The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) has joined such luminaries as UNICEF in coming out firmly in favour of the rights of imaginary children, lending its full support to the UK’s new draft legislation, set to ensure any illustrations of humans under the age of 18 a court deems erotic are rendered highly illegal, with anime and manga and their ambiguously aged characters likely to fair badly under the law.
The NSPCC’s Zoe Hilton has this to say on the subject:
“The NSPCC supports making non-photographic pictures of child sexual abuse illegal. We know from working with police forces across the UK that these types of pictures are more frequently appearing in the possession of people who are arrested for, or charged with, offences relating to child abuse images.
Our contacts with the police lead us to believe that non-photographic pictures of child sexual abuse, such as drawings, cartoons, or computer generated images, are an established part of the wider pool of child abuse images in circulation.
The fact that many of these images are currently legal implies a degree of acceptance or tolerance of depictions of child sexual abuse, and we want the law to send out a clear message that such depictions are unacceptable.
In practical terms we have found that the current legal status of these images means that they cannot be physically removed from offenders or confiscated by the police. It also reduces the effectiveness of therapeutic work which challenges perpetrators’ beliefs that child sexual abuse is acceptable.
Practitioners tell us that offenders use non-photographic images of abuse to rationalise and legitimise their own abusive thoughts and feelings toward children.
It is also important to point out that The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which amends the Protection of Children Act 1978 (Part 7, section 84), already covers pseudo-photographs.
In the UK it has never been necessary to prove that an actual child has been abused for an image to be considered illegal. The reasoning for this was based in part on the wider, damaging impact that such images could have on society. This is the approach that we continue to support.
Some of the recent media debate surrounding the new reforms has suggested that the materials to be made illegal will cover artistic works, or be mainstream in nature. NSPCC does not believe this to be the case.
As we understand it, the proposed thresholds mean that these materials are not something that anyone is ever likely to make or view unintentionally, unless they stumble across them by accident on the internet.
Let’s be clear that what we are talking about here are non-photographic images depicting serious sexual abuse and violence against children. And with that in mind we would urge the UK government to make such images illegal.”
The NSPCC was initially founded in 1884 to lobby for “pro-child” legislation; in more recent years the organisation has faced extensive criticism for spending huge sums on advertising campaigns of questionable merit, and for cultivating wherever possible an atmosphere of moral panic.
With regards to their failure to actually help any children in recent decades, they admit that “lobbying is more effective than direct action [to help children].”
The NSPCC has some particularly relevant experience in imaginary child abuse; it was heavily implicated in the “Satanic ritual abuse” scandals of the 1980s and 1990s, where social workers and psychologists fabricated thousands of cases of “Satanic” abuse cases using hypnosis and leading questioning, with the UK perpetrators of this mass-deception often being NSPCC staff, or informed by their publications.
Thanks to Infernal for the tip.
Father “Carried Liquefied Child in Backpack for 5 Years”
Miku’s Day Live Spectacular
PlayStation Move “Laggy Wiimote Rip Off”
Japan to Fund North Korean Cult Schools
Top 10 Ways of Looking Cute to Guys
Miku’s Day – “A Virtual Goddess Descended Among Us!”
Top 10 Anime Movies of 2009
Science: Religious People are Stupid, Leftists More Intelligent
Hot Chinese Exhibitionists Strip Looking for Husbands
Wives Demand “Ideal” ¥6,000,000 Salary from Husbands
Japanese Outraged at Australian Cat Slaughter
Yui Dominates Otaku Wife Rankings
Wii Blamed in Little Girl’s Death: “Controller Looks Like Gun”
Sexy Female Mangaka Compared
Tony’s Seena Kanon Bikini Figure Highly Desirable
Priest Burns Down Own Temple in $3,000,000 Scam
Buriki
Goddess of 2ch “Anna”: “I’m Going to Take a Bath”
Sexy Beach Amateurs
Izayoi Sakuya Nopan Ero-Cosplay
Goddess of 2ch “Chinatsu”: “Sexier than Any Idol”
Cool Cats Gallery
Asuka & Rei Sexy Test Plugsuits in 3D
Vancouver Olympic Figure Skating Ero-Highlights
Hope & Lightning Hottest Videogame Couple Ever!?
Kimura Daisuke
That OP picture can't be an image that fits the NSPCC's illegal type category somehow, can it?
I'll say artistic works will suffer.
They start with some images that are reasonable, understandable, and they'll soon move to make sure babies in diaper commercials will be wearing shirts or baby brassier to cover up unmentionables...
I've seen some works of art that depict nudes, children among them, it won't be long before those get shipped away on some technicality I'm sure.
Of course it can. It depicts small humanoids (albeit winged and blue-skinned) in a clear state of undress. This automatically makes it propagandistic paedophiliac pornography paraphernalia of the sickest and most depraved kind.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have TOR and TrueCrypt installations to attend to before the police outside my door manage to requisition a battering ram.
Oh wow, I didn't even notice the loli sprites there!
Well, I did, they just didn't garner my attention.
I believe the sprites are at least 18... :)
lol. these short girls are actually 18 but in the eyes of others, they are loli
the first that i saw was the picture and right click saved. THEN i found out the problem of the spirtes/pixies/faires whatever are the stuff of concern. aren't they like in most children fairy tales?
Better Sandboxie it too bro, and surf the internet with no hardrive via Live Linux CD Puppy Linux Is good for that kinda thing.
Or maybe I'll just upload all my hard drive contents to Wikileaks. Sooner or later it'll end up there anyway, as an attachment to their "UK reintroduces capital punishment for German immigrant distributing pixellated underage sex slaves online" stories.
Puppy Linux on a laptop without a hardrive running wine running sandboxie running firefox running tor all behind a SmoothWall or MonoWall. Anyone got any better ideas :D
The same setup you mentioned, ssh'd into using 32Mbit encryption and TOR via a daisy chain of similar setups, several parts of the chain being located in Sealand. Who cares if it takes me a decade to load Google.com, at least I am browsing completely without the risk of persecution. Unless, of course, they just sneak into my flat and install cameras there.
http://xkcd.com/538/
Link very related.
