New Zealand Man Jailed for Watching Cartoon ‘Pixies’ Having Sex

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8577037/Man-sent-to-jail-for-watching-pixie-sex

A man has been jailed for watching cartoon videos of elves, pixies and other fantasy creatures having sex.

Ronald Clark downloaded the Japanese anime cartoons three years ago, setting in train events that would see him in court in Auckland and jailed for three months for possessing objectionable material, and sparking debate as to what harm is caused by digitally created pornography.

Clark has previous convictions for indecently assaulting a teenage boy and has been through rehabilitation programmes, but the video nasties he was watching in this case were all cartoons and drawings.

He says the videos came from an established tradition of Japanese manga and hentai (cartoon pornography), a massive, mainstream industry in that country.

They weren't even depictions of people - Clark's lawyer Roger Bowden described them as "pixies and trolls" that "you knew at a glance weren't human".

Bowden said the conviction for possessing objectionable material was "the law gone mad".

However, while the cartoon characters were elves and pixies, they were also clearly young elves and pixies, which led to concerns the images were linked to child sexual abuse.

Anti-child pornography group ECPAT Child Alert director Alan Bell said the images were illegal because they encouraged people "to migrate from there to the real thing".

"The distribution of it is damaging. You have to ask what impact does it have even if it's not harming [an individual child]."

Bell said it had to be conceded that no child was harmed in the images' production but "it's all part of that spectrum". Cartoon images of child abuse were a "huge" problem in Japan and the practice had started finding its way into computer games, he said

Lincoln University philosophy lecturer Grant Tavinor, who writes on the aesthetics of video games, said the case raised two key questions: Did producing the pictures harm anyone, and could their viewing and distribution be injurious to the public good?

"The worry is that viewing or distributing such images could support the sexual exploitation of children even if the production of the images did not actually involve the exploitation of any children," Tavinor said. It's not enough that no one was harmed in the making of the videos, the law takes a protective role and says there are some things we just don't want circulating in society, he said.

Auckland University associate philosophy professor Tim Dare said "the justifications for punishment are likely to be worries about the tendency of the images to promote harm to real people in the future, or a concern for what the interest in the images tells you about their ‘character' ".
Ad Feedback .

Clark himself argued that the law led to the absurdity that he could, in theory, be convicted of possessing objectionable images of stick figures.

Clark admitted he was interested in the images but he said it was for their artistic merit and as "a bit of a laugh". He did not find them sexually arousing, he said.

Tavinor said there were ethical issues that complicated the case.

"The ways a person entertains themself is not morally negligible. This is probably an additional factor in the current case because as well as worrying about the effects these activities might have on children, we also naturally make moral judgments about the character of the person in question.

"But for the purposes of law it is probably important to distinguish between these because convicting someone for their moral views is very dangerous."

What disturbed me the most in this story is the defence of jailing a man (likely to be raped and beaten in prison) for thought crime by the two philosophy lecturers quoted. In particular, Grant Tavinor, a published philosophy lecturer at the University of Lincoln, who believes that a way a person 'entertains himself' is not morally negligible. Maybe we should criminalize wanking if it's accompanied by impure thoughts? Or maybe just the thoughts themselves? After all, scientists are developing mind readers at this very moment. Tavinor is credited with being an expert on the ethics of video games, yet he doesn't appear to apply the same logic to violence in video games. Teenage boys spending hours killing, maiming, and beheading countless other men in violent video games appears to be fine, but watch a pair of cartoon elves fucking each other, and you deserve to get your nonce anus raped on a daily basis.

Good to see that Western philosphy, after 2,500 years since its ancient Greek beginnings, has clearly reached its apex with this joker.

