Forum

Shay Guy wrote:

all-tsun-and-no-dere wrote:

Drawings do not, assuming the artist is not using photographic child pornography as references.

Do we know how common this is? I remember it coming up in another discussion, might've been here.

I don't think there's been any significant research into it. After all, how would you go about checking the numbers? How many artists would admit to it, even anonymously? Not a lot, I'm willing to bet.

AmpersandsUnited wrote:

Juno016 wrote:

If extra context on this helps as well, Akamatsu-sensei and his fellow "Freedom of Expression Party" members currently holding seats have not yet mentioned anything about "culture war" conspiracy nonsense from the West--as far as I'm aware.

I don't know if you consider it "culture war nonsense" but he is aware of the recent trend in the west of casting voice actors that match a specific race. But in general I would say most of the "culture war" stuff doesn't apply to anime and manga given how different the entertainment industry is handled and run compared to their western counterparts. But I would wager a lot of the more savvy mangaka are aware of certain points of contention in pop culture as we've seen an increase in loan terms like "cancel culture" being used by Japanese creators.

If by your narrow definition of "the West" you are referring specifically to your country (the U.S.), I feel I should remind you that your country is only part of Western civilization and does not represent the vision of an entire culture.

Besides, there are countries that, by necessity and even if they could do it, cannot afford to hire actors from the same ethnic group of the character they are dubbing, like Mexico, where there are not many black voice actors to begin with, and those that exist are dedicated to other professions outside of dubbing, although I must admit that there are many voice actors of Asian origin here, especially actors of Japanese descent.

Obviously, each Western country has its own problems in this regard, and unlike the U.S., there are not many actors who belong to a particular ethnic group, even if they would like to be more diverse, so the American experience or that of other countries in the Anglo-sphere cannot be applied to others outside of it.

BH0 wrote:

You have no idea how many japanese creators are against censoring loli/shota content, lmao. Just read about the controversial "non-existent youth" bill. From Kentaro Miura to Rumiko Takahashi to George Morikawa to CLAMP to many, many more who produce and/or defend this kind of content. Such a "vocal minority", right?

I don't think I've ever seen a Japanese creator advocate for any kind of censorship. It just seems like a bad thing to do. Any law or mindset that would ban a series for some kind of obscenity law with minor characters could lead to classics like Dragonball and Sailor Moon being banned due to certain content with minor characters in those books.

As far as it being mainstream or a vocal minority goes, I think it's the wrong way to look at it. We see it mentioned by popular all-ages anime like Doraemon and Detective Conan. Popular Japanese singers and comedians will mention it and make jokes about it. Lolita culture is trendy in Japan. You can find tons of Vtubers with millions of subscribers from Hololive and even Nijisanji openly talking about enjoying it on stream. Even if one argues it's limited to the anime community, the anime community is an incredibly big and profitable industry that very directly caters to fans of those kind of content. When I think of the term vocal minority I think of a group that could not fiscally sustain any kind of hobby or business despite supporting it very loudly in the news or social media.

LeonardRhine82 wrote:

Oh great... the conservative guy that consistently defends fanservice of minors and lolicon, as an ideal freedom of expression.
[...]
I can't with the "right" of sexualizing minors. I just can't.

Here's a very respectable, very responsible, good faith "leftist" (at least, in his own words, he says he'd be "so far to the left of any political party [in the U.S.] that [his] politics out there are considered irrelevant") explaining why anyone might want to defend lolicon as an expression of free speech:

https://journal.neilgaiman.com/2008/12/why-defend-freedom-of-icky-speech.html?m=1

This blog post is, of course, an opinion, but it's a really thorough approach to a fan question that reflects how a lot of people in this thread, regardless of their political leanings, feel.

