Erotic Manga to be Banned?

[Holkeye]

fallacy sounds like phallus.

[Gracie]

fallacy sounds like phallus.

*snicker*

[EvilM00s]

Broken down into its simplest terms, the debate in Japan right now is one of political power and platforming; I seriously doubt anyone on either side of the political fence there give a flying monkey shit about the consequences of hentai or other manga in their society The problem is that since the laws are on the dockett, the people HAVE to give it some real thought and decide what they think is best for their culture and country. All other cogitations aside, I think this, like any other law restricting behavior, must be boiled down to how much freedom you are willing to give up to protect your security. In that argument, I have to err on the side of personal freedoms.

Modern is one of, if not the most intelligent and rational people I know of, and his arguments make a whole lot of sense- but from a theoretical point of view, I'd say. While his facts are sound, and presented compellingly and passionately, I still must disagree with any law which bans a person's rights to 1) artistically express themselves, and 2) do something which causes no harm to the public, in this case viewing such material. As I am in awe of some of the previous posters' articulate arguments and cannot hope to match it, I shall condense my point into this: in this case, the benefits of the proposed legislation do not justify the loss of freedoms involved. The people's voice is not taken by the government, the people give it away bit by bit untill there is nothing left and it is here, the censorship of art, where it begins.

[Karo Rushe]

Tokyo's manga ban has been signed into law after passing a final vote, and is set to come into effect in 2011, with Tokyo governor Ishihara crowing that "Japan still has some common sense left after all!"

The ban already passed a committee vote, and as expected also passed a final vote on the 15th – the law stipulates that "voluntary restraints" must begun in April of 2011, with the full force of the ban to come in July.

All the major parties supported the ban – the ruling DPJ (leftist) insisted on a "prudent application" rider but otherwise did nothing to oppose the law as they did with the previous bill.

The LDP (right-wing) proposed and supported the original and current version of the bill. Their usual coalition partners, the Koumeito (the political arm of a Buddhist cult), also supported the bill, leaving only small parties to the left of the DPJ to oppose it.

Once again the motives of the DPJ can only be guessed at – they have repeatedly blocked national bans on possession of child pornography (already illegal to distribute) on civil liberties grounds, opposed the previously rejected version of the bill because it was worded as a ban on "virtual child pornography," and actually insisted the just passed Tokyo law remove a "duty not to possess [real] child pornography" clause.

However, when the current bill's wording was changed to ban depictions "promoting illegal or immoral sexual activity" (effectively a vastly more far-reaching ban than previously) rather than "[virtual] sexual activity involving minors" (this version of the ban was clearly targeting loli manga) as in the current version, their previous opposition all but evaporated.

That the law explicitly excludes photographic material can probably be interpreted both as a specific attack on "otaku" culture and an effort to avoid antagonising Japan's mass media, who obviously would not support any restrictions on themselves but are only too happy to support them on other industries.

The 10 publishers who have boycotted the Tokyo Anime Fair are angry at the treatment meted out to the industry by Ishihara and his cronies:

    "The earlier bill was defeated with heavy opposition, and we are indignant that the bill should be resubmitted in so short a time."

Kadokawa's CEO has vowed opposition will continue, although just what publishers can do about it is not clear, particularly in light of their evident ineptitude in handling politicians.

Ishihara for his part is crowing over the industry's defeat:

    "It makes sense for this to have passed – Japan still has some common sense left after all!"

In interviews he merely laughed at the industry boycott:

    "If they're outraged about this then they shouldn't come. They'll come the next year, for sure."

Veteran shoujo mangaka Machiko Satonaka speaks of complete betrayal at the hands of the politicians:

    "There were representatives who promised us 'we won't resubmit the bill without consulting manga and anime producers,' but they submitted it anyway, so I feel we were tricked. There are many issues with the ordinance, in particular the 'improperly promote or glorify [sexual activity]' passage, and there is no way we can accept this.

    In particular, I worry about the future for young mangaka – I hope they will persevere without the industry falling into decline."

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tim5nU3DwIE[/yt]

[Forty]

After reading this, I have a few things to say.

