Log in

No account? Create an account
17 December 2010 @ 11:45 pm
Youth Ordinace Bill 156 (Update)  
How many toes are you going to step on Mr. Ishihara?

And We has warped DNA... Doesn't anymore stranger than this.


Under Bill 156, the industry will regulate "manga, anime, and other images" that "unjustifiably glorify or exaggerate" certain sexual or pseudo sexual acts. The government can also directly regulate these images if the depicted acts are also "considered to be excessively disrupting of social order" such as rape.

In the press conference, a representative from the Weekly Asahi news magazine noted that Ishihara said in his 1972 book True Sex Education that "no book of any sort could instigate children toward crime or delinquency and that even if all undesirable books were wiped off the planet, crime would still take place." When pressed about this, Ishihara responded that he was wrong at the time and the world is different now. He then characterized people who read and write the restricted material as "sad people with warped DNA."

The self-regulation clauses of Bill 156 will go into effect on April 1 of next year, and the restrictions on sales and renting will go into effect on July 1. The current ordinance already prevents the sale and renting of "harmful publications" — materials that are "sexually stimulating, encourages cruelty, and/or may compel suicide or criminal behavior" to people under the age of 18.

Ishihara's writings before he became a politician have inspired a dōjinshi (self-published manga and other works) event next year. Opponents of Bill 156 contend that the content in Ishihara's novels, if made into anime or manga, would be restricted by the amendment.


More ETA: http://www.sankakucomplex.com/2010/12/17/ishihara-otaku-have-corrupt-dna/

Previous: http://community.livejournal.com/bleachness/591027.html
Current Music: Inside your mind by Kawada Shinji
oh gallant piglet,: sweatdropaizome on December 18th, 2010 04:59 am (UTC)
Thanks for posting this. I saw your RT on twitter and my jaw hit my desk. Ishihara needs to hook up with Fred Phelps and go fishing.
Kim!: Mushroom Mushroomspartydragon on December 18th, 2010 05:24 am (UTC)
Somehow, I don't think they'd get along...
Kit-chan: a bit odd you knowchiave_trust on December 18th, 2010 05:04 am (UTC)
The world is different now, but that doesn't mean that placing such subjective and blanket restrictions is right.
Kaitorukaitoru on December 18th, 2010 05:14 am (UTC)
I guess I'm a sad person with warped DNA

nivek01nivek01 on December 18th, 2010 06:18 am (UTC)
My take 1/2
What's "unjustifiably glorify or exaggerate"? or "excessively disrupting of social order"?

Times have changed. The people have not. If someone wants something, there are people who will just go out and take it, even though it's plainly obvious what will happen if they get caught. Banning material that contains gritty scenes isn't going to reduce crime. It'll just make it more original.

Also, while I agree that immortalizing rape or any other heinous crimes is bad, the fact of the matter is that things like that happen. Writing a book about how to rape someone, or telling stories where the protagonist is a serial rapist is not okay. But to completely eliminate that factor from media-and not just rape, mind you, but all forms of dark and disgusting crime-I believe is foolish. As I said earlier, in the real world, bad things happen to good people. A lot. So, if an author writes in his story, the main love interest being raped by the antagonist, that book would be banned? What if, instead of writing rape for the sake of it, the author was trying to show a contrast; While the protagonist would go about the act of sex with care and love, the antagonist takes what he wants, primally getting off on a woman. While limiting-key word, LIMITING- the sale of books, movies, pictures, etc., that have crime and such just for the sake of it isn't a bad idea, the move needs to be more comprehensive-the bill needs to recognize that some cases are the aforementioned glorification, and other times the author/artist just wants to use it as a plot device. The love interest refuses to make love with their previous lovers because she was sexually abused by their parent (something the protagonist could help them through). The main character is a heroine addict because they needed to sell drugs in order to keep there family safe and off the streets, and made a mistake (again, something they can overcome to make themselves stronger).

I'm concentrating on rape, if you haven't noticed, because that's the one actual example given. The bill itself seems very vague, and could easily hurt more then help.