I'm absolutely not conservative myself, and I do understand the fears of what a society that defends lolicon as free speech might look like to those who presume its mere existence is harmful, but there is no clear science (yet) that has been able to prove harm, and it's not an easy thing to prove ethically anyway. And honestly, calling Akamatsu-sensei a "conservative" is another example of people not quite understanding that Japanese "conservatism" and "progressivism" is a lot different from the U.S. or even Europe. For instance, Akamatsu-sensei and his political co-companion, Yamada Taro, have both spoken up for and/or directly campaigned for the legalization of gay marriage in Japan. It wasn't what either of them ultimately campaigned on, but Yamada has had direct experience helping same-sex couples find legal ways to exercise rights that married people usually have, and attended the very small gathering a few years ago when the federal government was hearing public debate on the topic. I'm not saying Akamatsu-sensei or those in his party are "progressive", but rather that you couldn't fit them into either category based on US criteria (whatever that is).

AmpersandsUnited wrote:

I don't know if you consider it "culture war nonsense" but he is aware of the recent trend in the west of casting voice actors that match a specific race. But in general I would say most of the "culture war" stuff doesn't apply to anime and manga given how different the entertainment industry is handled and run compared to their western counterparts. But I would wager a lot of the more savvy mangaka are aware of certain points of contention in pop culture as we've seen an increase in loan terms like "cancel culture" being used by Japanese creators.

I was living in Japan when a lot of "culture war" topics started appearing on social media, messenger apps, and matome sites (all considered sensationalized media that makes money by increasing engagement, even at the expense of credible journalism, like tabloid papers in the US). They usually covered controversies in the U.S. and, combined with an increase in subtitled political/conspiracy videos on youtube (where non-English-language content is HEAVILY unregulated), they helped bring the Western "culture war" topics to Japan, where they spread into the mainstream. That's why all my Japanese friends know what "political correctness" and "cancel culture" are. That's why writers like Konaka (whose blog I followed when he began rewatching and reviewing Digimon Tamers shortly before the infamous stage play) talk about Alex Jones and entertain 9/11 hoax conspiracies on their blogs.

In any case, I wouldn't really expect Akamatsu-sensei, or many people living in Japan, to know the real context surrounding "affirmative" casting, but his response (even as I re-read it) is fine and nuanced enough that I'd agree with it. "Let the US figure itself out and let Japan figure itself out" is a very common sentiment in Japan and I'd probably point to the long history of Japan's fears of the colonialism of Asia, its history of US occupation, its history of Japanese politicians bowing to foreign pressure, and so on as to why so many Japanese people feel the threat of Western influence corrupting their free expression or culture unvoluntarily is credible. Those fears most definitely reframe the "culture war" in a way that give things like "political correctness", or at least the way it's described by some conspiracy theorists, extra oomph.

all-tsun-and-no-dere wrote:

The "freedom of expression" side contends that since drawn child pornography does not directly involve child exploitation, it's ultimately harmless, while people in favor of restricting it believe that while it may not cause direct harm, it encourages harmful behaviors such as a permissive attitude toward pedophilia, or even cause people to develop a paraphilic attraction to children.

Thank you for adding this reminder of one of the biggest selling points of the pro-censorship camp. But we frequently get posts like this:

LeonardRhine82 wrote:

Repeat with me "I'm defending the right to create child pornography".

1) Those are children.
2) It's pornography.

You can say "it's 2d" all you want. It's Child pornography... even if it sounds wrong to you.

They consistently insist on straight up demanding drawn works and photos are indistinguishable to fake their championing the protection of children. Do they commit any other energy or effort on that front? Highly unlikely. Those demands that call for limiting the rights what media and entertainment others choose to consume prove they show no substance or productive sympathy beyond that battle cry I just pointed out.
Because they are not interested in even bothering with the reasoning you provided @all-tsun-and-no-dere.

BH0 wrote:

I'm surprised nobody has posted his main policies yet:

3. Protect creator and fan creations. Doujins, cosplays ect. will not be considered illegal nor will the creators be sued for copyright infringement. Offer health benefits and better pay for freelancers in anime, manga sections. Have better health coverage for mangaka, and other ACG industry people. Create an archive for all ACG creations. Allow out of print, or no longer copyrighted books to be available as free.

