banning of drawings is senseless and reprehensible. It solves no problems, and protects society none. Its fear and paranoia, that will lead to violation of rights of people who entirely harmless and innocent.
Man, it's a good thing I speak and read flawless Korean, otherwise linking to two completely Korean websites would be embarrassing. I'm kidding, I didn't get a word of this. I'm double kidding.
The translation makes it look like the law is overreaching and pretty overzealous, but it's not exactly enough to make me shout "I thought South Korea were the GOOD GUYS compared to North Korea". North Korea, just so you remember, is the country whose national sports are Syncopated Marching and the 100 Meter Starve.
angelxxuanFeatured By OwnerNov 25, 2012Student General Artist
the line ! here's how it goes, there isn't one. when it comes to fanart, the underaged stuff of people in "those poses" isn't considered to be pedo related so if you're caught with animated porn then your sentence is not as bad. although in Thailand you can get the real thing for a few bits of money. so as for South Korea, they are just like any country, they do what they want and outlaw what they consider a threat to them. "we" could boycott what they sell, but since we don't, nor do we boycott other things, I don't see that happening. people are going to do what they want to do, either they getting caught or not. sad but true. in this case the UN is calling it a work in progress to ban it all, some countries even ban "cartoon" porn. a lot use ISP to track what you're doing too. so things are being done, just not as fast if some countries don't comply.
The west seems to stick their nose in other countrys cultures or laws if we disagree with them ! Im not muslim or jewish or catholic or republican or democrat or mormon, etc & I disagree with lots of things like woman wearing hijabs and jehovas witnesses refusing blood transfusions but thats there problem, not mine ! I dont live in South Korea so let them get on with it ! Rather say nothing than get their backs up and they end up like North Korea ! LOL
Sometimes it's okay to be a hypocrite and this is one of those times. Sure, artistic expression is extremely important to me. But the number of situations where drawing questionable borderline child pornography is going to make some actual, deep artistic statement that I would honestly value? Extremely low to not at all, right there.
So, every piece of art has to make a "deep artistic statement" or it should just be banned? Should we ban all art that you personally don't "honestly value"?
Besides, s korea is not just banning child pornography, they're banning pornography, period. Not to mention that the ban of possession of child pornography does nothing to combat child abuse, and in fact just makes the problem worse.
>>> Putting words in my mouth, you. Never said that.
I wasn't putting anything in any orifice of yours, check out the surprise noodles in my post and process it again.
>>> I'd really appreciate some sources to back up your claim that banning child porn makes child abuse worse.
That's not what I said, I said the laws that make the possession of child pornography illegal make the problem of child abuse worse. And it's fairly simple if you think about it.
Let's say you're a housewife and your husband is abusing your children. You want to gather evidence to accuse your husband of abuse, so you videotape him abusing your children. Then you take the video to the police, you know what happens? You get charged for possession of child pornography, because its possession is illegal in all and any circumstances, and since you're now a registered sex offender, your children will be taken away from you.
Or: a 15-year old girl takes nude pictures of herself and puts them up on her facespace. Now she gets accused of possession of child pornography, and probably distribution too, because she is in possession of nude pictures of a 15-year old, never mind that the 15-year old happens to be herself. Her life is ruined, she's a registered sex offender for the rest of her life.
Production and sale of child porn should be illegal, not possession of it. Criminalizing possession only harms children by making the true abusers harder to catch.
You still have not provided actual sources for these claims.
I would love to know of any instance where a mother was arrested for child pornography because she videotaped her husband sexually abusing her children. That entire scenario is so far fetched, if it really happened I would really like to read it because that would be awful. But I'm a little confused why any good mom would sit back and film.
I am aware of your second example though, no need to provide evidence of it. Oh, it's silly that you as a fifteen year old girl could be charged for possession of porn of yourself. But here at least, where we already have laws like that of South Korea in effect, those charges would not be part of your permanent record for life. They would not follow you to your adult years, even. And they stand to prevent kids from being silly with nudes of themselves. My sister just earlier this week did a two-day seminar on exactly this with teenage girls at my old high school and explaining that law to them really opened their eyes.