If you would like to politely contact Grant Tavinor, and explain to him why there are ethical implications in allowing the feminist state to lock men away to be raped and beaten as subhumans for watching cartoons in their own homes, then this is his university e-mail address :

Grant.Tavinor@lincoln.ac.nz

Brief note to reddit r/mensrights : This is a men's rights issue because this is men being jailed under feminist laws, lobbied for by feminists, made by feminists, and implemented by the feminist state, laws based only on feminist junk science, or in this case, only by feminist speculation.  These are men being sent to prison where they will likely be raped and beaten, or at least face the constant and realistic fear of being raped and beaten, for simply watching cartoons in their own home - under laws made by middle-aged female feminists.  This is a men's rights issue.

48 thoughts on “New Zealand Man Jailed for Watching Cartoon ‘Pixies’ Having Sex

  1. Alan Vaughn

    Yes, it's indeed a very 'interesting' legal stance from the perspective of a government that only last Thursday, made history by being the first Western 'democracy' to pass a bill that makes marriage of same-sex couples not only as legal, but must also be regarded as equally socially acceptable as marriage between men and women. (And of course tougher new laws protecting such 'morally wholesome' marriages).
    The mere thought of it alone should make any normal man puke!
    When I read about or hear of this sort of immorality, (and it IS gross immorality, regardless of what feminists argue to the contrary), it only makes me hope more that there really is a God and the stories in the Bible, particularly the final one (just read the entire last book - Revelation), come to fruition...

    Our society desperately needs a shake up. I am not normally a religious man, however, I've read the Bible - read the story of Sodom & Gomorrah (I.e. Genesis 18:16-19:29) and what's occurring now is much worse! (In God's eyes). If he does exist, I'd dare say he'd be very angry by now...

    Feminists and their mangina cohorts, the manipulated governments and media propagandists are low-level, UNGODLY SCUM, what the Bible would definitely identify as those 'unrighteous ones'.
    Unfortunately however, I'm inclined or rather, compelled to, take the atheist view: considering that if there really is a God, where the hell was He during the Nazi holocaust? Which was almost as immoral and as EVIL as what's unfolding now...

    The SCUM running our society - controlling our lives, are now stigmatizing the only form of sexual relations God DOES approve of. (They know better than, and probably think they ARE better than, God).
    It makes what is chronicled in the Bible about the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah look like a morally wholesome, family-friendly Sunday-school picnic by comparison...
    If there is such a super-being as God, we are now living in a truly frightening time, as a lot of what is unfolding now, is mentioned in the Bible.

    However, I must once again, make myself clear (realizing that I must effectively look like a fanatical, moral conservative crusader, standing on a soap-box in the park on a Sunday afternoon):
    I am not religious or suggesting anything like Armageddon is upon us, although when reading stories like this, it probably wouldn't be such a terrible thing if it was!
    He would put the SCUM that are ruining our society, especially its children, (whom they fraudulently proclaim to have their best interests at heart), right where they belong - in Hell with the devil himself.

  2. theantifeminist

    Post author

    Yes, it’s indeed a very ‘interesting’ legal stance from the perspective of a government that only last Thursday, made history by being the first Western ‘democracy’ to pass a bill that makes marriage of same-sex couples not only as legal, but must also be regarded as equally socially acceptable as marriage between men and women. (And of course tougher new laws protecting such ‘morally wholesome’ marriages).

    I was thinking of posting on that subject - I actually read that the New Zealand parliament broke out into 'spontaneous song' when it was announced the gay bill had been passed. 'Liberal Progressives' are fanatically devoted to a superstitious religion as much as evangelical Christians are, only at least the Bible contains some useful myths and universal moral truths that have stood the test of time. The religion of the liberal progressives, however, is just utterly perverted bunkum adopted for purely selfish psychological reasons, that is quickly going to lead to the collapse of Western civilisation, as well causing so much misery, wrecked lives, and crimes against humanity on the way.

    Pat Condell uploaded a very good video on the subject of 'liberal progressives' this week :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwK7VRkbGiU

  3. "The worry is that viewing or distributing such images could support the sexual exploitation of children even if the production of the images did not actually involve the exploitation of any children,” Tavinor said. It’s not enough that no one was harmed in the making of the videos, the law takes a protective role and says there are some things we just don’t want circulating in society, he said."

