and how graphical they were.

As the cases was reported, we don't know what works were incriminated, so we can't judge how graphical the works are.

Also the fact every person working in the prosecution for this case was someone with no knowledge at all about Japanese culture, even had its adverse affects. I mean, for God's sake, when the guy was given the pre-trial release, he was forbidenn to view any manga/anime at all, regardless of content. And when he dared visit Anime News Network, he was accused of violating his release conditions even though ANN hosts no manga or anime on their server, just information of it. Hell, he might have simply gone there to read what people there said about his case.
This to me just smells of the people handling his case having no idea what anime or manga are and simply assuming all of them were lolicon hentai.

But then, having people with no idea on the subject a case is about handle the case, has a long history in the US. Let's just remember the US inquiry about the sinking of the RMS Titanic, where they appointed mostly people with little to no nautical knowledge to handle it. And that was 100 years ago (it was in 1912).
I don't think most newsdesks have 'anime experts' on hand for these sort of cases. Just like they wouldn't have experts on bovine husbandry or druid tree worshiping. It doesn't mean they're incapable of reporting the news. I'm sure that there are journalists who have no interest in a given story yet they cover it because they have a unique skill set which can apply to any situation.

Also, do we really need the Titanic in this thread too? I'm not sure if it's fair to compare (or identify a trend) in reporting in a contemporary setting to 1912.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 2012-01-07, 17:41
Battler's Avatar
Battler Battler is offline
Welcome to Zirla!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Koper, Slovenia
Posts: 5,322
Send a message via ICQ to Battler Send a message via AIM to Battler Send a message via MSN to Battler Send a message via Yahoo to Battler
Quote:
I don't think most newsdesks have 'anime experts' on hand for these sort of cases.
I was talking about the guys doing the trial (lawyers and so on) when I talked about people handling the case. The media/newsdesks simply reported what came out of the law guys.
But the prosecution should have gotten experts on Japanese culture to aid them and so should have the judge. They didn't and therefore the case was mishandled in my opinion.

And I brought in the Titanic because the majority of the inquirers in the US Inquiry on her sinking were senators with little to no nautical knowledge. On the other hand, the inquirers in the British iniquiry were the same organization whose regulations caused the Titanic to have not enough lifeboats on board, therefore the conflict of interest in the British inquiry was huge.
__________________
Join #doki-doki on irc.ringoflightning.net for some nice chit-chat about anime, manga, and other aspects of Japanese culture now!
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 2012-01-07, 18:05
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-J View Post
Fallacy: rape still exists even for those who have 'normal' sexual outlets.
Fallacy: what you said doesn't contradict what I said.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 2012-01-07, 19:57
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anakin View Post
Fallacy: what you said doesn't contradict what I said.
Evidence that providing alternative outlets (for any demographic) prevents rape? Otherwise, what you said is bunk.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 2012-01-07, 20:08
Double-J's Avatar
Double-J Double-J is offline
Magic Ball Master
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,411
Quote:
Originally Posted by Battler View Post
I was talking about the guys doing the trial (lawyers and so on) when I talked about people handling the case. The media/newsdesks simply reported what came out of the law guys.
But the prosecution should have gotten experts on Japanese culture to aid them and so should have the judge. They didn't and therefore the case was mishandled in my opinion.
Ah, I see. In that case, the DoJ has several (hundreds) different divisions based on the type of crime. I would not discount that investigators who handle these types of crimes are familiar with this type of media, though perhaps not manga itself.

That being said, I'm not sure how Japanese culture is relevant here (as far as advisement). It wasn't Japanese culture on trial, it was the comics he possessed that were considered to be in violation of the law. At best an expert could explain that this is not considered abnormal in Japan; however I've never heard of cultural differences being used as a defense (in this manner, I suppose).

