Fixed.
LOL… okay… fixed it. Had to edit it twice in fact. 
You’re letting your emotions override your logic. Try to step back and look at it more rationally. Ignore the snuff entirely, for the moment. Forget that it exists.
Is there any way that a normal person could be sexually aroused by rusty springs? (I hope not, that’s why I made that up!) To the best of my knowledge, no. There is not. Being sexually aroused by rusty springs shows that you have a severe mental disorder. Something is broken inside your brain. Quite possibly literally, as I think actual brain damage could result in extremely strange expressions. A person with this arousal fetish is deeply screwed up.
But simply having a screwed up fetish, even one that cannot possibly arise from a healthy mind, does not make it our business to dictate to them that they are not allowed to have these thoughts and must report to a center to have their brains rewired.
Now, to step back to the snuff fetishists. Of course I don’t think it’s okay to be turned on by that! There is something badly, badly fucked up in their brains, and I would be concerned that whatever damage caused that inappropriate arousal might also lead them to be actually dangerous. However, ‘having bad thoughts’ and ‘doing bad things’ are still separate. Just having the inappropriate arousal is not, in itself, punishable. If they commit crimes because of it, then that is punishable.
If the inappropriate arousal manifests suddenly when it wasn’t there before, that’s a sign that the person needs to get to a doctor to make sure they’re not having a brain tumor that’s going to cause something worse to happen.
Obscenity law is being taken out of its rightful context by the American legal system, imo. What is the purpose of obscenity law? I’d say it’s in the same category as crimes of “disturbing the peace.” For the same reason I shouldn’t be able to go to a park and start flashing people, or have a neo-Nazi gathering at a Jewish synagogue, I shouldn’t be able to take pages of lolicon manga (or anything pornographic) and post them all over a college university (I’d also argue that pro-life demonstrations with explicit images of aborted fetuses should fall in this category). However, as long as I’m not exposing people against their will to socially unacceptable content, it shouldn’t be considered obscene. If I have someone sign a waver before they enter my home, acknowledging they give up their right to not be flashed–I should be able to flash them. I should be able to hold a Neo-Nazi gathering in the privacy of my own home. Similarly, I should be able to enjoy lolicon manga in the privacy of my own home, and (gasp!) be able to import it in the mail (mail screeners forfeit their right to not be exposed to obscene material).
What we have in our current legal system is a separate rule that applies only to sexually explicit material. Which is, frankly, rather silly. Of all the potential issues that threaten societal norms (e.g., racism, violence, religious fanaticism, sexism), we single out pornography as the one issue that requires a separate, much more restrictive set of laws limiting freedom of expression. My question is…why?
I’m not sure what’s actually done, but I can imagine a relatively simple fix. Associate the concept of a child with a baby. Every person has a “range” of age-related physical characteristics they find attractive. While a pedophile obviously has a lower range than most, most pedophiles probably aren’t sexually attracted to babies. The idea is to reorient their sexual mood by emphasizing characteristics that provoke a “parenting” response rather than a sexual response, mimicking how a normal person would perceive a child.
An even simpler fix, but probably less useful, would be to associate children with a bad smell. That probably sounds laughable, but the sense of smell is actually more closely tied to memory and emotion than any other sense. That might fix the sexual attraction to children, but unfortunately might not be that helpful for restoring functional interactions.
Just to express my views further: it’s not that I don’t think someone who likes murder snuff won’t become a murderer. Or if someone who likes lolicon won’t become a pedophile. The way a MINORITY of people are, just seeing something is enough to be an “ignition” for criminality. That’s an undeniable truth. I don’t disagree with you on the possibilities of that. However this is a scant number. A mere fraction of 1%.
I think we also need to establish an open fact: the majority of extreme crimes in civilized nations, are NOT committed by insane people. It’s usually a husband who carries a legally concealed weapon on him, who suddenly sees his wife with another man in his own bed. Or the boyfriend who gets dumped by his girlfriend, thinking that making love to her one more time will make her regain senses and keep him. Those are the common murderers and rapists: NOT some weird guy watching a movie or playing a game. That’s scapegoat disinformation. Like how people in the 80’s said D&D gamers were more likely to become Satanists, and D&D should be banned.
Punishing a person who likes lolicon or rape games, doesn’t even solve the problem to begin with. It’s like the world outlawing Islam to prevent Muslim terrorists.
Now I can understand why you feel as you do - and I’m not disagreeing with your intentions - but think about the magnitude of what you’re expressing.
