Tokyo Bill may ban fanservice.

[Etoh*the*Greato]

The street was empty.

It was not often empty as this was a living city, bursting with the vitality of its inhabitants. And yet, today it was empty. A dust swirled down the blacktop and somewhere in the background a crosswalk sang its juvenile tune.

Down the avenue walked two men from each end, coming to a rest where it intersected with another rue. To the southern end Kousuke Sugawara (Or Sugawara Kousuke, if you like) wandered nervously, clutching his collection of doujinshi close to his chest. He felt it necessary to give himself the look of a great hero so he had tied the casing of a love pillow to his neck as a cape. In his free hand he brandished a replica bearing a close resemblance to the blades carried by his own heroes in his favorite shows.

Opposite of Sugawara (Or Kousuke, if you prefer) strode a man of uncommon height. His poncho fluttered in the wind like a knight's tabbard. His own hand bore a sheathed katana ably - black polished wood climbing to the hilt of a revolver. Tokyo Bill had arrived and it was time to call Kousuke out.

"Boy, I know what you done. You know it, too. So does everyone. Your actions are a stain on this town, and I plan on mopping up."

Click - Bill's thumb pushed the sword free of scabbard and his hand took it drawing it out with one long fluid motion.

"You knew the rules. You knew the risk."

[Yamamaya]

A few tacky neon signs were the only thing that illuminated the dark alley. A man wearing a neko hat was standing by the corner, waiting for business. Toshiro Katsurgai strolled up to the man. After exchanging a few brief words, he handed him 5,000 yen. The man slipped the doujinshi into the boy's arm.

He whispered into the lad's ear, "Whatever you do, stay clear of Tokyo Bill." Toshiro simply chuckled and walked away. He stared at the Higurashi no naku koro ni doujinshi in his hand. He stroked its cover. "Ohh Rika how I adore you." Suddenly, a figure fell from the sky! Tokyo Bill's poncho flapped out before him as he landed smoothly on the ground directly in front of Toshiro. Toshiro looked up in fear as Tokyo Bill straightened his posture. At 6 feet tall, he towered over the tiny Toshiro. He turned his head to spit some gum into a wrapper. He then slipped the wrapper into his pocket.
"Say son, is that a Higurashi doujinshi I see in your hand?" His voice was firm and lyrical.

"No sir, I didn't buy anything like.. Hey!" Tokyo Bill ripped the doujinshi from Toshiro's hand. With his other hand he grabbed Toshiro's collar.

"Listen here son. I'm just looking out for what's best for ya, ya hear! This here doujinshi is too much for your young mind to take! You got some sexual maturing to do! From the looks of yous, you're about 15! When you turn 18, give me a call and I'll return this to you. Now get your behind home before I call your mother, who is a very beautiful woman by the way!" Tokyo Bill dropped Toshiro to the ground and ran off into the sunset to fight crime and fanservice the Japanese Western way!

[crusader88]

Umm... as far as the actual bill for Tokyo...

Though I can sometimes seem as perverse as my avatar, I think this bill's a good idea. The problem with the operation of all these censorship laws is usually their demand for certain definite criteria; I believe someone on the first page used the example of slapping an R rating on all movies with a bikini. Ironically, I think Yamamaya identified the solution when he said,

I also find the language used in the bill to be dangerous. How do you even define "health[y] [development] of... youth[s]" without forcing your own morals and opinions upon others?

As Christians, we should look to the natural law tradition which began with Aristotle and which St. Thomas Aquinas elaborated in the light of the Faith. The basic principle is, form implies function. Christian morals conform to natural law because they lead us to act in accordance with the God-given purpose evident in our bodies and in human nature. The morals encouraged by governments which seek to operate in harmony with natural law are thus natural and universal, rather than personal and particular.

Naturally, there are way too many factors that could lead to anime or manga stunting the "healthy development of youths" to pin the corruption down to a few things, as the Tokyo bill may be doing. Ideally there should be more leeway, more of an "I know it when I see it" standard of decency, but at least the bill shows the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly is concerned about the downside of anime and manga. Even if a lot of series are affected, my hunch is a lot more bad than good will be omitted. We're not going to get a perfect bill in a fallen world, ergo I'm all for it.

By the way, I liked Lochaber Axe's Tokyo Bill the best!

[Yamamaya]

It's not up to the government to tell us what to watch or listen to. That's up to people's own discretion.

