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.
| 
Ellen Baker’s Illustrator: “Keep It Clean!”
Bullet Girls 2 Goes At It From All Angles
Sword Art Online: Hollow Realization A Real Grind
Koutetsujou no Kabaneri Immensely Gruesome
Tomoyo After Now on Steam Greenlight
Keiji Inafune Crafts Super Mario Maker Level
Singer Kouji Wada Succumbs to Cancer
Hatsumi Kosaka Bikini Figure
Sankaku App 2.0: Uploading & Editing
New Overwatch Pose Trolls SJWs: “Well Played Blizzard!”
Top 10 Cross-Anime Couples
Strip Fighter 5 Fights Dirty
Netoge no Yome MMORPG Romance Anime
“Official” Signed C.C. Labia Spread Nets $8,000
Sakamoto desu ga The Epitome of Perfection
Anne Happy Anything But Unhappy
Titillating Tomoka Wedding Figure
Touhou Ero-MMD Quite Ravenous
Babymetal Rocks Out On The Late Show
Uniqlo Bra CMs: “Show Us Your Breasts!”
Kashiwazaki Sena Cosplay Pure & Innocent
Minami Kotori Casino Girl Cosplay Takes No Chances
Shimakaze Cosplay by Ema Sakura
Harley Quinn Cosplay by Miyuko Colorfully Crazy
Sonico Ero-Cosplay by Yuka Hoshikage Super Sexy
Kasugano Sora Bunny Girl Cosplay Absolutely Admirable
Goddess of 2ch: “Barely Legal Beauty!”
Highly Yuri Tenryuu & Tatsuta Cosplay by Garo & Usagi
Yuyuko Cosplay by Aimer Lai Truly Enchanting
Tohsaka Rin Ero-Cosplay by Ayane Exceptionally Sexy
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?