Here's a little advice. F*ck off the Loli. How about you actually start concentrating on REAL issues and REAL incidents that are happening to the REAL victims.

Why worry about something that has something to do with a country you are not from. Deal with your country's problems first before scattering along to others and nit picking at things that you dont even know where to begin to try to understand it.

Japan has the lowest crime rate than most countries. Yes there still is crime but this is a country where people turn themselves in for stealing a candy bar out of respect.

I feel that Japan's crime rate, rape rate, etc.. is down than most countries is because they give their citizens the chance to experience things through PC, Console, etc.. games rather than to allow them to get curious as to what it would be like and go kidnap a child and molest them.

Other countries do not have games like this, that is why I believe that children are gettting raped, women are getting raped, men are getting raped, etc.. all around the world.

I don't condone child molestation but I'd rather see the men/women do it in a video game in the privacy of their own home rather than to go out and do it themselves.

Can I get an Amen!?!?! -_-

Lolimanga should never be banned, indeed.
This is true and I support this extremely.

However, I DO NOT support you people insulting an ideology with no knowledge on it.

Protest for lolicon's rights, but dont protest about politics.
Otakus only suit animes and games, not politics

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvsoVdvtZC4

Long-term observation of countries with draconian sex laws, versus those who have much more liberal ones, would seem to indicate a pattern though. As I said before, all the Commonwealth countries have ridiculously high rates of abuse, despite their harsh laws, yet many countries in Europe, with low ages of consent; readily available porn; etc., have rates far lower. Causality or not, common sense tells me (as it indeed told Freud) that people who are comfortable with their sexuality are less likely to want to commit crimes.

Purely on the grounds of Freedom of Expression alone, these laws are wrong anyway. However, also claiming we're the ones who have to justify our position is hardly fair when UNICEF, like so many do-gooders in this area, not only have no evidence to support their claims, but see fit to totally exaggerate the entire issue of child abuse, just to garner public support and hence secure larger and larger donations.

I mean, I spent this morning reading a massive paper on the child porn industry, with the conclusion being that it is and always has been a tiny problem compared to other more serious crimes. Most government or law enforcement sanctioned investigations have all been discredited over the years, yet the moral panic goes on to this day.

To sum up, the onus is on UNICEF, as an official charity, to prove a link, not us. Making grandiose claims without evidence to back it up just isn't scientific or professional, and the fact that my own government has taken to abandoning evidence-driven legislation in favour of heavy '1984-like' moralising does not sit well with me at all.

Am I to presume you mean my criticisms of the communities' antagonism against Unicef? If that is the case, I must say that I continue to stand by my criticism.

However, I would like you to note that at no point did I criticise the communities' desire to keep lolicon available and uncensored.

I myself have stated prior that I do not believe that lolicon porn contributes to increased cases of child molestation. But all I have is anecdotal evidence, and that is also all that I have been offered.

You said that there are studies which prove the availability of pornography reduces sex crimes. I have no contention with that. As a law student in my senior year, I've done a fair amount of research into this subject.

However, I must reiterate, rate and causation are separate entities. Just because Japan enjoys a low rate of sex related offenses, it does not necessarily prove the nonexistence of causation.

Personally, I'd like to see proof that no causal link exists. But I've yet to come across any. If you can supply credible, independent studies that prove no causal link, then I would happily get off the fence and stand on the side of this community.

Also, loli is already illegal in most English-speaking countries, so your argument about banning it is moot. With the exception of Britain, where they are still trying to force it through Parliament, and the States, where First Amendment rights resulted in the law being much more carefully worded, viewing loli can and has landed people in the dock. It isn't just those with real CP anymore either, but hapless fans of cartoon porn, like that poor bastard in Australia done for what I take for granted on a daily basis: looking at Simpsons porn.

No, I'm afraid many of the children's charities totally lost their credibility when they switched from helping real victims of abuse to fighting an unholy war against child pornography, most of which consists of nothing more than nudes or near nudes. Only a tiny percentage (around 7%) actually features real cases of abduction, coercion, or rape. Indeed, thanks to these fanatics, even images of 17-year old Samantha Fox topless are illegal now, despite the fact she posed freely for The Sun back at the start of her career.

As I said above though, there just aren't enough cases of CP to justifty their inflated budgets, so they've moved on to fictional material. Claiming it can be used to groom kids doesn't make it so, and they haven't produced a shred of evidence to back up their claims because there isn't any. Take it from me, real child molestors don't want pictures of Lisa Simpson, they want living, breathing flesh, and they want to destroy its innocence, like theirs was once destroyed. In short, they are totally messed up and need to be carefully monitored, much the same as any other kind of dangerous criminal.

Those who look at real child porn are a totally different entity, however, most being the true definition of paedophile. They are more often than not the kind who are merely fascinated with the idea of sex with children, but sensibly have no inclination to commit thoroughly heinous crimes. In fact, by taking CP away from them, like with P4P in Sweden now, it merely results in them going after the real thing instead and a noticable jump in the crime rate follows.

At any rate, I think you should do a lot more research before you criticise our position on the subject. Believe me, in a battle of wits, I could reduce Agnes Chan to a quivering wreck because I have something she doesn't: knowledge of the subject at hand. For sure, I'll see the lawmakers in Hell before I give up my 2D girls.

In terms of lolicon, the sufferer is not the consumer, but the child; therein lies the fundamental difference.

And in regards to TV and video games, they are mediums rather then subject. But if we are to talk about specific programing or game genres, then my views on lolicon apply.

@ Quen
Japan's low crime rate is both well known, and an appropriate argument in this debate.

However, we can not draw a firm conclusion based on it because rate and causation are separate entities.

The fundamental question that we are concerned about is whether lolicon causes people who would otherwise not be child sex offenders, to be child sex offenders.

And yes, the burden on proving causation currently rests with Unicef, them having initiated this. However, we the anime community, should hold ourselves to a higher standard then we currently do.

Regardless of what stance the Japanese government takes, the aftereffects could be wide ranging.

Should lolicon be banned, in addition to irking fans of it, it would also damage the industry, and possibly threaten the livelihoods of some.

However, should lolicon continue to be legal, there exists the possibility that we are inadvertently putting children at risk.

Therefore, if we are to argue that lolicon should continue to be legal, we must ascertain that lolicon truly does not endanger children. And this can only be done by rigorous research, not anecdotal evidence. Cliche though this may sound, we owe it to the children.

@ SasaMisa
Whilst I've heard about Operation Ore, I sadly do not know enough about it to comment in a learned manner.

I will say this however, misguided though some of us may believe Unicef to be in their crusade, I would wager they do so with naught but good intentions.

It would seem that they are convinced that lolicon does contribute to child related sex offenses. Whether this is true or not is what I seek to find out. However, their desire to protect children is noble, and we shouldn't demonize them for that.

My country, Britain has a history of abusing The Human Rights Act and ignoring The European Convention on Human Rights. It all sounds good on paper, much like The First Amendment, but you just try to gain any joy from it in Freedom of Expression cases like this.

Of course, Britain is a lot better than Canada, Australia & New Zealand, where 'penal colony' mentality continues to rule to this very day. In all three countries, I've known of artists & fans disappear into hiding, so afraid are they of being targeted by police.