4 ms·

I'm from Australia. I personally don't find it morally objectionable (because it's not hurting anyone) though I would consider it to be a grey area. I believe t

by cyphar 9y ago

I'm from Australia. I personally don't find it morally objectionable (because it's not hurting anyone) though I would consider it to be a grey area. I believe that lolicon is illegal here (or at the very least not explicitly legal), because it's effectively a depiction of child pornography. That's the reason most people find it objectionable, effectively due to the (entirely justified) taboo around underage sexuality and the worry it will lead more real child pornography.

ue_ 9y ago
It is very much illegal, as is stories depicting it. Here's an Australian supreme court of the Northern Territory case describing such a ruling: http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov.au/documents/judgements/2014/NTSC53.pdf http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov.au/documents/judgements/2014/... It is also illegal in Canada (similarly with stories), some US states, some European countries, and England, Wales and Northern Ireland (though only drawings rather than stories as far as I know). I think such laws are hideous.
- cyphar 9y ago
  Yeah, now I remember reading the news about that case a few years ago. I think that decision is understandable, though I don't agree with classifying something that is obviously not child pornography as "child pornography". Also note that in Australia "supreme court" does not mean that its rulings determine federal common law, that rests with the High Court of Australia (the next court up)[1]. So on paper, other States could have different laws on the topic (but I haven't checked whether the case was appealed to the High Court). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Australia
  - etplayer 9y ago
    Thank you for your information on the system, I had no idea, I'm only vaguely familiar with the system in England and Wales. It's worth noting, however, that the fact it is illegal is specified in the state code rather than being decided by this court case. There is a similar case which I think is rather silly that a man in Australia was convicted of having 'Simpsons porn' which featured two underage characters from the Simpsons.
    - cyphar 9y ago
      > It's worth noting, however, that the fact it is illegal is specified in the state code rather than being decided by this court case. Ah, you're right (I didn't read the whole document). In case you're interested, in other states there is a different criminal code (called the Crimes Act (1990) in NSW)[1]. The section on "child abuse material" (15A) is quite vague on what limits there are for something being "material depicting child abuse" and there is also a catch-all statement saying that something is also considered child abuse material based on " the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults". In general I would be surprised if it was legal in any state. I also checked, and it's considered "objectionable material" in New Zeland[2]. [1]: https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/inforce/a0a6239c-5e99-6ad0-fe6a-9d1efad30e4f/1900-40.pdf https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/inforce/a0a6239c-5e99-6ad... [2]: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0094/latest/whole.html#DLM313407 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0094/latest/w...
Retric 9y ago
As another poster points out Japan does not have a higher rate of actual child sexual abuse. So, does the lack of any actual harm influence your opinion?
- cyphar 9y ago
  You have to take into account that in Asian countries the reporting of sexual abuse is likely much lower because of social stigmatization. From what I've heard second-hand it's perceived as being shameful for your family to be a victim of such abuse, and I imagine that would affect the statistics. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with whether it causes actual child sexual abuse, it's just something to consider.
- mcguire 9y ago
  Be careful when comparing crime rates between countries. Japan, in particular, has...odd statistics. http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/09/world/fg-autopsy9 http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/09/world/fg-autopsy9 Further, sex crimes are...different everywhere. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/12/08/voices/foreign-students-account-treatment-rape-case-points-gaps-japans-safety-myth/#.WZh1PDe1thE https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/12/08/voices/for...
  - Retric 9y ago
    There is some bias in that reporting. The US rate of autopsy 8.5 percent the Japan rate is 11.2%. So, if your comparing the US with Japan it's the US that's more likely to miss something based on national rates. As to the second, US rape victims are often told not to report and prison rapes are frequently just ignored. From a sociology standpoint you need to be careful when doing cross country comparisons. But, reported statistics are not simply accepted at face value.
    - mcguire 9y ago
      The US rate of 8.1% (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db67.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db67.htm) is for all deaths. The Japanese rate of 11.7% (https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/02/27/editorials/troubling-low-autopsy-rate/#.WZtHoje1thE https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/02/27/editorials/t...) is for "unusual deaths". (Yeah, I wish I could find better figures, but all I get are abstracts for papers about the reasons for Japan's low rate of autopsies; the papers are behind paywalls.)