    Yet video games such as Grand Theft Auto which you can realistically commit numerous crimes including mass murder against innocent pedestrians are perfectly fine... why? because it's fictional!

    Alan mentioned before if cartoon pornography can somehow inspire the actual crime, wouldn't it be illegal to possess novels that depict murder like the Christie novels?

    "Anti-child pornography group ECPAT Child Alert director Alan Bell said the images were illegal because they encouraged people “to migrate from there to the real thing”."

    LOL, so anyone who plays GTA is a potential drug lord, mass murderer, arsonist, dangerous driver... Let's arrest almost every teenager in the world who has played that game in order to prevent them for committing a crime!

    The western world has no difference than the Sharia law controlled middle eastern police states, where it is an offense to draw something and is subject to jail time for a cartoon.

    Of course, the west justifies it by saying that its.... "to protect our children."

  4. Ashley

    Let's not forget about Lolita, a timeless literary classic. Should a person in possession of this book also be jailed? By this precedent he should, as it's just as "harmful" to children.

  5. Jack

    Brief note to reddit r/mensrights : This is a men’s rights issue ...

    I've given up on r/mensrights. It's a waste of time. I unbookmarked it from my computer and I've promised myself never as much as lurk there.

  6. F

    Stop liking what I don't like

    If it looks like something that I don't like then you should still stop liking it.

    -Law.

  7. "However, while the cartoon characters were elves and pixies, they were also clearly young elves and pixies, which led to concerns the images were linked to child sexual abuse."

    O' woe, what sort of world is it where people want to molest elves and pixies?!?! Seriously, this is yet another way to lock men up for no reason at all and keep everyone shitscared of being even a little different. Unless someone can prove to me that watching child porn makes people into pedos, the only kiddie porn that should be illegal is the kind involving the actual abuse of actual children.

  8. I am an opposer of child abuse, but the reason why actual kiddie porn is illegal is weird by itself.

    It mainly states that since it's an abuse of children, watching the video will keep the abuse from going.

    @Pigman

    I am for arresting and sentencing people who molest little kids to prison for as long as possible. But making the people who possess these photos to go prison is pretty weird.

    The Rodney King beatings involves a person being abused, will anyone who watched the beatings of Rodney King go to prison? Or let me rephrase that, would a white-surpremist who is enjoying the beating while shouting racial slurs go to prison?

    No, because no matter how much they enjoy it, they can't abuse the person anymore.

    Human-Stupidity calls this the voodoo theory.

    Think about this, murder videos are legal. Nannies caught on camera beating a baby is legal.

    However, a topless 16 year old will send the person who made the video and anyone who's seen it to prison.

  9. Eric

    Antifeminist:
    "Good to see that Western philosophy, after 2500 years from its Greek beginnings, has finally reached its apex with the joker."

    This brings up an interesting question: if looking at pixies has become pornographic, what about all those stories of Greek Gods and heroes pursuing nubile young nymphs and forest sprites? Shouldn't all public school teachers reading Greek mythologies to their impressionable students be charged under this law?

  10. Eric

    Alan:
    I tend to be more of the opinion that these SCUM are so repulsive even to God that he left them alone for us to deal with. And after this we deserve a Heaven don't we? (LOL, I'll take mine with the 72 virgins...)

  11. Eric

    Antifeminist & Larner:
    I don't know if you saw the article in the BBC today, but the American FBI has been trumpeting and crowing that it's captured a former (male) teacher who had fled to Nicaragua on child porn charges. I'm not sure what specifically he was accused of doing, but the BBC noted that this fellow had taken the late(?)Osama bin Laden's place at the top of the FBI's notorious 'Most Wanted List'.

    So---child pornographers are now more dangerous in the US than maniacs who plot to shoot up schools and bomb sporting events? It would seem so.