First off, coincidence does not cause correlation. In other words, just because there are less reports of rape in Japan does not mean the rape hentai is the cause. As it has been stated, this more likely due to the age old traditions of sexism in the Far East. Even if nobody is consciously sexist, it is possible for people to have unconscious for people of different sexes, races, or even body types due to their portrayal in the media. Therefore, being exposed to rape porn will probably effect you mentally in one way or another.

Secondly, I must agree with MA on the fact that laws are placed societal standards. If Japan does not want to be known for this then this would be the first step. I personally could care less if billions of people watch rape porn. However, if Japan does not want to be defined in this way then this must be their first step.

Third, even if it was banned, there will always be a way to get it thanks to the Internet. I'm sure the Japanese know this, but they just don't to be arrested for it.

Fourth, I do not endorse rape porn and I don't like it.

Fifth,

fallacy sounds like phallus.

EDIT:
So it passed? Better start storing up now.

[Arrow]

To honest I doubt too much will change... we'll just see less anime ladies covered from head to toe in cockroaches.

[Karo Rushe]

It doesn't start ti'll July 2011 thou. . .

[Arrow]

Right.

[Forty]

By the way this made no difference to me at all.

[Zylos]

We figured.

[modern algebra]

I understand what you all are saying, and of course I love you all as well, but I do not think my argument is simply moral or irrational.

We premise our society on the notion that people have equal opportunities when they don't. As a simple example, someone growing up in poverty has far less opportunities than someone growing up in wealth, even though neither had any choice about who their parents were. X and Y can both be thieves, but while X had to choose between stealing and a PS3, Y had to choose between stealing and starving. Nonetheless, we say that X & Y are both equally culpable because they both chose to steal. In that case, government may try to even out these balances by welfare, and whether it works or it doesn't depends on who you ask. The point is that if we are to structure our society around notions of equal opportunity, than government has a responsibility to try to ensure that equal opportunity is not a fiction.

Hatred can threaten equal opportunity as much as poverty can, and deriving pleasure from watching a person, usually a woman, be brutalized and stripped of her dignity is not morally neutral; it is not a preference; it is not a sexual orientation; it is an act of hatred. And it can manifest itself in much more subtle ways than whether that person actually goes out and rapes someone or commits some other crime. Maybe it's a boss who passes someone over for promotion because they masturbate to the thought of raping them every other week. The point is that discrimination is real and it creates artificial barriers where people, because of their sex, because of their race, because of their sexual orientation, because of who they were born as, do not have access to the same opportunities as everyone else.

I think it's perfectly legitimate for government to take steps to combat hatred and discrimination, especially when those means are fairly minimal - all they are really saying is that people cannot produce or distribute this stuff - in other words, saying that you can't make money from enabling and encouraging hatred; you can't make money from exposing this material to children. This isn't saying "you can't think of rape", nor is it saying you can never depict rape in art - it's saying you can't profit from depicting it in a context designed to stimulate pleasure because that is an act of hatred which reinforces the discriminatory attitudes that threaten the very foundation of our culture - the premise of equal opportunity.

I also reject the idea that this is a slippery slope; I think it is a principled exception to the protection of freedom of expression, just as not allowing violent expression is a principled exception. That said, I don't disagree that freedom of expression is generally important, but I believe it is important only when it protects values that are important: political self-determination; access to information; etc... masturbation does not rank highly.

In my opinion, it's a valid action for government to take, and if that makes me pretentious, so be it; pretention is a label I will gladly wear. I don't think I have anything more to say on this topic so this will be my last post.

[Zylos]

Perhaps I'm just a dumbass, but you lost me half-way through.

Really gotta stop reading this stuff at night when super drowsy. x.x

[Irock]

You're basing your argument on the notion that fictional rape manga/porn leads to non-fictional hatred and discrimination and that banning such content would lead to a decrease in it. Can you prove this?

