UK Anime Fan Convicted for Having "Illegal Pictures of Imaginary Children"

[Shalashaska]

The only way for that to have a victim is if actual child pornography was used in the process, which would imply possession of such material, which is illegal. Without that, it's just a work of the mind. Even if that work is obscene, one should not be subject to punishment when there is no victim to be compensated.

 

OK let's say for the benefit of this post he was viewing purely animated images of children having sex, no real people involved but not just 'cute' images either.

 

If he has any children in his life, be they relatives or just friends I would argue that now knowing that and possibly not understanding why he is looking at sexy kiddy art on the web could be potentially traumatising to a child and/or to their parents, I'm not sure I'd call them a 'victim' of his actions but I'm still out on another label for it.

 

I wouldn't allow my own child to hang out with dude for example, because I do not fully understand the level of his interest in the sexualization of young people fictitious or otherwise, and whether or not it stops with the fictitious images, I'd wager there have been people caught with both real and fictitious images of children in their possession before.

 

If you were his son/daughter, had young children yourself and found out about this and that he was viewing such images do you not at least think that would make you slightly uncomfortable about letting them spend time alone with him?

 

I cannot say I would feel comfortable at all, just my own personal view of course.

 

Also add in the fact that when this art is created there is also a possiblity that there is a subject of the piece, perhaps just an arbitrary character design but also perhaps based on a real life person who the artist knows and has seen in real life, that cannot be known to me purely based on just viewing the images.

This potentially conflicts with the title, 'imaginary' cannot be absolutely determined from our position of ignorance with regard to the artist and the subject of his art pieces.

 

If someone drew a picture of your child sexually would it be 'just victimless art'? I vote for no, regardless of whether other persons viewing it are party to that information or not.

[cae]

OK let's say for the benefit of this post he was viewing purely animated images of children having sex, no real people involved but not just 'cute' images either.

 

If he has any children in his life, be they relatives or just friends I would argue that now knowing that and possibly not understanding why he is looking at sexy kiddy art on the web could be potentially traumatising to a child and/or to their parents, I'm not sure I'd call them a 'victim' of his actions but I'm still out on another label for it.

 

I wouldn't allow my own child to hang out with dude for example, because I do not fully understand the level of his interest in the sexualization of young people fictitious or otherwise, and whether or not it stops with the fictitious images, I'd wager there have been people caught with both real and fictitious images of children in their possession before.

 

If you were his daughter, had young children yourself and found out about this and that he was viewing such images do you not at least think that would make you slightly uncomfortable about letting them spend time alone with him?

 

I cannot say I would feel comfortable at all, just my own personal view of course, also add in the fact that when this art is created there is also a possiblity that there is a subject of the piece, perhaps just an arbitrary character design but also perhaps based on a real life person who the artist knows and has seen in real life, that cannot be known to me purely based on just viewing the images.

 

If someone drew a picture of your child sexually would it be 'just victimless art'? I vote for no, regardless of whether other persons viewing it are party to that information or not.

 

I don't think children should be privy to the sexual fascinations of adults, especially those close to them. While it would certainly be uncomfortable for all parties involved to find those kinds of animated images on the computer, I agree that it wouldn't quite create a victim, similar to walking in on mom & dad. I wouldn't want my children hanging out with or being cared for by someone with those perceived inclinations either, but at the same time I'd try to better understand them to make a better assessment of their character.

 

I may be mistaken, but if someone drew and distributed it as my child's likeness, we'd be victims of harassment. Seems like another gray area I'd not want to get involved with, and certainly not one I'd advocate exploring.

[Shalashaska]

I wouldn't want my children hanging out with or being cared for by someone with those perceived inclinations either, but at the same time I'd try to better understand them to make a better assessment of their character.

 

This is why I don't think it's as harmless as some people are making out, despite not being reality it still rightfully carries stigma depending on your perspective.

 

If I knew someone was watching adult entertainment that was depicting consensual adults I would not consider that to be reason not to let my kids be around them, I of course agree that children should not be privy to the sexual fasciations of adults, but I also think that children and depictions of children should not be the sexual fascinations of adults.

