View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
|
Ranma824
Joined: 17 Feb 2005
Posts: 456
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:37 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | It contains erotic manga such as Taro Shinonome's Swing Out Sisters, Kondom's Bondage Fairies, Tuna Empire's The Spirit of Capitalism, Kengo Yonekura's Pink Sniper, and Yumisuke Kotoyoshi's Juicy Fruits. |
Some nice selections there. Everybody needs to own a copy of Swing Out Sisters.
|
Back to top |
|
|
BassKuroi
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:42 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | the curator of Kunsthallen Brandts, said no pictures show explicit sexual acts, and the point of the exhibition was to encourage a debate and question the power of media. |
Yeah, sure... My opinion is that in general, museums do this kind of thing for the sake of scandal (and promotion).
And what power of media is he talking about? those are restricted-selling products, they aren't Naruto, One Piece or some big-selling manga.
|
Back to top |
|
|
littlegreenwolf
Joined: 10 Aug 2002
Posts: 4796
Location: Seattle, WA
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:43 pm
|
|
|
I don't at all support child pornography, but at an artist who fully supports a person's right to draw whatever their mind, twisted or not, comes up with I have to say a "#$@ yeah!" to the curator of the exhibit. I'd go if I lived in Denmark.
Children aren't harmed by lines on a paper, no matter how offensive those lines may be to someone.
BassKuroi wrote: |
Quote: | the curator of Kunsthallen Brandts, said no pictures show explicit sexual acts, and the point of the exhibition was to encourage a debate and question the power of media. |
And what power of media is he talking about? those are restricted-selling products, they aren't Naruto, One Piece or some big-selling manga. |
I think it's the general idea recently that keeps popping up that if society thinks it's nasty, it should be illegal or something along those lines. People are exposed to a number of their opinions through the media (Fox news is a prime example of this), and can rally up for or against a cause because of it.
|
Back to top |
|
|
erinfinnegan
ANN Columnist
Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 598
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 1:56 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | We're looking for a debate on the issue. |
LOL they could read our forums for that!
|
Back to top |
|
|
BassKuroi
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:02 pm
|
|
|
littlegreenwolf wrote: | I don't at all support child pornography, but at an artist who fully supports a person's right to draw whatever their mind, twisted or not, comes up with I have to say a "#$@ yeah!" to the curator of the exhibit. I'd go if I lived in Denmark.
Children aren't harmed by lines on a paper, no matter how offensive those lines may be to someone. |
If there's no real child, is not "child pornography", which, by the way, is a double wrong use of language:
first: if you say "gay pornography" or "s&m pornography", you are naming products by the target of consumers, in this case gay people and s&m enthusiasts. "Child pornography" is intended to be consumed by children? that's WRONG. So, the phrase itself is absurd.
second: In this particular case, there's no real children involved in the production of this material. Hence, is no "pornography involving children", or whatever you call what is wrongly called "child pornography."
littlegreenwolf wrote: | I think it's the general idea recently that keeps popping up that if society thinks it's nasty, it should be illegal or something along those lines. People are exposed to a number of their opinions through the media (Fox news is a prime example of this), and can rally up for or against a cause because of it. |
I agree.
|
Back to top |
|
|
matrixdude
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 71
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:10 pm
|
|
|
I like how they're doing this so they can get people to actually think about it, and not just write things off as child porn, as there are no actual children involved. If they don't exist, they don't have rights. They're just pen strokes on a piece of paper.
|
Back to top |
|
|
GloriousMaximus
Joined: 11 Nov 2009
Posts: 138
Location: North America
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:18 pm
|
|
|
I am no in way into lolicon, but I would check it out just to see what the deal is. I sympathize with the protester's right to protest but I hope it doesn't shut the exhibit down. It's doing what the museum wanted to do, which is to spark discussion.
|
Back to top |
|
|
enurtsol
Joined: 01 May 2007
Posts: 14902
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:26 pm
|
|
|
BassKuroi wrote: |
If there's no real child, is not "child pornography", which, by the way, is a double wrong use of language:
|
Well, depends on which country you're in. I think in Australia, you could get arrested for that. Laws are made by citizens. So know the local laws before doing something.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mikuru
Joined: 08 Nov 2007
Posts: 124
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:33 pm
|
|
|
I'm wondering what the manga artists for these works thought of this exhibit. I'm guessing they had to give their permission first? He says there are no explicit sexual acts? So it just Kodomo no Jikan type ecchi stuff? Watching anime for about ten years now I'm so used to fanservice shows that include a loli character that it doesn't make me bat an eye.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hannish Lightning
Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 376
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:35 pm
|
|
|
We really are pushing the limit of what is right and what is wrong. How far are we going to fall into our depravity? We are becoming a hedonistic society, always trying find the biggest thrill and the greatest pleasure. And the more hedonistic we become the more that limit is pushed.
