They could have gone to my local FYE to see the section clearly marked/concealed with cards saying 18+ and NSFW and stuff like that. Why did the have to go all the way to Japan?

And the problem here is that a lot of people, not just the media, generalize on the basis of the few bad apples in the bunch. Same goes with furries, ect.  

Sensationalist Graalians.com users are sensationalist  

I don't really see the big deal, if you enjoy anime you know this isn't true and therefore should have no problem.

This is exactly why I don't watch the news, don't care what other people think just focus on your self.  

Posted by Colin

I don't really see the big deal, if you enjoy anime you know this isn't true and therefore should have no problem.

This is exactly why I don't watch the news, don't care what other people think just focus on your self.

If my friend walk in my room and see like a bookshelf full of mangas and anime Dvds, he's assume that it's porn. x.x Many other people too.

Posted by Skill

Imagine what hell I would go through if I went and said "I like watching anime" to someone who only read this article, if that wasn't included. I'm talking about some amazing poetic and dramatic anime like Clannad, they'd assume that I'm talking about animated rape porn or something. Wish they would have expanded more on anime as a whole though.

^^^^^  

I guess not everyone is as care free as they should be, regardless just invite them to watch some with you to show them it isn't what they think,  

I think manga fans give manga a worse image than cnn. Out of 2 pages of ******ed comments this is the only one that seemed to think before posting. Felt like I was in graalians.
Attachment 15765  

Posted by GOAT

I think manga fans give manga a worse image than cnn. Out of 2 pages of ******ed comments this is the only one that seemed to think before posting. Felt like I was in graalians.
Attachment 15765

Agreed 100%, terrible "news" hubs like Otaku USA are just spewing **** to rile up people that believe everything they read without actually thinking about what's being accused here, and the anime/manga community takes it to another level with threads like these.

I also agree with what that poster said, except for the fact that nowhere in the entire CNN article (any of them, for that matter) generalize anime/manga as CP. In fact, they explicitly state and acknowledge the fact that CP/child abuse is only a tiny fraction of the entire market.

Read, people, before you make yourselves look like fools. Can we quit being mad at CNN and take a step back for a second to see what you're all mad about?  

Posted by Kendama

B gata H kei

Sis x Sis (something like that)

And sword art online. This is the worst and most definitely needs to be banned it has no real substance besides child pornography. What a ridiculously ugly anime with no plot line or character development at all

Why ban something because you don't like it? Does freedom of speech mean nothing to you? If that's the case why don't we ban all the trash on TV that has little intellectual content? Why don't we ban anything that doesn't meet our quality standards? It doesn't cause any harm, so why ban it because most don't like it? That's one step closer to a government of censorship.

edit: I'm an idiot, didn't realize you were joking.

Posted by Talon

So I took the time to read the article and nowhere - not a single place in any of the original CNN articles - generalizes anime and manga as CP. Sure, maybe it said so in the skewed and biased OtakuUSA, but if you take a look at the actual source CNN articles, all they're saying is that CP mangas evade the new CP law in place, while giving an (incorrect) example. In any event, Love Hina wasn't used as an example of CP, it was used as an example of child abuse, and rightfully so. Where the hell are you seeing CNN say "all anime and manga is CP and should be banned"? All they're saying is that specifically CP/child abuse anime and manga do indeed exist. Don't get so worked up about it.

Quotes from the actual article:




Here are my favorites:




You guys have got to be kidding me. If anyone is oversensationalizing anything, it's "Otaku USA" trying to paint CNN as the villain. CNN isn't generalizing anime and manga as CP, quit blowing smoke.

The real source: http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/18/world/...html?c=&page=1

They're sensationalizing loli content, but the problem is that everyone upset about the article is interpreting it incorrectly-they're assuming CNN labeled Anime/manga as CP, when they made it very clear only some contains pornographic content. I agree with you that people aren't seeing the big picture when reading the article; however, I feel like their complaints are justified, as many other readers not familiar with Anime/Manga may be develop a skewed perception about what it is.

What disgusts me is that they labeled fictional drawings as child ponography. It's an absolute insult to real victims that have been harmed. It's like saying someone being harmed then having images of them distributed all over the internet is no worse than someone drawing a picture of some non-existent character and sharing it. Absolutely disgusting.

Posted by Lazerlatte

They could have gone to my local FYE to see the section clearly marked/concealed with cards saying 18+ and NSFW and stuff like that. Why did the have to go all the way to Japan?

And the problem here is that a lot of people, not just the media, generalize on the basis of the few bad apples in the bunch. Same goes with furries, ect.

I'm absolutely certain FYE won't have Graphic Doujin's/Manga containing fictional minors. The laws in the US are far too unclear for them to take such an absurd risk.

People are a lot more outraged by Loli Doujins in Japan than they are about ordinary porn films in the US. And when you're the media, you need to find the most OUTRAGEOUS thing possible to secure your job.It's not surprising.  