Saying any more will drag this thread into political territory.

[Nate]

I think this bill's a good idea.

You think banning literally 90%]The problem with the operation of all these censorship laws is usually their demand for certain definite criteria[/QUOTE]
Being vague in a bill is BAD. I really, honestly fail to see how making things less definite is a solution.

at least the bill shows the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly is concerned about the downside of anime and manga.

That is so far from the truth I can't even say the truth without starting a political debate. Let's just say they're only doing it because the UN has been bugging them. The Assembly probably just slapped together the bill, which will be turned down (this is the fourth time they've tried to introduce this bill) just so they can say "See? We're trying but mean ol' democracy and the will of the majority is making it impossible! Oh well!"

Even if a lot of series are affected, my hunch is a lot more bad than good will be omitted.

If you want literally every anime to be exactly like...you know what? I can't think of a single anime that wouldn't be banned under this bill. My Neighbor Totoro, Snow Fairy Sugar, Pokemon, Kiki's Delivery Service, Sailor Moon, Hamtaro, Bottle Fairy...every single one of those titles would be banned under the bill. The ONLY anime I can think of that wouldn't be banned is Jagainu-kun (Dogtato). And actually due to the language of the bill even THAT could be banned.

We're not going to get a perfect bill in a fallen world, ergo I'm all for it.

So how will you feel if Tokyo decides that Christianity is detrimental to the healthy development of youth and decides to ban it? Will you still support the bill then?

That just seems silly to me to say "Well, this is a terrible idea, but it's an idea so let's do it!"

[Sheol777]

I am with Nate on this one. The bill is worded very poorly. I understand what they were going for, but they kind of threw the baby out with the bathwater (Tokyo Bill did) on this one.

Who is to make the call on what violates the bill or what doesn't? Anyhow, this is not the first time something like this was brought up.....it won't be the last, and I see nothing coming out of this.

I does however light up message boards with debate. So thank you Japan for enriching internet discussion!

[Yamamaya]

You think banning literally 90% of anime, including My Neighbor Totoro, Fruits Basket, and Doraemon is a good idea? Please explain how. Because you DO realize under the language of the bill, those titles I said would be banned, right?

Being vague in a bill is BAD. I really, honestly fail to see how making things less definite is a solution.

That is so far from the truth I can't even say the truth without starting a political debate. Let's just say they're only doing it because the UN has been bugging them. The Assembly probably just slapped together the bill, which will be turned down (this is the fourth time they've tried to introduce this bill) just so they can say "See? We're trying but mean ol' democracy and the will of the majority is making it impossible! Oh well!"

If you want literally every anime to be exactly like...you know what? I can't think of a single anime that wouldn't be banned under this bill. My Neighbor Totoro, Snow Fairy Sugar, Pokemon, Kiki's Delivery Service, Sailor Moon, Hamtaro, Bottle Fairy...every single one of those titles would be banned under the bill. The ONLY anime I can think of that wouldn't be banned is Jagainu-kun (Dogtato). And actually due to the language of the bill even THAT could be banned.

So how will you feel if Tokyo decides that Christianity is detrimental to the healthy development of youth and decides to ban it? Will you still support the bill then?

That just seems silly to me to say "Well, this is a terrible idea, but it's an idea so let's do it!"

I will let the pic speak for itself

[ich1990]

It was nearly daylight as Cray Pack hurried up the subway steps towards his shop. All of the unfamiliar streets and crosswalks had confused him at first, but after two weeks of repetition, his feet had memorized the path from his apartment. Oblivious to his surroundings, Pack's mind was sharp and focused, like it always was in the early morning, and mentally he went through his checklist again.

Today, he would open his shop for the first time, and he couldn't afford to forget anything important. A memory of his first sale back in P'och'on flitted through his head, taunting. The customer had brought in a 50,000 Won note to buy a comic, (what was it, The Ravages of Time?) and he had forgotten to fill his register with change. Unable to give the remainder of the note back, he had to turn the customer away.

The memory of this failure still burned bright, and he was not going to repeat it. He rounded a corner and his humble shop came into view. Looking at it, with the sunlight sending a beam between a pair of skyscrapers to bless it, Pack's heart swelled. He looked at his watch. One hour until the grand opening. Plenty of time. Or so he thought.