Quote:
And I brought in the Titanic because the majority of the inquirers in the US Inquiry on her sinking were senators with little to no nautical knowledge. On the other hand, the inquirers in the British iniquiry were the same organization whose regulations caused the Titanic to have not enough lifeboats on board, therefore the conflict of interest in the British inquiry was huge.
It's not entirely unsurprising, given that most Congressional committees are formed by party alliances and not based on qualifications (at least to some degree). For example, I don't believe Henry Waxman has the faintest idea about steroids or baseball, yet he was the most vocal chair in the recent investigations in performance enhancing drugs.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 2012-01-07, 21:12
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-J View Post
Evidence that providing alternative outlets (for any demographic) prevents rape? Otherwise, what you said is bunk.
But that's not what I said? maybe if you read it a few more times you'll get it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.
Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old 2012-01-07, 23:31
Battler's Avatar
Battler Battler is offline
Welcome to Zirla!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Koper, Slovenia
Posts: 5,322
Send a message via ICQ to Battler Send a message via AIM to Battler Send a message via MSN to Battler Send a message via Yahoo to Battler
Quote:
Evidence that providing alternative outlets (for any demographic) prevents rape? Otherwise, what you said is bunk.
Well I did quote a correlation between increase of lolicon/shotacon in Japan and decrease of paedophilia, but it's just that, correlation. There's no proof of causation (unless Wikipedia overlooked it, which is once again why I'll get the relevant literature as soon as I can afford it and as soon as I can read Japanese properly).
However, it must be said that there's absolutely no hard evidence for the claim that all lolicon/shotacon consumers rape children or even want to rape children. In fact, I quoted a PhD stating a lot of consumers of it aren't even remotely attracted to real-life children. So at the moment both sides are unverified.

Quote:
Ah, I see. In that case, the DoJ has several (hundreds) different divisions based on the type of crime. I would not discount that investigators who handle these types of crimes are familiar with this type of media, though perhaps not manga itself.
They might be familiar with actual child pornography, but if they're not familiar with Japanese manga or at the least proficient enough in Japanese, they see what the graphical scenes, if any, are to be interpeted as in context of the entire story they appear in and therefore much more likely to attribute less artistic value to it than there might be.

To put an example, let's say you imported a hypothetical Chinese translation of Nabokov's "Lolita", which had an illustration of the protagonist kissing the 12 year old title girl as its cover, I can see why a prosecution lawyer who doesn't know Chinese could easily misinterpret the book to be a guide to recruiting little girls and creating a plausible case to get the receiver of said book into jail.

And in this case we also have very little "incriminating" material in comparison to the defendant's whole collection of manga. And yet, it was judged obscene enough to get him to plead guilty of transporting obscene material across international borders.
Let's ask ourselves, why? Given the amount of "incriminating" material in comparison to the whole collection, and given the fact no actual child pornography was found, it seems obvious the guy isn't a paedophile. It seems he enjoyed any kind of stories, and some just so happened to contain such stuff. That, and the law doesn't clearly say such stuff is illegal in US (as opoosed to Canadian law which clearly states it's illegal).
Here in EU such a case would fall at the least due to the law not being clear enough regarding the legal status of the incriminating material.
The material obviously wasn't jduged child pornography which is why its possession wasn't what the guy was got for in the end - it was simply judged obscene by the Miller test (which BTW is way too subjective so another court might have passed a completely different judgment in this case) so they got the guy at international transport of such material.
Which makes me wonder, if possession of this kind of stuff (specifically, anything not child pornography but that still fails to pass the Miller test) is legal, as per how this case went, then why the heck is importing it illegal? So the stuff is only legal if it's produced in the same state it's obtained in? Where's the logic here?

Quote:
It wasn't Japanese culture on trial, it was the comics he possessed that were considered to be in violation of the law. At best an expert could explain that this is not considered abnormal in Japan; however I've never heard of cultural differences being used as a defense (in this manner, I suppose).
If the people doing the Miller test didn't know enough of the material and the stories it appealed in, how can it even be reasonably judged obscene or not? Material should be judged in context. Maybe the material is obscene out of context but has an artistic value when considering it's part of a story and maybe even more so if it's known what story it is in and why it is in that story. None of that was considered in this case.

In short, the Miller test judges something not obscene if it can be reasonably states it has artistic value. The material here incriminated, considering it's generally part of a story and seldom appears on its own, I'd say does carry artistic value. Someone at the very least proficient in Japanese would be able judge that. Someone who isn't... well hardly. Someone who isn't even proficient in Japanese wouldn't even be able to see the story in those manga, let alone judge if the story is worth anything.