You know what I do when I play Grand Theft Auto? I kill innocent people. I get a lot of pleasure out of killing fictitious innocent people. Would I ever kill an innocent person in real life? No, I'd never kill an innocent person in real life nor does Grand Theft Auto change the way I treat or think about other people. I even discriminate in the game. One time I pretended I was an insane member of the KKK and went around killing just black people. Would I do that in real life? No. Did doing this in a fictional environment make me treat black people any differently? No. Am I a racist in real life? No. People, in general, can tell the difference between fantasy and reality and would never want to hurt anyone in real life, because they're real people with real feelings. Obviously there are exceptions for the mentally unstable, but they're the minority, and the majority shouldn't suffer because of it. Something else might have just as likely triggered any behavior they have.

[Grafikal]

I'm not sure if we should move this to the Elitist Debate or not. I haven't been keeping up with this... thing. hahaha

Personally I thought it was over here:

Regardless, nothing can be banned forever. There is nothing at all that is banned that you can't get your hands onto somehow.

[Djangonator]

The people's voice is not taken by the government, the people give it away bit by bit untill there is nothing left and it is here, the censorship of art, where it begins.

But the Nipponese are too docile to raise any objections, so now they can't be fat and they can't jerk off to the good stuff. They're losing the small pleasures in life

[Forty]

You're basing your argument on the notion that fictional rape manga/porn leads to non-fictional hatred and discrimination and that banning such content would lead to a decrease in it. Can you prove this?

You know what I do when I play Grand Theft Auto? I kill innocent people. I get a lot of pleasure out of killing fictitious innocent people. Would I ever kill an innocent person in real life? No, I'd never kill an innocent person in real life nor does Grand Theft Auto change the way I treat or think about other people. I even discriminate in the game. One time I pretended I was an insane member of the KKK and went around killing just black people. Would I do that in real life? No. Did doing this in a fictional environment make me treat black people any differently? No. Am I a racist in real life? No. People, in general, can tell the difference between fantasy and reality and would never want to hurt anyone in real life, because they're real people with real feelings. Obviously there are exceptions for the mentally unstable, but they're the minority, and the majority shouldn't suffer because of it. Something else might have just as likely triggered any behavior they have.

I'm not going to say this happens every time, but the more someone is exposed to, per se, anti-Middle Eastern propaganda then the more likely they will be against them. This may not manifest physically or outwardly, but it could be an unconscious predisposition. For example, I have nothing against fat people in any sort of way. However, I took a test once to test if I had unconscious disposition and towards fat or skinny people and I was in favor in skinny people. I was shocked by this, but I came to realize that the way media emphasizes being skinny over being obese changed my internal fiber.

In short, the more you surround yourself in sexist material, the more likely you will be sexist yourself.

[modern algebra]

Well, I guess it wasn't my last post as Irock has brought up a topic that I haven't addressed and which I should. I also moved the topic to ED, but maybe a better solution would be to split the news parts and the debate parts.

To your first question, I think it is a matter of common sense that how much respect you have for a person is inversely proportional to how much you want to brutally rape them and deprive them of their humanity. As a corollary, the amount of respect you have for a group of people is inversely proportional to how much you want to deprive members of that group of their humanity for attributes deriving from their membership in that group. Moreover, it is a fact that discrimination exists. As discrimination is not inherent, there must be aspects of our culture which contribute to it. I think those factors, taken together, are enough to suggest that rape porn contributes to the dehumanization of women in our culture (nonetheless accepting that not all rape pornography is directed toward women).

It is practically impossible to create a controlled study with respect to why humans behave in the way they do. There will always be variables that we cannot account for that could influence the behaviours witnessed. For instance, it is impossible to really "prove" that punishment deters future crime. We simply deduce, as a matter of common sense, that a reasonable person is less likely to choose to act in a certain way if he or she thinks they will be punished for it. In my opinion, common sense is reason enough, especially when the behaviour in question (easy access to visual aids for masturbation) has very little social value and the conceivable harm (hatred and discrimination) is very serious. And again, this isn't criminalizing possession, just production and distribution.