As soon as he crossed the threshold, he knew something was wrong. There was a stench of oil or something similar, rolling out from the shop. It was pungent enough to cut through even the harsh, mechanical scent of the city around him. Flicking on the light, he saw someone, no something sitting behind the counter. It looked like a character out of The Good, The Bad, and the Weird, only bigger, weirder, and meaner.

It sat smoking, with a thick plume hovering above its large brimmed hat. Seven spent cigarettes where crushed in a neat line along the counter. This thing had been waiting for him for a while. A voice like the rumble of an earthquake, mixed with a faint rasping of steel on steel moved out to meet him as he stood, just inside the doorstep.

“I have been waiting a long time to meet you Cray Pack. And I don't like to wait.”

“Well, I am sorry, sir, but the business isn't open just yet. Perhaps you could come by again in an hour or so--”

“You're right, I've come to talk business.” The rumble drowned Cray's voice and made the nearby windows rattle in protest. Before the clamor had even had a chance to stop echoing off from the skyscrapers outside, the man –and it was a man, Cray knew that beyond a shadow of a doubt-- slapped a photograph on the counter. He spun it clockwise, until it faced him. It was a picture of a Korean groom at a wedding ceremony. The groom was kissing a... pillow? It was wrapped in a wedding dress, but it was definitely a pillow. The Man across the counter kept his head tilted forward, hat covering his the upper half of his face. Cray's eyes fixed upon the wide mouth beneath the brim; it was still clutching a half spent Marlboro.

“You've seen this man before.” It wasn't a question. “His name's Lee Jin-gyu and you ruined his life fifteen years ago, when you sold him your corrupting manwha. You started the downward spiral that turned him into what he is now.”

Cray started backing towards the door, obeying some deep survival instinct, but froze when the man stood up. He had a katana at his side, with a hilt made out of what looked like an old six-shooter. The Man drew it without flourish and slung the blade over his shoulder. The katana's hilt boomed and a poof of feathers erupted to Cray's right. A dakimakura, set up on display, had taken the bullet.

The man spoke again, making Cray's hair stand on end. “Why did you come to Tokyo? You get tired of corrupting the Korean youth? Think you would ruin some Japanese boys now?” With every question He loomed closer, although Cray didn't perceive him taking any steps.

“Cray, I am going to give you a chance to get out of Tokyo. I don't give many chances, so think of yourself as lucky.” The man was close enough that Cray could smell the cigarette smoke now. “I want you to go home and rethink your life. If you come back to peddle more of your corrupting stuff,” he took aim and shot a poster for emphasis, “you would be a fool. And, as uh' buddy of mine would say: 'I pity the fool'.”

Cray backed out. He thought about turning around and running, but decided he would rather not turn his back to Him. The Man turned momentarily to pick up an empty gas can, then followed Cray out the door. He let a cigarette drop out of his mouth, then crushed it with a boot as soon as it hit the ground. With his free hand he lit his lighter and tossed it behind him, an explosion followed, silhouetting Him in fire.

Cray bolted, but a raspy tremor seemed to run along the ground behind him, catching up to him in a moment. It whispered in his ear as it passed, “My name is Tokyo Bill. Don't you ever forget it.”

Cray never did.

[goldenspines]

I am amused by the fact that this thread is half serious and half Goof Off material. Yet, both sides are coexisting happily (sort of).

You all continue to amaze me.

[Nate]

Anyhow, this is not the first time something like this was brought up.....it won't be the last, and I see nothing coming out of this.

Right, I don't even know why ANN brought it up in the first place. Like I said, this is the fourth such bill to be introduced, the others never even made far enough to get voted on, and this one probably won't either. If we looked at every bill that ever got written, there's ones a lot worse than this, and none of those ever make it to the voting process. Like that one bill introduced by that insane South Carolina politician to ban US dollars in the state and use only gold and silver. And I'm sure that's not even the most bizarre and crazy one.

[crusader88]

Since the (new) 2nd clause of the section 3 concerns depictions of or what seem to be depictions of sexual activity, I think 90% is too high a guess even for anime. NONETHELESS: the series Nate listed are fine in most aspects (I'm really only familiar with Fruits Basket, Sailor Moon, and Hamtaro--I must have missed the explicit Hamtaro episode). I admit it--many of the series I like are a lot worse than those (DearS, My Wife is a High School Girl, etc., though I think Maria-sama ga Miteru would still pass muster somehow or other). But just because a series is good overall doesn't mean it doesn't have elements that might have a bad effect on a young person's malleable mind. To finish my logic, I won't deny that some enjoyable series may have a bad effect on most people of any age, sometimes including you and me. Even if I take myself to be more mature and unimpressionable so that I can enjoy a series without detriment, even if I am confident that I can responsibly recommended it to friends, I can still acknowledge that if no one saw it, or that it could only be seen with the effort and inconvenience of evading the law, society at-large might be better off.