Quote: | Children aren't harmed by lines on a paper, no matter how offensive those lines may be to someone. |
It's not about children being harmed and it's ridiculous to think that this would harm children. It's about the media having sexualizing children for years. Even if it doesn't harm children they should never be seen as sexual objects real or fictional. And that's why people are so offended by this. Not because fictional children are being hurt, but it is promoting the sexualization of children.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Annf
Joined: 20 Feb 2009
Posts: 578
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:59 pm
|
|
|
BassKuroi wrote: | if you say "gay pornography" or "s&m pornography", you are naming products by the target of consumers, in this case gay people and s&m enthusiasts. "Child pornography" is intended to be consumed by children? that's WRONG. So, the phrase itself is absurd. |
Pffft, next you'll be trying to tell me bishoujo games aren't targeted at bishoujo.
|
Back to top |
|
|
4nBlue
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 2:59 pm
|
|
|
Hannish Lightning wrote: | We really are pushing the limit of what is right and what is wrong. How far are we going to fall into our depravity? We are becoming a hedonistic society, always trying find the biggest thrill and the greatest pleasure. And the more hedonistic we become the more that limit is pushed. |
This limit was pushed already three decades ago (or that's where the oldest lolicon stuff I know is from). Bondage Fairies was released in 1994 in the US. This isn't anything new.
Hannish Lightning wrote: |
Quote: | Children aren't harmed by lines on a paper, no matter how offensive those lines may be to someone. |
It's not about children being harmed and it's ridiculous to think that this would harm children. It's about the media having sexualizing children for years. Even if it doesn't harm children they should never be seen as sexual objects real or fictional. And that's why people are so offended by this. Not because fictional children are being hurt, but it is promoting the sexualization of children. |
So what next? Ban violent entertaiment because it promotes real life violence? Ban furries because they promote beastiality?
|
Back to top |
|
|
InnocentSorrow59
Joined: 12 Aug 2010
Posts: 156
Location: Los Angeles, CA
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:09 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | Children aren't harmed by lines on a paper, no matter how offensive those lines may be to someone. |
It's not about children being harmed and it's ridiculous to think that this would harm children. It's about the media having sexualizing children for years. Even if it doesn't harm children they should never be seen as sexual objects real or fictional. And that's why people are so offended by this. Not because fictional children are being hurt, but it is promoting the sexualization of children.[/quote]
...
Again, THEY ARE 2D DRAWINGS ON PAPER. It's not really promoting ANYTHING. IT'S FOR MERE ENTERTAINMENT (if you like that kind of thing, fine by me, just don't flaunt it around...).
That's like saying "One Piece promotes being a pirate and fighting!" or "Black Butler promotes demon summonings and satanism!" or "Fullmetal Alchemist promotes Alchemy and bringing the dead back to life!" (Okay, so that FMA one was just for the lulz...).
It was made to entertain people who like that kind of thing, it's not really going out there and saying "Sexualing children is A-okay!".
|
Back to top |
|
|
Pongu
Joined: 23 Aug 2010
Posts: 1
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:12 pm
|
|
|
As I understand it, none of the manga shown in this article actually depict children - Juicy Fruits (or anything by Kotoyoshi Yumisuke) features women with huge breasts, which children generally do not have. That back cover of Pink Sniper merely represents grown up characters in a childish manner - the front cover features a mature woman. Considering there is, in Japan, such a thing as lolicon manga, which contains some quite horrible images of child sex, I think this exhibition is very selective and entirely superficial.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hannish Lightning
Joined: 13 May 2008
Posts: 376
|
Posted: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:25 pm
|
|
|
Quote: | So what next? Ban violent entertaiment because it promotes real life violence? Ban furries because they promote beastiality? |
*sigh* You just don't get it, do you? I can dumb it down as much as I could and it would *whoosh* go over your head. And it always comes to that, someone always has to compare fictional violence to lolicon.
|
Back to top |
|
|
|