I also feel I need to explain myself; I come from a family of conspiracy theorists, and while I'm probably the most level headed of the four of us, I still have a bad habit of biting at 'Big Brother' (though I myself hate the term) when something like this happens. And though it has nothing to do with my own country, and I don't read anything sexually explicit anymore, I'm afraid that many manga authors and artists who would normally not worry about this might try and keep a tighter hold on their own leashes, possibly degrading their own work.

I've actually found it quite comical, the way Tite Kubo draws practically every female in Bleach, and (as an IchiRuki fan) it helps provide a nice contrast to someone whom I consider the main love interest. In another manga I read, Katekyo Hitman Reborn, one of the current antagonists ( I refuse to call her a bad guy, because I'm positive at the end of the arc she, and many of her comrades, will be allies of the main character) has an disproportionate chest that seems to grow with each chapter (really, they do. They put Inoue's to shame, and make Rangiku proud). I honestly believe that both Kubo-sensei and Amano-sensei (whom I'm fairly positive is another woman, which is strange considering the many things she puts her female characters through) do this not for fanservice, but comic relief. When Ichigo is depressed because his hollow is going out of control or Rukia is no longer in his life, I take a (small) bit of pleasure out of seeing the motion lines around Inoue's breasts, because it's so unnatural. I would hate for this to impede that.
nivek01nivek01 on December 18th, 2010 06:19 am (UTC)
My take 2/2
I'm not just blowing hot air here-I've struggled, and am still struggling with, an addiction of the pornographic kind, costing my family hundreds of dollars in computer antispyware and memory wipes, over five major crashes. Though I'm now ashamed of the fact, I can say with all honesty I'm coming out of it (not out of the woods yet) with a respect for a woman's body. Completely removing the media where that kind of thing is exhibited is lulling future generations into a false sense of perfection. Parents talk to their teenage children about sex because they're afraid of what might happen in their child's ignorance. However, if said child has no idea what sex really entails, will they know exactly what they want? Why would parents need to explain to their children about such intimate and frankly embarrassing things if they have no fear of their children acting on their urges?

I admit, while I believe that last bit is very possible, it's a long shot. Especially considering that I'm sure there will be people who will find a way around this bill. In the 1920's, during the american great depression, and more importantly prohibition, bootleggers would bring alcohol from other countries to their wealthy customers, oftentimes distilling it themselves if they couldn't get anything from across the border. I believe the same thing will happen here. Though it will decrease, sexually explicit manga is still going to be made. It'll just be done in secret. Hentai manga will still be passed around school rooms when teachers aren't looking. The one difference being, sex ed wont concentrate so much on the disillusioning theories and other things about rape and the like, because this bill SHOULD be making sure that such material wouldn't be in their students hand. Imagine this with me for a moment; A generation of teens who are secretly enjoying such things to their hearts content, the one difference being they have no one to tell them no, that just because a girl orgasms doesn't mean she's enjoying it, or that you can kidnap someone and bring them to your safehouse, rape them, then expect them to ask for more. We really don't want a bunch of boys running around with that kind of misconception in their head...or worse, a bunch of girls.

This little triad of mine just came about from my personal feelings based on my own experiences and the experiences of people I know, and what little I know about the mind of the people that are trying to be protected by this bill. If I've misinterpreted what this bill is trying to accomplish, I apologize to debbiechan and deathlike for posting this comment that has been inferred from misinformation. If I've offended anyone with anything I've said, I'm sorry, really. These are my views, and I'm not so arrogant to think that this is what needs to happen, and if you have something to say that would prove me wrong (and it's not a rage filled rant about how naïve and stupid I am because of my age, which is 16) then please, do so. Again, I really don't want to be spreading misinformation or anything like that. (also, I'm not looking for pity, and I really don't want to hear anything about whatever I've said that has to deal with that. I've said what I have about myself because I want you to know that I'm not just repeating something I've heard on the radio or what my parents believe. I have this inherent fear of not being taken seriously.)