These series may all seem perfectly legitimate, but I believe that the destruction of traditional mores in the modern age is due to an entire phalanx of factors, and more explicit sexuality, which has seeped into even many of the more innocent animes, is one of them. We should be open to the government regulation of potentially unhealthy influences, and recall that unlimited freedom of media and the arts, whatever its effect on the body, was thought up during the anti-Christian Enlightenment. To frame Christianity as harmful for the youth, one would need to completely invert the meaning of language and ignore nature, but it's more to the point and pithy to say: Some popular media... are detrimental to the healthy development of youth... if we do not ban or regulate them... it will be detrimental to the healthy development of youth.

My apologies for not seeing into the alterior motives behind this bill, but ashamed as I am to say it, even the UN is right some of the time.

And of course democracy isn't always right; if the bill fails, I encourage them to try it a fifth time. It is past midnight here, so I'll have to come to the defense of that South Carolina politician some other time.

[Bobtheduck]

Any literature or film which might be thought to constitute a depiction of sexual activity involving or apparently involving a person under 18, someone dressed in a manner reminiscent of an under-18, or who speaks like an under-18, may not in Tokyo be viewed by or sold or distributed to any young person.

But sexual depictions of minors MAY be sold to adults... And they think this is going to SOLVE problems in Japan? Making it so ONLY the Lolicons can see this stuff? Japan never ceases to amaze and scare me.

[Nate]

Since the (new) 2nd clause of the section 3 concerns depictions of or what seem to be depictions of sexual activity, I think 90% is too high a guess even for anime.

No, it isn't. Taken directly from the bill:

"Any literature or film which might be thought to constitute a depiction of sexual activity involving or apparently involving a person under 18, someone dressed in a manner reminiscent of an under-18, or who speaks like an under-18"

For example, what constitutes sexual activity? Is it nudity? If so, Fruits Basket is banned, the Sohmas are naked after they transform back to human form. Is it lesbians? Well, Sailor Moon is banned now too. Is it kissing? Hamtaro is gone.

That's the problem. The bill does NOT define "sexual activity." Kissing can be defined as sexual activity if you want. Nudity can be defined as upsetting the healthy growth of children, thus resulting in My Neighbor Totoro and Fruits Basket being banned, EVEN IF they don't have explicit nudity. It could just be "These characters are naked, and even though you can't see anything, the audience could imagine the details which would be harmful to healthy sexual development in children, therefore it is banned."

You can't say I'm wrong either because the language of the bill doesn't explain what it is. This is why I said vague is bad]But just because a series is good overall doesn't mean it doesn't have elements that might have a bad effect on a young person's malleable mind.[/QUOTE]
That's not your call to make. Maybe it is for your own children, but not the children of others. That's why there's a simple solution: don't let your children watch it!

I can still acknowledge that if no one saw it, or that it could only be seen with the effort and inconvenience of evading the law, society at-large might be better off.

I'm not trying to personally insult you. And I'm not trying to Godwin or anything. But this logic sounds a lot like how China controls its citizens through the government, by saying things like "This show will harm China's society and for the good of all people, we must ban it." Therefore I cannot agree with your statement at all, because who decides what's harmful? In China, they've said that Christianity is harmful and society is better off to ban it, so they have. I'm sure you will agree that China banning Christianity is bad, yet they use the exact same logic in banning it that you just stated.

Do you see the problem here?

These series may all seem perfectly legitimate, but I believe that the destruction of traditional mores in the modern age is due to an entire phalanx of factors, and more explicit sexuality, which has seeped into even many of the more innocent animes, is one of them.

Correlation does not imply causation. If the sun rises after the rooster crows, it doesn't mean that the rooster crowing caused the sun to rise.

We should be open to the government regulation of potentially unhealthy influences, and recall that unlimited freedom of media and the arts, whatever its effect on the body, was thought up during the anti-Christian Enlightenment.

