| Making a new entry to reply to several people at once. |
[Oct. 27th, 2006|08:59 pm] |
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) littlegirllover, here's where I don't even read your post because you are wrong. It is not illegal to possess or sell drawn images of any kind of fetish, including guro, hentai, beastiality, or what have you.
The article you posted was misleading, and I am surprised that as a supporter of the genuine thing, you are not well aquainted with the case.
"...twenty obscene Japanese anime cartoons that graphically depicted prepubescent female children being forced to engage in genital-genital and oral-genital intercourse with adult males. Whorley was convicted under a new federal statute enacted in 2003 that criminalizes the production, distribution, or receipt of, or the possession with intent to distribute obscene drawings, cartoons, sculptures, paintings, or any other obscene visual representation of the sexual abuse of children. "
This seems to be the only part of the article you read.
"...The jury also convicted Whorley of receiving fourteen digital photographs of real children engaging in sexually explicit conduct..."
"...Whorley was re-arrested for violating the conditions of his probation..."
There's the kicker. He was on probation already for being a sex offender, which means he follows different rules than the rest of us (more or less law abiding) citizens. The PROTECT act of 2003 requires proof of "obscenity" and if you possess ACTUAL child pornography on your puter the way this man did, or are already a convicted criminal, there's not much to prove. It merely added flame to the fire.
I would like you to show me one conviction where a person was fined or went to jail simply for posession of lolita manga. You can't. Livejournal itself has many communities where sexually explicit loli and shota images are posted, and there are tons of very popular sites, such as not4chan, which host strictly loli and shota hentai. If a single real image of a child is posted, the user is immediately banned, but by sticking to only artwork, they break no laws. The FBI has no interest in pursuing any sites devoted to artwork because they cannot prove obscenity. Not to mention my ability to purchase loli hentai at any local comic book shop, which would not be allowed if it fell under "obscenity."
Do you have any idea how difficult it is to prove obscenity? Clearly you should have a vested interest in the subject as those "child model" sites which are legally allowed to remain open do not violate the laws, and that is depiction of live children.
So allow me to completely disregard your arguments as you have no grasp of the law.
"Also, historically, 'women' were married off and sexually active as early as 11, 12 years old. So."
To what end? For purposes of procreation, because keeping the population large enough to survive wars, disease, famine... that used to be a huge deal, so it was necessary to pop out the babies as soon as a girl had her "first blood." Any childless married woman who did not pop out the babies was ostracised and shunned, as an example of the importance of procreation.
Let me back up a second here and say how much it angers me to see people use the "history" argument. People in the past did not marry for love. Let me repeat that because it bears repeating.
People.
In the past.
Did not.
Marry for love.
If you were getting married off to a 12 year old boy or girl, or hell, sometimes even infants were married off as soon as they were born, chances are good that your marriage was arranged by your parents in order to gain title, land, or social standing. ESPECIALLY in these "third world" countries a previous replier mentioned. Those children are property being used by their parents for a number of reasons.
One of these reasons might be that they have too many children and cannot afford to feed them all, and so to avoid starving some, they marry them off to other families. Another reason might be to get the dowery of the daughter, which could come in many forms, such as land or money. Or perhaps it even works the other way around, where the husband buys the daughter from the family. There are a hundred reasons why marriages happen, but I assure you, most marriages made around the world were not and still are not made for love.
So I really don't see how your stance on childlove, which, by the way, has "love" in the name, is justified by living in a western first world country where we have no immediate or religious need to produce as many children as possible and where we are allowed the freedom to choose our own mates. |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
fuck_childlove
confused
accomplished![[info]](http://stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
aggravated
hopeful
contemplative
cynical
nauseated
discontent
complacent