Thanks for the post!
oh gallant piglet,aizome on December 18th, 2010 06:28 am (UTC)
Re: My take 2/2
The thing is though, this ordinance does not effect what is already labeled as adult or hentai. That stuff will continue to be available to 18+ audiences. What's being targeted here is material that has thus far been available to general audiences, like the contents of Shounen Jump, for example.
Re: My take 2/2 - nivek01 on December 18th, 2010 06:37 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - aizome on December 18th, 2010 06:41 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - deathlike on December 18th, 2010 06:45 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - aizome on December 18th, 2010 06:59 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - nivek01 on December 18th, 2010 07:12 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - arcadiasilver on December 18th, 2010 07:34 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - aizome on December 18th, 2010 07:45 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - arcadiasilver on December 18th, 2010 07:46 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - aizome on December 18th, 2010 07:52 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - arcadiasilver on December 18th, 2010 08:07 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - aizome on December 18th, 2010 08:17 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - arcadiasilver on December 18th, 2010 08:26 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - aizome on December 18th, 2010 08:31 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - lovely_masoka on December 18th, 2010 08:43 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - arcadiasilver on December 18th, 2010 08:48 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - lovely_masoka on December 18th, 2010 08:49 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - hinodeh on December 18th, 2010 11:21 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - nivek01 on December 18th, 2010 07:15 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - deathlike on December 18th, 2010 07:23 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: My take 2/2 - ashurahime on December 19th, 2010 06:01 am (UTC) (Expand)
Super Nintendo Chalmers: Erza Knightwalker - Time to die bitchstrawberries_85 on December 18th, 2010 06:24 am (UTC)
This guy...why is he allowed to hold a position of power? >_>
Brad C: thanatos - shinedeathlike on December 18th, 2010 06:43 am (UTC)
Uh citizens of Japan voted for him...
(no subject) - strawberries_85 on December 18th, 2010 11:05 am (UTC) (Expand)
reynardine on December 18th, 2010 10:30 am (UTC)
This guy really embodies the worst about Japanese politicians, doesn't he? And to think he's managed to stay in this office for more than 10 years, not to mention his previous position in the Diet.

He has to be crafty to have managed to maintain a political career for so long.
Brad C: hypnos - nemurudeathlike on December 18th, 2010 01:33 pm (UTC)
He has to be crafty to have managed to maintain a political career for so long.

He's just batshit crazy... I haven't stopped loling since...
(no subject) - marajade116 on December 19th, 2010 01:30 am (UTC) (Expand)
sleepwalker: wtfsleepwalkerrrr on December 18th, 2010 02:39 pm (UTC)
Umm can someone clarify the dumb, what does this change actually ? Some sick stuff like "the Rapeman" being banned ?
nahlackasexical on December 18th, 2010 09:07 pm (UTC)
...I just looked that up and WHOA. O.O
Lizzy, a harmless lecher and pyromaniac: Believe it bitch!wicked_liz on December 18th, 2010 10:45 pm (UTC)
Sadly, it's not surprising that they're now planning on restrictions at the "source" - The art itself.

In the U.S. possession of the material referenced in this Bill is already criminalized in some States.

Many international courts already have similar bills on their tables.

We're not supposed to read what we want, draw what we want and encourage the exposing of corporate and government secrets. By painting US with the broad brush of PERVERTS and SAD PEOPLE WITH WARPED DNA they manage to win the vote of members of the public who don't necessarily care by using FEAR. The great motivator.

Protectionism doesn't actually protect anyone - take away all the porn/drugs/alcohol/cigarettes and THE KIDS WILL STILL BE AS FUCKED UP AS THEIR PREDECESSORS.
Lizzy, a harmless lecher and pyromaniac: Believe it bitch!wicked_liz on December 18th, 2010 10:59 pm (UTC)
(Deleted comment)
(Anonymous) on December 19th, 2010 12:31 pm (UTC)
Oh God, thank you... I couldn't help but to feel a little unesy about how almost everyone here are like: "Hey, there is a lot of fucked up shit in this world, so why ban it from our media/comics/ect"?.

Expect the fact that those fucked up shit are out there in the real world doesn't justify exposing them to the general public (AKA: minors). It doesn't really matter if minors can find it elsewhere, that's their issue, and it shouldn't be treated as an exuse to turn a complete blind to those kind of stuff.

I'm not saying I necessarily suport this rule, I just don't want stuff like rape and child porn to be "normilized" or "romanticized". You want to write about those stuff? just pick a differant audience. As simple as that.
(no subject) - deathlike on December 19th, 2010 01:05 pm (UTC) (Expand)
Kim!: Mushroom Mushroomspartydragon on December 21st, 2010 06:37 pm (UTC)