I like how practically everyone commenting on this post has made dire doomsday predictions of the coming UNICEF government and how they will ban anything remotely perverted.
A wise person said it best, "Until all the babies are born wearing clothes."
Soon your local GP might be carted away because he examined a little girl to find out if she has a cold or not.
While doctors helping a woman giving birth will also be labeled pedos as he is handling a naked newborn and making it cry.
It's sad how gullible the general public is and how easy it is to make them follow you like lambs to the slaughter.
This sort of political correctness is starting to pickup pace in Australia with the Great Firewall of Australia being in the works.
:|
really? are you talking about the blacklist sites they're proposing?
I'm pleased to say that they haven't done shit all to Australia yet. There is nothing I can't seem to find, nothing blocked etc.
TOR and TrueCrypt eh? Those aren't enough to do the job. After all, open source encryption utilities are easily hackable. So unless you have such utilities used by the corporations (corporate level encryption) or above, it ain't going to help.
"After all, open source encryption utilities are easily hackable."
HAHAHA~
Don´t say any shit about anything you don´t know well, troll...
I work for a company which sells encryption software and hardware to banks, governments etc. Let me assure you, the only cryptographic algorithms we trust are those which have been public for years, so that any problem with them will hopefully have been noticed by someone. Free encryption utilities use the same algorithms.
That's the dilemma though. Security through obscurity is in general a bad idea, but because TOR is open source, it's trivially easy to create rogue relays. So, who are the people most likely to set up a relay? Law Enforcement Agencies. How many PCs do you think, for example, Interpol has? By just setting up a fraction of those as rogue relays, the whole TOR network becomes sufficiently compromised to be able to trace the flow of packets using simple timing attacks. I'm not saying this has happened already, but if I were the boss of Interpol, I'd have done it years ago.
@encryption software:
Sure, hiding the source code will temporarily hide exploitable bugs, but do you know what else could be hidden that way? A secret back door or a monkey wrench!
Since Truecrypt isn't permanently connected to the net and you usually use it to open files/partitions you created yourself it isn't exactly the best choice for hackers trying to take over your computer.
File encryption software is pretty much the only type of software where I personally would NEVER trust a closed source program.
BTW: Truecrypt is using AES, Twofish, Serpent and combinations of those as its encryption algorithms. All three algorithms are finalists of the Advanced Encryption Standard contest and therefore properly tested.
@tor: Unless a single law enforcement agency controls the majority of tor nodes it won't be of much help when trying to catch criminals.
When using the tor network the data is usually sent through ~8 nodes. Each node knows the IPs of the computers it directly connects to but nothing beyond that. Node 4 knows the IP of node 3 and node 5 but it doesn't know who the other nodes are.
So even when Interpol controls five of the nodes your internet connection is going through they would at best know who you are OR which computer/site you are connecting to but not both.
Of course you could still be identified using cookies or javascript. Turn that off when using tor!
On the other hand controlling a tor exit node could be handy when trying to collect login data in case the user isn't using a secure connection (TLS or SSL). Therefore it's more likely that quite a few tor nodes are controlled by intelligence services and these people hardly care about someone downloading pictures of nakkid 2D girls.
Actually, in tor's current incarnation it always uses exactly three nodes on any path. Compromise the first and third and you can probably deduce who is going where. It's still a hell of a lot better than nothing though, because unless you can compromise multiple nodes, you're left with little chance of finding people. Timing attacks are possible but difficult and require you to be well placed. Unless an attacker has vast resources and are willing to make a considerable investment in tracking you in particular, tor will stand up quite well.
I say museums and any establishment that feature naked cherubs be burned and all those who made said piece of art be prosecuted as fucking pedophiles.
Can those assholes please burn in hell and let my lolis alone! Why can't they get that no fucking child is being abused, they're only drawings.
I feel for you UK loli fans, here in Canada it's already illegal.
All your talk about TrueCrypt is meaningless because in the UK the authorities can tell you to decrypt anything you have encrypted, and if you fail to do so they can lock you away for a few years just because of that.
So? Better to be locked away for refusing to decrypt my private files than to be branded a sex offender for life and considered to be breaking the law if I breathe the same air as a child.
That's why through the miracle of true crypt we have the two password solution. just break your crypt space to two parts with two different passwords and if the authorities want you to decrypt it, just so them the safe side and be amazed and unknowing if they ask about the "possible other side" :)
seriously? someone would arrest someone for possesion (for whatever intent) of friggen images of FAKE people (age regardless)? thats so retarded given the "way things are" put it this way people, if these people are watching or viewing images or movies of animated or otherwize unrealistic children or people in general what ARENT they doing? Ohh yeah, molesting our REAL children. Think SMART GOVT Bastards
The basic answer to that is "yes". Go look up the UK Comic Book Alliance website. Apparently the police can't wait for the law to be passed so they can go and nail all the disgusting pedos.
I did, thanks for that link.
Can everyone else here please do that too? There's lots of us here, so it would be good.
Please?
So I guess that means stick figures children draw of themselves will be outlawed. Since they never put clothes on them. A child could get 10 years for soliciting himself with a crayon and a piece of construction paper.
Yup, those clearly disturbed underage paedophile pornographers have to be protected from their own predatory impulses.
That's exactly why 14yo girl may go to prison now, for she is probably dangerous for her classmates. I have no idea who is protected by laws nowadays.
Next, PETA is gonna go after Tom and Jerry and similar cartoons to end violence against animals. Kids and adults may think that cats are resilient to attacks from scalding irons and anvils.
PETA isn't that influential in Britain — try the RSPCA, it falls squarely within their purview anyway.
I LOL'D SO HARD
PeTA is a bad example because they're wayyy beyond the crazy line. No really, they kill adoptable pets with one hand and brainwash ignorant and gullible children with the other.
Funny you should say that. They already did try to ban Tom and Jerry for 2 reasons (In the UK). The first being that the cat never won and this was deemed a bad example to children. The other being that the show features a black female but never showed her above her legs which is demeaning to the black population.
Sometimes even a dictatorship seems like a better leadership plan than what we currently deal with.
Britain will be a dictatorship soon.....
For some reason, I don't doubt that...
As long as said dictator is an otaku?