He's already at work at some of the things mentioned on his platform as just the other day he put together a team for preservation of past games:
https://twitter.com/KenAkamatsu/status/1547048482552262656 (tl. DeepL)

Quote:

Yesterday at 8:00 p.m., the Digital Archives Society's Legal System Subcommittee's Digital Rights PT.
A select team of experts has been formed to start working on "legal preservation of past games in a playable state. The archiving and utilization of old content that is being lost is an area in which I have a strong passion. I want to make this a success.

...

Past wrote:

They consistently insist on straight up demanding drawn works and photos are indistinguishable to fake their championing the protection of children. Do they commit any other energy or effort on that front? Highly unlikely. Those demands that call for limiting the rights what media and entertainment others choose to consume prove they show no substance or productive sympathy beyond that battle cry I just pointed out.
Because they are not interested in even bothering with the reasoning you provided @all-tsun-and-no-dere.

Your description of them is so very much reminiscent of the pro-life crowd in USA who are so so concerned of the unborn ones. But once it comes to issues real babies/children/parents face(poverty, healthcare, education, support for parents etc) etc we don't hear so much as a whimper from them Confused

...

Shay Guy wrote:

all-tsun-and-no-dere wrote:

Drawings do not, assuming the artist is not using photographic child pornography as references.

Do we know how common this is? I remember it coming up in another discussion, might've been here.

I don't know nowadays, because despite what some people think, some things HAVE changed in Japan. For many many decades it was quite common to use Magazines depicting minors as reference, many of those magazines are no longer allowed i think. Catalogues of clothes aimed at kids are normal too, from what i read.

Some use child mannequins and children underwear.

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

Quote:

demanding drawn works and photos are indistinguishable to fake

In reality, the whole "it's about if its fictional or not" comes from people defending it. As i said, it's children pornography, sexualization of minors, and many thing more. I don't change my view depending on the media used.

And it's so "fake", that some authors use real life references, genitals are usually censored (of course, for some reason japan's law doesn't distinguish there, uh?), and people fap to it without problem. But i'm sure people are against genital censorship too.

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

BTW... the fact that people are using as arguments a bill from 12 years ago, and a blog post from 2008 only reinforces what i think. I'm not stuck there.[/quote]

LeonardRhine82 wrote:

I don't know nowadays, because despite what some people think, some things HAVE changed in Japan. For many many decades it was quite common to use Magazines depicting minors as reference, many of those magazines are no longer allowed i think. Catalogues of clothes aimed at kids are normal too, from what i read.

It's a good thing if Junior Idol is going away, as it concerns real underage people. But no-one's defending it to begin with, at least not in this thread.

Quote:

Some use child mannequins and children underwear.

It's quite easy to get anatomically correct ball-jointed dolls in Japan to use as reference(the doll scene is almost as huge as anime figure scene), and there's an excess of pre-existing media to draw inspiration from.

Quote:

As i said, it's children pornography, sexualization of minors, and many thing more. I don't change my view depending on the media used.

Then it's a good thing the law does draw a distinction between the two. One is a crime(victim), the other is not(no victim).

Quote:

And it's so "fake", that some authors use real life references, genitals are usually censored (of course, for some reason japan's law doesn't distinguish there, uh?), and people fap to it without problem. But i'm sure people are against genital censorship too.

The 'no genitals' law is an archaic relic stemming from the occupation after WW2. It would be good, and high time, if it was made away with(a lot of artists, like Megumi Igarashi, have gotten in trouble because of it). And as you said, a lot of people ARE against it.
This law is actually something I hope Akamashi DOES get around to and gets to work to repel, at some point. It certainly fits his platform.

Past wrote:

all-tsun-and-no-dere wrote:

The "freedom of expression" side contends that since drawn child pornography does not directly involve child exploitation, it's ultimately harmless, while people in favor of restricting it believe that while it may not cause direct harm, it encourages harmful behaviors such as a permissive attitude toward pedophilia, or even cause people to develop a paraphilic attraction to children.