[LAwLz]

Also add in the fact that when this art is created there is also a possiblity that there is a subject of the piece, perhaps just an arbitrary character design but also perhaps based on a real life person who the artist knows and has seen in real life, that cannot be known to me purely based on just viewing the images.

Have you even seen your average loli? Here is an example:

 

 

If your child looked like that you'd have far bigger issues that "someone drew a lewd image of her". Her nose is non-existent and her eyes are like 10 times the size they should be.

Even IF this was based on a real person it's so distorted that nobody would recognize her. To me it sounds like you're grasping at straws to rationalize why it's bad. There are no studies showing that it leads to real life crimes (if anything studies shows that it's the opposite). People don't have control over their sexual preferences. Things are drawn in such an unrealistic way that an alien would probably think it was a completely different species, and not human.

[WhiteSkyMage]

guys if u think about it on other perspective, whatever is banned in the country, there would always be crime, so what's the conclusion - simply don't make it illegal. So, UK will go wrong to stay with that law, since children and adults watching that loli will still watch it, share it, hide it and there will be still a lot in the background breaking the law... 

 

It would be better to just let go and ignore. Read the study posted earlier about the ban of pornography - if you ban such things, you will get more child abuse crimes (you are making it worse!). If you let it go, the % of crimes might just stay same or even decrease. It's same with drugs. In lots of countries it's banned and the % of drug use is high, it's opposite in other countries where it is not banned.

 

Have you ever asked yourself, why teenagers watch porn? Simply because they know they are not allowed to by parents. If they are allowed to freely do it, im just betting, it actually gets boring at some point cuz your parents just won't care to say "stop", in other words - there will be no reaction. - Taking from personal experience - i got bored long time ago cuz of the same reason.

 

You know that saying - "LAWS ARE THERE TO BE BROKEN"

[Fred Castellum]

This is why I don't think it's as harmless as some people are making out, despite not being reality it still rightfully carries stigma depending on your perspective.

If I knew someone was watching adult entertainment that was depicting consensual adults I would not consider that to be reason not to let my kids be around them, I of course agree that children should not be privy to the sexual fasciations of adults, but I also think that children and depictions of children should not be the sexual fascinations of adults.

What I think needs to be done here is more accurate research. Many factors go into such things. We don't have a whole lot of info in this guys case but from what I can see he's never actually committed such a crime, though his past incident may have been a reason to why he was caught with the pedophilia content.

We need to understand how the said person in these cases think in order to make a good evidence based consensus on what to do.

A little brain picking in the psychology of these people could give valuable results, I'm order to deter the crime you must understand the criminal. While this guy is more of a victim in this case figuring out how he thinks could still help us categorize the criminals.

[Toddwjp]

this is essentially punishing some for for harming no one. the issue is people are so scared to talk about sex and implications of things like this in an honest and logical way where the main line of reasoning becomes, its disgusting and morally wrong. we have to be able to explain why its morally wrong. this is the same argument that would be used to imprison gays 100 years ago.

 

child porn is illegal because children cannot consent (and a few other factors but this is the main one), this is the same reason bestiality is illegal, the animal cannot consent. Sex is all about consent, in this case there is only one person and they are an adult capable of consent.

 

we must also remember to never punish someone for there thoughts,

[WhiteSkyMage]

Have you even seen your average loli? Here is an example:

Capture.PNG

 

 

If your child looked like that you'd have far bigger issues that "someone drew a lewd image of her". Her nose is non-existent and her eyes are like 10 times the size they should be.

Even IF this was based on a real person it's so distorted that nobody would recognize her. To me it sounds like you're grasping at straws to rationalize why it's bad. There are no studies showing that it leads to real life crimes (if anything studies shows that it's the opposite). People don't have control over their sexual preferences. Things are drawn in such an unrealistic way that an alien would probably think it was a completely different species, and not human.

 

Actually anime fans will NOT have problem with that. To me, I actually wanna have a son who looks like this:

 

I am not joking... Simply, if I could chose an anime character that I want my son/daughter to look like, I would choose with confidence.