    Under Michelle Obama's command, incidentally, the FBI has shifted much of its focus to combatting porn and so-called sex trafficking.

  12. Dog Meat

    That they were "underage" elves and pixies is an assumption only.

    There are some people who have a medical condition by which they look for all the world like 12 year-olds. I saw this guy on the TV once. He was about 22 and had trouble getting into casinos etc. even with ID.

    We can make mistakes even within our own species.

    Elves and pixies aren't even human so how does anyone know how old they look upon full maturity?

    What if there are different species of elves and pixies and they look different upon maturity, some looking like underage humans, others looking older.

    It's therefore important to ask what KIND of elves.

    Let's nopt forget about axolotls and other neotonous organisms. Adult axolotls look like salamader juveniles yet they are are mature.

    I'm wondering if the poor guy had a lawyer who was really on his side.

  13. Alan Vaughn

    That's a damn good point Dog Meat, although I must admit I feel totally stupid commenting on this case at all, less that it even needs to be discussed, or given any SERIOUS thought. However that is the reality we now live under, unfortunately.

    If anyone's perverted, or guilty of thought crime, it's not this poor unfortunate man in New Zealand, but his SICK accusers, for simply dreaming up this NONCE-sense:
    As far as I know, thus have always assumed: those fictional beings (elves, pixies and trolls), according to the legends about them, are either immortal, or if not, they are different to humans in the way they are always tiny and never age - never grow old, because they were never 'young' either - they weren't born like mortals were. So how can those feminist, man-hating accusers deem any of the cartoons the man they charged under the child porn act (or whatever ridiculous law they charged him under), was watching, of being ANY age, let alone UNDER-age?

    Therefore, none of the cartoons could be 'youthful', or 'children', 'childish' or 'child like'; or indeed: "underage".
    Another famous immortally youthful character of course, being Peter Pan.
    He could be aged anywhere between about 10 years old and 10,610 years old and would still look, behave and even THINK the same (as a 10 year old boy), throughout his entire (immortal) life. He never had a "child" or "underage" phase, because he cannot grow up - his existence therefore cannot be related to anything in terms of age, despite being over 10 centuries old, as he remains suspended in only one age 'condition' - 10 years old, FOREVER!

    If anything, Peter Pan could be accused of being a 'paedophile', providing his friends ('victims') were mortal beings, such as under 18 year old humans.
    Seriously, they're already accusing, trying and sentencing DEAD celebrities for being paedophiles, so why not fictional celebs as well?
    At least Pan's still alive (according to the story that these lunatics take seriously), and use to convict and destroy a totally innocent and harmless man's life with.
    LOL! No wonder I feel ridiculous writing this comment.

    This unfortunate victim of the gynocracy's hate campaign should demand a re-trial and use US as his counsel! (I'd happily represent him, free of charge). If it's thought crime they say he's guilty of, we could and would, easily turn the tables on THEM and put their (much less PRIVATE), perverted thoughts on trial...

    BTW Dog Meat, I know a bloke who was still being asked to show his ID in bars etc. when he was 35, never mind at 22! Lucky dog! He's over 60 now and still looks about 30 something.

  14. theantifeminist

    Post author

    Surely the police should be raiding the homes of anyone who has ever watched an episode of National Geographic? After all, the animal world doesn't tend to inflate the notion of 'innocent childhood' 8 or more years past the capability to breed, like we humans do. As soon as an animal is capable of producing offspring, it is having sex, and most of its psychology is geared towards having sex (just as humans from the onset of puberty are). We've all probably watched a wildlife documentary in which 'young looking' monkeys or lions were filmed humping (and no doubt being emotionally scarred for life, lol).

  15. Alan Vaughn

    We’ve all probably watched a wildlife documentary in which ‘young looking’ monkeys or lions were filmed humping (and no doubt being emotionally scarred for life, lol).