The problem is who decides what is unhealthy? Some people feel that modern medicine is unhealthy. Should the government ban medicine and surgery?

I also don't agree with your statement about the freedom of media and arts, simply because of what the First Amendment of the United States Constitution states. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech. . . " That second part is really what I wanted to draw attention to, but I posted the whole thing anyway.

To frame Christianity as harmful for the youth, one would need to completely invert the meaning of language and ignore nature

And who's to say they wouldn't do that? If they're already failing to describe what "harmful" even means, or even what it entails, then they certainly would be willing to do that I'm sure.

Remember, if nothing else they could say that Christianity is a foreign gaijin religion that teaches children to ignore the cultural heritage of their country by not going to Shinto shrines, etc. and therefore it is harmful to Japan's well-being. The bill's language is vague enough to allow for just that.

Some popular media... are detrimental to the healthy development of youth... if we do not ban or regulate them... it will be detrimental to the healthy development of youth.

And again, who determines this? And why do they think they know what's better for children than their own parents? I thought we were supposed to be AGAINST the government interfering or commandeering the job of the parents.

even the UN is right some of the time.

A stopped clock is right some of the time too, but I'm not going to rely on it to tell time.

And of course democracy isn't always right

I actually completely agree with this. Though probably not in the same way you do, but still.

if the bill fails, I encourage them to try it a fifth time.

Because why should the taxpayers be allowed to keep their money? Let's waste it on a bill that's already failed four times! They'd just spend it on crap like food and shelter anyway.

It is past midnight here, so I'll have to come to the defense of that South Carolina politician some other time.

Don't bother; his position is indefensible. Yes, I know, it was because he thinks paper money is becoming worthless and gold and silver have inherent value and thus if the US economy collapses they would still have a strong economy in their state. His bill fails to recognize that South Carolina would need to build about fifty billion exchange stations for anyone passing through South Carolina and that they would have to have special unique vending machines created solely for their state (and vending companies won't do this for free, you know!) and that's not even scratching the surface of how expensive implementing these changes would be, nor even how much MORE than what I mentioned would have to be done, thus making the bill ridiculous.

Also gold and silver has no more inherent value than paper does. You can't eat it. You can't live in it. It's only got "value" because human beings like shiny pretty things. It's no more valuable than dirt honestly.

[Yamamaya]

Since the (new) 2nd clause of the section 3 concerns depictions of or what seem to be depictions of sexual activity, I think 90%]Fruits Basket[/I], Sailor Moon, and Hamtaro--I must have missed the explicit Hamtaro episode). I admit it--many of the series I like are a lot worse than those (DearS, My Wife is a High School Girl, etc., though I think Maria-sama ga Miteru would still pass muster somehow or other). But just because a series is good overall doesn't mean it doesn't have elements that might have a bad effect on a young person's malleable mind. To finish my logic, I won't deny that some enjoyable series may have a bad effect on most people of any age, sometimes including you and me. Even if I take myself to be more mature and unimpressionable so that I can enjoy a series without detriment, even if I am confident that I can responsibly recommended it to friends, I can still acknowledge that if no one saw it, or that it could only be seen with the effort and inconvenience of evading the law, society at-large might be better off.

These series may all seem perfectly legitimate, but I believe that the destruction of traditional mores in the modern age is due to an entire phalanx of factors, and more explicit sexuality, which has seeped into even many of the more innocent animes, is one of them. We should be open to the government regulation of potentially unhealthy influences, and recall that unlimited freedom of media and the arts, whatever its effect on the body, was thought up during the anti-Christian Enlightenment. To frame Christianity as harmful for the youth, one would need to completely invert the meaning of language and ignore nature, but it's more to the point and pithy to say: Some popular media... are detrimental to the healthy development of youth... if we do not ban or regulate them... it will be detrimental to the healthy development of youth.

My apologies for not seeing into the alterior motives behind this bill, but ashamed as I am to say it, even the UN is right some of the time.

And of course democracy isn't always right; if the bill fails, I encourage them to try it a fifth time. It is past midnight here, so I'll have to come to the defense of that South Carolina politician some other time.

Because obviously we should let the government determine what is healthy and unhealthy for us to hear, watch, and see. There's something called Freedom of Speech and Expression in the states. If you allow the government to start censoring "unhealthy things" then they can start censoring anything they don't like. That sir is the makings of a dictatorship.