[Shalashaska]

Even IF this was based on a real person it's so distorted that nobody would recognize her. To me it sounds like you're grasping at straws to rationalize why it's bad. There are no studies showing that it leads to real life crimes (if anything studies shows that it's the opposite). People don't have control over their sexual preferences. Things are drawn in such an unrealistic way that an alien would probably think it was a completely different species, and not human.

 

 

From the article

Six years ago he was prosecuted for having “Tomb Raider-style” computer-generated pictures of fictional children.

 

They were so realistic, a jury convicted him on six counts of making “indecent pseudo-photographs” of children, which he had denied.

 

That too was the first case of its kind in the country. A judge told him he “crossed the line as to what is illegal” and those pictures could be “a door into a very murky and distasteful world”.

 

We are not discussing 'regular loli' we are discussing this man and his images, it seems to me that he does like them to look like the real thing.

 

To be honest, I think you are if anyone the person 'grasping at straws' to rationalize your acceptance of this man's actions, I've not tried to rationalize why I think it's bad more so than I've just been explaining why I don't like it and don't think it can always be passed off as harmless without in depth assassment of the material.

[cae]

This is why I don't think it's as harmless as some people are making out, despite not being reality it still rightfully carries stigma depending on your perspective.

 

If I knew someone was watching adult entertainment that was depicting consensual adults I would not consider that to be reason not to let my kids be around them, I of course agree that children should not be privy to the sexual fasciations of adults, but I also think that children and depictions of children should not be the sexual fascinations of adults.

 

There certainly is a stigma; this article just popped up on my FB, and many comments seem to condemn his actions even if they disagree with the charges. I wouldn't assign righteousness or validity to that stigma, though.

 

We all have our opinions on what should or should not be, but fact is paraphilia exists in many people. I'd rather understand and address that. Hoping or pretending it doesn't exist doesn't help anyone, nor does labeling it as a mental illness, let alone throwing people in prison for it.

 

We are not discussing 'regular loli' we are discussing this man and his images, it seems to me that he does like them to look like the real thing.

 

To be honest, I think you are if anyone the person 'grasping at straws' to rationalize your acceptance of this man's actions, I've not tried to rationalize why I think it's bad more so than I've just been explaining why I don't like it and don't think it can always be passed off as harmless without in depth assassment of the material.

 

There are two cases, the "realistic" images were from his first case. We don't know about the most recent ones.

[Shalashaska]

There are two cases, the "realistic" images were from his first case. We don't know about the most recent ones.

 

And that's why we cannot IMO assume they are OK without assessing them as I've made a point of in my first post on this page, especially considering it's the same person.

 

OP seems to want to assume that they are just going to be arbitrary generic loli designs.

 

I feel I've posted enough in this thread, thanks for your replies to me and everyone else who replied to me but I'm fairly likely going to leave the discussion now I feel I've made all the contributions I wish to.

[Fred Castellum]

There certainly is a stigma; this article just popped up on my FB, and many comments seem to condemn his actions even if they disagree with the charges. I wouldn't assign righteousness or validity to that stigma, though.

We all have our opinions on what should or should not be, but fact is paraphilia exists in many people. I'd rather understand and address that. Hoping or pretending it doesn't exist doesn't help anyone, nor does labeling it as a mental illness, let alone throwing people in prison for it.

There are two cases, the "realistic" images were from his first case. We don't know about the most recent ones.

Well said.

This is morality based on psychological reasoning wrapped up with the group consensus and sheep mentality. Because thinking on your own is hard right? Why not just follow everyone else's opinion? Lol.

[LAwLz]

And that's why we cannot IMO assume they are OK without assessing them as I've made a point of in my first post on this page, especially considering it's the same person.

 

OP seems to want to assume that they are just going to be arbitrary generic loli designs.

 

I've feel posted enough in this thread, thanks for your replies to me and everyone else who replied to me but I'm fairly likely going to leave the discussion now I feel I've made all the contributions I wish to.

Well even if this case do not involve "generic lolis" (we only know about the case 6 years ago) the law still makes those illegal.

I can kind of get the ban on these photo realistic images, although I still don't think they should be illegal (again, it's a victimless thought crime). To go back to Sweden, those photo realistic images are illegal but for example the loli I posted earlier is legal. I think that's a decent compromise. In the UK they are banning everything though.

