Gorbals Vampire and Gomic Censorship

[Lew Stringer]

it's still... lines on paper. If lolicon "causes" pedophiles videogames "cause" school shootings.

I don't for one moment think such comics would create pedophiles, I think they just cater for their perverted tastes, - but that's reason enough not to have such material decriminalized in the UK.

Recent news suggests Japan are looking into clamping down on them too.

Lew

[felneymike]

Did you even read what i said? The lolicon comics are hardly going to turn on a real peadophile, the 'stories' in them are of a carry on standard at best (though rather more graphic). And they are not "underground" in Japan but sold alongside comics with adult porn, or even both, as in the case of the "Mate" magazine that i bought.

Anybody who can suggest and support that something which is not real is equal to committing the real crime is... well, the same kind of person who wanted penny dreadfuls, horror comics and video nasties banned.

And i hope you are not seriously calling normal manga such as Death Note or Love Hina "suspect". That big-eyed style was inspired by Betty Boop... is that "suspect" too?

Recent news suggests Japan are looking into clamping down on them too.

Was it that disgracefully-written article in the Economist calling it a "loophole"? And saying that Japan was considering expanding child protection laws to "include non-existent children"? The world's gone mad. Still, we'll look back on this in 25 years and laugh, going "was that it?", just like we do with "Cannibal Ferox" today.

EDIT: Bwahahahha, i just wandered back over to melon farmers (no direct link due to the content of it's adverts, but it's a site for every patriot) and they made the point that given what the London 2012 logo is said to represent, anybody who has it cached in thier computer had better watch out! You couldn't make it up.

And what about cartoon depictions of flat-chested porn stars such as Lil' Miss Kitty or the Suicide Girl "Chroi" where they are not explicitly stated to be these adult people? You really coluldn't make it up.

[philcom55]

Arguments for and against all forms of pornography tend to be quite similar, regardless of one's personal feelings about the tastes being catered for. The chief objection is based on psychological research that points to an addictive reaction in certain individuals which can spur them on to abusive acts they wouldn't otherwise have contemplated. The main defence is the Aristotelean notion of catharsis, whereby the same people are instead thought to safely 'let off steam' by indulging their more perverse desires within vicarious fantasies.

...Of course if you don't accept either argument it seems to me that the whole thing comes down to 'lines on paper' after all!

- Phil Rushton

[felneymike]

Well real-life images are more than just lines on paper as they really happened somewhere, and should rightly be banned - except for when they get into the hands of detectives to track down the people who did it anyway. I remember reading somewhere (mind you, it was probably The Sun) that one bloke got caught because there was a slight arch on the wall in the background which was only designed into houses by one architect in one city. Gotcha!

I discovered that the "dangerous cartoons" act doesn't come into force until the 6th of April. I ought to get my girlfriend to post me that Mate magazine (no way was i bringing it on the plane!) and ceremonially burn it on the fifth as a monument to the latest "fiction will doom us all! ...again" madness.

[philcom55]

Well real-life images are more than just lines on paper as they really happened somewhere, and should rightly be banned

Abusive ones undoubtedly - though I do think there's a certain amount of paranoia involved when parents are even being banned from filming their own children in school plays. My worry about banning cartoons is that it's just a short step from banning these to banning thought itself!

- Phil Rushton

[felneymike]

I find the name of the act a bit worrying too... if they are going to ban cartoons of rape, why not murder? If murder, why not terrorism? If terrorism, why not any cartoon that advocates changing the government?

...and all the while knife-waving savages will rule the streets and set up death-traps for firemen whilst the police hunt down some nerds who downloaded some cartoons. I feel safer already.

[Captain Storm]

I really cannot believe what I am reading here! And from posters who I admire! Child porn wether moving pictures(real people-though I hesitate to say acting)or lines on a page(depicting the greatest crime of all) is still child porn! I will never defend it. I am all for freedom of speech and expression but this is one area any civilised human being must protest about vigorously! I'm no Mary Whitehouse especially when it comes to scanning old comics etc but if we are to even contemplate that this area of comic child porn be approved then it's a sad day indeed!

The Cap.

[Lew Stringer]

Did you even read what i said? The lolicon comics are hardly going to turn on a real peadophile,

As I made clear earlier in this thread, the comics I'm talking about are NOT the "childlike heads on adult bodies" type. (If that's what "lolicon" is then we're talking about different comics.) That's just a style of Manga artwork, and they're legal in the UK. The ones I'm talking about, and which are illegal, show little children drawn in proportion being subjected to graphic abuse. Totally indefensible imho, but if you want to defend why they should be legal that's your prerogative.

And it's rather presumptuous of you, and a bit silly, to say I'm the "sort" to want horror comics banned when a few days ago I posted a blog against the censorship of 1950s horror comics and defended horror comics on this very thread! Nor did I suggest reading pedo comics was the same as committing the crime. You're just lashing out with assumptions.

I'll say no more as this topic is heading into unpleasant depths and arguing on the net is futile.

[philcom55]

I'll say no more as this topic is heading into unpleasant depths and arguing on the net is futile.

I'm not too sure about the latter, but I agree it's a uniquely distasteful subject and that Comics UK isn't really the place to discuss it in detail.

- Phil Rushton

[felneymike]

Did you even read what i said? The lolicon comics are hardly going to turn on a real peadophile,

As I made clear earlier in this thread, the comics I'm talking about are NOT the "childlike heads on adult bodies" type. ... The ones I'm talking about, and which are illegal, show little children drawn in proportion being subjected to graphic abuse. Totally indefensible imho, but if you want to defend why they should be legal that's your prerogative.

Those are the ones i'm talking about, and i'm hardly "defending" them, merely stating that clamping down on them is a cynical vote-winner by a discredited government trying to appear "tough on crime" without fighting actual everyday crime like knife-wielding savages ruling the streets (though no doubt i'm going to be reminded that actually violent crime is going down, it only appears to be going up because they are 'recording the statistics differently'. Funny how they record them differently every single year).

I really don't see how banning this fiction is any different to banning video nasties or 'extreme porn', or are the crimes depicted in those somehow not as bad? Or is child molesting somehow different to premeditated murder or the rape of adults? The whole thing is a waste of time and resources that, i am willing to bet money on, will be laughed at in 25 years time, in the same way that the video nasty ban is now.

And back on topic (at last): Those stupid kids, anybody knows zombies come from graveyards, not vampires.