Heh… some guy named Arved posted this… sounds like one of us. 
Don’t see it passing: metropolitan Tokyo area is fairly liberal as far as Japan goes.
If this were were somewhere like Hachinohe, maybe it would be a threat…
Honestly, the ban’s pretty weakly worded. “seems reminiscent of a person who might be recognised as an under-18”? Seems reminiscent? No clue as to the original wording (I’d have to actually do some research to find that out) but I agree; this wouldn’t work in Tokyo.
Is it just me or are these anti-ero people about as successful (and hard to take seriously) as this guy:
It seems we’ll be getting censored anime releases from an unexpected source Et tu, Funimation?
It’s more than just Funimation… they’re just a drop in the bucket. RETAIL - such as Best Buy and Walmart - are closer screening what they carry. If retail will not carry a Funimation release, then they automatically lose money. Retail is the 600 pound gorilla of marketing.
The Handley trail might have been an influence… but the real matter is that Funimation doesn’t want to get blacklisted by stores that carry their product.
Furthermore, outlets like Walmart will rate an ENTIRE company by a single product. So if Type 1 of X-Brand soap causes warts, Walmart won’t carry ANY of X-Brand soap… not even Type 2 and Type 3 that are safe. Same goes for Funimation. If one anime gets Walmart negativity, they’ll dump ALL of Funimation. Best Buy, Barnes and Nobles, Gamestop, etc… they’re all the same.
Funimation is not going to martyr themselves for lolicon… and from a business prospective, its sound reasoning. Piss off some hardcore fans, or completely lose the mainstream access? I know what choice I’d make, if I ran a company.
Of course the anti-censor in me hates it… but reality is reality. 
EDIT
Interesting thing has hit the news. [b]Hustler is stirring the obscenity pot again and pushing the limits.[/b] Guro fans might wanna keep tabs, just for the novelty of it. Flint is doing it more for the media exposure, and the fact he likes screwing with conservatives. I hope he wins.
The funny thing is… they’re ALL in compliance with US law.
Unless I’ve missed something, there’s no law that says Lolita is illegal.
But this is America… :roll:
I think Funimation is just covering their ass from negative publicity (and the fallout from it). We’ll see soon enough though.
:shock:
Sorry, I can’t agree with you on this one. It violates the victim’s right to privacy and is needlessly cruel to her family.
Watch CNN for a full day. No one asked the family of those killed terrorists, if the news crew could show them. Watch the Crime Channel: no one asked the family of those killers, if they could show the their dead bodies after a shoot out with the cops. No one asked the families of dead victims in a natural disaster, if they could show their corpses floating in the river.
Why? Because you don’t have to ask. In fact had this girl not been stripped naked, there would be a weekly crime journal that WOULD show it (in America, showing something like decapitation, isn’t censored for “informational” purposes). Crime scenes - like 911 emergency calls and scenes in a warzone or natural disaster- are public domain. There’s ramifications of grand magnitude if you change that. Namely that the government could enact political censorship (see the Vietnam War for an example).
People are pulling double standards.
Hustler has the right to show those pictures. If it’s immoral or despicable is moot - we do it all the time. The only difference here, is that it’s a “good 'ole American girl”, and Larry Flint is stirring the pot for sensationalism and fighting against censorship. I’d like to see how the family of those mummies and Indian bodies in the Smithsonian feel about their ancestors being showcased.
EDIT
And before someone asks a rhetorical, “what if it was your daughter,” question. It truly doesn’t faze me. Furthermore it really doesn’t matter, as the ramifications of fighting against it, are far worst than just letting it happen and be forgotten. After all… just watch late night cable news and the history channel.
And before someone states, “this girl and Hustler isn’t the same as Life Magazine and jihadists”… yes it is… it’s exactly the same. Just a different venue and exploitation. The family of Saddam Hussein demanded that he be executed in private. Multiple times… months in advance before his trail was even over. Obviously the US Provisional Government obeyed their wishes, eh? And on top of that they showcased his corpse every chance they had, purely for political reasons. Oh sure… there was that lazy excuse the Iraqi people wanted to see it. Yea… we always do what the Iraqi people want. :roll:
EDIT 2
Just for the record… I’m not trying to be an unfeeling bastard: I’m concerned about the ramifications. What we can have is two conclusions if this goes all the way: that ALL laws concerning public domain are altered so that the expressed wishes of primary victims who might be offended are first sought for approval - so unlikely that it’s more likely Narg will have a harem of twins magically appear on his front porch - [u]OR[/u] or that highly exploitable and very dangerous tools of “surgical censorship” are passed to support one cultural/political view, but totally ignore all others.
There’s several principals at stake here - on both sides of the spectrum, for and against - but there can’t be favoritism. That’s even more dangerous and disturbing. The current situation should be left alone, which means Hustler can print those disturbing photos, for the same reason other publications and media can release theirs. It’s certainly a line exploitation, but it also crosses into freedom of information. Gray as Hell, but fine as it is, since I certainly don’t see the alternative being wholesomely benign.
To the best of my knowledge, while it may not be illegal, most American media actually is quite careful about showing bodies, especially near to the time of an event, because it’s highly distressing to people personally affected.
In fact, one of the things that makes my raving liberal blogs cry ‘racism’ is that your typical Western media is happy to show scenes of devastation, wounded, dead bodies, people crying in the shocked aftermath of a disaster… as long as the people involved aren’t white (and are usually from some far away country). For local disasters you’re more likely to need to wait until it’s been long enough that it’s not such a sensitive subject, or to turn to very specialised outlets. I admit, I have no idea what the ‘crime channel’ shows.
Sums up my point here. Double standards if they aren’t allowed.
It seems Osaka is considering banning shotacon along with yaoi:
http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2010/04/0 … oi-bl-ban/
Someone call the fangirls, maybe we can forge some kind of alliance now.
Oh boy… someone’s either very, very brave or very, very foolish - or they don’t know what fujoshi girls are like. This won’t go quietly.
What’s the point? Nothing good is gonna happen.
Behold!!!
I’ve just exposed you all to Unborn Porn!
That’s right: you’re all going to jail you sick perverts!
Mwa, ha, ha, ha!!!
Here’s some twincest! :twisted:
Looks more like twin cysts to me …
[duck]
Okay… this is bound to cause mix feelings, due to all of us being against real cruelty (make believe is make believe; but actual suffering is unforgivable)… but it pertains to censorship, and is a major victory against it. Just announced a few hours ago:
Supreme Court strikes down law banning dogfight videos.
Animal Rights Activists are obviously up in arms.
EDIT
I think it should be pointed out, that it’s still illegal to MAKE these kinds of videos (animal cruelty) - it’s that OWNING and SELLING them is fine. The owning part wasn’t surprising - one can privately own obscenity. It’s the selling of this obscenity that’s defining here.
Huh. That is surprising, and seems like some obvious connections to other kinds of ‘bad’ media would come up… But I guess in a lot of people’s minds, there is “cp” and there is “everything else”.