The question of medium is more contentious. I think the medium of video games and the medium of pornography are different enough that there is little merit in analogizing them. The pleasure derived from video games is usually a combination of participatory description, creation, and skill. They tell a story, they allow you to create something, or they are skillful contests. MGS4, for instance, is heavily story-based - the actions you take in it are intended to unravel a pretty linear story - the pleasure in that video game derives from participatory description. Other games like the Sims, are practically all creative. Smash Brothers is more or less entirely skill-based. Most games combine all three elements, like GTA. The story parts of the game are more or less participatory description, while the freeform elements are about creating your character. The joy you get from killing innocent people is not so much from imagining yourself killing innocent people as it is from creating a character who does these things. Or, alternatively, people can derive joy from video games in the skillful elements of it - so, you could go on a rampage just to see how many innocent people you can kill before the cops kill you or arrest you or whatever, and in that sense it is about skill. Some people may in fact derive the pleasure from imagining themselves doing it, but there is nothing in the medium of video games that necessitates or assumes that.

The joy derived from pornography, however, is all about immersion - imagining yourself in the scenario. There is no real story, no skill, and no creativity. Deriving pleasure from watching rape pornography is all about imagining raping someone (or imagining being raped). That is why it exists, and that is the only reason it exists. It is not the same as a video game. That said, there could conceivably be a video game where the purpose of it is to imagine yourself stalking and raping someone without any story, creativity, or skill required. In that case, it would simply be rape porn masquerading as a video game however.

I say all this without any love for GTA - I simply legitimately feel that the purposes of video games differs quite substantially from the purposes of pornography. It's cannot be reduced to: both are about entertainment therefore they are the same. I don't know though; this is a necessarily subjective topic. I am simply generalizing from the types of fun I have when playing video games and assuming it is more or less the same universally. Maybe to some of you, video games are equivalent to porn, reading a book or watching a movie and there is no difference between the ways you interact with those mediums. But I think the differences are quite substantial and that you can legitimately draw a difference between rape or murder in the context of a story and rape or murder in an immersory context.


And just to ensure there are no hard feelings, I do think you are all very smart people and that your arguments are meritorious and influenced by important values. I am just in disagreement as to how they should be applied in this situation.

[Irock]

Alright, I'll go ahead and say it; I've watched fictional rape pornography, but it did not change how much I discriminate against or respect women. I have just as much respect for women as I do men, and I don't discriminate. I'm 100% opposed to rape and wish it would never happen. The only reason I watched rape porn was because it's entirely fictional. The person being raped is simply a character, and the sex, in reality, is consensual. If the rape porn were non-fictional, I'd be disgusted. But the point is, it didn't change anything about my attitude or mindset toward anyone, just like how only killing black people in GTA IV doesn't change my mindset toward black people. The fact is, it's fiction, and the person isn't really being raped. To me the person being raped is just nothing more than a robot with no actual consciousness, just like the NPCs in a video game.

Now, I can understand your concern with real recorded rape porn and the people who may get off to that, and I'm even strongly against that. The enjoyment of real rape porn may obviously cause actual discrimination, because if you're at the point where you enjoy people being raped, you obviously have a disrespect for certain people and are likely okay with it. But I believe it is entirely unreasonable to conclude that fictional rape porn will cause discrimination and disrespect.

Also, I use cheats in GTA IV so I don't die.

Also, I don't imagine myself being in porn videos, I just watch it.

[Djangonator]

Wait, so how is participatory action - i.e. being violent in a videogame, where you're choosing your actions, choosing to harm other people - exactly better than something passive, like staring at tear-covered tits and thinking, "My that sure does look great?" and leaving it at that?

Personally, when I'm watching porn and trying to get off, it's for the audio/visual - not so much immersion. It's all about the way someone looks or sounds, and what I'm interested in at a specific time varies widely between masturbatory sessions. Sometimes rape porn totally does it for me.

Also what about people who watch rapey porn to imagine being the victim? It's like that scenario is being totally overlooked.

[Forty]

Personally, when I'm watching porn and trying to get off, it's for the audio/visual - not so much immersion.

I think that's what MA means by immersion. Since you have no direct control over the video, you are immersed by the audio/visual and in turn this is what turns us on.