Not to mention the thing it claims about "children raped by animals" ---> if the animals in the incriminated manga are meant to repesent Japanese divinities (and that's very possible), then it's as obscene as an Ancient Greek depiction of Zeus impregnating a virgin-like goddess while appearing as a horse. But when the people running the Miller test aren't even proficient in the language the material they're judging is written in, let alone know anything about the culture it comes from, it's very likely they'll be yelling "obscene" as they wouldn't even be able to see the context, yet alone understand it.
__________________
Join #doki-doki on irc.ringoflightning.net for some nice chit-chat about anime, manga, and other aspects of Japanese culture now!

Last edited by Battler; 2012-01-07 at 23:42.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 2012-01-08, 16:31
Darkflame's Avatar
Darkflame Darkflame is offline
Classic
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Sol, Earth, NL
Posts: 23,836
Send a message via ICQ to Darkflame Send a message via AIM to Darkflame Send a message via MSN to Darkflame
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double-J View Post
Fallacy: rape still exists even for those who have 'normal' sexual outlets.
I think what Anakin was pointing out is that that statement is irrelivant unless the sexual activity causes a increase in the number.
__________________
http://fanficmaker.com <-- Tells some truly terrible tales.
-
Phones & Tricorders & Blobs & Bombs & 3D Printers & TVIntros also;stuff
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 2012-01-08, 17:44
Reek's Avatar
Reek Reek is offline
Party animal
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: israel
Posts: 9,491
Send a message via ICQ to Reek Send a message via MSN to Reek
it's really simple:
guy 1 = completely deprived of any form of sexual release
guy 2 = has at least some form of sexual release

guy 1 is more likely to commit rape.

how can anyone disagree with that? does anybody here contest the fact that being deprived of sexual release is bad for your mental health..?


close inspection of my posts will reveal that i never said that people with normal sexual outlets never commit rape.

there's a difference between "less likely to do X" and "will never do X"
i cannot make it any simpler than that.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpaceGuitarist
there's no room for subtleties, which are so important in personalities such as mine.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 2012-01-09, 03:29
Axx's Avatar
Axx Axx is offline
The return of
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightwing View Post
By that logic, you would not leave your 18 year old daughter in the presence of a heterosexual man.
Depending on the situation and the level of attraction, he may attempt to sleep with her. While rape is far less likely, the situation allows for mutual consent, which would be absent in situation earlier mentioned involving the child. Briefly, two adults may have consensual sex, and any sex involving a child is rape.

Quote:
I'm assuming the answer is the opposite, though. In which case, shall we assume that a viewer of lolicon is more likely to commit rape than a viewer of "Xtreme Bondage Pussycats (18+)"?
Rape per se was never mentioned. Would he be more likely to make advances on a person(s) that more closely suit his specific tastes, then yes, he probably would.

Quote:
The truth is that those "weirdos" are no more likely to rape children than fans of Sadomasochistic Bondage. Pornography, no matter the type, does not necessarily make you want to be a rapist.
Agreed. The problem here is that, as far as most pedophile subjects interviewed in this study were concerned, it isn't rape, its delusionaly seen as 'love'. They don't necessarily intend harm.

But as far as the law is concerned, it is still rape, even if the child 'consents'. They may have empathy, and they may well care about their victims, but that doesn't prevent them from acting out their urges with the knowledge it may well cause perpetual suffering in their victim.

Quote:
Child porn is illegal not because people watching it might flip out and rape kids, but because the kids in it have already been raped and watching the material promotes more distribution of it. Since 2003, US says it's no longer the case based on the opinion that simply possessing virtual material makes you a promoter of real child abuse. Just like being a fan of Heist movies makes you a promoter of bank robbery. Or, you know, Slasher films a promoter of teen murder.
The comparisons are somewhat irrelevant. I did mention quite specifically the viewing of such materials for sexual pleasure, as opposed to curiosity or general entertainment. No one really busts one out to slasher.

Quote:
I guess my argument is strictly based on principle since we both agree on never leaving kids around strangers. Still, I am perplexed regarding the discrimination in your logic. True logic means that when there's no date, you don't assume one unproven thing over another unproven thing. As I said, it sounds equally logical to say that potential child rapists calm down by watching hentai. But with lack of scientific findings, I'll be quiet about it.
I'm not calling them guilty, I'm merely stating that I would be more cautious around such individuals. I have a child, and they are attracted to sexual depictions of children. Why wouldn't I be more suspicious?

