You are welcome to look at the talkback but please consider that this article is over 15 years old before posting.
Forum - View topicNEWS: Three 'Hentai' Manga Cases Go to Trial in New Zealand
|
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Tofusensei
Posts: 365 |
|
||
|
Jesus
|
|||
|
|||
vashfanatic
 Posts: 3495 Location: Back stateside |
|
||
|
Given that New Zealand banned "Pumi Pumi Poemi" (apparently missing the parody angle), these manga don't stand a chance.
I'm all for boycotting this kind of trash, but there's no way to legislate it without hitting the ol' slipper slope. |
|||
|
|||
Faceman
 Posts: 300 Location: Boston |
|
||
|
I just love how they use vague terminology in laws like the word "objectionable." What's objectionable to one person may not be to another; it's complete subjective.
|
|||
|
|||
Takeyo
 Posts: 736 |
|
||
|
Scary. As. Hell.
|
|||
|
|||
Dargonxtc
 Posts: 4463 Location: Nc5xd7+ スターダストの海洋 |
|
||
Actually they do get somewhat specific. I pretty much agree with the stuff it says about children, but most of the other stuff that is applicable to consenting adults I don't. So overall, I think this bill pretty much sucks. |
|||
|
|||
|
ConanSan
Posts: 1818 |
|
||
|
Well, sucks for New Zealand, at least they can go and play some M rated video games with high speed internet, right?
... Oh, right. |
|||
|
|||
|
fighterholic
Posts: 9193 |
|
||
|
Word to the wise, don't buy hentai in New Zealand.
|
|||
|
|||
Zin5ki
 Posts: 6680 Location: London, UK |
|
||
I'll make no complaint so long as legislation only penalises those who commit real criminal activities inflicted upon others, and not those who possess artificial depictions of fictional acts. Alas that clearly isn't the case here. I can't say I respect the Authorities in question for certain clauses contained within this bill. |
|||
|
|||
|
Brasolis
Posts: 3 |
|
||
|
Can people's tax dollars not go about for uses better then this. Who gives a damn, its clearly fictional, and im pretty sure it doesnt say anywhere in the manga "Please go out and do these things to real people, as this is clearly a good idea". Spend the money on something worthwhile...
|
|||
|
|||
|
BrianRuh
Posts: 162 Location: West Lafayette, IN, USA |
|
||
|
|||
|
|||
kokuryu
 Posts: 915 |
|
||
|
Remind me to never go to New Zealand - EVER.
This is the one thing that I object to - all of these so called "obscenity" laws. I think these laws themselves are obscene in what they do, how they are implemented, and in the reach into what should be private lives they have. I also think most people would agree that what is termed "obscene" is a matter of who you are talking to. What is "obscene" to one person, may not be to another. And what goes on for a person's personal and private time and use should also not be subject to monitoring by any type of governmental agency. What an obscene story. What an obscene country. They should be unplugged from the Internet. They need a revolution over there to protect people from the government itself. |
|||
|
|||
|
vashfanatic
Posts: 3495 Location: Back stateside |
|
||
Yay for the first total overreaction post! Whoever knew that idiotic censorship laws relating to pornography were grounds for anti-government violence? I always thought they were more of a call for legislative action. The problem is that people don't distinguish between what is morally reprehensible and what is possible to legislate. You can't come up with legal language on "obscenity" and "objectionable content" because not only is there disagreement about what falls under these terms, the real problem is not in the content but in the readers. To take an example, I read Berserk. It has gobs of violence and scenes of rape. Objectionable? Quite possibly, but I don't read it as titillation, I read it as horror, and these features add to that. That there are creeps out there who'd get off on it is not something I need to apologize for, nor is it something that the law can really do to stop. We can't read people's minds (nor should we) to tell what effect something has on them or why they're reading it. People don't like to live in the uncomfortable gray area of having to allow things that may indeed be morally abhorrent to be published so as to allow things that have higher merits to still continue. But that's why boycotting was invented; let consumers take it into their own hands to tell companies what they think should and should not be produced. Last edited by vashfanatic on Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
|||
hikaru004
 Posts: 2306 |
|
||
|
It's interesting that there is a tracking program that includes hentai.
Somehow, I don't think that the New Zealand tourist board is going to lose sleep over people not going to their country over this. Last edited by hikaru004 on Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
|||
|
alexcampos
Posts: 91 |
|
||
|
Well, more and more of this subject keeps coming up it seems that every country has it's unique laws, and they DON'T want Hentai, especially if it contains child like characters.
I personally think that for any loli, of shota related material that depicts them in any sexual act should be banned, PERIOD. I have no problems with Hentai in general, but underage, flat chested, child like characters, should not appear, wheather you think that 2D is different from real life is not the issue. I really don't think that the whole world has something against Japan, the fact is no country wants to see children being raped, or any kind of sexual activity in which they may be in. 2D or 3D. |
|||
|
|||
|
turboyoshi
Posts: 16 |
|
||
Hmm, actually reading the act doesn't make it sound that bad. It's basically saying no violent/forced or otherwise degrading sex and no kiddie porn. I think (hope) the "young persons" clause is so people can't draw obvious lolis but pretend they're actually 18 or whatever the legal age of consent is. Although I can see the concern about censorship, I do believe there are some materials that simply have no social value and I've can't see any objection to banning them. This act seems to cover those areas I think without being broad enough to incite frivolous cases. |
|||
|
|||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group