I’m sorry for bringing up another military example, but it’s the only thing I can think of right now. Skip the rest of this post if you want… I won’t bring it up any part if it you don’t. 
There are thousands of war veterans in America. There is proof that many war veterans retain their “reflexes and perception” (for lack of a better word) of being on a battlefield: which is why no one screams “incoming” in a room full of Vietnam vets, with an audio recording of falling artillery shells or diving aircraft. There is even a smaller fraction of these individuals, who completely snap and go into total kill mode.
What you’re suggesting, is that any vet who scurries under a table when you scream “incoming” at the top of your lungs, should go see a psychiatrist. I vehemently disagree. Yes it’s weird behavior. Yes normal people don’t do that. But the person is NOT crazy. Is it okay if anyone suggests they see a doctor? Sure. Nothing wrong with that. But if the person says they’re fine and refuses: THEY’RE FINE. They’ve got a different prospective on life than everyone else (and a superior survival reflex), but otherwise has done nothing wrong or harmed anyone else. Could they snap and go into kill mode one day? Maybe one in a room of a thousand. I don’t deny that. But UNTIL they do it, or show proof they’re capable of doing it, leave them alone.
Now if someone in that room suddenly brandishes a gun and starts randomly shooting everywhere… Yes, that person NEEDS to see professional help, because they’re a danger to those around them (and obviously themselves). If nothing else, that person should not be allowed to own firearms or carry weapons. Why? Because maybe hearing a car back fire (sounds like a gun) or hearing a jet liner landing (sounds like a bomber run) could cause him to snap. For the other veterans, they’re reacting strange, but not harming anyone. The trigger happy guy is obviously dangerous. He reacts with a criminal action: intentionally or not.
Naturally the REAL criminal (and person who need mental help), is the asshole who shouted “incoming” and started the whole mess. I don’t care if that person did it for the good of society to discover which of the vets was a dangerous “kill mode” threat. He did a criminal act and clearly lacks common sense.
Continuing with this… it’s quite possible that if these people were suddenly exposed to toy guns or heard a war movie on TV in another room, they’d react the same. That does not mean I think all war movies should be banned and toy guns should not be sold, just to prevent a PTSD incident from occurring. There’s NOTHING wrong with war movies or toy guns. There’s NOTHING wrong with most war vets. It’s just those handful who aren’t in complete touch with reality. However you can’t suddenly accuse all people in the military of being potential PTSD hazards, because there are vast numbers of them who’ve never even on a battlefield or will never suffer from PTSD. Are people with PTSD more likely to be from the military? Absolutely. Does not justify monitoring every person who ever served: because that alone would increase paranoia… which would make PTSD happen in situations it would have never happened to begin with. Basically in trying to solve a problem, you make it worst while denying the freedoms of innocent people.
I think that this is rather easy question to answer. In my opinion, it is the fact that the Christianity (being the predominant religion in the US) heavily influences our laws. Unfortunately, Christianity, due to the social engineering aspects it has, tends to try and repress human sexuality.
I agree. It’s religion. They make you swear on a Bible in many court houses. Depending where you live in the country, it’s practically mandatory, since only a liar criminal would refuse to swear on the Bible. :roll:
Random question that goes with the lolicon talk…
This is Kitty Jung - it’s worksafe and doesn’t show sex or nudity… there’s a surprise in it though. Kitty is a 4’ 11" American porn actress who has the body of child. She stars in so many lolicon roles, I can’t even begin to count them. She does age though. I think she retired from the industry, because she doesn’t have a babyface anymore.
Anyways… the question I wanted to ask: Do you think Kitty’s husband is a closet pedophile? 
In all seriousness: I’d hate to be the man. Can you imagine the accusing stares and false arrests just walking on the streets?
Thank you, Narg! I’ll remember that name - Kitty Jung. This is the ammo I’ve been looking for. I knew there are AV actresses like that, but couldn’t name any. Excellent.
See, clearly if looking at pictures of a character that is over 18, but that someone thinks is under 18 is equivalent to looking at REAL child porn…
…surely having sex with someone that is over 18, but that looks under 18 is equal to actual child molestation.
THANK YOU. That’s all I wanted, someone else who understood the difference between punishment via law and the potential need for care.
To put the thread back on topic.
minori’s reaction to all this.
…I’m speechless and can only hope it doesn’t become widespread.
But Minori didn’t make any rape games, right?