Thank you for adding this reminder of one of the biggest selling points of the pro-censorship camp. But we frequently get posts like this:

LeonardRhine82 wrote:

Repeat with me "I'm defending the right to create child pornography".

1) Those are children.
2) It's pornography.

You can say "it's 2d" all you want. It's Child pornography... even if it sounds wrong to you.

They consistently insist on straight up demanding drawn works and photos are indistinguishable to fake their championing the protection of children. Do they commit any other energy or effort on that front? Highly unlikely. Those demands that call for limiting the rights what media and entertainment others choose to consume prove they show no substance or productive sympathy beyond that battle cry I just pointed out.
Because they are not interested in even bothering with the reasoning you provided @all-tsun-and-no-dere.

I wasn't agreeing with our supporting you. As far as I know, there hasn't been and evidence that looking at child pornography makes people more likely to hurt an actual child, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It's just a poorly researched subject.

LeonardRhine82 wrote:

Blanchimont wrote:

tonk82 wrote:

What's even worse, people don't realize how this only holds back Japan's creativity.

I don't see any base for that claim.

Repeat with me "I'm defending the right to create child pornography".

1) Those are children.
2) It's pornography.

You can say "it's 2d" all you want. It's Child pornography... even if it sounds wrong to you.

The very same way you are defending depicting sexual harassment toward women. You can say "it's 2d" all you want. It's still sexual abuse towards women.

The moment Key Visual Works decided that "all-ages" version of their works is the desirable one, they were in the right. The only reason all this fanservice and lolicon bullshit exist in japan, is due to a vocal minority that consume and fap to this kind of contento. And no, that is not right... most japanese people don't even know this kind of content exist.

I suppose you're also in favor of banning depictions of all the other evils as well, like murder, assault, theft, reckless driving, littering...
If so, I guess congrats at least you're not a hypocrite, but you are in the minority. Edit: at least in the US, if the fall of the Comics Code, Hays Code, and Jack Thompson are any evidence...

I am shocked and saddened by the amount of people who support this.

This is honestly really bad news because it means it's going to be much, much harder for drawn child pornography (and please don't delude yourself into thinking it isn't) to be made illegal in Japan.

I support freedom of artistic expression as much as the next person, but there are limits.

These images can be used to groom children for sex, not to mention they normalize the behavior that these kinds of acts are perfectly acceptable.

They have absolutely no place in the world, and there should be strict penalties for people who draw and consume these kinds of things.

More should be done against drawn depictions of incest, rape and bestiality (and yes, this should include "furry") as well.

If it's immoral and people can get themselves off to it, it should be illegal. No exceptions.

Japan should really follow the examples of Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada where these are illegal, and rightfully so.

Acknowledging that you're a single post troll whose expressed views are even more extreme than most (furries? really? does that include other non-human bipedal sentients like vulcans? klingons? mermaids?), I do have some questions to demonstrate how seriously I take you...

Steve D. Ledataovich wrote:

More should be done against drawn depictions

,,,only the drawn depictions? What about literature? spoken word? It's a big world out there! Haven't you ever encountered lemons of underage characters?

And how generally do you mean "people" when you say "[they] can get themselves off to it". Because let me introduce you to Rule 34. And Guro. The latter of which includes especially immoral stuff, and is adjacent to splatter and horror films. (The point being, for anything there's someone who can get off to it, so you can drop the "and people get themselves off to it" and go right from "it's immoral" to "it should be illegal")

Really, the only sensible part of that entire post is the question of grooming and normalization.... had it been accompanied by actual evidence of harm caused by such depictions greater than what using the power of the state to punish the creation and consumption of such depictions would be and the spillover effects on free expression in general.

Gamen wrote:

furries? really? does that include other non-human bipedal sentients like vulcans? klingons? mermaids?

Vulcans and Klingons are simply different species, nothing more. Mermaids, should in my personal opinion since they are half fish.

But if it looks like a dog (Isabella from Animal Crossing, for example), it's a dog.