It's exactly this kind of media hysteria that is making me seriously want to reconsider my pending application to UK universities for four-to-five-year undergraduate courses.
there are actually other reasons why you'd want to do that, too, but i won't spoil you the fun and go into detail here. :)
I noticed that most anti-loli fanatics basically find pornography of children in the possession of child molesters and such and assume that is to blame for their "tastes". are they really so stupid as to not realize that arnt into that wouldnt buy the pictures in the first place so it couldnt possibly make them that way? frankly i see it as a way for them to satisfy themselves WITHOUT having anything to do with real children
Ya know... the lefties are so dishonest that they will probably take the missing hour of daylight savings time and say that everyone voted by not using one fucking watt of power.
Feeling bad about something is sufficient and easier than doing something.
INTENT is more important than OUTCOME.
EFFORT is more noble/valuable than the RESULT.
If you are in sweat it means that you've "worked". No result is necessary.
No matter what you have achieved unless you are sweating, you haven't worked.
For every person who succeeded, must be some someone else who lost. Everything is a zero sum game after all.
For every dollar earned must be a dollar lost somewhere.
They can't sleep because someone, somewhere is happy and successful.
to some extent, i agree with ur comments. they are comments made to satisfy the ppl without getting outcome and results when they had the right intention and the effort put in.
in the real world, only outcome and results are valued. one example would be: who won *any sport* in *any year*, some ppl would be able to rmba the winner, but most won't be able to rmba the runners-up who might of put even more 'effort' than the winner did.
anyways.... how are the comments u make related to the post?
*pls excuse my crappy gramma
^
Agrees to anon. No one would go trouble themselves in understanding the how one had achieved such results.
What I don't get is why these people spend much of their time on loli manga and not so much time protecting actual children. Is it just me or are their priorities really fucked up?
You have to admit it's a lot easier to just call for a computerised "paedo filter" that will sniff out all naughty collections of brush strokes lacking in the boobage department on the intertubes and mail anyone who accesses them instructions to report to Pentonville Prison, than to actually look for cases of flesh-and-blood childresn suffering abuse.
Worse fact is they undoubtly would take any actions on Hollywood movies showing RL 5yo little girl turned to lifeless zombie (getting ready to be killed) and 10yo getting murdered and her eyeballs dug out by some bald retard named Kane.
*sigh*
Why can't people just RESPECT each other's preferences? It's not like lolicon directly affect other people in any way. Lolicon are NOT in any way directly related to real child abuses. They are just being bullied and shunned for their preferences in IMAGES.
Seriously, the VAST MAJORITY of people who scream "HELL YEAH!" when someone's head receives a bullet in the latest action film would probably faint from trauma witnessing a real-life headshot in person, and it's the SAME with lolicon. The vast majority don't objectify or sexualize real-life girls and boys.
And by reading the above quote from Zoe "Hitler", the NSPCC doesn't even try to address both sides of the conflict. Their arguments are blatently one-sided and selfish.
How did such idiots gain so much power? They shouldn't force their baseless opinions on millions of innocent people who never have any intention on hurting others and just seek personal fun.
"How did such idiots gain such power?"
That one's easy to answer. Take a good look at the history of the British press and the numerous moral panics it has spawns. Contemplate the fact that "YOUR CHILD MAY BE IN DANGER IF YOU DO NOT READ THIS PAPER" has almost always sold more newspapers than "OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENT WANTS TO SEND INNOCENT ART COLLECTOR TO PRISON". I think you can see where I'm going with this.
Um, to once again point out, "lolicon" in English doesn't have the same connotations as in Japanese.
In Japanese, it's a lot closer to "pedophile". "Hentai" is yet another Japanese word that has a different connotation outside of Japan. You can find a lot of these.
Just elaborating, not correcting anything or so, since that was said in English about the situation in England. I've just met too many people who think lolicon has nothing to do with the word pedophile at all.
There was a Japanese blog that would take English anime fansites and translate a few forum threads.
The ubiquitous use of lolicon and hentai seemed to urk them. English speakers really do use different meanings for the words then the Japanese.
I should point out that we always use both words in their Japanese sense...
Random funny: A so-so done study showed that people who had viewed violent films were less likely to help people in physical need (in non-threatening situations) while still being in the mindset of the movie (i.e. that effect wore off after a few hours). So while as violent movies probably don't make people more inclined to do bad things (unless they're mentally unstable), it does make them numbed and less inclined to be altruistic.
So this is why I don't care that valuable rights are being taken away after watching 1984....
...That only makes sense if you habitually and repeatedly watch it several times a day.
Also, compare the two different reactions to fictional violence:
"Sweet! Awesome roundhouse kick! And did you see how he shot that guy's head clean off?! Totally bitchin', man!"
vs "That is so disturbing, argh. Do not want."
Most movies try to go for getting the former reaction to the violence portrayed, rather than the latter. I have never seen the movie, but the book makes me more keen on preventing that sort of way of life, rather than numbed by it.
My jokes cry when they are taken seriously.
Sorry?
all this is going to do is cause an increase in child molestation, banning doesnt somehow magically "cure" the people who are into it and they will eventually molest real children when they cant molest imaginary ones, this whole thing is going to end up like prohibition, theyll ban it, it will cause more problems, theyll realize how stupid they are and lift the ban
It's possible that the Lords will make this skip right past the "ineffective prohibition" stage and into the "ban lifted" phase by politically cockblocking the law.
Possible, but I wouldn't bet on it happening just by chance. Anyone willing to take the fall to speak out against the law in public?
They ban Loli manga, I organize all lolicons into a terrorist group the worlds never seen before
NEVER make otakus mad
"Thank you for submitting this report of potential terrorist activity! The ACPO thoroughly investigates each and every report filed as a matter of policy. Please be assured that your concerns are being dealt with."
Oops. So THAT was what that button did.
Bring it on! Ill take them all down, ive been grinding for the past 6 years encase something like this would happen!
BOLT 3!! BOLT 3!!
should we go with the name loliban? or the P.L.O (Pro Loli Organization)? dont forget the cool logo!
terrorism is never there where you really need it.
What would Lelouch do...
(sorry. Couldn't resist.)