by cyphar 9y ago

ue_ 9y ago

It is very much illegal, as is stories depicting it. Here's an Australian supreme court of the Northern Territory case describing such a ruling: http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov.au/documents/judgements/2014/NTSC53.pdf http://www.supremecourt.nt.gov.au/documents/judgements/2014/... It is also illegal in Canada (similarly with stories), some US states, some European countries, and England, Wales and Northern Ireland (though only drawings rather than stories as far as I know). I think such laws are hideous.

cyphar 9y ago
Yeah, now I remember reading the news about that case a few years ago. I think that decision is understandable, though I don't agree with classifying something that is obviously not child pornography as "child pornography". Also note that in Australia "supreme court" does not mean that its rulings determine federal common law, that rests with the High Court of Australia (the next court up)[1]. So on paper, other States could have different laws on the topic (but I haven't checked whether the case was appealed to the High Court). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Australia
- etplayer 9y ago
  Thank you for your information on the system, I had no idea, I'm only vaguely familiar with the system in England and Wales. It's worth noting, however, that the fact it is illegal is specified in the state code rather than being decided by this court case. There is a similar case which I think is rather silly that a man in Australia was convicted of having 'Simpsons porn' which featured two underage characters from the Simpsons.
  - cyphar 9y ago
    > It's worth noting, however, that the fact it is illegal is specified in the state code rather than being decided by this court case. Ah, you're right (I didn't read the whole document). In case you're interested, in other states there is a different criminal code (called the Crimes Act (1990) in NSW)[1]. The section on "child abuse material" (15A) is quite vague on what limits there are for something being "material depicting child abuse" and there is also a catch-all statement saying that something is also considered child abuse material based on " the standards of morality, decency and propriety generally accepted by reasonable adults". In general I would be surprised if it was legal in any state. I also checked, and it's considered "objectionable material" in New Zeland[2]. [1]: https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/inforce/a0a6239c-5e99-6ad0-fe6a-9d1efad30e4f/1900-40.pdf https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/inforce/a0a6239c-5e99-6ad... [2]: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0094/latest/whole.html#DLM313407 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0094/latest/w...

Retric 9y ago

As another poster points out Japan does not have a higher rate of actual child sexual abuse. So, does the lack of any actual harm influence your opinion?

cyphar 9y ago
You have to take into account that in Asian countries the reporting of sexual abuse is likely much lower because of social stigmatization. From what I've heard second-hand it's perceived as being shameful for your family to be a victim of such abuse, and I imagine that would affect the statistics. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with whether it causes actual child sexual abuse, it's just something to consider.
mcguire 9y ago
Be careful when comparing crime rates between countries. Japan, in particular, has...odd statistics. http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/09/world/fg-autopsy9 http://articles.latimes.com/2007/nov/09/world/fg-autopsy9 Further, sex crimes are...different everywhere. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/12/08/voices/foreign-students-account-treatment-rape-case-points-gaps-japans-safety-myth/#.WZh1PDe1thE https://www.japantimes.co.jp/community/2014/12/08/voices/for...
- Retric 9y ago
  There is some bias in that reporting. The US rate of autopsy 8.5 percent the Japan rate is 11.2%. So, if your comparing the US with Japan it's the US that's more likely to miss something based on national rates. As to the second, US rape victims are often told not to report and prison rapes are frequently just ignored. From a sociology standpoint you need to be careful when doing cross country comparisons. But, reported statistics are not simply accepted at face value.
  - mcguire 9y ago
    The US rate of 8.1% (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db67.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db67.htm) is for all deaths. The Japanese rate of 11.7% (https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/02/27/editorials/troubling-low-autopsy-rate/#.WZtHoje1thE https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/02/27/editorials/t...) is for "unusual deaths". (Yeah, I wish I could find better figures, but all I get are abstracts for papers about the reasons for Japan's low rate of autopsies; the papers are behind paywalls.)