Of course I agree that production and sale of child porn should be illegal. But possession too. I fail to see how it makes the abusers harder to catch when this is how they can track child porn to it's source.
>>> I would love to know of any instance where a mother was arrested for child pornography because she videotaped her husband sexually abusing her children.
Well, there is one case where the mother was videotaping her kids to document their behaviour, not actual abuse or sex acts, but simply her children playing with each other in overly sexual ways, which she intended to use as evidence to show that her husband was abusing her children.
The link is in swedish, but I'm sure google translate will help you. What happened was that she got convicted for possession of child porn and her husband who is possibly a child abuser got full custody.
>>> And they stand to prevent kids from being silly with nudes of themselves.
Oh well that's all fine then. I guess it's one way to teach children that sexuality is evil and they should live their entire lives being ashamed of their own sexuality - just slap them with jail sentences if they even dare to see themselves as sexual beings.
In what reality does it make sense that the laws that are supposed to protect children are making those same children into fucking CRIMINALS????
>>> Of course I agree that production and sale of child porn should be illegal. But possession too. I fail to see how it makes the abusers harder to catch when this is how they can track child porn to it's source.
How exactly does the criminalization of possession make it easier to track the source of child porn? Care to back that up with some sources?
And then there's situations where you click on an unknown link, and you end up on a site full of child porn. Congratulations, you are now a criminal and a sex offender!
I don't really get how children on tape acting sexual can be used as legal evidence of child abuse. I can, however, understand why neither parent should be trusted with custody.
You are exaggerating the law here. This isn't something that will follow them their whole lives, like taking nudes and them getting on the internet would. Why are you so keen on children exposing themselves and children "seeing themselves as sexual beings"? That's disgusting.
Can you show me evidence of someone who was arrested for being on the home page of a child pornography site once, ever, for a split second without browsing?
I've been using the internet for over a decade like a lot of people here. A lot of times I've hung out in the underbelly of the internet. I've clicked a lot of horrible links.
Never child pornsites.
But I've probably seen a lot of teenagers expose themselves when I was a teenager too. And yet look at me, living in a country where that is illegal, and I am not in jail. They're not making these laws to arrest everyone who browses the internet.
>>> I don't really get how children on tape acting sexual can be used as legal evidence of child abuse. I can, however, understand why neither parent should be trusted with custody.
So the parent who tries to gather evidence of child abuse of her children should be denied custody? Yeah, whatever champ. It's already apparent that your idea of justice is quite perverse.
>>> You are exaggerating the law here. This isn't something that will follow them their whole lives,
So that makes it ok then I guess. I guess it's ok that you can criminalize children or teenagers for taking pictures of themselves.
And maybe you should consider that with the current law, it's not just distributing those pictures that's illegal, it's possession of them as well. A 15-year old who takes nude pictures of him/herself is already a criminal, whether he/she puts them online or not.
>>> like taking nudes and them getting on the internet would.
So in order to protect the children from themselves, you're making them into criminals. Again: in what reality does that make sense?
It's kind of like making stupidity a crime.
>>> Why are you so keen on children exposing themselves and children "seeing themselves as sexual beings"? That's disgusting.
Wow, strawman much? That's so typical of you moral guardian types. You can't even have a reasonable debate without trying to demonize your opposition.
Like it or not, children are sexual beings. Most children discover masturbation in preteen ages, and most get curious about sex at least when puberty hits. That doesn't mean its ok for adults to have sex with them, it just means that children should be allowed to discover their sexuality in whatever way feels natural to them, and it should not repressed only because it feels uncomfortable to adults.
>>> Can you show me evidence of someone who was arrested for being on the home page of a child pornography site once, ever, for a split second without browsing?
Can you show me evidence that it does not happen?
>>> I've been using the internet for over a decade like a lot of people here. A lot of times I've hung out in the underbelly of the internet. I've clicked a lot of horrible links. Never child pornsites.
Oh, I guess this personal anecdote means that it can never happen to anyone.
>>> I thought South Korea were supposed to be GOOD GUYS,
South korea has long been a totalitarian society. They made away with internet anonymity long ago - no one can write or publish anything online or use any kind of online services without identifying themselves, each citizen has a personal account they are required to use for all online activity.
