Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

So I'm taking a college law class, and one of our pieces of assigned reading this week was the Wikipedia article on child pornography laws in America. Having to read the article made me curious to settle something I've wondered for quite some time: How do our laws compare to those of Japan?

While Japan has some very odd restrictive laws about what can be shown in pornography, I've always gotten the impression that in this one area, there may be strange loopholes. From what I read on Wikipedia (and anyone who feels I'm reading it wrong please feel free to correct me) it seems that while Japan is just as restrictive on actual child pornography, there is virtually no ban on portraying sex with even very young minors in anime and manga.

There seems to have been occasional half-hearted attempts to close up this loophole, but among other things, there are people who have argued that lolicon and shotacon give pedophiles a safe outlet for their desires, as people who are fapping to this sort of hentai are supposedly less likely to go out and actually molest a child.

Now while I would nominally agree that if true, this is a preferable state of affairs to the alternative, as a socially conservative Christian I tend to view pornography of any type as bad. But I was wondering what other people's views on the matter might be?

I really don't have too much knowledge about the laws in regarding lolicon.

As a Christian myself, it's not ok to an extent, real child pornography is not ok. But I am not relly sure on what to judge on people preferences on the actual lolicon/shotacon hentai and connecting it to actual CP.

How is this a "loophole" in the first place? It's not like the animation is just a rotoscope of actual CP, you know.
In my opinion of things, the precedent of "obscene materials" not being protected by the First Amendment will either be overruled or (more likely) severely cut back by a Supreme Court decision in the time-frame of about twenty years from now. That's the argument used when declaring drawings of children engaging in sexual activities illegal (which since 2003 has been applied through the PROTECT Act), and it's something I've thoroughly disagreed with ever since I became a "follower" of US law.

It's worth noting that as long as a specific age isn't mentioned, hentai or eroge with obviously underage characters are allowed in the us.
I see no problem with it seeing as they are just drawings.

@0.9999…=1:

I suppose it's mainly a "loophole" in comparison to the American rules on the matter, where as I understand it, no CP of any kind is allowed, even if it's just drawings.

You seem to be using an uncommon definition of CP. Under law, CP is only actual photographs/videos- this is key, because it is that stuff and that stuff only that you can be punished for making/distributing/possessing without it being found "obscene" first. Which, again, I find to be BS in the first place, but that's how it is for now.

I agree with the people who say it provides an outlet for feelings and desires.

What you described isn't really a loophole so much as just them regarding drawings as not the same thing as real thing. the US has similar laws, Loli and shoata are both protected as art forms as long as no real children are used in the creation.

A loophole would be if they just say "oh this character is actually 20 and just looks young" and getting away with that.

but they also found that many pedophiles genuinely understand what they desire is wrong and when offered safe help they often times went out to get it, and many improved. but often times they are too afraid to get help for these issues and that leads to problems later down the line.

Not just legal but social, rather than people wanting to help people who have desires directed at minors, they simply condemn them as child molesters, even if they have no intention of acting on their actions.

I think Loli and Shota should stay legal and more help should be given to people who suffer from these urges and believe it or not, There are plenty of people who enjoy these kinds of art without being pedophiles.

I can see that you're unfamiliar with our Forums, my friend:

This board, as you can see, is called "Serious Debate", and thus your post does not belong. I believe your brand of humor would be more fit for something that we've chosen to call "Riff-Raff". You can even create a thread there that parodies this one there if you wish. But so long as you're here, though some minor joking around is fine, try to stick to a semi-serious attitude.
Thank you, and please have a good time.

Now you've got me curious on two levels. First, are you saying that loli and shota are not legally considered to be CP in the US? Secondly, are you saying that you think CP should be legal?

@Basilius:

Sounds like you read that Cracked article from a few weeks back. I thought it made some very good points.

1. No, certainly not.
2. Uh… I don't consider it that way either, so why would you assume that? CP is fucking horrible only because of the actual, physically existing children that it exploits in its production. Drawings do no such thing- I hope we can agree on that.