Gamen wrote:

,,,only the drawn depictions? What about literature? spoken word? It's a big world out there! Haven't you ever encountered lemons of underage characters?

I didn't take those into consideration. That's a good point. Literature could promote a graphic image in the mind, so any textual depiction of child sex abuse should be illegal. As should spoken words.

Thankfully there are some restrictions on speech, such as hate speech and yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

No idea what a lemon is.

Gamen wrote:

And how generally do you mean "people" when you say "[they] can get themselves off to it". Because let me introduce you to Rule 34. And Guro. The latter of which includes especially immoral stuff, and is adjacent to splatter and horror films. (The point being, for anything there's someone who can get off to it, so you can drop the "and people get themselves off to it" and go right from "it's immoral" to "it should be illegal")

People do not generally masturbate to murder or violence, though.

Gamen wrote:

Really, the only sensible part of that entire post is the question of grooming and normalization.... had it been accompanied by actual evidence of harm caused by such depictions greater than what using the power of the state to punish the creation and consumption of such depictions would be and the spillover effects on free expression in general.

I forgot to point out that the "drawings" in question could be based on real children, so that's another good reason why it should be illegal.

A lemon is a sexually explicit fanfic. E.g. (and with apologies to Bo Burnham) a story of all the characters from Harry Potter boinking (lol) each other.

Anyway, good luck with getting sexually explicit art of Ariel from the Little Mermaid punished with jail time and/or fines. /sarcasm

(And yes i did read through the rest, but I don't feel any need to respond...)

Quote:

People do not generally masturbate to murder or violence, though.

I’m pretty sure you’re just a troll, because an adult (or anyone who has been on the internet long enough) can’t actually believe this. The world is a sick, sick place. There’s a reason why there are kinks like rape, gore, vore, amputee, crushing, torture, etc. But like most lolicons and shotocons that I know, most fans of violent kinks keep it within the realm of fantasies. Always fanfiction/fanart.

And it still doesn’t change the fact that if we have to set rules in how we can depict fictional minors or child-like characters, then we would always have to set rules for violence. Because both are considered illegal IRL. It’s no different than when discussing the whole “do violent video games/movies create violent people?” argument.

Quote:

I forgot to point out that the "drawings" in question could be based on real children, so that's another good reason why it should be illegal

.

Not sure about Japan, but I’m pretty sure that in the United States, this is the exception to the rule of fictional content. If it can be proved they the art was indeed based on a real child, that does count as a crime and is highly illegal. And I personally think that’s the best course of action. The art came at the expense of a minor, their identity, and their well being. It should be a crime and (in the US) it is.

Forum - View topic
NEWS: Manga Creator Ken Akamatsu Wins Seat in Japan's House of Councillors

The New Gate Anime Series Review

Tadaima, Okaeri Anime Series Review

Kaiju No. 8 Anime Gets Sequel, Koki Uchiyama Joins Cast

Advance Merch Sale At The KADOKAWA Booth

Studio Pierrot Announces Production on New Magical Girl TV Anime

The Summer 2024 Anime Trailer Watch Party Starts Soon!

This Week in Games - Need-To-Know Nintendo and Neptune Goes To Brazil

Grandpa and Grandma Turn Young Again Anime Series Review

The London Cast of Your Lie in April: The Musical

Frank Wildhorn, Composer of Your Lie in April: The Musical

Lunar Legend Tsukihime: Revisiting the Anime that 'Doesn't Exist'

The Summer 2024 Anime Preview Guide

11 Startup Founders I've Met Who Are Shaking Up the Anime Industry

A Few Moments of Cheers Anime Film Review

This Week in Anime - Yatagarasu Is the Anime to Watch Right Now

Rumiko Takahashi's Ranma 1/2 Manga Gets New Anime

Forum - View topicNEWS: Manga Creator Ken Akamatsu Wins Seat in Japan's House of Councillors

Forum

Forum - View topic
NEWS: Manga Creator Ken Akamatsu Wins Seat in Japan's House of Councillors