Forum - View topic

NEWS: Tokyo Reps: 'Nonexistent Youth' Bill May Still Pass in June

Nemo_N wrote:

Mohawk52 wrote: This whole outrage is a storm in a tea cup. The bill is only about which shelf it sells from, not banning it out right. Again, for those who haven't read Dan Kanemistu's articles: Quote: Is this a ban on (loli/shota/BL)? -No, it is not a total ban, since this bill is more about zoning fiction into "general versus adult" catagories. What is scary, however, is that this could very well beginning of bans on fiction based on subject matter, since the bill basically states that "minors, even if they don't exist, should not be sexualized." If they set this as law, they can (and don't fool yourself, they will) use it as the legal basis to outright ban sexual depictions of "nonexistent youths". "Why, if we already assume fictional characters are real people in that other law!" <---that would be the argument.

He's just speculating and causing unproven scare mongering by reading too much between the lines of it. Allegedly a sales restriction never existed for manga porn of any kind in Japan. It was left up to self regulation by the shop owners, which didn't work very well, hense this bill.

He's just speculating and causing unproven scare mongering by reading too much between the lines of it.

Allegedly a sales restriction never existed for manga porn of any kind in Japan. It was left up to self regulation by the shop owners, which didn't work very well, hense this bill.

I don't understand--If material that is "sexually stimulating" can already be classified as harmful content, then why do they need to expand the definition to include fiction featuring "minors involved in anti-social sexual situations?"

We have a hard time understanding this as well, but the Tokyo Metropolitan Government has responded a number of times stating that "some fiction featuring extreme anti-social sexual situations, such as rape and bestiality, cannot be regulated because they are not highly sexually stimulating to minors.
If we take their statements at face value, the seem to imply that certain "non-erotic" situations involving sexual situations must be regulated, not because they are sexually stimulating but because their mere existence is somehow dangerous, regardless of social or artistic statement such material might be making.
It is important to note that a number of Japanese authors have employed the medium of manga to talk about their own experiences of rape and sexual abuse. This bill could very well silence such important social commentary.

Why should I trust what Dan Kanemitsu says? Last time I checked, he was a translator, not someone well-versed in Japanese politics. It's also funny that anyone who disagrees with him is just led back to his article, as if he is the only and final word on the subject because he has a webpage about it.

animalcalls wrote:

Why should I trust what Dan Kanemitsu says? Last time I checked, he was a translator, not someone well-versed in Japanese politics. It's also funny that anyone who disagrees with him is just led back to his article, as if he is the only and final word on the subject because he has a webpage about it.

I suppose you are more comfortable trusting Japanese politicians? Okay.

You haven't read Dan Kanemitsu's articles, have you?:

From the website:

If passed, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government (TMG) will have the power to conduct the following:
1) The TMG will have more control over minor's use of the Internet and mobile phones. Parents will be discouraged to remove Internet filtering provisions from their children's mobile phones. The TMG can specify which mobile phones minors should be using.
2) The TMG already has the power to designate "any material that may be detrimental toward the healthy development of youth because of their capacity to be sexually stimulating, encourages cruelty, and/or may compel suicide or criminal behavior" as being "harmful material," and thereby force it to be restricted. This bill will create an entire new class of harmful content category where any fictional material involving visual representations of "nonexistent youth," (anyone who looks like or sounds like being a minor) in sexual acts or any acts that might be considered sexual, could be considered to be "harmful material," and thereby be subject to be restriction.
3) The bill makes it the responsibility of all citizens and organizations in Tokyo to cease possession of child pornography, even though the definition of what constitutes child pornography is vague and confusing in Japan. (See section titled "What the big deal with child pornography in Japan?" at the very bottom for more information.)
4) The bill allows the TMG to encourage for the elimination of child pornography and the prevention of "rampant availability" of fictional visual representations of sexualized youth, possibly through establishing and funding groups that would attempt to alter public opinion to accept the notion that reckless sexualized youth in fiction is harmful and must be discouraged in material consumed for all audiences.

Nemo_N wrote:

You haven't read Dan Kanemitsu's articles, have you?:

Au contraire! I've read it all. It's full of "could, might, maybe," all signs of speculation as to just what it actually "will, and will not, or can, and can not" do, and it's because of its vagueness that a bill like this will be a nightmare to enforce should it become an act, for which I can not believe the Tokyo Metropolitan Government will pass without detailed clauses and ammendments properly listed in the final approval. I've been involved with our local council in the past to know the ins and outs of the political game, so I'm no armchair politician. What I'm not is Japanese. Some of you guys are going waaaay OTT with the conspiracy theories here.

Nemo_N wrote:

I suppose you are more comfortable trusting Japanese politicians? Okay.

Hahaha, I don't even know what to say to that. I don't trust anyone. But I certainly don't trust a translator to properly decipher a legal-mumbo-jumbo filled bill. Would you trust Danielle Steele to give a clear and rational understanding of an American bill? Doubtful.

Trust me, buddy, I'm just as disenchanted and fed up with politics as you are, but simply re-posting a link to the same article over and over again won't get much done.

Nemo_N wrote:

You haven't read Dan Kanemitsu's articles, have you?:

Au contraire! I've read it all. It's full of "could, might, maybe," all signs of speculation as to just what it actually "will, and will not, or can, and can not" do, and it's because of its vagueness that a bill like this will be a nightmare to enforce should it become an act, for which I can not believe the Tokyo Metropolitan Government will pass without detailed clauses and ammendments properly listed in the final approval. I've been involved with our local council in the past to know the ins and outs of the political game, so I'm no armchair politician. What I'm not is Japanese. Some of you guys are going waaaay OTT with the conspiracy theories here.

[Pointing out ways that the government can misuse its power hardly constitutes conspiracy theories, Einstein. I'm kinda curious as to why you are so eager to persuade others that this bill is harmless. I also see no reason why you are so optimistic that the TMG will pass "detailed clauses and amendments" that will make rainbows shoot out of everyones' asses.