This new suppression of freedom of expression is just par for the course for them. Once you start taking away basic human rights in the name of "protection" it's a slippery slope to fascism.
The really scary thing is though, there are people in EU and US governments who want to do basically the same thing... [link]
Why would you protest Tae Kwon Do? First of all, it's probably taught to you by Americans who were in turn probably trained mostly by other Americans.
You know what comes from South Korea and involves a ton of art? Cartoons and anime. Rough Draft Korea, for example, worked on Futurama, the Simpsons, Family Guy, Rocko's Modern Life, and Gravity Falls, plus literally dozens and dozens of other shows.
No I don't think you should boycott south korean companies because of their government's internal politics. At this point, multinational corporations are pretty much independent entities apart from any country they nominally represent...
Trying to affect a foreign country's internal politics is a tough thing to do. Probably the most you can do is demanding your local government and politicians to express disapproval towards them. Other than that it's p much up to s koreans themselves to change their government's internal policies. Also if you're a blogger or a journalist you can write about it and affect the public opinion that way.
You should probably focus towards your own country's politics though, because you have a much better chance of making a difference there. Think globally, act locally and so forth.
I suppose that makes South Dakota good guys because it's not North Dakota.
Frankly I wouldn't fancy living in either. This mentality is also the reason you guys got into Vietnam, which was ruled by a dictator on both the North and South side. It's just that one dictator was more Christian than the other.
You cannot think of states as good or evil. Such a line of thought leads to the hyper-partisan view that is so common in Republican/Democrat America. To expect South Koreans to accept your standards of law and morality just because you happen to have an agreement that keeps your military bases in their country is ridiculous. They are an autonomous country with their own democracy. I mean, if we have to get down to it, can even Americans be considered good guys? I most certainly don't consider Americans to be wholly 'good'. I consider it to be an autonomous state that we Canadians have good relationships with.
Overall it is sad that such undefined laws are made, simply because IDs can be faked and politicians play to the fears of a few over rightious people.
That said any material involving real children should be illegal. Both on the count of slavery (children lack the mental ability for complete self determination) and the health and safety of the child.
Yes this does leave the door open for lolicon or other computer generated images. However no one was harmed in the production, no child used.
I am not going to use the false logic of temptations being pushed beyond thought. We allow violence on tv, kids live with violence in their homes, we must simply demand self control over actions taken, not thought about.
The biggest reason why we should care about undefined laws and laws which limit speech is that as we become a smaller world turning to the UN more often. Each nations laws affect the way that nation votes and the UN resolutions passed.
In time, each nation picks up versions of that resolution and creates laws of their own to comply with said UN resolution.
"Both on the count of slavery"... child abuse, child exploitation, sexual assault of a person under sixteen, sexual assault of a person under thirteen, corruption of a minor, you jackass. Those are the crimes.
Everything after that... well, I understand what you're talking about with lolicon and shit. I'm on board for that, but what the fuck? The UN? Who told you that that's the reason that anyone should care about anything?
The world is a community, each nation within it is a smaller community within a greater community. What is pushed by one part of that community is often times accepted by the greater community over time.
So when we have ideals such as protecting our children is pushed by one part of the greater community, the greater community accepts it.
The UN in this case is that greater community. Just look at how the left is so quick to try and adopt many of the measures the UN tries to employ.
"Just look at how the left is so quick to try and adopt many of the measures the UN tries to employ." Which ones? Specifically, which ones are "the left" implementing UN policies simply because they're UN policies, not because it's simply a strong advocacy point for a piece of legislation they already support?
Additionally, there are tons of countries across the world that have wildly far more conservative laws than the US that haven't magically seeped into our country via communal osmosis. Uganda's gay rights stuff. Pretty much everything China has ever done. Japan, on pornography. Australia and Germany, violence in the media. Most of the Middle East, alcohol consumption.
There was a man arrested in the U.S. for child pornography over a manga that was in all totality, lolicon. I can't remember if he was exonerated or if he was convicted on those charges. But I suppose it might depend on the laws of the state too.