You are proceeding to a page containing mature content. Is this OK?

check Yes, show me everything
close No, hide anything sensitive

This is “Child Pornography” in Sweden…


Sweden’s dubious status as an enlightened nation is being further cast into doubt by the publication of some of the images it has been attempting to lock people up for possessing.

The original case revolved around the child pornography conviction of a Swedish manga translator, based on 2D artwork found on his computer.

His punishment was later reduced on appeal and he escaped prison altogether, but the court still insisted the art constituted child pornography.

The court refuses to make public the actual images it regards as “child pornography” so it is impossible to know how they are applying the criteria, but 10 of the initial set the child pornography prosecution was based on (including the merely “suggestive” banana picture) were subsequently judged as non-pornographic and released to those scrutinising the case.

The images in question:


But for a partly successful appeal, possessing or viewing any of these could have resulted in a prison sentence.

However, so tasteful are these loli nudes that they are barely a step away from the sort of fine art any gallery be desperate to hang on its walls:


Leave a Comment


  • Loli artists should change their styles and techniques and paint oil, pastel, watercolor, etc. images. Then, when a loli-fan is caught with the loli fan art, the defense can point to the lolis and shotas in museums worldwide and ask, “so it’s not porn if it’s hanging in a museum,huh?”

  • This is animated child pornography, please understand this, these pictures are made for the wackoffs to wack and fap to these pictures, but the picture to the bottom is not meant to be used to wack and fap to. It is a expressive piece of art, opinions, thanks.

  • o-o my entie laptop is full with loli
    y should this be considered child porn its juts pixels its fiction fucking gay ppl who think this is porn
    loli porn ftw btw i saved 70% of the pics above 😉

    greets from holland bitches

  • Honestly, compared to some of the stuff in, say, the Channel, this is actually pretty tame.

    I mean, it cuts a little close, but it’s still not that obscene.

    Hey, fine art is fine art. It shouldn’t discriminate based off age.

  • No, don’t lock him up. Realize that pedosexuality is a NORMAL sexuality and it’s time to acknowledge that fact, just as they acknowledged that heterosexuality outside of marriage, homosexuality, and non-whites having sex with whites is a normal sexuality.

  • I live in sweden.. and you put up loli pics.. so now i get to jail? ahh i’ll just said it was unexpected.. oh wait.. im using the internet.. i should’ve known..

    btw i haz loli manga on my computer (hope you are not a cop living in sweden 🙂 )

  • The lower court charged him with possession of child pornography, but then a higher court changed that by claiming the above images are not child pornography.

    A lawyer has made a private analysis of the case and he came to the conclusion that, according to the constitution, the judgement was basically flawless. I’m not saying that he supported it, because he doesn’t, but he said the verdict is pretty much exactly according to the law…

    Only the curious thing is they did declassify some of the images and that was basically all they could do within the framework of the current law. Meaning that even if they didn’t want to charge him, it wasn’t possible to do it any other way.

    Basically: They have to work within the framework of the law and the law says these kind of pictures are illegal. So the judge says basically “Well child pornographic pictures might be illegal, but these pictures cannot possibly be child pornography, and thus they are not illegal”.

    My personal belief is that the judge didn’t even want to reach this verdict at all. The current result is the best he could do. Especially since it is, and I’m not a lawyer so don’t quote me entirely on this, almost impossible to get a law declared unconstitutional in Sweden… (it’s notable also how easy it is to change the constitution in the first place)

  • Why are you illustrating the article with the pictures that are the ones that were judged NOT to be child porn? All the pictures above are judged to NOT be child pornography. IDIOTS. EJ SEKRETESS are written on the pictures that were cleared of being child pornography… and therefore ok to share with anyone. The material that were considered to be child pornography you have to have special permission by the police to view and therefore of course doesn’t have a EJ SEKRETESS = “no secrecy” label.

  • This will get buried of course but oh well.

    In the end, the only truth that matters, is if THEY have the power to put YOU behind bars, it is THEIR opinion that essentially matters.

    What is and is NOT CP is only relevant, if YOUR opinion can be enforced and or defended without repercussions.

  • Well, looking at the last picture it reminds me that if this becomes a trend in Europe, France will have to sue and shut the Louvre down for indecent child pornography hanged in some of the galleries…

  • The reason it is illegal is because the images are not done in a tasteful way, they were created with the sole intent of turning the viewer on, and to be used as masturbatory aids.

    They aren’t art, they aren’t just cartoons, its animated pornography depicting children.

    That’s that.