The NSPCC supports making non-photographic pictures of FLAT CHESTS illegal. We know from working with police forces across the UK that these types of pictures are more frequently appearing in the possession of people who are arrested for, or charged with, offences relating to child abuse images.
Our contacts with the police lead us to believe that non-photographic pictures of FLAT CHESTS, such as drawings, cartoons, or computer generated images, are an established part of the wider pool of child abuse images in circulation.
The fact that many of these images are currently legal implies a degree of acceptance or tolerance of depictions of FLAT CHESTS, and we want the law to send out a clear message that such depictions are unacceptable.
In practical terms we have found that the current legal status of these images means that they cannot be physically removed from offenders or confiscated by the police. It also reduces the effectiveness of therapeutic work which challenges perpetrators’ beliefs that FLAT CHESTS are acceptable.
Practitioners tell us that offenders use non-photographic images of FLAT CHESTS to rationalise and legitimise their own abusive thoughts and feelings toward children.
It is also important to point out that The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, which amends the Protection of Children Act 1978 (Part 7, section 84), already covers pseudo-photographs.
In the UK it has never been necessary to prove that an actual child has been abused for an image to be considered illegal. The reasoning for this was based in part on the wider, damaging impact that such FLAT CHESTS could have on society. This is the approach that we continue to support.
lol u
This is making me start to form a conspiracy theory that both UNICEF and the NSPCC are in league with the World Association of Cosmetic Surgeons, the silicone industry and Wonderbra Inc.
Incidentally, all this FLAT CHEST = LOLI attitude, with people no longer able to legally look at porn of e.g. Morino Ichigo from the Onegai franchise without being accused of harbouring paedophiliac tendencies, despite her being centuries older than any human woman, makes me envision a future scenario where women will no longer be treated as adults by the law if they're not sporting at least a C-cup.
err, duh. I should have edited this betterbefore posting. My original example was Etna from Disgaea, who is indeed centuries old, but then I thought "nah, she acts too childish" and looked for another example. Ichigo is only 18. Please don't kill me, Ichigo.
OK, I just messed up more by calling her YOUNGER than she really is this time. She's actually 21 at the time of the series. Halp, how do I Ichigo-proof my home? I will have nightmares of her chuckling in that nasty way of hers while going yandere on my ass for years to come T_T
Do you want to start over?
Yes. Are you offering to shelter me from the wrath of the student council president from hell?
Can't help you there, bud.
For those about to die.... we salute you.
If you insert a quarter now you will get an extra guy.
While as I prefer women with moderate to somewhat bigger boob-sizes, there are plenty of attractive flat-chested fully grown women out there! ;____;
Besides, I really don't see why topless boys = nonsexual, while as topless girls with the exact same torso = sexual
So weird. Makes me think most of society is pretty mentally ill, imposing such artificial divides between the genders. It would make more sense to make all people cover up their chests regardless of age, or to make everyone above a specific breast size cover up, no matter gender. E.g. "moobs" = "WEAR A TOP YOU SHAMELESS HUSSY! THIS IS ISN'T A NUDIST BEACH!"
...That reminds me of this video of a grossly overweight guy in a blonde wig I once saw. His breasts looked amazing and gorgeous, had they belonged to a female. I needed a lot of mind bleach after that, too much cognitive dissonance. I hadn't seen moobs that looked that much like real, healthy boobs before.
He may've had implants you know. lol.
Extremely unlikely. He was more than fat enough for them to be completely natural. Boobs are mostly fat with some breast glands. Men have normally less breast-glands than women, but not always. I don't know if he had more than the average for males, but he did have way more body fat than normal.
I lol'd pretty hard. It's so true about flat chest = loli. My ex didn't have very big breasts at all, but she was definitely not flat. Having a youngish looking face and I was pretty much dating a loli. Probably wouldn't even matter that she's a month older than me that if police were ever to find my pics of her posing for me I'd land in jail for a long long time if I couldn't prove it was her.
Seriously these scare tactics are so absurd that there is some kind of hysterical hatred of sexy pics of flat-chested/small breasted girls. I won't forget the time my ex joked that the only type of guys willing to date her in spite of her small frame and kiddie face were pedos. Christ.
An acquaintance of mine was in the same uni as this really short and petit woman who looked like 13 in spite of being almost a decade older than that. Dating must have really sucked for her.
Someone call V quickly!
I already tried calling him, hes to busy trying to take out Gonzo for censoring R+V
Were on our own here men D:
Zero or Kira then preferably zero and OMG V working with Zero. Also i must agreew ith icy-nee-san NEVER FUCK WITH OTAKU with our nerdy knowledge who knows what weapons we could craft cyber or otherwise. Oh and on a side note my therapist who used to work for fbi with sexual predators says LOLI is cool she dosn't see problems with it.
"...unless they stumble across them by accident on the internet."
TO STUMBLE UPON!!!
I accidentally 50 gigs of doujins, officer.
Thank you for making me LOL for the first time today.
Let's just hope that a lol a day keeps officers at bay... or something.
NOT THIS SHIT AGAIN.
I know. Every time I open the newspaper at work it's stories like these, every time I go to an anime news place it's stories like these. Psychological warfare at its finest, you at least have to give them that.
The thumb squeezes harder and harder down on cartoon lovers, of all people. What a world indeed.
I remember I used to wonder why on earth people would become hermits or violent criminals or any social extreme. What sort of persecution could they possibly have experienced that would drive them spiraling into such sad fates.
But I wonder no more.
Here's to hoping for the rise of a loli robot apocalypse, self-replicating and viral enough to purge the entire planet within a couple weeks. I retire to my chambers of mad science...
I wonder if they found in Loli-con Manga in the several father fucking daugheter cases???
"What you didn't fine any impossible!!!"
Damn them and UNICEF! They can't feed children so they feed 2d lolis and protect them from their rightful owners...
This stops being funny and starts being offensive once you've seen firsthand how children suffer in the third world.
Well UNICEF should do their jobs and take care of them third world kids... Not waste budget protecting 2d girls from their rightful owners... Go be a smart ass elsewhere...
Yeah, that's exactly the point I was trying to make, genius.
yes- there are children suffering in the thrid world. it should not be tolerated at any cost.
