I’ve seen similar stuff on Literotica, which does have a rule that everyone be over 18. So pretty much every story set in High School mentions how she just turned 18 last week, or simply declares everyone 18, even if that would result in a setting where people would be wondering how someone of that age is still a Junior or whatever.
That will come as a shock to my local library, which has a copy of Piers Anthony’s Firefly (which includes a rather graphic depiction of child molestation). As JRDelerious points out - advocating and depicting are two completely different things.
What about when it starts getting into pre-pubescent children here? Most of the examples given seem to be teenagers?
So what? It’s animation – pure fantasy. Well, ok, impure, but no one is harmed in the making or distribution of it.
I found the sex scene in Bigto be deeply disturbing, but obviously not illegal.
As long as the objective factors remain the same - most crucially “no real living beings used in the making of” - then I would have to say that Lolicon would also have to pass muster, at least in the strict sense. Though I could fully expect if applying the Miller case’s “community standards” criterion many a jury would be inclined to feel that in their minds anything of that nature is per se obscene and rule accordingly; IMO that is already the status of the law for practical purposes.
Ha; now I’m picturing Maggie as a gender-bent version of Baby Herman from Who Framed Roger Rabbit, or possibly as Baby Herman in drag. As soon as the shot’s over, “Maggie” promptly whips out a big cigar and lights it up…
I’ve seen art sites with R- or X-rated cartoons thsat contained the notice that “All Models are over 18”, which seems ridiculous when they’re only cartoons (and often biot very good cartoons). I gather that the artists are just covering their asses against prosecution.
If they were prosecuted, they could just draw birth certificates for their characters.
Shouldn’t this thread be illegal? We’re all thinking about minors having sex as a result of it. In fact, shouldn’t a statute forbidding porn about minors be illegal itself, for the same reason?
The unfortunate thing here is that most of us agree, cartoon porn is not a necessity of life and if it were to be outlawed or disappear we’d be a better society for it.
Though society must be rooted with a solid foundation of law and order.
And through law and order it’s difficulty to govern this subject since it is essentially make believe.
Curiously though, if the majority of people find cartoon porn depicting minors to be useless and even offensive, then aren’t the only people who would defend it be persons that support or advocate the cartoon porn depicting said minors(sans the people whom are simply trying to play the ‘law’ angle)?
Further suggests it’s a niche interest and like a lot of niche interests, society will shun you for it. That in itself could be punishment enough.
Feel free to stroll into work and tell people you like to draw Lisa Simpson with a penis having sex with her little sister Maggie (especially since she’s really young).
Good luck with that.
[QUOTE=Evelyn Beatrice Hall]
“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
[/QUOTE]
..
Right. It’s the principle of the thing. And Saraya, social disapproval should indeed be punishment enough for twisted taste. Let the justice system concentrate on catching real child abusers.
Wrong! This is such a completely useless statement I have to wonder what thread you’ve been reading. Our society would be much, much worse if certain kinds of expression were removed from it.
We are pretty much never a better society when any form of creative expression is outlawed or vanishes.
What’s wrong with child porn is that children have to be made to do compromising things to make it. We punish because it hurts people, not because we find pedophilia icky. It’s the same reason child molestation is the crime, not pedophilia.
Pedophiles are people with a mental disorder, and a rather tragic one at that. They can’t ever be fully sexually fulfilled. To deprive them of wank material is just to make it that much harder for them not to become child molesters. Why should our distaste override our desire to protect our children?
I don’t know if removing all forms of creative expression would be bad for society, but this one definitely would be.
EDIT: And Canada sounds screwed up on this issue.
How does this have anything whatsoever to do about whether CARTOONS of child porn should be illegal or not? No children are damaged or in any way at all involved.
That was BigTs point I think.
Please clarify what his point was, because not only do I not see it, it seems internally contradictory.
No, we wouldn’t; we’d be a worse off society. You are talking about eliminating a sub-genre of entertainment for no gain. And anything beyond sitting in a hut with water and some gruel is “not a necessity of life”; I think we can do better than that.
Nonsense. Plenty of people will support it being legal simply out of a distaste for censorship. Other people consider it useful as a harmless outlet for destructive urges.
I on the other hand entertain myself with massacres, assassinations, cannibalism, thievery, and setting people on fire. Speaking of which, I’m off to play some more Skyrim.