  • I’m a 20 year old guy and by societies standards I’m a a sick pedorapist.

    I find girls/women attractive in the age range of 10-30.
    And while I do fap to lolicon hentai I would NEVER EVER try to force a young girl into sex. If however in a fantasy world a really attractive 12 year old tried to sexually seduce me, I would have a hard time saying no.
    But that would never happen since we live in the real world and if by some strange reason a girl this young would be interested in sex she probably needs professional help since it’s usually the cause of abuse.

    tl : dr
    So while I’m technically a “pedophile” I’m NOT a rapist and never will be, so what’s the big deal?

  • As a Swede I can say that the trail is NOT without controversy. As the law is they can’t change the verdict (a heft fine but no jail)but it may, and probably will end with the law being changed.

    Also please note that THESE ARE NOT THE PICTURES THAT HE GOT THE FINAL SENTENCE FOR, these got overruled and deemed as “legal” in the second round of the trail. Knowing manga I’m quite sure there were some more dubious stuff left there.

    They guy works as a manga/anime translator and more or less introduced it to sweden in the 90s. He’s bound to have some shifty stuff on his harddrive (and no, he’s not an old freak. He just started early).

    Still, wonder who framed him? That is suspicious. Wonder what would happen if “they” found my folder of guro? But hey, atleast they’re all over 18 right?

  • Enlightened my ass. If the people in charge there were so enlightened they’d realize that if children are going to be violated and exploited, it’s better the fake/imaginary/fantasy/ink-and-paper children be ravaged and not someone they or anyone else might know.

    • First off, most children who engage in sexual encounters with adults are NOT exploited in the slightest.
      That is a fallacy created by people who think that just because an adult or older child tells a child to do something, they are going to do it.
      Not true in the slightest if they have been raised in the proper manner, with the idea that NO ONE has the right to touch them in certain ways without their permission.

      As to being ‘violated’…. they said the same thing about white women who had sex with black men. Wasn’t true in that case, isn’t true in this case.

  • 004 doesn’t even look like a child! What the fuck was the prosecutor thinking when coming up with the first set.

    007 isn’t human.

    009 reminds me of Brooke Shields in Blue Lagoon (probably intended). You probably can’t see her twat in that movie but you can see it in another. Why do I know this? They showed it on Finnish TV a couple of years back…

  • 1.Draw Loli
    2.Claim she has Mosaic Turners and is of legal age.

    Seriously, my friend is a turners girl, she’s 16 and looks about 7. XD

    This would only apply to lolicon, not to shotacon though, the genetic disorder only affects females, it keeps them in a prepubescent body.

  • I’m wondering if anyone managed to read this line in the article:

    “…but 10 of the initial set the child pornography prosecution was based on (including the merely “suggestive” banana picture) were subsequently judged as non-pornographic and released to those scrutinising the case.”

    “…subsequently judged as non-pornographic…”

    By my interpretation this means that the above images are no longer considered child porn? The next line confused me.

    “But for a partly successful appeal, possessing or viewing any of these could have resulted in a prison sentence.”

    • And Dear anon you should have read it too:

      “But for a partly successful appeal, possessing or viewing any of these could have resulted in a prison sentence.”

      Notice the word “could” which suggest possibility. And thats seems to be the case.

  • Drawings are DRAWINGS. Thats all that needs to be said.. arguing further then that is simply unnecessary..

    I can’t wait for places like sweden to start taking in people for murder because they drew gore pictures.

  • So, by Swedish standards, it is perfectly acceptable to go have sex with a 16yr old (as long as the condom doesn’t break), but it is illegal to possess any nude depictions of someone who is under 18. Yea, makes perfect sense to me…

  • hmm.. none of those images really points to child pornography.

    A pedophile probably can get off on those but as far I know they always prefer 3D over 2D, tbh won’t it be better they look at images of 2D then an actually 3D and hope they stick to just that.

    Isn’t it what some people try to do with virtual games, instead of exposing them to the real danger keep them at bay in a virtual world where anything they do affects no one in reality.

    They are people who play military base games killing off “virtual” people but don’t have the heart at all to kill an actual person.

    As far I am concern this is rather stupid no actual crime was committed, it’s not like he went and paint a portray of an actual underage girl, this is more of a moral issue.

    ps: I know pictures are in question here and not games

    Also this remains me of the movie “minority report”

  • As a swede I’m ashamed this shit was even brought up into court. Use that money for something that’s important you know, like stopping an actual pedophile rapist? Or why not all rapists since we one of the highest amount of rapes in the western world.