Posted by Skill

Why ban something because you don't like it? Does freedom of speech mean nothing to you?

even freedom needs a limit.

Posted by Skill

They're sensationalizing loli content, but the problem is that everyone upset about the article is interpreting it incorrectly-they're assuming CNN labeled Anime/manga as CP, when they made it very clear only some contains pornographic content. I agree with you that people aren't seeing the big picture when reading the article; however, I feel like their complaints are justified, as many other readers not familiar with Anime/Manga may be develop a skewed perception about what it is.

How are their complaints justified regarding this article when theyre "interpreting it incorrectly"?

Im thinking that your whole outrage over this story is that they might have used the wrong cover in the video. Does the blur cover in the cnn video have scenes described in the article? If thats the case your whole argument is that cnn made an error by using the wrong cover or series of manga. I dont recall them saying loli in the actual video.

Posted by Skill

1What disgusts me is that they labeled fictional drawings as child ponography. 2It's an absolute insult to real victims that have been harmed. 3It's like saying someone being harmed then having images of them distributed all over the internet is no worse than someone drawing a picture of some non-existent character and sharing it. Absolutely disgusting.

1. would "Animated C/P" make you feel better?
2. whats more insulting? A. having a manga/anime/comic depicting a scene that might be similar to what a real victim went through or B. CNN calling a animated manga which contains scenes involving children in sexual scenes C/P?
3. Just because one is worse than the other doesnt mean both cant be wrong at the same time.  

Posted by GOAT

even freedom needs a limit.

Why? That's what people have been saying for thousands of years. If someones actions doesn't harm anyone else, why limit their freedom, just because we don't agree with them?

Freedom needed a limit with slavery
Freedom needed a limit with Women's Suffrage(right to vote)
Freedom needed a limit with civil rights
Freedom had all kinds of limits that we realized were bad for the world, even though they seemed logical at the time.

Why not ban religion? In the eyes of an athiest, its a waste of time and unproductive. Why not ban entertainment as a whole? People could be working for the good of the country and the world instead. There's serious problems in the world, and we're all sitting around watching TV. Why not ban anything unproductive, for the sake of improving the world?

Point being, any form of censorship that isn't for the sake of protecting others is nothing but a another step towards a totalitarian government.

Posted by GOAT

even freedom needs a limit.

1. would "Animated C/P" make you feel better?
2. whats more insulting? A. having a manga/anime/comic depicting a scene that might be similar to what a real victim went through or B. CNN calling a animated manga which contains scenes involving children in sexual scenes C/P?
3. Just because one is worse than the other doesnt mean both cant be wrong at the same time.

[/QUOTE]

1. Not really. There's such a stigma associated with the word that it doesn't really express how its a 'lesser evil'.

2. This can be interpreted both ways. But I feel like putting the same punishment on someone who creates a fictional drawing vs someone who distributes imagery of an actual victim is insulting, both to victims and the criminals.

3. It's all question of morals really. One has a severe impact on another human being. The other has no impact on others, but can be considered disgusting. And my simple philosophy is that I don't judge people for what they are, do, think, or say, as long as their actions don't cause harm to others.


Traits
While many traits may be considered unfavorable to have, I don't hold it against people, as their identity is beyond their control. Someone with Autism may socially act in ways that can be perceived as annoying, but I still think highly of them for coping with their challenges and doing their best. Someone fully paralyzed from the neck down may be unable to support themselves, but I don't think lesser of them for a problem beyond their control.

Actions
I don't think lesser of people for actions I disagree with, as long as they don't harm others. For example, I think drugs are an absolute waste of time, money, and health. I feel like people would be better off without them. However, I do not think poorly of people for using them, as long as the drugs don't cause them to harm others(such as driving when super high, or causing violence), and they're considerate of those around them(no secondhand smoke).

I myself am straight, but I have nothing against same sex couples. It's their choice. Their choices do not affect me or others negatively.

I dislike rap music, and think it is degrading of society, and also lacking in intellectual value, but I don't mind that people listen to it. If it brings them enjoyment, I won't think any lesser of them for pursuing their interests.

Now, I may be upset about a guy that blares his music in his car with his windows open at 2 AM as he drives by my house, waking me and several neighbors up every night. That is a case where personal choices impact others.

Point being, we as a society need to learn to respect the differences of others as those differences don't harm others. It allows for a healthier community in which people could get along.  

Posted by Skill

Why? That's what people have been saying for thousands of years. If someones actions doesn't harm anyone else, why limit their freedom, just because we don't agree with them?

Freedom needed a limit with slavery
Freedom needed a limit with Women's Suffrage(right to vote)
Freedom needed a limit with civil rights
Freedom had all kinds of limits that we realized were bad for the world, even though they seemed logical at the time.

Why not ban religion? In the eyes of an athiest, its a waste of time and unproductive. Why not ban entertainment as a whole? People could be working for the good of the country and the world instead. There's serious problems in the world, and we're all sitting around watching TV. Why not ban anything unproductive, for the sake of improving the world?