Quote:
As an aside, I want to point out that I never suggested that anyone mute their beliefs in order to avoid excessive legislature. But you've clearly indicated that, putting the "children alone with strangers " argument aside, viewers of underage hentai nearly automatically indicate child abusers, which is an opinion that an unconstitutional stature like § 1466A fully supports - by giving people jail time for purchasing obscene material.
No, thats not what I meant. The first distinction is that people identified as pedophiles simply need to be attracted to children in order to merit the term. There are people who quite publicly state their pedophilia tendencies and remain quite free to go about their business because they have not, to the best knowledge of the state, committed abuse. Attraction in itself cannot be a crime.

The second distinction is that viewers of child cartoon pornography probably have pedophile tendencies. Not to say they are pedophiles, but that they may harbor, to whatever small extent, an attraction towards children, which makes them a higher risk person to leave one's child with unsupervised.

It's not to say they will rape my child, it is to say that the probabilities of harm to my child have increased. I never suggested any of this is set in stone, and never do on topics I have not researched throughly enough. I once again am simply stating that given the knowledge we have, and the responsibility of parenthood, it would be inappropriate to leave ones child with them unsupervised as Mr. Obras has suggested.

Quote:
I have another logical decision in mind. It would seem logical to assume while looking at countless media reports, that all Muslims are terrorists. Granted there's no data, logic still dictates it's a good theory. I only wonder what kind of legislature that type of widespread thinking might support. For the time being, all Muslims or Arabic looking men, or Indians who are easily mistaken to be Muslims even though they are everything but, have been stopped and humiliated at every Airport in America by Border Customs patrol. My friends included. Thank god for logic.
I don't quite see the connection. And in any case, welcome to reality, its already happening

Last time I arrived at an airport, I was questioned no less than 4 times by different custom agents, then made to submit my luggage to a separate screening process, and made to leave from a different exit. Made me uncomfortable, very uncomfortable, but I complied and was done with it in a half hour.

There's always a sign somewhere that states that the checks are random. I'll be damned if they are, I always get pulled over without fail.

Quote:
it obviously doesn't work that way.
so what are you going to do? prevent these people from reading lollicon or whatever that's called?
and that's supposed to stop them from...what? being pedophiles? they already are pedophiles.
What, no, what are you on about? Were discussing whether you'd leave them with your child alone with such an individual. I could care less what people fap to as long as they're no where near my child, and particularly if they enjoy child cartoon pornography (which is what were debating).

The debates about parental responsibility, not pedophile witch hunts.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 2012-01-09, 03:59
Axx's Avatar
Axx Axx is offline
The return of
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,677
Also, Ron Paul.

Never really been excited about a GOP candidate, but this man is the most honest politician I seem to have ever followed. That to me explains in part all the ridicule and hate others in the race and the general media appear to throw at him. I really would prefer him over Obama any day.

Some highlights from the debate yesterday:-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvZ5D...deFOAAAAAAAAAA

Santorum coming in second in the Iowa caucus is quite scary. This is a man who doesn't believe in separation of church and state, espouses religious based discrimination, lies at every opportunity (some of the accusations he made of Obama were on several occasions the exact opposite of what really happened).

One of his sticking points that particularly worry me was that all Muslims were secretly working to establish Sharia law in the US. While there are a few trouble makers, that accusation is completely ridiculous, fear mongering at its worst. The problem I take with that is that most Muslims in the west don't want sharia law, are for separation of the mosque and state, and are against the few insane salafi/whabi inspired individuals who have that mindset.

Romney is so boring, he really is quite typical. I guess his popularity comes from people being more comfortable with what they know that what they don't. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't applies here quite nicely.

Rick Perry is an idiot, there's not much else to be said. And I care too little about the others to have spent any amount of time following them up.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
RPGLBA NEWS) How is the project leader? CrazyBee Fan Games 31 2016-11-17 14:32
LBA Speedracing [December 2008 / January 2009] Kitarii General 44 2009-02-08 17:08
What Happened on the 19th Of June 2006? Axx General 17 2008-08-22 22:38
Korean LBA 2... Battler LBA Modifications - General 9 2005-03-16 23:08
n00b of the month award - December morshem Off topic 47 2003-12-29 01:49


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 15:19.


News Feed
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, the Magicball Network