Yamamaya wrote:may not in Tokyo be viewed by or sold or distributed to any young person.
1. Items which. . . encourage suicide or promote crime
otherwise impede the healthy growth of youth.
Etoh*the*Greato (post: 1381233) wrote:Who is this Tokyo Bill and why does he have such pull in Japan?
Etoh*the*Greato (post: 1381233) wrote:Who is this Tokyo Bill and why does he have such pull in Japan?
The way I interpreted it was that they don't want KIDS seeing this stuff. They can't stop them from MAKING it. It's kind of like how you can't sell M-rated games to minors.
Fish and Chips wrote:I find it hilarious that certain groups on the Internet are up in arms about the possibility of having their fetishes banned.
Nette wrote:Also, encouraging/glorifying suicide is impeding the healthy growth of youth, wouldn't you say?
MD wrote:It's vague enough that it could technically be applied to lots of shonen and shojo titles as well, pretty much anything that has even a hint of nudity or suggestive situations.
Allow me to clarify. I don't actually think the bill is going to work like that. I read all the same names you did. It's just that in various corners of the Internet I frequent, people, either misinterpreting the article or having the article misinterpreted for them, are blowing a fuse over this. Whether the bill has anything or nothing to do with sexualized mass media, the fact that people think it does and immediately complain inspires a sort of dark humor in me. That was the purpose of my post.Nate (post: 1381271) wrote:People like Yashuhiro Nightow (the guy who did Trigun) are totally against this so I mean this is pretty good evidence that it's not "disgusting perverts who worry about fetishes being banned."
Make it happen Internet.Nate (post: 1381271) wrote:Okay, admission time. I also read the thread title as "Tokyo Bill" being an actual person. This further proves Tokyo Bill must be a manga character immediately.
Fish and Chips (post: 1381293) wrote:Allow me to clarify. I don't actually think the bill is going to work like that. I read all the same names you did. It's just that in various corners of the Internet I frequent, people, either misinterpreting the article or having the article misinterpreted for them, are blowing a fuse over this. Whether the bill has anything or nothing to do with sexualized mass media, the fact that people think it does and immediately complain inspires a sort of dark humor in me. That was the purpose of my post.
For example, the first place I found talking about this was basically a cliff notes version of the actual article, including mentioning in passing several Mangaka standing against it, the only one of which actually named was Ken Akamatsu, which flavored most of the proceeding whining and comparisons to Australia. See what I'm batting at?Make it happen Internet.
I know you're reading this.
This already happens in America, actually. Not bikinis, necessarily, but there is an existing hierarchy of content descriptors for ratings board, with some credentials being judged much more harshly than others.Yamamaya (post: 1381313) wrote:The problem with this is Hikari is that it's not like a rating system. It simply declares one type of content to be worse than all others. It would be like if every time someone was in a bikini in a movie, it would get an R rating automatically.
The smoke detector went off calmly in the silence of the cramped space.Etoh*the*Greato (post: 1381445) wrote:LADIES AND MENTLEGEN. I will, this day, forthwith, (after work), deign to design Tokyo Bill and all of his love of Justice and not-selling-stuff-to-minors-ness.
Await.
Return to Anime and Anime Reviews
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 146 guests