    In all seriousness Schop, if they can charge poor ol' Ronald Clark for watching totally non-existent life forms that could NEVER be real life forms doing that, then yes, almost everyone should be in prison - that is every white, adult man.
    At least 'young looking' monkeys or lion cubs are REAL 'children' of REAL adult monkeys or lions.

  16. @Eric

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2013/03/former_nj_man_sentenced_to_nea.html

    "Former N.J. man sentenced to nearly 6 years for taking military data to China"

    This guy got 6 years for stealing and taking military secrets to China

    Compare it to this

    http://www.dallasnews.com/news/community-news/fort-worth/headlines/20121221-defense-contractor-gets-20-years-for-sending-child-porn-to-fort-worth-resident.ece

    "Defense contractor gets 20 years for sending child porn to FW resident"

    So basically you get way more time for sending a picture of a topless 15 year old from the 60s than sending military secrets to China.

    In other words, military secrets is not a big deal, a picture of a topless 15 year old is.

  17. @Alan

    They're not human, and they don't exist.

    Somehow people are going to prison for victimizing something that doesn't exist?

    It's a cartoon people... It's a cartoon, the so called free world are now locking people up for looking at a cartoon, so much for being "free", we're just as crazy as the countries that lock people up for drawing a picture of religious figure.

  18. antifeminist

    I am aghast that

    this was a councilman

    even a councilman does not have free speech

    that the poor sap RETRACTED and apologized

    that he did not even mention GENETIC INBORN differences in IQ, self control, criminality, but just mentioned some people and races are more hard working

    You can actually get arrested in the UK in 2013 for expressing an opinion that the children of certain ethnic minorities tend not to be as bright or as hardworking as other ethnic minorities.

    You know, I wrote a lot about race and iq

  19. About harmfulness of cartoon elves engaging in sex

    I am shocked. Of course.

    First it conservative and feminist voodoo theory
    at its finest

    Second

    Reputable academic researcher Dr. Milton Diamond from the University of Hawaii RECOMMENDS to produce artificial href="http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt" >child porn, without damaging real children. Because his multi-national research clearly proved that watching child porn helps pedophiles to jerk off and to take the edge off their drive. Thus they are LESS likely to fiddle with real children.

    Third
    By the child sex trauma myth, most child abuse is not as terrible as it is claimed to be

    Fourth:
    Most child porn involves 15 year old postpuertal "children" engaging in nonsexual poses. How this would harm children is hard to understand. See Copine scale

  20. Alan Vaughn

    @Larner

    ...we’re just as crazy as the countries that lock people up for drawing a picture of religious figure.

    Nope, we're MUCH more crazy than them.
    In terms of the sheer stupidity of it and how it's based literally on childish degrees of pure superstition, we're even worse than our pitch-fork wielding, inbred ancestors of the sixteenth century Inquisition, who were gleefully burning witches:

    The white adult male is the 21st century witch of the 21st century's Inquisition, for even more superstitious and far more ludicrous reasons. (Hint: Voodoo).

    This incredibly bizarre case, when contrasted with the same ('liberal-progressive') government's 'ground-breaking' announcement, that gay marriage officially became equally as legal as normal marriage, in the same week that its RIDICULOUS, misandrist laws allowed their feminist controlled judiciary to imprison, thence destroy Ronald Clark; proves nothing more than the fact that MEN are indeed the targets of a true holocaust...

    And what are MEN doing about it?
    Absolutely NOTHING. Nothing, other than enabling and facilitating much more of the same and worse, by being obedient little white-knights and manginas to the same feminist FILTH that the New Zealand government are clearly enslaved to.

  21. Eric

    Alan & Brady:
    Regarding my earlier comment, I looked up online a reference to the Islamic vision of the hereafter and found that the word which our puritanical media translates as 'virgins' is actually the Arabic word 'houris'. The houris apparently were the Arabian version of the Greek nymphs: who along with their ability to stay young also had this peculiar quality of remaining virginal no matter how much sex they had or how many children they bore.