    • Sweden has among the highest amount of “reported” rapes in the western world. That’s actually good because many other countries have problem even getting the women in their country to report the rape. The reports is also counted as every rape equals one rape. That means if a wife has been raped in a long period of time by her husband and she report all rapes over the years; every rape counts as a report. Everything results in higher number of rape even if Sweden actually may have less rapists.

      When it comes to sex laws in Sweden it’s completly fucked up when I read about this in the newspapers; I laughed. It’s ridiculous!

      • Don’t worry, I think, that every human in Earth thinks, that it is a shame to be a member of his own nation. I say it as a Polish. There are many things typical or customary in Poland we consider we should be ashamed of before the world, like passengers’ applause after successful landing of a plane. I do not see in this anything bad or strange. At last it doesn’t hurt anybody and expresses gratitude and respect for pilots.
        1: This is not our blame we are born as members of our nations.
        2: As far as we are personally honest and decent people there is nothing to worry about.

        • Kinda ironic eh?

          If you rape a 15 year old you can claim she wanted it and get away with it. Which happens quite a lot.

          If you posess a DRAWN image of a nude 15 year old, you’re jailed for being a pedophile and in posession of child pornography.

          So, IF you’re a pedophile, you better rape some 15 year olds rather than jerk off to drawn images to be within the law and still satisfy your sexual desires.

  • Speaking of Sweden, I read somewhere that Sweden is one of the most liberal countries when it comes naturism.

    So looking at 2D images of unknown age is illegal but having people of all ages gathering a nude beach is fine?

    • As a Swede who is “too” used to nude humans, most if not almost all of those images seriously piss me off in this context because there is nothing sexual about them, the chests look the fucking same as on boys and nobody has any issues with that. Some of the images are questionable, but that because of pose and such, and not because of nudity – for instance the first image. Actually, that one is the only one of these images I have any objections to.
      Would I want that image to be illegal? Fuck no. I would however look rather funny at someone who owns it though, and be less keen at letting any kids spend unsupervised time with that person, but that is about it.

      I am pretty sick and tired of this increasing sexualization of children that has been sweeping the world the past decade or so. Yes, prepubertal children are capable of having sexual emotions or feelings, that does not mean there is any reason to sexualize children – especially since they are ridiculously sexually immature and are not even a quarter as sexual as teenagers or adults.
      (By “children” in this post, I am mainly referring to prepubescent kids but even up to 14-17, as puberty starts early for some, late for some, so just because they have hit the age of consent does not necessarily mean they finished their puberty even though it is legal to have consensual sex with them.)

    • it is. We have a lot of retarded people in power over here and it keeps getting worse.

      A few years back there was an official group taking care of “anti-racism” questions that attacked an icecream company for having a liqorice icecream called “nogger black”, since their original icecreams are called “nogger”. Apparently “nogger black” was racism.

      • The “Nogger Black” thing got laughed at by most people here in Sweden. It also turned out that the group that started the “Nogger Black” thing, “Centrum mot Rasism” (centre against racism), had ulterior motives.

        They were supposed to do a ton of stuff, like write reports to the government, collect statistics, hold events, and in general do stuff that decreased racism, and in the return they had gotten millions of government funding for years.

        Unfortunately, they hadn’t done any of the things they were supposed to do. It turned out the only thing they had done was to rent a really flashy and expensive office space for their HQ, pay high salaries to the handful of “workers” for years, and paid for these “workers” lunches and expensive conference trips.

        So, when someone on the outside started to take a closer look at what the government actually got for all those millions and tried to find something tangible that the group had actually done the group panicked. Like little schoolboys that forgot to do their homework, they got creative in and invented the whole Nogger Black thing, as their “the dog ate it” excuse.

    • Where did you hear that? We have some group of women which tries to get it allowed to bath without a bikini at public baths but they have failed miserably.

      Sweden – The country where women covering their whole body in a burqa or a niqāb is a sign of integration and integrity and where showing of certain harmless body parts is seens as tasteless, xenophobic and harmful.

      • Anon, your facts are wrong.

        Burqa or a niqāb are illegal to wear in public. We justified this morally with “You should not be allowed to hide your face”.

        Because of the amount of people being impossible to identify. The police had some disturbing cases of stealing from med disguised as women too. They had to go.

        • If you are talking about Sweden you got your facts wrong. I haven’t seen a burqa in town myself but a few niqabs and they are perfectly fine to wear according to the law.
          Niqab meaning a full body covering except for the eyes so identifying them are impossible.