 

 

 

This is morality based on psychological reasoning wrapped up with the group consensus and sheep mentality. Because thinking on your own is hard right? Why not just follow everyone else's opinion? Lol.

The sad thing is that these cases are like 99.9% based on emotions. If you even dare to bring logic into it and suggest that they might be wrong, you will probably be called a pedophile and in some extreme cases even physically abused (like the person in the article).

[WhiteSkyMage]

Well even if this case do not involve "generic lolis" (we only know about the case 6 years ago) the law still makes those illegal.

I can kind of get the ban on these photo realistic images, although I still don't think they should be illegal (again, it's a victimless thought crime). To go back to Sweden, those photo realistic images are illegal but for example the loli I posted earlier is legal. I think that's a decent compromise. In the UK they are banning everything though.

 

 

 

The sad thing is that these cases are like 99.9% based on emotions. If you even dare to bring logic into it and suggest that they might be wrong, you will probably be called a pedophile and in some extreme cases even physically abused (like the person in the article).

 

Seriously? So the loli u posted will be illegal in the UK?

 

The biggest problem is that people don't take their time to think about someone's idea and logic and after they punish someone then they think and say "Oh he was maybe right...?" but it's too late already. 

 

I just don't understand, how in the world can they catch you downloading pictures or watching anime which is illegal? Should I set a BOMB under my desk so I can blow up the police when they come to check my PC? I guess that won't be Illegal - JUST KILL THEM WHEN THEY COME FOR YOU!

[LAwLz]

Seriously? So the loli u posted will be illegal in the UK?

 

The biggest problem is that people don't take their time to think about someone's idea and logic and after they punish someone then they think and say "Oh he was maybe right...?" but it's too late already. 

 

I just don't understand, how in the world can they catch you downloading pictures or watching anime which is illegal? Should I set a BOMB under my desk so I can blow up the police when they come to check my PC? I guess that won't be Illegal - JUST KILL THEM WHEN THEY COME FOR YOU!

Already is illegal. Well the specific picture I posted is not illegal, but the manga she is from would definitely be. Just listen to the text of this song and you'll understand what happens in it.

They will most likely don't bother tracking people down though. At least I hope not because that would be a colossal waste of resources to hunt down and ruin the lives on harmless people. Killing them if they want to confiscate your computer is probably a tiny bit extreme.

Destroying evidence is illegal too.

[WhiteSkyMage]

Already is illegal. Well the specific picture I posted is not illegal, but the manga she is from would definitely be. Just listen to the text of this song and you'll understand what happens in it.

They will most likely don't bother tracking people down though. At least I hope not because that would be a colossal waste of resources to hunt down and ruin the lives on harmless people. Killing them if they want to confiscate your computer is probably a tiny bit extreme.

Destroying evidence is illegal too.

 

Counting the things u say, gosh, looks like im a little criminal there...oh...not little actually, a one that might get 10 years jail just for that. Oh well who cares, let's just watch animes, illegal or not, just watch. I was wondering why my friend would not watch animes I suggest him to, maybe cuz he knows and want to just keep away with it.

 

Let's just BREAK THE LAW!

 

           

[KingKeith55]

Im not into loli stuff, so im good.

 

And I dont live in the UK.

[Fred Castellum]

Im not into loli stuff, so im good.

 

And I dont live in the UK.

You live in Canadia lol... the land of the moose's and ice cold winters. 

 

I want to move to Toronto.... 

[KingKeith55]

You live in Canadia lol... the land of the moose's and ice cold winters. 

 

I want to move to Toronto.... 

You mean smog land? (jk thats hamilton)

 

What about that city that has Google Canada's HQ (you know this)

[Sushicat89]

Same thing happened in Quebec city. The was registered as a sex offender for 10 years... 

[yurihellsing]

Im not into loli stuff, so im good.

 

And I dont live in the UK.

 

You have a similar law regarding this it was one of the big things doing the rounds on old 4chan about it being banned.

 

Also there was that one guy who was arrested for simpsons porn in Australia

 

 

 

This is the first case I've heard of under the new law i forget what piece of legislation it was brought in under but i do remember it was hard pushed by a hard line feminist.