I'm not sure about wanting to be the victim. I have nothing constructive to say about that.

[tSwitch]

In Sweden any porn can be rape porn as long as there is a scene at the end where the girl goes to the police within 30 days of penetration and officially retracts consent to sex.

[Sophist]

Bureaucratic rape porn.

[Karo Rushe]

Today's news:

shintaro-ishihara.jpg

Tokyo's governor Shintaro Ishihara has accused manga fans of being "abnormal" and having "corrupt DNA," whilst condemning sexually explicit manga as "causing harm without a single benefit."

His comments were made at a recent press conference, in which he sought to justify his support of the ban by rambling about genetic defectives:

    "There are indeed plenty of perverts in the world. The DNA of these pitiful people is corrupt. They are indeed abnormal."

The perverts in question are apparently anyone who opposes his ban.

This of course comes not long after he called homosexuals "genetically defective" and "pitiful."

Another remark saw him criticise loli manga:

    "Stories with young children being raped serve no purpose. They cause nothing but harm with no benefit."

However, in the same press conference he went on to praise Vladimir Nabokov's classic lolicon novel "Lolita" – "It was shocking at the time, but at that level the description is quite beautiful."

When it was pointed out to him that when he was criticised during the 1972 publication of his own novel "Shinjitsu no Seikyouiku" ("True Sex Education") he defended himself by saying "Literature of any kind does not lead children to commit crime or cause juvenile delinquency," he merely responded that "I was wrong."

In other recent remarks he again restated his indifference to the industry boycott of the Tokyo Anime Fair, saying "Who cares if they don't come – they'll come next year!" and even expressing his belief that the attendance of the anime industry is not necessary to an anime fair at all – "It doesn't matter if they never attend it!"

All this from the man who has been writing rape novels for the past 50 years.

A synopsis of Ishihara's 1956 novel "Kanzen na Yuugi" ("The Perfect Game"), loosely adapted into a movie:

    A group of youths kidnap a mentally retarded girl whom they brutally rape and keep as a sex slave. After failing to sell her to a brothel, they dispose of her by throwing her off a cliff.

"Taiyou no Kisetsu" ("Season of the Sun"), a 1955 novel which sold a million copies and was also made into a movie:

    A tearaway boxer in highschool begins a sexual relationship with a schoolgirl (by sticking  his penis through a paper screen door), whom he soon grows tired of. He sells the girl to his brother for 5,000 yen.

    The story ends with the girl becoming pregnant with her former boyfriend's child and dying after a botched abortion, with the protagonist showing remorse for the first time in the story whilst attending her funeral.

"Shokei no Heiya" ("Execution Room"), a 1956 novel with a movie version, was the most controversial of his novels due to all the copy-cat crimes it inspired:

    A group of young men pick up two women, who they go drinking with. They slip sedatives into their drinks and subsequently rape them. The girl's friends catch up with them and stab one of them to death in a fight.

Interestingly, in 1957 a group of 7 16-year-old youths were arrested for gang-raping a 16-year-old girl whom they had drugged. Police later discovered the crime was modelled on the events described in "Execution Room."

The book was also connected with a case where a middle-school boy crept into his neighbour's house and placed sedative in their sugar, putting a housewife into a coma.

Another case saw a group of high-schoolers put a sedative into a girl's coffee and drag her off to a nearby ryokan, where they attempted to rape her. Yet another case involved a group of unemployed youths kidnapping a woman for use as a sex slave.

Incidentally, all Ishihara's novels are on sale in Tokyo bookshops and can be bought by children with no restriction.

I kinda know it doesn't have to do much but . . . the guy is a hypocrite, it's like just because he doesn't like it, doesn't mean he has to put his 'beliefs' & crap, specifically force them on people by abusing his power.

[Sophist]

Welcome to a corrupt government. The first thing I noticed while reading that was the mention of corrupt DNA. Fourth Reich is in order?

[Arrow]

That's utterly disgusting. Discussion of whether or not rape manga is good or bad aside, this should not be the person making that decision. He is clearly not fit to be in command of anything.