  • there are 2 there that aren’t anime style, of those 2two, one would be considered art in any context the other one… i say its not porn, but it is suggestive.

    the rest are a clear anime style, and shouldn’t be subjected to any law that reap people are subjected to.

  • Sweden’s censorship laws are just as stupid as Australia’s Classification Board rules. The Aussie’s Board banned Mortal Kombat yet they rated a spanking game for Wii called We Dare a PG?!

    Well at least in Sweden, they don’t have a idiotic politician like Ishihara, hopefully.

    • I too wrote a paper about child pornography, but I knew they would have no idea what Loli was. I know many of you will not read this, but here are a few parts of it. Warning – Wall of text!

      Child Pornography Legality
      In the United States today, there are laws that have children as young as 10 being arrested and charged with sex crimes for things as simple as touching each other inappropriately. Teenagers are arrested and charged for sexual offenses for sending nude photos of themselves to each other. Thousands of people are labeled as Sex Offenders who would never rape anyone or molest a child. How can America allow such broad, sweeping legislation to make criminals out of so many? Examining the history of child pornography laws and policing dilemmas with them, reveals that they are ineffective because they lose sight of what needs protecting.

      The history of child pornography laws since 1977 has been influenced by unproven or strait-out false claims. The belief in a massive child pornography business began in the United States, England, and Scandinavia in the late 1970s (Rossen & Schuijer, 1992). The Netherlands in 1984 openly sold child pornography in porn shops. News reports about child abuse were considered small incidents and exceedingly rare. The Vrij Nederland newspaper often held undisguised classified ads for child pornography. In July 1984, this all changed. The police raided many porn shops and confiscated “eight cubic meters of child pornography.” It was also reported that 50% of their business came from child pornography sales. Both of these figures were found to be inaccurate. An organization called Defense for Children International (DCI) recognized by the United Nations continued to spread information about this theme. They claimed an annual profit of five billion dollars from child pornography business. They sometimes stated that it was 10 billion. A study done in 1986 by the United States Senate Commission on child pornography and pedophilia found that, “The most generous estimates of the value of foreign child pornography entering the United States — according to known seizure figures — would probably not exceed $5 million” (Rossen & Schuijer, 1992, para. 7).

      The study of boy prostitution done by Robin Lloyd in 1976 influenced much of this action. In his book, For Money or Love: Boy Prostitution in America, Lloyd claimed that 300,000 boys were involved in child pornography (Lloyd, 1976; Ost, 2009, p.159). Lloyd offered no evidence for this figure and he later admitted, “It was a working hypothesis which he had suggested to a number of experts to test their reactions” (Rossen & Schuijer, 1992, The Origin of the Myths, para. 1).

      This study began Judianne Densen-Gerber’s campaign against child pornography. Judianne Densen-Gerber was the director of Odyssey House, a chain of residential treatment clinics for drug addicts. She used Lloyd’s figures to generate her own. She deduced that if 300,000 boys were involved in child pornography, then 600,000 children would be the total (Ost, 2009, p.159). 1977 saw a major increase of news reports about child pornography, thus it became a topic of national interest.

      A member of the House of Representatives named John Conyers Jr. aided Densen-Gerber’s claims in court when she stated that her 600,000 children claim is likely twice that because Robin Lloyd’s discoveries could not accurately count all involved. According to Rossen and Schuijer (1992), Conyers reasoned that “American had not only one million runaways but another one million school drop outs.” Thus, he multiplied the statistic again to represent two million children. The law that passed that day was 401 for, zero against (Rossen & Schuijer, 1992).

      In 1986 the Meese Commission, initiated by the Reagan administration, concluded that child prostitution “have become highly organized, multi-million dollar industries that operate on a nationwide scale” (Rossen & Schuijer, 1992, The Spread of Rumors, para. 1). This conclusion came from previous studies that were also proven untrue. Even though studies from 1980 refuted all the evidence that claims child pornography was a mass market, the same statistics were used in the United States Senate, the United States Supreme Court, a Commission of the American Justice Department, the United Nations, and the Council of Europe (Rossen & Schuijer, 1992).
      This trend of over exaggerating the problem continues today. John Walsh of ABC ‘s Nightline, better known for the television show America’s Most Wanted, stated that 100,000 level three sex offenders are missing in America (“Big Registry,” 2010). The show To Catch a Predator hosted by Chris Hansen on NBC claimed there were 50,000 Internet predators online at any given time. Both of these claims are based on nothing and guesswork.

        • Go to google image search, set safe search to OFF, type in FAMILY NUDIST or TEEN NUDIST or CHILD NUDIST or NUDIST PAGEANT VIDEOS.