However, lets make something clear here. for something to be a crime you need a guilty mind and a guilty act.
loli is 'fantasy'- ie NOT REAL. ergo, people who like loli have not "done" anything wrong!
when, and only WHEN they DO something wrong- then they are guilty. owning loli does not mean that you are a pedophile (in action, not thought- some go a little too crazy.)
futhermore- if these gov organisations want to HELP children- they should spend less time bitching about artistic depictions of children and focus on fixing child abuse and molestation with tougher laws on pedophiles and rapists. either help or kill the bastards/bitchs.
these gov organistations are nothing but a bunch of moronic parents who are too busy controlling kids lives. it is they who are destroying and huirting children- by smouthering them in so much cotton wool that they suffocate!
pedophilia is wrong- im seriouse about that- but art is only art.
im worried what will happen to yaoi next...
will gays and lesbians will be hunted down as 'a danger to children' because they live an alternate lifestyle? how redneck is that. shit, the world is adopting stupidity as a new lifestyle.
come on guys, dont be even more stupid then you already are- long live FREE THOUGHT!
Okay, I clearly should have written more than I did. Once again, that is exactly the point I was trying to make.
Let me try again: Once you have seen firsthand how children in the third world are suffering, these attempts at starting crusades against things that are merely vulgar stop being funny and start being offensive. What UNICEF is doing here has no place in an organization that exists to keep children from living (and DYING) in Hellish conditions.
Better?
you'll have to pry the lolis from my cold dead hands...
Save the Lolis!
"Save the lolis, save the world!"
"It's not that I like loli, I also likes loli."
I'm confused, is the plural form of "loli" is "lolis"?
No, there's no need to attach the "s" to Japanese words as they are already plural and singular. So "there are several anime" should probably sound correct to you. This is the style used on this site.
There are plenty of non-Japanese words with the same sort of inconsistent rules applied.
Incidentally, whenever I hear the NSPCC acronym, I think of a lovely parody of their TV ads begging for donations which I saw on b3ta.com last year (I'd link, but the picture's missing these days): A monochrome photo of a scared five-year old captioned "Emily's uncle makes her do things she is too young to understand" - followed by the cover of an undergraduate textbook on engineering thermodynamics. Gets me every time, it does.
I think the real problem here is that people are being punished for bad thoughts. If someone draws a picture of an underage girl being raped no one has been hurt. Some people may be offended but that is the price of free speech. I wish the people behind this would direct thier attention towards people commiting actual crime like.... child molestors? When the givernment tries to criminalise our thoughts then what freedom is left. It makes me wonder what is next, if you write a story that involves the assassination of the U.S. president should you be tried for murder? How about one that depicts an arsonist? or a brutal rape? These are the thought police and if you give them an inch they will take a mile.
Indeed, isn't thoughtcrime such a swell invention?
UNICEF: We need to kill these mother fuckers
i hope they'll DIE s2pid law
say yes to lolis, we need to protest!
ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWAH!
We know that alcohol makes people drunk and cause traffic incidents that kill many, then should we ban alcohol ?
We know that loli pictures can cause people doing bad things to children, then should we ban loli ?
Bad example, you drink to achieve a state of mind, or lack of. But it's your state of mind that causes you to like loli.
A better analogy may be banning the film Saw. It's a film that could possibly promote torture and so for watching that film you are instantly labelel as a mental case. Not taking into account the people who watch the film but wouldn't think to do it in real life.
The slight difference between this example and loli is that the group of people who find the film Saw deeply disturbing aren't going around calling people who watch it murderers, whereas with loli the people who find it disturbing are.
Actually there are people who use lolis pictures to 'achieve a state of mind' too...
Well actually what I mean is everything has a good said and a bad said, it's not like all people into loli are bad, and not all people who drink drink for fun, some would kill to get some alcohol for them
i mean good side and a bad side*
For the love of fuck, go and help REAL children.
All the real children have been arrested. Now all there is left is the 2D children.
All the real children have died due to poverty and starvation. Now all there is left is the 2D children.
fix'd
All the real children are either in prison from self-exploitation or have died from starvation. Now all there is left is the 2D children.
Double fix'd.
All the real children are either in prison from self-exploitation, have died from starvation, or murdered by selfish adults in third world countries as well as world powers. Now all there is left is the 2D children.
Triple fix'd.
There haven't been any real children for generations. Don't ask me how it works. Anyway, all that's left is the 2D children.
Quadruple fix'd.
I fail to see how anybody could possibly prove the age of a drawn figure unless it was stated by the artist themselves.
Easy. Judge looks at the picture, says "this girl/boy/fairy/sprite/angel/demon/alien looks to be around 8 to me", bam! Instant sex offender.
Remember, if you're going to make a drawing of a character in a potentially sexual manner, make sure that the model has filled out the proper information to make the image USC 2257 record-keeping compliant.
OH WAIT THAT'S RIGHT YOU CAN'T DO THAT FOR REFERENCES THAT DON'T EXIST IN REAL LIFE
What needs to be banned is people who call ANY sexuality an 'abberant' sexuality. As I have said many times before: it is simply past time to realize that pedosexuality is a NORMAL sexuality, legalize it, and deal with it that way!
It isn't like being a pedosexuality is easy to hide: anyone who spends five MINUTES with me, whether I say that I am a pedosexual or not, knows that I am one. Not because they get a 'creepy vibe from me', but they see the lingering looks I give some female children.
If you mean that statutory rape laws should be repealed, I have to disagree. I don't feel that children are mature enough to be able to really consent to the act, social stigma be damned.
There is such a thing as being TOO permissive.
This guy's made similar comments here before. I sincerely hope he's a troll.
At least he's being honest. You can't get help if you're in denial.
On top of that his statement is ambiguous. Hardly anyone knows what the real definition of a pedo is. If he's talking about underaged but post-pubescent girls then there's actually nothing unnatural about it. We're just brain-washed to think it is.
That said, I do think the statutory rape laws need to be changed, though not repealed. Reform our shitty education system, force parents to actually raise their kids, and some needed changes to mass media, and lower the age of consent down to 15 or 14. You'll have a lot less criminals and the money you save can be used to fund those programs as stated above.