I'd ask you to prove that "some popular media is detremental to youth." That's such a broad concept that it is almost impossible to prove. Also it's the government's job to regulate what we do with our bodies and minds now is it? That's up to our own conscience.

The Enlightment was merely an intellectual movement which is the bedrock of much of modern thinking. Yes it was pro Deist but to label it as only an "anti Christian thinking" is absolutely ludicrous.

Keep in mind the Christians did a lot of illogical things prior to the Enlightment, like get into wars with each other over theological differences.

Also that SC politician needs to learn a lil bit about the effects of the gold standard on the US economy following the crash of 1929.

[Radical Dreamer]

It is past midnight here, so I'll have to come to the defense of that South Carolina politician some other time.

I'd really rather you didn't. This thread is skirting very close to politics as it is. I don't want an unnecessary debate springing up if it doesn't need to. And of all things to argue about, that particular bill is just not worth it.

That being said, feel free to carry on via PM if you prefer.

[Nate]

Corrie you posted like right after I did and I'm sorry I hope I didn't make it too political when I talked about the bill but if he responds to it I will do it in PM okay? ._.

[Yamamaya]

U guys post too fast. I apologize Corrie.

Let us debate instead if Corrie should legally change her name to Tokyo Jane, Tokyo Bill's sister!

[Radical Dreamer]

XD It's cool guys, I hadn't seen either of your posts before I posted my own (they sort of showed up at the same time, just after I posted), so it's fine. XD But yeah, PM will be fine after this. XD

[blkmage]

The most dangerous effects of these sorts of laws that aren't well-defined have are never on existing works or accessibility to works but the precedent it sets and the chilling effect that it has on new works, regardless of the intent. That said, there are plenty of existing works to prove as examples of how poorly defined the bill is.

[crusader88]

Oh ho ho! Posh, I was just joking about the SC guy! I thank you all for the responses, and with the appearance of Radical Dreamer I take a parting bow.

[goldenspines]

Oh ho ho! Posh, I was just joking about the SC guy! I thank you all for the responses, and with the appearance of Radical Dreamer I take a parting bow.

Aww, but you didn't even contribute to the fanfics yet. D:

*is kidding*

[ich1990]

Accidental post.


EDIT:
http://www.christiananime.net/showthread.php?t=52121

[Bobtheduck]

This is an outrage! Why do people treat Tokyo Bill so badly? Fanservice killed his father!

[Roy Mustang]

Right, I don't even know why ANN brought it up in the first place.

Because now a days ANN will post anything close to anime as they can. I would go as far and say they kind of wanted to stir the pot, if you will, so they could get their name out there as much as they can as an anime news site.


Also, from one Japan/Anime site they have reported this,

Some breathing room: Tokyo anti-loli law vote postponed

Whew. It seems that cooler heads have prevailed regarding Japan's disturbingly general anti-loli legislative proposals, as the scheduled vote has been delayed to facilitate further deliberation on the issue. Maybe now that they have a little more time to think about it, supporters of the bill might notice that what amounts to a blanket ban on characters that random people think look "underage" doesn't exactly foster creative endeavor.

And it was worse than we originally thought. The law was to be applied to pretty much every form of 2-D media, including games, anime and manga, not just adult material. No wonder so many mangaka and publishers came out to voice their opposition to the measure.

Doubtless these cultural heavyweights had some influence on the decision to delay the vote to June. Even some Japanese politicians didn't quite appreciate their peers working the "moral panic" angle.

That doesn't mean we should get complacent, though. The fight to maintain artistic freedom is a neverending one.

[color="Red"][font="Book Antiqua"]Col. Roy Mustang[/font][/color]

[Nate]

Because now a days ANN will post anything close to anime as they can. I would go as far and say they kind of wanted to stir the pot, if you will, so they could get their name out there as much as they can as an anime news site.

Yeah, you're probably right. Sounds like something they'd do. That's why I don't really go there.

That doesn't mean we should get complacent, though. The fight to maintain artistic freedom is a neverending one.

They really put that in their article. Argh. Look I'm against this kind of bill as much as they are but the point is, we're not "fighting to maintain artistic freedom" by posting angry rants on message boards. The fact of the matter is we can't do anything about these bills because we don't live in Japan. Japan doesn't care what a bunch of white Americans think about their laws, so even if everyone on ANN was all "Hey let's send emails to Japan's legislators telling them this law is dumb!" they wouldn't pay any attention. We don't live in Japan, we're not Japanese, and quite simply, our opinion doesn't mean anything to them.