    Islam may have a lot of faults, but a religion that makes sex part of paradise can't be ALL bad, I suppose.

    Here's another interesting question: if there is intelligent life on other planets, can aliens be charged with statuatory rape since their years are calculated differently than ours?

  22. Eric

    Antifeminist:
    I live on the outskirts of the city, near a national forest and the raccoons and foxes are in mating season now. The male raccoons are fighting all night long over the females from just last winter's litters of cubs. I've noticed that the females don't seem too emotionally scarred by any of this, from what I've seen so far.

  23. Eric

    Larner:
    Now that the US military has been completely feminized, the femihags in office probably assume that the Chinese are no threat, since female superiority will naturally win the day in the event of war. So we can turn our military might on more important issues---like protecting the Sexual Trade Union.

    I wonder how long it will be before drones are programmed to key in on computers transmitting porn and launch missiles at them?

  24. Dog Meat

    @Alan Vaughn and Human-Stupidity

    That's right, the very fact we're reduced to talking about elves and pixies and Peter Pan shows the sheer unreality, the sheer refusal to face reality, of the current legal, politicial and cultural situation.

    Hmmm, if some kind of mythological beings mature more slowly, maybe a 600 yr-old one is still the equivalent of a little kid...

    As for Ronald Clark, the article mentions a prior conviction in relation to a legally underage boy. I don't know the circumstances so I can't comment on whether or not it was a gross miscarriage of justice.

    This most recent conviction of course, is.

    I hope he knows about this site and that there are people who are outraged by his conviction for this.

  25. @Eric

    The guy that they just caught is probably the peeping tom type, he allegedly installed cameras in the boys restroom.

    probably would get less time had he sold military secrets to a foreign nation.

  26. @Dog Meat

    And they're criminalizing a drawing.

    Criminalizing an image itself is already questionable because of free speech.

    Now they're criminalizing a drawing, how are we going to justify that? Makes no difference than a religious nation with religious laws that criminalize the drawing of a certain figure.

    In the free world, you can go to prison for drawing a picture at home. Had you draw a picture of a cartoon character who seems like a "minor" and is in a sexually explicit position. You're done.

    What kind of world are we living in now?

  27. @Dog Meat

    I don't know about the laws in NZ, but he would most likely end up on the sex offender registry if it happened in the US.

    Imagine that.

    I wrote several articles regarding that.

    If you know who Dog The Bounty Hunter is, you probably know that he was convicted for murder when he was in his 20s, he doesn't need to register for shit. Imagine that, murder is a lessor deal than something like taking a leak in public.

  28. Eric

    Larner:
    Actually what the case of Dog the Bounty Hunter shows is the quality of goons the femihags employ to enforce their laws against guys who look at drawings of pixies! All they really lack to make the picture complete is a brown uniform and a baseball bat.

  29. Carlos

    Ok I have to speak out about this. I had the misfortune of knowing this guy when he was first arrested for this three years ago.
    For a start the reason police caught him at all is because he was moderating a dutch boy child sex forum called boylove.org or something equally repugnant and foreign police told the NZ police.
    He was caught possessing and distributing hard core child porn.
    Because of a complete stuff up all of this evidence was not admissible so all they could do him for was the cartoons.
    This is a man who was previously in prison for abusing 11 and 13 year old boys.
    His friends (including his flat mate at the time) are convicted peodophiles, most of which he met in prison.
    He is not the innocent man he is claiming to be.

  30. theantifeminist

    Post author

    @CARLOS - This is all irrelevant. Maybe he does belong in prison, maybe he does belong in hell. The fact is, the court system was allowed to jail him for posession of cartoons. That means that they can jail anybody they 'catch' in posession of cartoons. And believe me, they will.

    EDIT : And how the fuck do we KNOW that he was trading in hardcore child pornography if the evidence was inadmissible? Because the police said so? Even though their 'evidence' was inadmisible?

