Standing Up To Proposed Virtual Child Porn Legislation

The Tokyo Metropolitan government is moving forward on legislation that sets out to ban provocative "visual depictions" of characters who appear to be 18 years old and younger. And some of Japan's most famous manga creators are fighting it.

Manga artists Go Nagai, Tetsuya Chiba and Machiko Satonaka appeared at the Tokyo Government Office on March 15 to show their opposition to the proposed legislation.

Nagai and Chiba are two of the most well-known living mangaka (manga creators) with Nagai responsible for magical girl manga Cutie Honey and robot manga Mazinger Z and Chiba for iconic boxing manga Ashita no Joe. Shojo manga creator Machiko Satonaka received a Lifetime Works and Cultural Activities award from the Japanese government. All three are big time, mainsteam Japanese mangaka, and their opposition to this proposed legislation shows just how unpopular it is with the manga industry.

Chiba told those gathered that the proposed legislation can be "freely" interpreted and would affect manga character "despite no living beings being hurt". These mangaka are standing up for their artistic freedom.

"We are looking at an example of how the popularity of culture will disappear by restricting this," Chiba added. "I would like you to decide how you will vote based on readers' feelings."

As Kotaku posted previously, the proposal, submitted on February 24, would amend the Metropolitan Tokyo youth welfare law on child pornography and limit the manner in which "nonexistent youths" are represented as well as clauses that call for the filtering of images of minors online and via mobile phone. The "visual depictions" are understood to encompass underage characters in manga, anime, computer games and video games - i.e. virtual characters.

The assembly will vote on the proposal on March 19.

ちばてつやさんらが反対アピール 都の児童性描写規制案に - 47NEWS(よんななニュース) [PicPic]


Comments

    If it looks like a kid, talks like a kid, reacts like a kid, and is then raped by tentacles, then youve got no platform for declaring it being protected under the merit of art.

    Nor is the fact that people enjoy it a better argument.

    Nor is the fact no one is actually being put through this situation first hand.

    Animating a act of child abuse then simply saying in the text the character is actually 18 does not get around it either. Especially not when your character is in diapers.

    Wow, up in arms over child porn and whaling rights. Do you guys actively WANT the rest of the world to be hatin on you?

      You're looking at the wrong end of the spectrum. The problem with this law- and ones like it, like the Australian internet filter- is that it's ENTIRELY open to the personal judgement of the person in control of it. Ask a lawmaker in Iran or Saudi Arabia, what is considered obscene, I'm sure it'd cover a lot of things YOU think are perfectly acceptable.

        Oh dear, how could I miss the single best example on the topic- Michael Atkinson. One man, completely out of touch with modern values, able to dictate for an entirely country. QED

        Yeah they deffinatly need a clause it there that says 'being cute' is ok.

        hmmm yeah i hate how these legislations are so subjective and wishy washy. i for one am one who enjoys ...'art'...not of the child abuse kind, definitely not, but it almost seems like you can get arrested if the character happens to don a highschool uniform, even if the depiction is clearly of a female with adult physique and qualities.

        The problem with blanket laws like this is that people without wrong intentions are affected. Hence the protest of these legitimate artists.

      Yeah who cares about things like principals.

      Look I'm not saying I want a tonne of lolicon porn, but the fact is no harm is being done so why should it be illegal?

      You finding it icky is not a good enough reason to make a law.

      Freedom of speech and freedom of expression don't mean anything unless you support peoples rights to do things you don't like.

        100% agree. You may not like it, but you may not like a lot of things. I personally don't like religion but I won't try and make it illegal, and I bet I can argue it does a hell of a lot more harm than a few drawings.

      W-what?!

      MaXX: "Nor is the fact no one is actually being put through this situation first hand."

      How is that irrelevant? The purpose of anti-child porn laws is to protect children.

      People should be responsible for their own actions. We don't need thoughtcrime to be used as the justification for a law. Not now or ever.

      you are an ignorant twat, these artists are defending child porn you idiot. they are defending their right as artists, to create works of Manga and Anime. Do all those girls in those japanese Manga and Anime look over 18 ? No, they certainly not, they look very young and so under this new law, you can say bye to all those wonderful works of manga and anime.

      And so, perfect legitimate works will be banned. Shows such as BLEACH and others will have to drastically change some of their characters appearance to satisfy the new law. In effect, this will limit the creativity of these artists.

      This is what they are fighting against.

        sorry, typo
        = these artists are "not"defending child porn

        maybe if the legislation made more clearer and target more specifically the child porn.

        As far as I understand the article referring to manga/anime characters who look underage?

        If I am wrong, than please accept my apologies for the misunderstanding.

      Also, things like Lolicon and Shotacon aren't actually images that are created from the abuse of a child.

      Child pornography, in the western sense of the term, is created through the violation of a child's rights. A kid has to be raped and said rape has to be photographed/filmed.

      Lolicon and Shotacon, on the other hand, are drawn/animated images, created entirely by an artist. Thus, no actual real children are hurt in the process (assuming said images aren't modelled on any real child; that would be using someone's appearance without their consent).

      I find Lolicon and Shotacon distasteful. But that is not the point; they should not be made illegal. This is not about sexual perversion but about artistic freedom.

      And to be honest, I simply don't care what kind of sick sexual perversions you enjoy in your fiction. If it involves 14 year old schoolgirls getting raped by tentacles or whatever. As long as you keep it within the realm of fantasy, I won't stop you.

      And note that if you argue "fictional child abuse creates real child abuse," then you are no different from Michael Atkinson and all those people that argue "fictional violence creates real violence."

    A huge number of very well known Mangaka are voicing their opinions against this law.
    Fujiko Fujio A (Doraemon), Rumiko Takahashi (Ranma/Inuyasha/etc), Ken Akamatsu (Love Hina/etc) to name just a few of the more well known and main-stream ones.

      i would rally behind ken akamatsu to the ends of the earth, that man is a god.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now