I gree with Rockbottom. Most people are brainwashed to think of 14 and 15 year olds as incapable of doing anything when we all know tgey are. Also fun but odd semi relavent fact i nearly got laid when i was 6-8 years old girl was a year older i said no foolish move in some ways in my 20s now and still a virgin. The point of that BTW was to point out age isn't that important. though i did find out later she'd been screwed by her older brother. Thus prompting my view consensual is pretty much always cool rape only in 2d.
That's pretty creepy, actually.
Actually I kind of agree with this guy. There are enough laws against rape and abuse to put people like him in jail anyway.
Laws that are specific cases for child rape/exposure lead to absurd laws such the loli bans and arresting 14 year old children.
But then again, since when were laws supposed to make sense anyway?
I hate to further play devil's advocate on an already Status Quo challenging site.
But, would it really be a bad idea just to treat rape as rape, period? Not strings attached like "well you're 15 and s/he's 17 so...therefor he's a sick pedophile and no matter how you say this is stupid and not only did I want that, I initiated the sex act." it's still rape.
I understand there's a lot of stigma with rape and people who won't come clean because of that. But that doesn't mean you have to make age a determinant. It means you have to spend while being delicate, and do what you should do with all rape cases, make a person feel like it's alright to say the TRUTH about what happened and that it's not their fault. I don't see how "oh you were 15/16 so oh, you were raped" helps anything.
Just putting that out there. I am for changing the age of consent at least a bit after hearing about young kids going to jail for age of consent violation when there WAS consent involved and kids taking pictures of themselves naked(OH GOD THE HUMAN BODY) and going to jail and being listed as a sex offender.
I don't claim to be with the majority of people here for lolicon rights. Last thing it needs is to be further lumped with pedophilia and lumped together with an even MORE oppressed and hated political idea. But I'd be lying if I said I thought EVERYTHING about the age of consent was COMPLETELY fair and reasonable.
I fully agree with your points, as does [www.rickyslife.com.]http://www.rickyslife.com.
They do this and the amount of pedophiles will sky rocket where else will they get their fix? This type of thing occurs all the time and this is hopefully no different. They ban it and one of two things will happen...tons of people will go to jail for pictures of fake females or the amount of child rapists will increase. Either way nothing good will come of this and after about 8 years they will learn the errors of their ways and undo it but by then it will be too late and a new generation of pedophiles not lolicons will have been created. what they did for good will be used to make great evil...or something like that.
I agree with you 100%.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again....
They have to keep all those correctional officers and staff working, don't they?
It's kinda like the welfare system in the US: They have an overbloated, underbudgeted, and ultimately useless government organization in place sucking up taxpayer dollars, but where do all those government employees go to work if it all gets shut down? Welfare may be the only help some families have, or options available, but there are families and employees who've sponged off the system for DECADES who could work harder but don't.
I think the same could apply to UNICEF and other such organizations.
Why not ban the appearance of anything bad and nuke the world? If there is no life there are no mroalistic whack jobs to offend...
this is turning into something like the minority report where your going to get booked for simply thinking of a crime. and in this case, a "crime" against imaginary 2d children which don't even exist.
the uk has gone mad. less moral panic spread please? more of actually doing something to help kids?
I say they are just 'pretending' that they are 'doing something' and is making the world better, when the truth is just want to make themselves look like they are useful to get more donations/fundings etc, so they would not be out of a job considering the current recession/credit crunch and decreasing in the number of jobs available...
"Cruelty to fictional loli"? Seriously man...they need to find something better to do...like saving underaged girls in the REAL WORLD from being raped by step dad or mom's boyfriend...
".. non-photographic pictures of child sexual ABUSE, such as drawings,..... the wider pool of child ABUSE images in circulation."
How can they even call it a case of ABUSE when more than half of the lolis we see in loli ero manga are enjoying and having sex on their own decisions, not forgetting Lolidom?
It's just sad that these shitters tend to make their own hypothesis based on the "number and possibility of a child molesters possesing loli manga" instead of the "number and possibility of loli manga possesser molesting a child". Hence, they tend to ignore the real fact that loli manga actually won't cause child sexual abuse.
It's the fact they don't take into account the people who aren't child molesters. Think about it, without breaking into your home they can't know if you like loli and so their only experience with it is where it's happened to be in the hands of molesters.
Completely one sided.
Not a 'fact' per se.
If overexposure to violence can make people more violent, then overexposure to loli manga could influence people to molest children given the chance.
Human minds are pretty susceptible, ya know.
But then again correlation doesn't prove causation and there's no proof either way.
Frankly Japan is has a lower rate of rape than the US, so it is pretty much fact fiction dose not break you. You have to be broken to start with and even then it dose not always lead to random tragedies.
These fascists don't have the facts on the benefit of banning loli porn. Where is proof it will protect children????
Basically it offends them so they want it banned.
Truecrypt is not hackable. However, the police have the right to demand the password. I encrypted everything after the biggles9 case.
I hate loli porn btw. If it hasn't got tits and ass its not lustworthy.
what will pedobear do without unreal loli pron? go for real thing! how bright of them, don't they learn? oh...
.-´¯¯¯`-.
,´ `.
| \
| \
\ _ \
,\ _ ,´¯,/¯)\
( q \ \,´ ,´ ,´¯)
`._,) -´,-´)
\/ ,´/
) / /
/ ,´-´
There's an old phrase - "might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb". When you criminalize trivial things, it trivializes criminal things.
If I remember correctly, wasn't there a study which concluded that countries with legal CP actually has a lower count of child-rape-related crime?
Reffering to the research i did.
Yes it did say that countrys with legal cp had a lower count of child rape.
But this law probably has such thinking,if only even 1 victim is saved becouse drawn hentai loli was made illegal(don't know if somebody really raped someone becouse of hentai loli),then it was worthy.(it's how they think,i read stuff)
Meaning becouse content was not available legaly.
It won't matter to them so fast until it will become abnormal,if there will be a sudden increase of real loli rape in the process becouse they banned drawn lolis.
The idea is that the content could not affect them legaly but only on an illegal bassis.
I actualy researched many things since i was bored.
