Out of Context Content Skewed - Vampire Bund, Himari & More

[DragoZERO]

Many online sites that let you read manga or watch anime (legally and "illegally") have removed just about all mature content, regardless of what it's about or how much "mature" content it may contain. I find this understandable with regards to the child characters being depicted in questionable situations however there are series such as Futari Ecchi, which has all adults and is even educational, taking the fall and that is unfortunate. Then there are series like Vampire Bund, Omamori Himari and Kaichou wa maid-sama, which are not about sex, taking hits because of this.

What is everyone's opinion on this sort of thing?

Relevant reading:

http://l7world.com/2010/04/google-sp...rnography.html

http://www.animenation.net/blog/2010...eing-censored/

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news...-obscene-manga

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

Many online sites that let you read manga or watch anime (legally and "illegally") have removed just about all mature content, regardless of what it's about or how much "mature" content it may contain.

Which legal sites are actually removing/discontinuing the viewing of mature content? All of the streaming is just airing either the TV OTA version (CR, FUNi) or just a slightly more censored version (Vampire Bund).

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

Many online sites that let you read manga or watch anime (legally and "illegally") have removed just about all mature content, regardless of what it's about or how much "mature" content it may contain. I find this understandable with regards to the child characters being depicted in questionable situations however there are series such as Futari Ecchi, which has all adults and is even educational, taking the fall and that is unfortunate. Then there are series like Vampire Bund, Omamori Himari and Kaichou wa maid-sama, which are not about sex, taking hits because of this.

What is everyone's opinion on this sort of thing?

Relevant reading:

http://l7world.com/2010/04/google-sp...rnography.html

http://www.animenation.net/blog/2010...eing-censored/

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news...-obscene-manga

The proper response is to *STOP* using those sites, write them a letter, and let them die on the vine. Don't give them page hits.

The links you provide don't seem terribly relevant to this issue... but they are relevant to people concerned about the level of witch-hunting that seems to be growing on access to material no one was harmed in the making of. The equation of "child pornography" with *drawings* and *animation* as well as obvious cluelessness about cultural differences (or even getting the ages of characters completely wrong or smearing underage-vs-pedo) is a separate topic that has its own disturbing "thoughtcrime" problems.

[0utf0xZer0]

Well, the author of the first link throwing the term "child pornography" around like it's nothing certainly managed to tick me off.

Reminds me of the people I've meet who feel the need to make sure you know damn well that they aren't perverted lolicons by railing against stuff like the anime version of Moon Phase. Although those people probably strike me as even more ridiculous.

Edit: The precedent from the Handley case is that anime/manga can be considered child pornography if they are obscene right? I seem to remember that being a key factor.

If that's the case, then the starcade guy in the second link is actually the one who needs to get his facts straight, not the other posters.

[DragoZERO]

Originally Posted by bayoab

Which legal sites are actually removing/discontinuing the viewing of mature content? All of the streaming is just airing either the TV OTA version (CR, FUNi) or just a slightly more censored version (Vampire Bund).

I think YouTube? I'm not 100% sure, so I apologize if I was wrong about it.

Originally Posted by Vexx

The proper response is to *STOP* using those sites, write them a letter, and let them die on the vine. Don't give them page hits.

The links you provide don't seem terribly relevant to this issue... but they are relevant to people concerned about the level of witch-hunting that seems to be growing on access to material no one was harmed in the making of. The equation of "child pornography" with *drawings* and *animation* as well as obvious cluelessness about cultural differences (or even getting the ages of characters completely wrong or smearing underage-vs-pedo) is a separate topic that has its own disturbing "thoughtcrime" problems.

It's all I could find on the topic. If you have other sites, please post them. I do realize those sites themselves are skewed but I had little choice in linking them since I want users to know what I am talking about and all. The first and third are poor sites I know, but the second is an editorial blog, so yeah.

And as for the Handley case, at first I thought it was the authorities overreacting and all, but he was quite extreme. Either way, I think his case has led to this "witch hunt" as you put it.

[Ashaman]

Agreed. He was rather extreme, and so publishers and sites are defending themselves against a Witch-Hunt that is apparently about to begin, or is just starting.