  31. Carlos

    Because one of my children was involved in this whole disgusting situation and so i was involved in the case from the start.
    But I think the fact that he was moderating a child porn forum speaks volumes about this guys character to start with. And bear in mind I have known him for years.

  32. theantifeminist

    Post author

    @Carlos - If he was 'moderating a child porn forum' it does seem quite bizarre that the police had to rely on a cartoon to have him convicted, given that all they needed from his harddrive was a reconstituted fragment of a trace of a single thumbnail image of a 'child' who looks under 18 in a sexual context.

    Why not just scrap this absurd cartoon law and bring in a new law saying that the courts can jail any man who the police are 'pretty sure' is a pedo? This would be more honest and no more or less in tune with the principles of basic justice.

  33. theantifeminist

    Post author

    @Carlos BTW, I have sympathy for you if your child has been the victim of abuse from this man, but really we are not discussing the character of this particular individual, but the principle that men can be jailed for watching cartoons in their own homes - something defended by the philosophy 'experts' in the original news article. This is what we are really discussing here.

    Maybe this law turned out well in the end in terms of punishing the bad guy, but so would have a law giving the police the power to arrest and cage anyone they didn't like or they suspected of involvement in crime (with no evidence to convict).

  34. @Carlos

    I'm sorry to hear what happened to your child

    But theantifeminists is right, he should go to prison for molesting the boys but that doesn't mean we can throw him in prison for a cartoon.

    The point in this discussion is not what this man has done, is the fact that he's being sentenced to prison for possession of a cartoon.

    It's like sending a man with a previous violent crime conviction to prison for owning a violent drawing.

  35. Jack

    @CARLOS: if they want to jail the man for possessing the cartoons, they should first jail your child for possessing them. Cartoons are very much a child thing: if cartoons are found around a man & child, barring overwhelming evidence to the contrary the cartoons should be assumed to be the child's, not the man's.

  36. Alan Vaughn

    The article states:

    Bell said it had to be conceded that no child was harmed in the images’ production but “it’s all part of that spectrum”. Cartoon images of child abuse were a “huge” problem in Japan and the practice had started finding its way into computer games, he said...

    Really, Mr Bell?
    From what I understand about current Japanese trends and culture, the cartoon images which do not depict child abuse at all, but more like 'erotic' or, sexually oriented images of various imaginary characters (i.e. pixies, elves etc.), and are a significantly popular genre occupying a sizable arena within the country's entertainment industry.
    (Japanese people generally don't regard the anime or cartoon genre as 'erotic' let alone as pornography or 'child abuse')!

    This is yet another classic example of how the manipulated media of our sex-obsessed society, totally twist the facts around to simply maintain its current climate of rampant peadohysteria and causing the frenzied, knee-jerk reactions to them such, as imprisoning men for possessing such harmless material.
    Material that could only be perceived as 'child-abuse' by those with suitably sick and sufficiently twisted enough minds, to think of things that way and see it as such.
    They are the ones who should be on trial for THEIR thought crime.

    They would imprison men solely for possessing such imagery, regardless of their previous criminal history and indeed they DO imprison those with no prior convictions of any kind for this (ludicrous) thought crime. It is in fact those otherwise law-abiding men that make up the majority of those particular thought criminals being beaten and sodomized in prison on a regular basis, at this very moment.

    Their lives irreversibly destroyed for possessing some drawings of imaginary creatures that nobody can therefore, in any stretch of their wildest imaginings, possibly inflict harm upon (because they don't even exist and can't exist), yet these imbeciles who have the authority to totally destroy someone by these psychotic laws, directly link those drawings to 'child abuse'.
    It's even more ridiculous and more psychotic than the 'Satanic Ritual Abuse' and its 'repressed memory recall therapy' hysteria of the early 1980s.