Point being, any form of censorship that isn't for the sake of protecting others is nothing but a another step towards a totalitarian government.

you realize that with adding a BUT to your post it validates my statement regarding freedom is true? Idk about other countries, but in America all the government needs is the belief that whatever youre saying or doing has the potential of bringing harm to others, so they can remove your "freedom" privileges.

Its either full freedom or limited freedom.

Posted by Skill

1. Not really. There's such a stigma associated with the word that it doesn't really express how its a 'lesser evil'.

2. This can be interpreted both ways. But I feel like putting the same punishment on someone who creates a fictional drawing vs someone who distributes imagery of an actual victim is insulting, both to victims and the criminals.

3. It's all question of morals really. One has a severe impact on another human being. The other has no impact on others, but can be considered disgusting. And my simple philosophy is that I don't judge people for what they are, do, think, or say, as long as their actions don't cause harm to others.

1. so what would you call it?
2. Interesting now its the punishment.
3. Didnt you judge CNN reporters for their "disgusting" report? they didnt physically harm anyone. dont they have the "freedom" to be crappy reporters?

Posted by Skill

Traits
While many traits may be considered unfavorable to have, I don't hold it against people, as their identity is beyond their control. Someone with Autism may socially act in ways that can be perceived as annoying, but I still think highly of them for coping with their challenges and doing their best. Someone fully paralyzed from the neck down may be unable to support themselves, but I don't think lesser of them for a problem beyond their control.

Actions
I don't think lesser of people for actions I disagree with, as long as they don't harm others. For example, I think drugs are an absolute waste of time, money, and health. I feel like people would be better off without them. However, I do not think poorly of people for using them, as long as the drugs don't cause them to harm others(such as driving when super high, or causing violence), and they're considerate of those around them(no secondhand smoke).

I myself am straight, but I have nothing against same sex couples. It's their choice. Their choices do not affect me or others negatively.

I dislike rap music, and think it is degrading of society, and also lacking in intellectual value, but I don't mind that people listen to it. If it brings them enjoyment, I won't think any lesser of them for pursuing their interests.

Now, I may be upset about a guy that blares his music in his car with his windows open at 2 AM as he drives by my house, waking me and several neighbors up every night. That is a case where personal choices impact others.

Point being, we as a society need to learn to respect the differences of others as those differences don't harm others. It allows for a healthier community in which people could get along.

youre comparing rap music to raip scenes :0 and you ignored the middle part of the post which is probably the reason youre so "disgusted" ;0 and if that wasnt enough, you brought the big guns with slavery ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0 ;0

Lets not get forget what the original argument was ;0 ;0




Note: i dont have a clue about manga, but believe me, I didnt start thinking all anime/manga was C/P from watching the CNN article.  

Posted by GOAT

you realize that with adding a BUT to your post it validates my statement regarding freedom is true? Idk about other countries, but in America all the government needs is the belief that whatever youre saying or doing has the potential of bringing harm to others, so they can remove your "freedom" privileges.

Its either full freedom or limited freedom.

You completely missed my point. Graphic manga was PROVEN not to contribute to child abuse, it even said so in the CNN article, despite the article being heavily against it.

A drawing does not "have potential to bring harm to others" so I don't see why it would be restricted for that reason. Generally speech can fairly be censored for the following reasons:

Slander/Libel: Spreading lies about someone to damage their reputation

Dangerous speech: Doing something such as leaking nuclear weapon research data, that could cause issues

Inciting Violence:For example, if a hate group decided to pass out pamphlets encouraging people to go and kill people, it would not be protected.

Threats: Self Explanatory.

Real Child Pornography:Images of actual victims. This needs to be censored in order to protect victims. And the bans on this have been effective, as it does not circulate the open web, unlike viral self harm/bullying/suicide videos that ruin people's lives. While enforcement of it is not perfect, it has made decent progress.

Also, by banning it, it eliminates a potential black market for child abuse by making the images unable to be sold, and scaring away potential viewers.

Drawn, fictional content does not have victims to protect, nor does its creation cause harm to others. All of the reasons the supreme court gave for banning CP do not apply to fictional content.  

Did you really just compare CP to slavery? GG thread.  

Posted by Imprint

Did you really just compare CP to slavery? GG thread.

Lmao my thoughts exactly.  

Posted by Imprint

Did you really just compare CP to slavery? GG thread.

That wasn't my intent, it seems you misinterpreted what I was trying to prove. Slavery is by far one of the worst restrictions on human freedom in history. Yet hundreds of years ago, people thought it was acceptable and a part of life. My point is that restricting freedom may seem like the right and normal thing to do at the time, but it may turn on not to be the best thing in the future.

Don't get me wrong, complete human slavery is far worse than not being able to look at drawings. I cannot even put into words how much worse it is. I wasn't trying to put them on the same level, if that's what you thought I was trying to do. I was showing the extremes people would go to do deny freedom, and how outrageous it ends up looking in the future.