          Viola – millions of under 18 naked people. Just like in David Hamilton, Jock Sturges & Sally Mann photo books & films. Just like the scores & scores of aged 16 & 17 year old models in 1950s thru 1970s USA Playboy & Penthouse. Traci Lords at age 15 & 16 in Hustler, OUI, Genesis, Club, Penthouse in the 1980s. The hundreds of 15, 16 & 17 year olds in UK Mayfair/Mens World, German & Italian Playboy, Spanish Penthouse in the 1980s thru 2000s. All purchased by tens of millions of normal red-blooded men. These models & actresses ain’t traumatized or commiting suicide.

          They’d been screwing & sucking for “free” otherwise if they hadn’t modeled.

          Tens of millions of under 18’s & their parents go to nude beaches or are Naturists on the lawn in Europe & Russia. All displaing their bodies to countless pot-bellied balding middle-aged men.

          Porn is just photons which once existed striking silver halide crystals deposited on ground up trees. Nothing more.

        • Depends. For drawings, it’s mostly prejudice. Photography, though, is a problem. Not having maturity to take a life changing decision, exposure could later lead to acute embarrassment, trauma and, in extreme cases, suicide.

    • people always argue that there’s a difference between porn and art form… there’s an australian photographer encountered the same problem (forgot his name), even though the mother was present and had her consent during the photoshoot… i think the difference is at the audience not the artist itself

  • So this is the new witch-hunt of the 21st century!? Drawing with “2D children” made by Japanese are pedo materials, but when they are made by Europeans are arts (e.g.last pic of a Couture Thomas’ painting)? So ridiculous it’s racist. Go after the real pedophiles who harm/hurt real children next time, okay!

  • Jail time in Sweden equates to being shipped to a “prison” island where you live in houses with fellow prisoners and endure physical labor until they believe you’ve paid for your crimes.

    A man who chainsawed his entire family spent only a few years there.. And they had them cutting lumber with a chainsaw.

    • Just another case of politicians letting personal feelings get in the way of common sense. Of course they’ve been doing this for several thousand years so its not like I expect any less, but cases like this highlights just how ridiculous it can get.

    • Some things in the Renaissance ARE child pornography. What is it with people thinking that just because something is ancient it wasn’t intended to be pornographic? I can name plenty of works that were intended to appeal to people’s sexual sides. Sure they are scene as art NOW, but that doesn’t erase the original intentions. Do some research and shut up.

      • I’d love to research that aspect too but I unfortunately don’t have access to my own copy of “The Femnazi Radleftist Man-hating Dyke Revisionist Encylcopedia of World History Philosophy & Art” as you apparently do.

      • wow, wouldn’t figure renaissance painters did pin up posters, what with painting materials being so expensive and the Inquisition would arrive at your door anytime. wouldn’t figure that

        • And even before more or less public galleries, rich men payed good for such paintings that we don’t usually show in our modern galleries since they are considered explicit even with todays standards.

          They were custom orders delivered right to the customer, sometimes for private use only.

    • I imagine it depends on whether the intent is to sexually titillate or not. I’ll bet the population of people whacking off to renaissance paintings is near nil. If the same were true of these loli pics, there probably wouldn’t be a problem.

    • I agree. They should stick with one decision. I would personally consider art in the renaissance depicting nude children, pornography. At least with me you’d get a straight answer of what I would think is and isn’t pornography. Basically giving a free pass at pushing those boundaries.

      • I am dead set against child pornography. It is just plain disgusting, wrong and there is no gray ground. It is what it is.

        HOWEVER, nudity is NOT pornography. It simply is not. There is nothing wrong with a nude body no matter the age. It is how it is presented that constitutes if it is or not pornographic.

        Some individuals, like yourself it seems, think that any type of nudity should be considered pornographic and that is simply wrong.

        If it were so half the world would go to jail and be considered in possession of child porn. There are a great many cultures where kids might roam the house naked or the parents will take pictures of their kids when they are born. Latino cultures generally do this for example. It is normal in their culture.

        Please take this into consideration next time you are looking at a classic painting or go to an European beach.

