EarthBoundGiygas said:
boradis said:
Yes that legislation absolutely must be defeated. But the manga/anime/game industries need to change.
And personally I think they should outlaw the pedophilia stuff entirely.
Some of the stuff actually makes the anime more interesting and or funnier, like Roshi and Oolong, Jiraiya, and Zorc.
Yes it does make it funnier, and I would have no problem with any of those characters or their behavior in material entirely intended for an older audience. Roshi, Oolong and Jiraiya are all pretty harmless caricatures of dirty old men and in the cases of the literary inspirations for Jiraiya (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiraiya) and Oolong (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhu_Bajie) it's fitting. However it's one thing for a cartoon character to go goggle-eyed at a pretty girl and want to kiss or kidnap her ... it's something else when they're sniffing her underwear. But they are pretty mild, as I said.
I actually have less of a problem with Zorc since I don't have a problem with nudism if it's a culture-wide practice, and kids have to be near puberty before that stuff even begins to register as unusual. So in a way, his dick is kind of like when Hinata has lions on her hands.
I'm actually more upset at the "fanservice" present in the stuff that's intended for kids. It bugs me that clearly pubescent girls are always flashing their panties. Aside from giving the older perverts what they want, it also validates it as a cultural norm for the boys and girls in the audience. A message of "Pinching, grabbing or spying on young girls is funny to boys and harmless to girls" is not true and not healthy.
EarthBoundGiygas said:
That made those shows hilarious in a more sexual orientated way. But does it mean that its wrong?
Sexuality is not a bad thing, and in the abstract it's not traumatizing to children. My problem is primarily with the pedophilia angle.
EarthBoundGiygas said:
But games like Touhou were every character is almost if not "loli" like are amazing, sure they have some "sexual" themes to it. But does it mean its wrong? no.
By your definition it features sexualized pubescent girls: "Loli" from "Lolita." If you think there's nothing bothersome about that then Chris Hanson would like you to have a seat over there.
EarthBoundGiygas said:
Children sometimes need to be exposed to these kinds of things in moderation.
No, they don't. We're not talking about sexuality between two consenting adults, and if we were I'd agree with you wholeheartedly. What we're talking about in this case, and in the other fanservice cases I'm talking about, is adults fetishizing children.
No it's not molestation, but it certainly creates a threatening environment for kids during a period when they are particularly insecure.
EarthBoundGiygas said:
It may sometimes pose a negative influence, but on the other hand, it is good to have children not too naive.
"Alright class, today we have a guest who's going to teach you about pedophiles. Suzie, Nancy and Claire? Would you please go to the girl's bathroom and change into these outfits? Thank you. No, Mr. Miller, please don't follow them. ... And keep your raincoat closed until they get back."
EarthBoundGiygas said:
The fanservice and sexual references are heavy, but thats what makes the show so funny, because it can be handled by a mature audience. That dosnt mean you need to kill the fun for others to "Protect" the few, sooner or later they're gonna learn about this stuff.
The legislation, news article and my first post have to do with sexual content in children's entertainment. Yes they will learn about sexuality eventuality, but firstly it should be handled by the parents, and secondly we're not talking about healthy adult sexuality ... we're talking about humor and thrills derived solely from pedophilia.