There is also a saying the more you forbid it,the more people are interested in it.
Lol UK is maybe messing up there.
I still think that real cp should be illegal.
But i do wonder if it would be legal if it really would decrease the real loli rape?
Thank God we have people protecting our paper from being scratched with indecent, disgusting images in ink. Don't these people have anything better to do? Dear idiots: actual children are being abused in your country and you are babbling on about "non-photographic images". How about, I don't know, putting your prodigious efforts towards helping those children? Christ.
The last time the NSPCC made a major effort to crack down on actual child abuse, they made a complete fuckup of it, and traumatized countless children by insisting that they have their anal sphincter reflexes checked with surgical instruments. No, I wish I was joking. Look up "satanic child abuse". Trying to help imaginary children is much safer because even if the NSPCC screws up again, the children won't be hurt.
We had similar cases in America during the 80's. Go look up the details of the McMartin trial if you want to sprout a huge pillar of hatred for both the American legal system and the American news media.
That sounds as bad as the McCarthyism Commie Witch Hunts of the 1950's.
Alot of people arguing here are missing a big point and that is that drawn loli images are very different from actually pictures of children. Remember 3D pig disgusting. I'm sure if any actually child molesters got there hands on 2D loli images they would never want to go back to the real thing. What UNICEF should really be doing is using these images to convert all 3D child molesters to go molest harmless 2D images.
UK fag here, soooooooo, its a bad thing that all my loli smut i just bought at a anime con is gonna get arrested, plus all 70gb of loli on my computer, ALSO all my loli posters on my bedroom walls!, fuck they are gonna have a field day with me XD
inb4 "zOMG TORRENT PLOX"
Moar liek in b4 "I have reported you to the NSPCC for violating the human rights of underage pixels, as it is a crime", amirite?
I believe that the NSPCC just wants more damn adult hentai or mature boobies =)
Didn't AkabeSoft release a new game called W.L.O.? What was it again?
World Loli Organization?
Well OF COURSE they find loli images in the hands of child molesters, that's common sense. It's NOT common sense however to reverse engineer that logic and declare that all possesors of loli content are abusers. All inuits are eskimos but not all eskimos are inuits. Furthermore, laws are in place because of psychological and physical damage incurred to children involved, but remove the child from the situation and there's nothing inherently wrong with being attracted to that imagery.
not a chance, japan makes too big of a money for that
I guess they better start destroying some of the paintings and artworks of those naked child-like angels from the churches. Or else the whole church will get arrested for having 'illegal images'
OH NOS. more illegal paintings!
http://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/cgi-bin/WebObjects.dll/CollectionPublisher.woa/wa/work?workNumber=NG6596
I guess those British museums won't be too happy with this either eh? XD
seriously, I haven't such levels of retardation for a long time. Inducing moral fear to try to pass a law without any concrete basis or facts, AND taking away people's freedom of expression. Great. What next, passing a law that ban girls from going out of their homes until they are 18? lol
That sort of scaremongering doesn't do our campaign any good. First, to be illegal, the work as a whole must be reasonably assumed to have been produced for the purpose of sexual gratification, which that painting clearly wasn't. Second, the Human Rights Act protection of freedom of expression still overrides the proposed law, and that includes protection for bona-fide works of art. All of that said, though, I'd like to see how some of the more erotic loli paintings by Balthus get on.
at least some folks in UK are against this petition.
if your British, then sign up.
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/Protect-Comics/
Screw being British, all that's needed to sign a petition on number10.gov.uk is a legitimate address inside the UK. I've signed several, and I will sign this one too.
Now if only online petitions had any sort of real impact ... oh right, if that were so everyone would go to jail for offending someone else's sensibilities/not being Christian/not being Muslim/having the wrong skin colour/liking the wrong music etc. Never mind.
By signing that petition, you might as well be saying:
Dear Police,
When this law comes into effect, please come and smash down my front door at 4 in the morning, traumatize my family, and humiliate me in the community.
Love,
P. D'oBear.
next lets ban video games, then children will stop bringing weapons to school!
honeslty a paedophile is a paedophile because they're a paedophile, not because they found hentai on the interwebs
The next step is that they outlaw fictional character murder. Geez, I can't kill off children in my books.
You already can't, at least if the character being killed off is a central plot element and you're hoping for a movie version. Haven't you notice that child characters are nigh-immortal in the vast majority of Western cinema?
Was that a poke at Harry Pooter?
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InfantImmortality
i deemed television and movies that should be banned too if this law is passed
Banning 2D lolis = banning guns = nothing happens
Personally I am a fan of loli's all the time. I do know underage sex is wrong and i am total againts it although i am a lolicon.I wouldnt most likely agree if they say more punishment will be deal to underage sex but not banning 2D loli pictures.This is just fucking wrong because it takes away the only entertainment that will be providing to lolicons
No need to get overly defensive. What's wrong with, say, a 16 year old and an 18 year old having consensual sex? Age of consent laws in most countries do need major reforms. If you feel the need to defend your loli preferences by stating that you think real underage sex is wrong you obviously feel guilty for having these preferences.
There's only one defense for lolicon, and it's the only defense that should ever be needed: freedom of expression. If any legislator wants to curtail the right to freedom of expression, that person better provides scientific proof that the thing he/she wants to see banned harms basic human and civil rights of other people in a significant way, or otherwise he/she better STFU and GTFO.
Would you say a 16yo having sex with a 48yo is wrong, then? Anyway, I don't think you'll find a better way of how things ought to go than by looking at the traditional Japanese way. No age of consent as such, but for a minor (i.e. under 20) then I believe it depended on the parents'/guardians' consent. Just like Ryuuji and Taiga at his grandparents' house :)
No, but I chose that example because it happens a lot more often (or at least that's the impression I get). Just take a look at the many cases of arrested teenagers...
I don't think the traditional Japanese way is the optimal solution either, since it also involves arranged/forced marriage and the likes.
Uk is fucked up.
Anyway lets think of a situation.
Officer i was just trying to learn some japanese,i didn't know moetan learning book was erotic loli XD.
Regardless of the morality of "lolicon", this is another example of the way UK law always goes for "soft" targets because prosecuting them is easier. And we know all about paedo-paranoia in this country.