[roriconfan]

Is this another case of taking you to court for reading lolicons? Retarded...

[Solace]

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

If that's the case, then the starcade guy in the second link is actually the one who needs to get his facts straight, not the other posters.

What, you mean disturbing comments like this? -

Originally Posted by starcade

If what you are doing is “freedom” and what I believe is “1984″, I’ll take “1984″ over your “freedom” (read: your anarchy).

These are the people who champion "think of the children!". Be afraid.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

What is everyone's opinion on this sort of thing?

*Facepalm* A whole lot of fuss for absolutely no reason. The Christopher Handley case makes my blood boil and is a disgusting violation of privacy, time, and taxpayer money.

edit: Whoever responsible needs to be tentacle raped.

[roriconfan]

Yeah, think of the children. Most of them carry guns these days so it is very important to be worried about them.

Hey wait a second, where did they get the guns? ... Oh, I see, you get one for free if you buy 10 kilos of oranges. And all these manga are commanding them to kill on sight. I see, it's all the grown ups fault for DOING ALL THAT SHIT.

[NorthernFallout]

Everywhere I look when it's talk about 1984, censorship, privacy rights abolishment... it's the "Please, Think of the Children!" argument that pops up the most.

And the majority fall for it. Sigh.

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by DragoZERO

I think YouTube? I'm not 100% sure, so I apologize if I was wrong about it.

Youtube has always had a quite strict content policy that is selectively enforced. When FUNi first started throwing content up there, Youtube kept removing episodes because a character lacking clothing or there was a panty shot or something silly and perfectly harmless.

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

*Facepalm* A whole lot of fuss for absolutely no reason. The Christopher Handley case makes my blood boil and is a disgusting violation of privacy, time, and taxpayer money.

Except the Handley case really wasn't a violation of any of these.
And what he had is so far removed from the mainstream that it really does not apply to anything else.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by bayoab

Except the Handley case really wasn't a violation of any of these.
And what he had is so far removed from the mainstream that it really does not apply to anything else.

I still don't see why it is necessary to go after people for DRAWINGS instead of say spending the time trying to save real children from being abused. It just sounds like a witchhunt. It certainly doesn't make me feel safer that he is being put away.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by bayoab

Except the Handley case really wasn't a violation of any of these.
And what he had is so far removed from the mainstream that it really does not apply to anything else.

Yes, the content was... but the notion that *drawings* (no real beings misused in the production of, other than sweatshop animators) are contraband just sets off all kinds of alarm bells. If you read the prosecution's case, they *knew* they had to walk all sorts of tightropes and in the end, it came down to scaring Handley into settling on some sort of conviction so the prosecution could parade about "saving the children" ... except there aren't any.

[roriconfan]

So in that country if you draw a cartoon of a fictional person being fictionally killed by a fictional character you get accused for real.

It's the thought that counts...

[Archon_Wing]

Nah, we're more accepting of violence

What's gonna happen if I draw 2 stick figures and label one "loli"? Is the FBI gonna come after me?

[roriconfan]

KIDSEXCHANGE

Will I go to prison for not adding spaces between those words?

[Vexx]

Technically, yeah -- the precedent now exists (or rather that the law wasn't fully challenged) that stick figures may or may not be illegal depending on how you labeled them or what you thought you were drawing. :P

[Izayoi]

Things like this makes me very very very afraid.... NO MORE LOLICON GENRE?! FBI IN MY HOUSE? OH NOES!

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Yes, the content was... but the notion that *drawings* (no real beings misused in the production of, other than sweatshop animators) are contraband just sets off all kinds of alarm bells. If you read the prosecution's case, they *knew* they had to walk all sorts of tightropes and in the end, it came down to scaring Handley into settling on some sort of conviction so the prosecution could parade about "saving the children" ... except there aren't any.

If the content doesn't pass the miller test, then it doesn't really matter if the content is drawn though. The USPS regulations deal with "obscenity", not "pornography". (Note: I never actually followed the case until it was brought up as being relevant to Vampire Bund censoring... which it wasn't at all.)