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.
Zero no Tsukaima F Yuri Skinship Anime
Yozora Mikazuki & Sena Kashiwazaki Figures
To Love-Ru Darkness Totally Tentacular
Ano Hana Naruko Anjo Anal Dress Figure
Top 10 Most Followed Seiyuu
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Wondrous As Ever
Ciel nosurge: “Your Date With Ion = $170″
Nisemonogatari – “Where Did All The Ero Go!?”
Police Hunt Ushijima for “Public Indecency”
Cops Bust Cop in Nude BDSM Club Raid
K-ON! “Causes Keionbu Girl Band Boom”
Vippers vs Vankers: 2ch Targets “Korean Propaganda”
Overflow Delays “Final” Game: “We Are Not Going Bankrupt!”
Ritsu Topless Manga Time – “She Has Boobs After All!”
Top 10 Most Boring Anime of Winter 2012
Behold: The ONACOUNTER
Future Diary Unveils Eye-Popping Scenes of Sex & Guro
K-ON! Pilgrims Invade London
Top 10 Essential Anime Elements
Lolicon Teacher Rapes Pupils 37 Times, Faces 30 Years
Wonder Festival 2012 Winter Cosplay
“Post The Highest Level Cosplay Ever!”
“Share The Cutest Cosplay Ever”
“Dolls vs Figures – Which is Best?”
“Why Do Girls Always Have Such Cute Rooms!?”
Ranka Lee Wedding Dress Cosplay by Tomia
Shoko-tan’s Madoka & Ika-chan Cosplay “Excessively Cute”
Guilty Crown Yuzuriha Inori Cosplay by Sasa
IdolMaster G4U: “Who Needs 3D Idols Now?”
Anegasaki Nene Cosplay by Rinami
i deemed television and movies that should be banned too if this law is passed
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.
Banning 2D lolis = banning guns = nothing happens
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
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
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.
Didn't AkabeSoft release a new game called W.L.O.? What was it again?
World Loli Organization?
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.
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.
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.
Those preachy fucks, destroying art, I hate them.
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.
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.
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.
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.
What about bread?Chairs?Door handles?Aren't they usually found in offenders homes?They must cause pedophilia!
I think all of this "virtuak child rights" is all bull...instead of being worried about some fictional character they should put a real effort in actually helping REAL flesh and blood children; there are hundreds of them being abused every day at home or being sold as slaves in so many countries all over the world!!!! So, for once, they should stop making stupid laws to make excuses for not doing their fu**ing job in aiding those children who really really need protection!!!
Fictional characters are just that FICTION, they are not really hurt, not in a real life way, they might be hurt, yes, they might be even raeped, yes...but they are NOT REAL!
Stop making lame lwas and lame excuses to help "fictional children" and start helping those REAL children who actually need your help...or is it that it is easier to help the ones made of ink and paper? I'm starting to believe that.
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.
Sounds like fun.
"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.
No doubt that the MPs etc will go on an all expences paid trip to find out the facts?
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 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.. (^-^)
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 guess suggestive loli image also sufferred. T.T
LOL
I believe that the NSPCC just wants more damn adult hentai or mature boobies =)
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!!!"
"...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.
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.
This stops being funny and starts being offensive once you've seen firsthand how children suffer in the third world.
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?
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.
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.
Damn them and UNICEF! They can't feed children so they feed 2d lolis and protect them from their rightful owners...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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" :)
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.
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... :)
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?
lol. these short girls are actually 18 but in the eyes of others, they are loli
Better Sandboxie it too bro, and surf the internet with no hardrive via Live Linux CD Puppy Linux Is good for that kinda thing.
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.
http://xkcd.com/538/
Link very related.
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.
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."
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
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.
really? are you talking about the blacklist sites they're proposing?
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.
:|
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.
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.
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.
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.
@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.
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.
"After all, open source encryption utilities are easily hackable."
HAHAHA~
Don´t say any shit about anything you don´t know well, troll...