        I also have a great dislike for loli hentai, however as I understand the law is meant to protect the abuse of children not of paper. Seeing judges taking a high moral ground just because they dislike the drawings doesn’t seem right to me, even if I find that type of art disgusting. At the most just confiscate it to destroy. :/

        • personally, any 2D material, is not child pornography in my book, since you get turned on by it BECAUSE it’s 2D. atleast for us lolicons.
          perhaps pedos like loli material too, but lolicons doesn’t necessarily have ANY secual interest in real kids. thats just plain prejudice, and stupid.

          sadly, thats what my country is like… T_T

        • wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text

          HOWEVER, nudity is NOT pornography. wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,

          wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,
          wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,

          wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text European beach.

          wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text,wall of text. :/

          sorry but thats all i could read my dear anon

    • You don’t have any renaissance paintings hanging on your wall or as wallpapper do you?

      Why someone would like to have a graphic depiction of a clearly UNDER AGED GIRL in his/her pc? sexualy explicit pictures of UNDER AGER GIRLS!

      Why it’s not child pr0n? If these where photos of actual existing kids, it would be called that, it´s not art, that’s not the reason this kind of pictures are concieved for, it’s for sexual pleasure in most cases.

      I truly believe that people who likes this kind of pictures have something wrong in their minds.

      • The point is they ARENT photos!! They’re DRAWINGS!! CHILD PORNOGRAPHY is typically classified as photos of children in sexual situations, at least by SANE people. CHILD PORNOGRAPHY is a PROBLEM because in order to get these photos, some poor child has to be ABUSED. In DRAWINGS, no child is touched or influenced in any way. That is the heart of the issue regarding child pornography, though that gets a little foggy these days because EVERYBODY IS FUCKING INSANE

        • Pic 10 blurs the distinction, though – looks traced from a photo to me. In the UK, a traced drawing counts as a photo, which has a much lower threshold of illegality than a drawing. Drawings of a child have to be obscene to be illegal, but photos only have to be “indecent”.

      • They are not considered child porn (my guess):
        – Not sexually explicit (nudity in itself does not equal ‘explicitness’). Even a picture of a real undressed kid will not be considered pornographic as long as it is not explicit and/or erotic. Otherwise a lot of parent could be facing jail time (like a latino couple almost did some years ago in the States).

        Some people would like to include drawings in the definition of child porn (and some countries do) however this is losing sight of why the laws were created in the first place. The law purpose is to protect children from abuse, real children, and to put an end to child pornography.

        Using the law to put people in prison just because they have a shitty art taste is not right, no matter if they derive pleasure from it or not. Not pretty, but the law should be objective in its purpose.

        Finding other people taste distasteful doesn’t give us the right to judge.

      • The intent doesn’t matter! It’s got to have a real child for something to be called child porn.
        Drawings are not children, do not have an age, and are not real unlike real child porn.

        I truly believe that people who think like you have something stuck up their asses.

        • That’s a bad comparison. Either way, Gogetters’s point wasn’t whether it’s pedophilia or not, but if it’s child pornography, which it is not, as he stated, because there is in fact no child present in any of those pictures at all. Much like the painting of a pipe that says ‘this is not a pipe.’

          Whether you cannot stand pedophilia in any way, shape, or form, enjoy it yourself, or are sympathetic to the situation, it doesn’t matter. People must stop pretending that drawings are equal to reality.

          I don’t care if people stupidly think I’m a pedophile for saying that, as long as my freedom to think about whatever I want to think about isn’t made into something criminal. As soon as someone is stupid enough to allow thought policing on one idea, even something they vehemently abhor, they invite it for everything else. That is the inevitability.

      • Well first off, the human body is gorgeous and amazing, in every instance, in some way shape or form. Even the morbidly obese have a crude fascination about them as to how the hell a body we inhabit can expand to such a state and still support us.

        It’s hypocritical to say that a little baby is beautiful, and then be unable to look at a young girl or boy and not recognize the beauty and amazing nature of how the body exists in a state of constant change. The problem is, if I said that second half, nobody would even think twice about considering me a pervert rather than someone who recognizes just what the human body is. Why suddenly is it no longer beautiful and okay to recognize it when it was when they were infants? Are infants beautiful and then children suddenly ugly? See the hypocricy yet? If not, you’re a fool.

        One other thing is many Renaissance paintings are beyond amazing in terms of skill and artistic ability for anyone who’s had the pleasure of looking at them directly. No digital image of them can or ever will embody the depth these paintings really have. Be it a war scene, a nude, or a fantastical depiction of a greek myth. In all cases, I want to see how the artist conceives of it and performs the motions to represent it. That is why it’s amazing. Because to PAINT a depiction of a little girl that honestly gives off the feeling of being a little girl is a remarkable achievement. Same for if you paint an adult, or an animal. It’s to prove you have the ability, and to capture the beauty in a moment, not the perversion.