Yet they have enough problems which they are ignoring, such as education scandals and weapon crimes.
They should better take care about real child problems.
I don't think that imagination affects children life.
They just trying to do something easy, so people won't think that they do nothing.
Child rape drawings are wrong, but adult rape drawings are fine? So rape on adults isn't that bad? Is it?
Harming children (harming anybody) is very wrong, but imagination doesn't harm them.
I have repost to anything that they says. -.-
aha good saying on the adult one.
Not really... remember the anti violent porn act?
Do you think this will really stop at children?
All sex, everywhere, unless plastic and vanilla, shall be deemed illegal.
The big difference between the "extreme pictures" law and the "anti-loli" law is that the police don't actively pursue the first one as they don't have the resources. They will pursue the second with a vengeance though because they'll easily get the funding to do it.
lol Stupid censoring fuckwads I mean they do know americans an alot of other countries married off 11 and 12 year old girls back in the 1800's and early 1900's and society considered it perfectly normal. I know some countrys still do it even today. The unicef and others must be a bunch of holy rolling faggots that are probably still virgins.
I think loli pictures are fine as long you don't go and just ra** some children out there ^0^. And I am agree with the previous comment, if they think that loli pictures can encourage child abuse, then why don't they say anything about action movies? It certainly encourages for violence and shooting, if you want to see it that way.
I think it's all depend on the people's morale itself, good guys will always be good guys, bastards will always be bastards, no matter what kind of pictures you show them.. (^-^)
I do wonder if this covers fairy hentai also?
There's a bit about 'regardless of characteristics that are not normally seem on a human child, such as attenae'.
Does that answer your question?
Does that include tits or being 6ft tall?
You gotta ask.
I guess suggestive loli image also sufferred. T.T
LOL
"We know from working with police forces across the UK that these types of pictures are more frequently appearing in the possession of people who are arrested for, or charged with, offences relating to child abuse images."
That sounds a lot like a logical fallacy. Saying that offenders frequently posses loli material doesn't mean anything, they have to show that it leads to an increase incident rate in order to have a valid argument. Its the same thing as saying porn leads to sex crimes, violent video games leads to violent crimes. Keeping those things out of the hands of children makes sense, but banning those won't fly unless there's solid proof that they cause problems. Unfortunately the 'for the children' argument blinds these people, even when its not much different at all.
Sounds like fun.
these shitty organizations are full of fucking soccer moms and retard bitches who don't know what they're talking about. if they can't find anything to do, they'll just go around blaming shit about something else totally irrelevant to anyone else.
goddamnit, these people need to learn how to fucking stop meddling in things that don't actually rape children.
when you deem sexual offenders fit to be released back into society after a year or two, you don't really get to complain when they go groping someone's poor child again.
if you dont want sex offenders to be around, start killing one or two or ten to set examples for the rest. i guarantee the death of ten pedos will make some of the thousand potentials to think twice.
these soccer mom bitches are stupid bitches.
I don't like Lolli, but what the fuck under 18. How do you deem a cartoon under 18, especially in Hentai. Some of these girls faces look about 16, while there breasts say about 20.
I can't believe this shit, I could be arrested simply for having Giri Giri sisters on my PC. If they deem them under 18. Infact any school girl hentai could get you arrested.
This means simply surfing 4chan could get me arrested, get this Labour government out.
Those preachy fucks, destroying art, I hate them.
sigh whats wrong with people,
cant tell that fiction dose not = real
thay might as well say harry potter is promoting witchcraft.
i cant belive these people ><
banning a drawing and giving police power to arrest and call loli fans pedos and lock them up with real thugs, child molesters/murders, rapists and all around bad people..
i think thay should be thrown in jail for wanting to waste time and money on banning and weeding out cartoons when thay have real kids to look after..
If these images cause moral decay and abuse on children...why is Japan one of the safest places for little children across the world?They have less rape than the US as well.Their accusations are just as imaginary as anime.
Hell, I think loli makes the Japanese men comfortable with their love for lolis and want to protect them from abuse.
ok i had it some1 introduce the leader of that NSPCC so i can punch him in tha face. not only they judge ppl that has those stuff but they r judgeing it.child pornography is 1 thing but hentai loli!? and dont give me the crap that ppl tend to do what shows on those loli manga/hentai. its just a stupid excuse of some1 trying to integrate his own morals on every1's mind. this goes directly to those NSPCC folks: U DON'T LIKE IT MEGABITE ME, KEEP UR MORALS TO URSELVES, and instead of persecuting loli porno persecute child pornography ones.
Cops like easy targets.
If you are on the street near the donut shop, the cops will bust you for jaywalking, particularly if you look like you're easy to intimidate.
If you are hiding in a jungle of poisonous snakes, the cops will have better things to do than go look for you.
Comic-book fans are already of low social status. Cops like harassing people with low social status - it's safer than hassling people who might have allies.
Comic-book fans are likely to be introverted and polite - and that makes them good targets.
You make a good point. They don't want to risk people who might fight back. This is something they use to meet quotas.
With this I think big companies like disne y and such are in trouble cause tinkerbell shows way to much leg and since she is so short she must be a loli herself therefore bad.
Sorry but that's just sad.
Have no doubt, characters like Tinkerbell will certainly come eventually. They'll start with human characters first though. They'll be conservative at first, like Lisa Simpson in Australia, but eventually even Meg Griffin porn is something you can get arrested for.
you guys shouldent BAN lolicon. I like it, however i can completely understand where your coming from. Mabey you guys should first start with Toddlercon (fiction sex images/manga/anime of girls under 8 and above 2) or even live porn, compared to these things lolicon is not as bad as it seem as the youngest girls you will find in lolicon are at least above 8years.
There is no clear definition for what lolicon is Anon. Furthermore, toddler/baby etc. cartoons should not be banned for the same reason: there's no actual wrong being done to harm another person.
I believe the live stuff is already banned. I don't really see the necessity though, it's already illegal to do the stuff that's being filmed. Outlawing the media transmission seems to me just an opportunity to make numerous easy arrrests and rack up years against the curious as opposed to catching the actual offenders breaking age of consent laws.