    Mind boggling. Because supposedly informed, intelligent people actually believe these moronic fairy tales in 2013!

  37. theantifeminist

    Post author

    The article states:

    Bell said it had to be conceded that no child was harmed in the images’ production but “it’s all part of that spectrum”. Cartoon images of child abuse were a “huge” problem in Japan and the practice had started finding its way into computer games, he said…

    Really, Mr Bell?

    @Alan

    Rates of real child sexual abuse and assault are also far lower in Japan than just about anywhere else, and far, far lower than the USA, UK and Australasia. Same for teenage pregnancy, youth crime etc

    Of course this is not a problem for the Western Sexual Trade Union. Husbands fapping off to pictures of nubile elves, instead of giving 100% sexual attention to their wives, is.

  38. @Alan

    The whole "no child was harmed but it's still illegal due to the fact that it promotes child abuse" is what I considered a last resort when it comes to banning the so called "child pornography".

    They use the voodoo theory of course, justifying the decades imprisonment of people who possess these images because it makes them just as evil as the people who actually abuse children. But now when it comes to a cartoon, the voodoo theory can't apply, so they of course uses the "it promotes it" to lock you up.

    It's absurd how they're just making shit up as they go in order to lock people up for a cartoon.

    In Japan, the age of consent is 13, so an image of a 16 year old cartoon character having sex is not child abuse... it's legal sex. The thing that confuses me is that in almost all European countries and most of the states in the US. A person under the age of 18 can have sex, but when this legal sex is caught on camera, it is considered child abuse?

    The brainwashed society actually believes the fact that child porn is an image of child abuse when most of the time, it's simply nudity (nude beach) and consenting teenagers who can have legal sex anyways having sex that happened to be caught on camera.

  39. Alan Vaughn

    @Larner

    It’s absurd how they’re just making shit up as they go in order to lock people up for a cartoon.

    I think you meant:
    It’s absurd how they’re just making shit up as they go in order to lock people men up for a cartoon any reason at all.

    In Japan, the age of consent is 13, so an image of a 16 year old cartoon character having sex is not child abuse… it’s legal sex. The thing that confuses me is that in almost all European countries and most of the states in the US. A person under the age of 18 can have sex, but when this legal sex is caught on camera, it is considered child abuse?

    In Japan: any image of any person, or other life form: be it a depiction of someone, or something real or otherwise, having sex is NOT considered even to be pornography, let alone an image depicting a form of 'abuse', never mind 'child abuse'...

    It wasn't so very long ago either (certainly since you were born), that this was also the case in the US, and all European countries - in the previous sane, normal thinking and enlightened West: before feminists ruined it with their paedohysterical narratives that play an essential role in funding the chief financial source of their man-hate organization: their mega-wealthy abuse industry.

    Never overlook, or forget that their primary and by far, the simplest, yet most effective and powerful 'weapon', they've deployed in their fight to destroy the human male and eventually eliminate him from humanity: is to target, thus demonize, stigmatize and ultimately: CRIMINALIZE (with very stringent, Draconian penalties), normal male sexuality.

    These feminist hate-mongers will go to any length, no matter how ridiculous, to firstly stigmatize, then: CRIMINALIZE, any normative male sexual behaviour, to make it look sick or 'perverted' in the eyes of our already feminist indoctrinated and paedohysterical society.
    And that is what we are opposing here and what the MRM SHOULD be opposing, but unfortunately most of them are also convinced by feminist lies and propaganda, that men are 'perverts' or 'pedos'...

  40. However, no one is going to prison for a video of men being beheaded...

    The issue here is that people are going to prison for images and even cartoons. I find that disturbing when the west claims to be free. The internet needs to be regulated, but sending someone to prison for decades for images is absurd, can't they just take it off the internet instead of locking someone up?

  41. Satyrist

    One has to take into account the disturbing possibility that this man may choose to migrate to Middle-earth at some point in the future and run amok amongst the fairy folk. =[

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>