But that's okay, they can go on thinking that their posting "FREEDOM OF SPEECH" on an internet website completely saved Japan from this bill. Doesn't hurt anyone, so no reason to ban it.

[Rewin]

One of the biggest problems I saw in the bill was that it bans the distribution and lending of the anime/manga to minors rather than just the sale. That means under law the parents would not be allowed to buy them for their own children, thus taking power away from the parents. This bill is in essence saying that the parents don't know what is good for their own children and the government knows best, which is a very dangerous road for a government to take.

[bkilbour]

So I keep hearing that the bill is not specific enough. I also keep hearing about artistic expression - despite the valid desires for parents to protect their children. Perhaps the japanese government was being far too polite in their wording.

So how about this?
"We don't want our kids seeing panty shots, we don't think it's right for them to be indocrinated into homosexuality, we hate the destruction of any semblance of innocence through the sexualization of children, and we will not tolerate the constant barrage of perversion that is being injected into young minds, leading into the malconception of women in society and the spread of social plagues, not the least of which being hentai and partner abuse. If this happens to be in any certain anime, then we will not allow that child to view it without their parents consent - and here's hoping that their parents are not sick enough to allow it."

I would vote for that bill in a heartbeat. As it is, I have become selective in the anime I watch simply because of the perversion in so much of it.

[AnimeGirl]

One of the biggest problems I saw in the bill was that it bans the distribution and lending of the anime/manga to minors rather than just the sale. That means under law the parents would not be allowed to buy them for their own children, thus taking power away from the parents. This bill is in essence saying that the parents don't know what is good for their own children and the government knows best, which is a very dangerous road for a government to take.

Wait, are you serious? I thought it was just banning fanservice! Though I do not agree with it, it is the artists' rights to draw that if they want. 'Cause you know what they say "if you give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile!"
Now this...this is crazier!

[Rewin]

From the Bill: Any literature or film which might be thought to constitute a depiction of sexual activity involving or apparently involving a person under 18, someone dressed in a manner reminiscent of an under-18, or who speaks like an under-18, may not in Tokyo be viewed by or sold or distributed to any young person.

Section 3: Restriction of the Sale of Unhealthy Literature

[SIZE="5"][A ban on sales, lending or distribution to, or viewing by, minors in the Tokyo area would cover:][/SIZE]
1. Items which stimulate sexual emotions, foster cruelty, encourage suicide or promote crime, or otherwise impede the healthy growth of youth. [This clause is identical to current legislation]

2. Items which through age, clothing, accessories, school year, setting, other peoples ages, or voice, seems reminiscent of a person who might be recognised as an under-18 (hereafter called a a fictional minor) engaged in, or appearing to be engaged in, sexual activity or activity resembling sexual activity, or which impede the development of healthy sexual faculties in youths, or which might be feared to obstruct the healthy development of youths.

There it is

[Nate]

I also keep hearing about artistic expression - despite the valid desires for parents to protect their children.

"Protect the children!" is never, never, never, never, never, never, NEVER a valid reason for censorship. Never.

There are other options for parents. Again, it baffles me how people can cry "The government shouldn't take the job of the parents!" but then support a bill that--guess what--takes the job of the parents. It's hypocrisy plain and simple, or at best a double-standard.

There's ways to protect children other than censorship or laws. Especially when those laws can present a serious problem and actually do more harm than good. When you get into things like fake IDs, or vengeful store clerks...imagine if someone was angry with their job, and purposely sold a hentai manga to a 13 year old to get the manager of the store in trouble. Now do you see why these laws are a bad idea?

I would vote for that bill in a heartbeat.

I would not vote for that bill in a heartbeat and would greatly oppose it. One, because it projects a negative social stigma on those things. The tone is all "Yeah you can put this stuff in your works if you WANT but if you DO you are a horrible evil person and you hate children."

Two, it still does not cover the problems I stated above, where a kid with a fake ID or a disgruntled worker could cause an innocent person to be charged with a crime.

Three, it's a largely pointless law. It wouldn't really resolve anything, since kids will find a way to get the stuff anyway...and it isn't the fault of the stores or distribution centers (which is who would be charged under the law).

Fourth, what Rewin said, basically.