I’m glad you like it. There are other actresses like Kitty, but none really became as popular as her, because Kitty seriously looked the part. She predominantly stared in “babysitter” themed porn - where she was the one getting babysitted - so if you follow her titles, you’ll find her less popular associates. Naturally her earliest films, have her looking the youngest. Kitty started in 1997 and worked until 2005. Performed in almost 80 movies: that makes her incredibly popular/successful as far as porn goes.
Fear not follow PP fans: this is why Man invented proxy servers.
Thou shalt not deny thy eroge!
It’s more about the action itself, you know? minori is clearly showing a… “dislike” of foreign people going on their page. What about if many others do the same?
Ah… I gottcha now.
Hmmm… I suppose that makes it harder for PP to license titles too, if they’re all being anti-Western like Illusion and Touchy. 
nm
Totally. Worth it.
She’s been my favorite porn actress for a long time. Sorry to hear she’s retired. 
That’s my main worry, that future releases here will be impacted. Yin-Yang 2 already has questionable content, but the argument COULD be made the character in question is 18. It’s not as obvious as the Lipp scene from X-Change 3. I obsess about it every so often, since so many things could impact its release.
Is it possible to get Anon’s help in beating back this group? I think they’d be more then willing to help out.
Beating back which group? Anon would happily mailbomb Equality Now but that wouldn’t accomplish anything. Even if you convinced EN to stop writing people and complaining about rape games, that wouldn’t help, because it wouldn’t cause the ban to be reversed. Stuff’s already in place.
Even if you convinced EN to actually write all the people they wrote before and say “Never mind, we changed our minds” (highly unlikely), that still wouldn’t change anything. They’re nothing but the straw that broke the camel’s back, as far as I can tell. There were many other pressures at work. The EOCS are not their lapdogs, and once moved to action, would not likely change course based on their sayso alone.
To get any result, you need to target the people who actually make the decisions, and figure out what their values are and how to sway them. If they’re worried about Japan’s image in the global community, try figuring out how to spin eroge as a POSITIVE thing and convince them that BANNING things makes them look bad.
Actually one way to fight back is using EN’s own medicine against them. If you seriously could get Anon to organize and be civilized about it (very important - be CIVIL and PROFESSIONAL), send letters stating support for Japan’s eroge market to the very same people EN is sending them too (as seen at the bottom of this page). Also send letters stating we’re against censorship to EOCS and CSA. This is equally important, as some addresses EN is sending letters to, might try to hide the fact there’s a campaign supporting eroge overseas (Seiko Noda). You want to include them though, because if they lie about getting letters… well… you know how politics works.
Basically EN is making Japan look like they’re a deviant nation and that everyone else in the world finds their eroge disgusting. The politicians against eroge are using this to fuel Japan’s self consciousness. Sending letters would help immensely in proving otherwise.
On top of that, disprove the assertion that sex and violence in games, increases it’s occurrence in society. Spread the word how almost every study proves otherwise. Show how EN is twisting things to their benefit, not what the numbers show. Challenge potential legislation that limits sex and violence in video games - be wary of how certain politicians and activists word things so it sounds like video games are only for children (thus painting it a pure and noble cause only evil people would challenge). Naturally getting the relevant pornography obscenity laws repealed in your native country would help.
While EOCS and CSA are putting restrictions, it’s important to note that EOCS and CSA are doing it. They could as easily undo them. They exist because if Japan’s government made the laws, that wouldn’t be possible. This is the whole reason why Seiko Noda and her friends, WANT to pass legislation. If the Japanese Diet could pull it off, that would put the ball in the politician’s control, not the game makers. EN has just begun realizing this (I’m sure Noda has opened communications with them) and are pushing for legislation.
I should stress that online petitions, email, and bloging how this sucks is not enough. It helps, but there has to be more. SEND POSTAGE LETTERS. There’s a lot of political and media weight when an organization can produce boxes of letters from people on a legislative floor. It’s not the same with emails or blogs.
Also sending letters to Larry Flynt Publications and Playboy Enterprises wouldn’t hurt. Let them know about eroge. Not only do they support porn in general, possess millions of dollars and boast powerful connections, but both organizations have spent millions against various feminist campaigns. Like the saying goes: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. On the same token, there are pro-men magazines like Maxim worth sending editorial letters to: let 'em know feminists are leading a campaign of sexual censorship in Japan and help spread the word.
That’s basically what I’m saying - Don’t write to EN. Write to the people EN is writing to. Don’t threaten and whine - work with the values of the people you’re writing to.