        But then sometimes it’s also poignant to capture the perversion aspect as well as an exploration of the human mind. The fact that you react to these pictures so negatively means that you are reacting to the artist’s depiction of a little girl, and are having your own experience about it, feeling your sexual side reacting and feeling guilty about it. A subtle shift in the curves and you can change that painting of a little girl into a sensual pose if you wanted to. It is the oldest form of commentary one can make about life: to force people to literally see a new perspective and face who they really are, whether they want to or not.

  • Don’t worry, in Sweden even a “marriage” between two men or women is considered as normal marriage. Swedish aren’t normal, so there is no need to bother with their opinion in this matter.
    So far, one of the most normal society is the Japanese one. As far as I know in Japan still marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

  • Photography is art too.
    Food prep is an art as well.
    The wonders of Photoshop can make art too.
    You see where I’m going with this right?
    Art has many forms.
    If I made a statue of a child naked or “dressed” (I’m a girl but hypothetically) made out of solid chocolate, took pictures then recorded eating it, am I committing a crime of child endangerment?

    • Anyway, the food thing was off topic.
      But a picture of a real child is fine to slip under the radar since animated nonexistent unrelated to the real thing is wrong.
      Part of me sees it as an anti Japanese sentiment.

  • The real question for all of you is: If a picture of a naked child is child pornography, why would a very detailed and expertly drawn or painted “piece or art” not be child pornography if it is of the same type of content?

    These are some fine friggin lines you are balancing here, world.

    Stick to the obviously adult stuff, and stay safe…

    • There is an obvious difference between fine art and this crap.

      I don’t understand how people can’t see the difference. Fine art has expert taste in color, composition, and how the subject is viewed. This guy’s collection has nothing that is remotely like fine art. All he has are pictures that were created SOLELY for the purpose of looking at naked children.

      There is no background, no good composition, and it’s not as though he’s just appreciating fine art in which children happen to be the subject. He is clearly seeking images of naked children and viewing them as sexual subjects.

      Why is everyone so confused about this? The fact that his collection is even compared to Thomas Couture is ridiculous.

      • You have a point. However, should somebody be prosecuted for this?? Would he be prosecuted for having drawings rape and torture scenes, also? It’s not REAL rape an torture and nobody was hurt, just like no children were hurt by these drawings..
        People just get hysteria when it comes to children.

        • I dunno dude…i think like teenage gurls can be attractive…but those pics above are pretty fucking CP to me.

          Just because theres sick fucks that agree with you doesn’t mean its okay.

          THose pictures above are clearly sexualized images of children, even if they are drawings. If any of those gave you boners, I don’t want you allowed near elementary schools.

        • @11:57 Your taste is shit. Please refrain from commenting on any art-related discussion from now on as you obviously can’t tell the difference between, say, a Sargent work and a pile of dog crap.

      • >Fine art has expert taste in color, composition, and how the subject is viewed. This guy’s collection has nothing that is remotely like fine art. All he has are pictures that were created SOLELY for the purpose of looking at naked children.

        The only difference between Thomas Couture and these lolicon artists is that nowadays lolicon artists are lazy and don’t want to spend days (months ? years ?) making one piece of “fine art”

  • starsplash says:

    Ummm Im against child pornography to, but the kind of child pornography that you posted is not what we are talking about. Its 18 year olds+ that have a childlike body that you guys also count as child pornography.

    Im not mad that sweden is banning this crap (I dont live in Sweden, so dont care), but I dont think they are understanding that theres a difference between anime chars and drawings that are blatantly -18 of age and anime chars that are +18 that have childlike bodies. Instead, Sweden bans everything. Thats why we are mad.

    Seriously, I wonder what would happen is a women that 18+ years of age that possesses a loli body would have to go through. Would Sweden put her in jail? Its kinda the same thing since Sweden can’t tell the difference between a child that is -18 and a childlike (loli) body that is 18+. If they can’t tell the difference in an anime or in a drawing, how can they tell the difference in real life?

  • Eh, this doesn’t really bother me that the guy got arrested. This guy is clearly dealing with being a pedophile (pic 010 probably sealed his fate) and isn’t just a fan of loli. People need to learn that not all loli lovers are pedos, but some pedos will love loli. I wouldn’t be surprised if they found other stuff in his house too since some of this stuff is really pushing the line.

    Also, the whole world isn’t Japan. Just because a nation disagrees about child porn and its limits, doesn’t mean we need to throw a fit. We can throw a fit about Japan because Ishihara’s rules are so vague and ridiculous. But Sweden? This guy must have known better.

