For the record I’m firmly against against animated porn depicting underage zombies.
It does make me wonder is if the body of a 15y/o who died in 2012 is animated via zombification today would pornographic pictures of that zombie be legal?
I have no idea what warning you are referring to, are you sure it isn’t a function of your browser highlighting sites that put your computer at risk. My googles search of ‘manga porn’ brought up numerous sites none of the ones I clicked had a warning.
If you were indeed under investigation, the first you’d likely know about it would be when the police/FBI came banging on your door in the wee hours of the morning. It’s not standard police procedure to give you advance warning when they’re coming for you, as doing so would give you the opportunity to flee or destroy evidence.
I’ve seen similar “warnings” to the one you mention. While I can’t speak specifically to the ones you’ve seen, odds are that there was a handy link you could click to clear your name (or something similar) … and that link would probably have installed malware on your machine.
Australia has banned small tits so as not to encourage paedophilia.
I sexted a dick pic to an Aussie lass and received an Austalian Federal Police warning for simulating little boy junk.
So if I were in Canada, and I wrote a story where my eleven-year-old self is mowing the lawn of the divorced lady down the street, and when it’s time for me to get paid, she seduces me instead (with lots of fun pornographic details included in the telling of the story, which would be the point), I’d have committed a crime? Would I have to distribute this story in order for it to be a crime, or would its presence on my hard drive constitute a crime, even if I never shared it with anyone?
Who would be the victim - my younger self, who now only resides as a collection of memories in my mind? I wouldn’t exactly feel victimized by the writing of the story. I’d certainly feel victimized by being prosecuted for it.
My question is why should there even be such stuff?
Answer: Pedophile guys can get off on it.
So how is this a good thing?
Would you rather a real-live altar boy be molested?
Does it have to be a good thing? I think it is a bad thing to prosecute people for thought crimes. If no actual children are involved what crime has been committed? Who has been harmed? I don’t like the concept of prosecuting people for thinking about bad things.
If we are going down the road of saying we can’t allow pornographic cartoon depictions of minors. should we also ban cartoon depictions of minors being murdered? What if someone gets off on that!
But it’s more than a “thought” crime.
Think about what it takes to make a cartoon. someone has to write the script, draw out the storyline, do all the cartoon stuff with some sort of graphics computer, film it, edit it, have actors do the voices, then put out the final product. Someone has to pay for all this and then it must be sold and distributed.
Think about the graphics part alone. They have to draw realistic bodies with all the parts and then make them come alive thru animation. Editors and directors look it over and they say things like more or less body hair, bigger or smaller breasts and other parts, we want close-ups of these parts or this action , etc…
That is a LOT and requires some major commitment to make things as realistic as possible.
Dont tell me that’s not being pretty sick!
You realize it’s just pretend, right? They don’t really “come alive”; you know that, don’tcha?
I thought “cartoon porn” would also include a dirty picture, which one guy could draw in an afternoon. But I’m hardly an expert on this subject.
Anyhow, I agree that cartoon porn of minors is pretty sick, but don’t see that as a valid reason to ban it.
A valid reason would be that using cartoon porn increases the odds someone will assault an actual minor. A reason to allow it (other than just, “don’t ban stuff without a good reason”) would be if pedophiles are less likely to engage with actual minors if they can use porn, instead.
Whether either of those is true is a question of fact to which we probably don’t have a good answer. A priori, they both seem plausible. There might even be pedophiles in each category.
You’ve thought quite a lot about this, haven’t you?
First, “cartoon” in this thread includes still drawings. Sketches. Stuff that someone can toss off in a few minutes.
Second, well, crude animation is crude. It can be done quickly now, and by only a single person working alone. Quality stuff isn’t made that way, but most live-action porn isn’t quality, either.
Third… even if it was a big industry with multi-million dollar productions and hundreds or thousands working on the next big hit, so what? You still haven’t articulated a single reason it should be banned beyond “BAN THIS SICK SHIT”-type tabloid crap. Crude appeals to emotion are more suited to what you wish to ban than the methods by which you mean to ban it.
What is the crime? How is anybody being harmed?
People doing something you find disgusting or disturbing isn’t sufficient reason to ban thier activity or imprison them.
I knew a girl in college, who even as a 21 year old senior, literally looked so girlish that she could have been confused with middle-schoolers, except for her height. Put another way, it was enough to make 21-22 year old horny, rather indiscriminate college guys feel creepy when someone would comment about it.
If you’d have put her in pigtails, you’d have had some not-really-barely-legal action going on.
Similarly, as a grown man, I’ve seen 13 year old daughters of co-workers and acquaintances who I’ve felt fairly dirty when looking at in a non-creepy way; they don’t LOOK 13, for sure.
Well what does one have to have then? Do I need some PHD’s to put together studies? Do I need statistics?
Sick shit is sick shit. It doesnt have to have a reason beyond that.
That would help.
Demonstrate that the actions of people who create or view cartoon depictions of underage pornography are dangerous to our society and thus require policing.
As a bonus demonstrate how it can effectively be policed. How do you prove a drawing is an underage depiction?
There are plenty of things I find disgusting that are perfectly legal. Finding something disgusting is not sufficient to me to make it illegal.
When talking about live-action porn, it’s important whether the actors are mature-looking 13 year-olds or young-looking 21 year-olds. But for cartoon porn, I think all that matters is whther the subject is pre or post pubescent. Lida Simpson is pre pubescent. She’s a child, by any sense of the word. (well, except that she’s a cartoon, and not actually a child, of course.) But I doubt anyone gets proscuted under kiddie porn laws for cartoons that look like post-pubescent teenagers. Because, who could tell?
OK, list off a few of your hobbies so I can get outraged and the government can ban them, based on the same logic.
Hell, I bet you watch NASCAR. Sick indeed. Ban it now.
But how can you tell? It’s possible for a 21-year-old to look like a prepubescent 13, but it’s still legal for that 21-year-old to be in porn, because she is, after all, 21. The law doesn’t care about how she looks, because she has a real, factual age. But if one has a drawing that looks the same way, is that a drawing of a 13-year-old, or is it a drawing of a really young-looking 21-year-old? There is no answer.
Right. It’s a hot button issue because we (most of us) have a very deep-seated and powerful instinct to PROTECT OUR CHILDREN, so we tend to react emotionally to anything that seems like it might be a threat to them.
Yes, you do. I voted “other” simply because, if sound studies were to show that cartoon kiddie porn significantly increases child abuse, then I’d consider banning it.
Well, yeah, it does. Take gun ownership, for example. That’s sick shit, but it’s legal.
BTW, be happy you don’t have any sick desires. People aren’t necessarily responsible for their desires. A lot of people have desires they find wicked or wrong or socially unacceptable, and fight them to no avail. (While no doubt others repress them successfully. It’s not an all-or-nothing thing.) Having sick desires doesn’t make you a bad person. Acting on it in a way that hurts others does.
Cartoon kiddie porn might just provide a release that avoids more harmful action. Or it could work the other way. Show me studies and I’ll pay attention. Otherwise, you’re hating the sinner, rather than just the sin. Tsk tsk.