This sounds like a job for Ten Foot Pole Man!
 
But I don't think the world is ready for that hentai.
 
 
I've thought about it like this:

You have a depiction of gory violence in a comic. It's obviously meant to entertain your audience in some way. In more twisted pieces of entertainment (such as "Postal" or more recently "Hatred,") you have games where the ultimate goal is to kill as many relatively innocent people as possible in worlds more or less similar to reality.

These depictions even go so far as to allow you to do such things yourself. So it's not something where the protagonist of a book is going off to massacre a town while you read it: you, the player are given the option to do so (i.e., in playing the game at all) and then the player actually does these in a form of simulation. Men, women, children…all slaughtered in these sorts of games…by you.
 
Of course, if you know more deviant forms of pornography, you know there's a lot out there on violent forms of forced sex including unrealistic tags like "All the way through." But there's also tags that are quite realistic and explicitly state that the scene is that of a rape.

So if violence is allowed against weaker, innocent humans (after some controversy) where you actively instigate such behavior in realistic video games with voice acting, then why would that make less realistic depictions of minors illegal?
 
The simple answer is due to morals that change or don't. Most people in the US see sex in a different light than violence. Gender, sex, and identity is attached to a lot more than simply physical well-being. People kill themselves due to the frustrations of not being straight and/or cisgender, and this isn't even considering any discrimination or bullying. Sex is touchy, so to speak.
 
 
So as long as legislators and their constituencies (and their fundraising entities) feel a certain way, then laws will likely stay as they are in the US at least. Other countries like Australia may be on a different track. It's hard to say what the impetus would be for legislators to say "We should allow that Japanese loli porn over there back here in the US." I think you'd have to find a consistent stream of studies that show that pedophiles are much, much less likely to commit sexual crimes when viewing lolicon or shotacon at their leisure than if they aren't.
 
With actual CP, however, you're exposing minors to the direct gazes of others for sexual pleasure. If those children knew what people were doing to pictures or videos of them, they'd eventually begin to have a very different (at best) view of sex, one which may not be very safe when they begin to learn about their own sexuality and realize they're very attractive to a lot of people much older than them and their age as well. Teasing a man by showing off cleavage is entirely different from doing so when you're not developed enough to have cleavage yet.

Children shouldn't be shielded from sex altogether, but sex is something that needs to be exposed to children at a reasonable rate based on their maturity. And being a porn star (willingly and especially unwillingly) before you're ready doesn't seem ethical with that in mind. That's why I don't think you'll ever see even indirect CP be allowed in the Western world as we know it, and why I don't think you'll get a whole lot of clarity legally regarding depictions of it.

1. Okay, my reading of the Wikipedia article led me to believe this was the case, but I may have read it wrong. Or maybe I'm reading you wrong, since I asked a negative question. Let me ask again: Loli and shota are illegal in the US?

2. More than okay, good! Your wording was a little confusing to me and I wanted to make sure.

2b. Actually, I have heard it argued by some that drawings of children having sex could be used as tools by pedophiles to coerce victims, but this may be a stretch. Certainly the drawings in and of themselves harm nobody in any direct manner, although I'm sure many people find them disturbing. Being disturbing in my opinion would not be sufficient to argue against legality on 1st Amendment grounds, though.

Shota and Loli are NOT illegal in the United States of America, As Long as the Creation Did not involve any Real Life children. The Supreme court decided that.

As long as it is a Cartoon its legal.

That just ain't true, son.

Though the case I just linked to doesn't have anything to do with this particular issue, it demonstrates the fact that nothing within the PROTECT Act of 2003 has been declared unconstitutional.
To quote Wikipedia, it:
"Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition."

I'm just going off what I have been able to buy from legitimate north american distributors. As long as the game has "no identifiable minors", its good to go. So, you can have lolis, just as long as they are never said to be under 18.

American politics at its finest.

Not specific enough that it can be used to avoid sending some people to jail.
but specific enough that if the wrong person gets caught they can get sent to jail.