  • Yes the laws are quite stupid, but they are there for a reason. Do you honestly think the cops will go after someone just for loli? I would say these laws are like most in north america, laws to add more charges to pedo scum when they find some. Kind of like how if you resist arrest, the cops can pile on other charges to make it a tougher sentence if you get convicted.

    Besides, if someone has loli in a folder with a bunch of normal porn, isnt it obvious that the person is interested in kids sexualy? I dont care how its surgar coated or if its “art”, if you wank to loli your a pedo, and I dont see how it can be justified as anything else.

  • the comments of this sire are just so ignorant and foolish, he tried to imply that old masters were pedophilic, but in no point they arent giving importance to genitals in the painting you show, and they arent making sexual expressions like they got a cock in their ass.

    Please, this should be the last time you compare art with, drawings of 30 middle aged man of 13 girls in sex stuff, fucking pervert ignorant.

    • Some of it dose look a little too realistic for my tastes – that stuff being the images art critics might consider ‘fine’ art. The manga stuff is completely harmless. Pray for Sweden? They’re obviously a lost cause.

    • Any person or country can be as biased as they wish regarding the subject of drawn nudes of children (artistic or suggestive), or even real child nudes. Now, before we start a shitstorm, I’ll give two prime examples:

      – Doraemon. Every other episode you have a bathing scene with Shizuka, yet that’s fine and dandy because there’s a lot of countries (mine included) that had no problems showing these scenes on TV. And no one complains about it.

      – The movie “Blue Lagoon” is a classic 80’s movie, and as I recall, there’s one or two scenes where you see the kids naked. This one should be even more serious, because it’s not drawn… But people accept it. Why? It’s not in bad taste.

      Now, do I agree that someone can be arrested for looking at or owning drawn loli? Not really. It’s just a drawing. No one was hurt, abused, or harassed during the production of said drawing, so why criminalize it? Laws against child pornography exist to protect children, but in this case, there’s no one to be protected.

      If people aren’t comfortable looking at loli pics because they let their imagination run wild and imagine those as real children being forced into whatever situation they’re seeing depicted, then that’s their problem. Squeamish people stay away from horror movies for the same reason, and it’s not like anyone actually got killed in those movies… It’s your imagination that’s ruining it for you.

    • The problem with your line of reasoning is this: child pornography is wrong simply because it harms children. Sexual fantasies are never wrong because they cause no harm to anyone, they are simply fantasies.

      When governments punish people due to their fantasies, which in this case are represented by artwork, they are taking the role of “thought police” and punishing people for something created by the mind, which has no consequences in the real world and doesn’t harm anyone.

      Of course, apologists will immediately argue that “looking at lolicon art turns people into child molesters” but that is a completely baseless claim. There is no proof that anyone has “turned into a child molester” due to looking at a drawing.

      • To have fantasies with children, real children or fictional ones… doesn’t sounds… let’s say, healty, or moral, or right. It’s not like you will suddenly transform yourself into pedobear but it says a lot about the kind of person you are or may likely be.

        At some point it becomes a disgusting trait.

        • Endersgame says:

          Wait, did you just bring up morals on Sancom? OK lets think this through, morals make no sense, why, because every single person on this planet thinks differently. Now about it being disgusting well lets throw out the old argument on this and say less then 100 years ago (yes less then the age of the USA) it was considered normal to marry girls when they had started their menstruation cycle. Admittedly that is most likely due to the shorter life expectancy, but still it makes no sense to make a law saying its wrong to see a girl who’s say 16 and fully developed as attractive, some girls develop quicker then others. And another thing, just because you find underage girls attractive or not says nothing about who you are as a person nor does it say anything about your mental health. Why? Because it hasn’t been long enough for evolution to remove that appeal from the human race as like I said it was only around 100 years ago that it stopped and evolution does not work that fast. And on the character of someone, most people who are found to like loli are ridiculed and cast out by society as it is now and are forced into becoming these shut-ins and what most society considers nuisances because of society’s beliefs not because they like loli but because someone found out they like loli. I’ll bet most people on here who do like loli you wouldn’t be able to spot in a lineup even if it was half “normal” people in the lineup. OK I’m done ranting about retards and morals and how it doesn’t work and/or make any sense. Oh and sorry if my rant doesn’t seem to make much sense, I’m tired.

    • @Seira I think i will hop in your boat and brace for the hurricane also, but i do have to agree that in some of them were pushing it and could be considered child pornography. However it doesn’t take away from the double standard which was mentioned about the “fine art” which is allowed.