Appears Taiwan is moving in on regulating loli

Japanese Cartoon Association run by Mangaka Ken Akamatsu(LDP politician nowadays) supported by LDP politician Taro Yamada, Mangakas Tetsuya Chiba and Machiko Satonaka all sent messages in opposition to any regulation to the Taiwanese minister before anyone on Japan SNS even talked about this.

3 Likes

Wait, the DPP are the ones most opposed to the CCP, right? Ironic. Of course, an entire party cannot be defined by only one of its party members.

It’s another thing that righteous religious people find “morally reprehensible”. Something they wish would go away so they wouldn’t have to know it exists. We see what prohibition did and how it didn’t work. We’ve seen the failures of “the war on drugs”. NGO black projects using them as a source of revenue, as does organized crime such as Cartels.

Punishing the innocent is what history has shown us the religious enjoy doing. Self flagellation, guilt, and shame, is their path to humility. Another lie they believe in. So is swearing (“morally reprehensible”), and they haven’t stopped that yet! The U.S. was founded on the principle of freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Trying to control what people say and THINK has been the goal of the power-hungry since the beginning of time. All these laws against inanimate things are another way the religious want to control people. It IS about religious moralism and control. What someone is “allowed” to do, say, think, or have. By whose authority?? When did the establishment become God?!?! The Creator!

All religion has been used since their beginnings as a system of controlling the masses. Anarchy will NOT reign without religion. People have built-in limits so long as they have empathy for others. No one wants to be bullied, put down, berated, labelled, shunned, tortured, or killed. So why are the moralists so quick to use punishment (a passive version of torture, taking someone’s freedom away) as a means of control? If that worked, there’d be no crime. History once again has shown us it doesn’t work. Only the sadistic people supporting that system are deriving pleasure from it! So, obviously, legalists still have the wrong ideas.

If people are doing things that cause no harm or potential harm to others, they should be left to their vices. Why do politicians and others feel the need to stifle everyone’s existence? We know it’s for the “feel good” support of the masses, to keep them in positions of power; who have mostly been indoctrinated into the system of false beliefs.

Tobacco and alcohol kill people, yet they are still legal to use. The illusion of governance over them is what placates the moralists. When in reality, it’s tax revenue that drives the regulation of the devices of pleasure. Why is how someone masturbates in the privacy of their own home, without victimizing anyone, even as issue?? If not for taking away any means of enjoyment for people on their own time, in their private spaces. Why? We’re only “allowed” to get drunk and get as high as a nicotine buzz? It’s ALL about control in this economic system of slavery!! Nothing more!

1 Like

Basically, it’s appeal to the masses.

The Japanese Constitution is mentioned a lot (and the “reasons” for censorship are bullshit).

There are two relevant passages:

Article 19. Freedom of thought and conscience shall not be violated.

Article 21. Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed.
No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated.

4 Likes

I hope anyone who is in the know and involved with these groups can discuss organizing for the long haul and explain that this is a multinational long-running effort that will require staying in touch and coordinating, and providing work and funds where they can to related groups and orgs, and that they mention Prostasia in the process. I see people all over the world are getting affected by this and expressing disapproval but I’ve yet to see more hapen than a fizzle out once their opposition fails. What is needed is organizing, staying up to date, and coordinating across nations and I just feel people aren’t getting educated enough on how to do this. Since this is a major national effort I wish Prostasia at least got involved in some official capacity and maybe sent someone to contact them and get involved with whoever leads these groups, and at the very least make people aware. These are opportunities to build networks.

2 Likes

This is just a suggestion.

One issue with the narratives is the language used. Social influencers are skilled at controlling language. What is proposed is punishment for not pretending a doll is precious. That needs to be stated explicitly. The nonsense needs to be exposed for what it is. That same idea applies to imaginary characters.

It’s not evil or morally lacking for anyone to not pretend that a doll or an imaginary character is precious.

Pushback against an ideology that advocates punishment for not pretending what even a child is not expected to pretend needs to address the language used.

I suspect that the word “pretend” needs to be used more often than it has been.

One could ask how preposterous it is to expect an adult to pretend that a doll or an imaginary character is precious. One could ask whether it’s ever morally relevant for an adult to not pretend that a doll or an imaginary character is precious. One could ask whether punishment for not pretending that a doll or an imaginary character is precious can be justified.

It also isn’t evil to pretend that a doll or an imaginary character isn’t precious.

This is about the idea that one has the right to be left alone if they aren’t bothering anyone. It’s not about being an ally or a sympathizer. It’s about a sense of justice that encompasses the notion that one should be left alone if they are leaving others alone. Taking away freedom and liberty is a punishment in itself. The attack on doll ownership and fictional materials is unprovoked and, therefore, unjustified.

4 Likes

Like I said, usually in democratic countries, it’s not the government that you need to worry about. It’s the private lobbyists. Even things that appear to be from the government is usually spearheaded by said private companies. For example:

3 Likes

INHOPE | Taiwan Amends Regulation to Prevent Digital Violence INHOPE says it was changed after heavy lobbying from their local hotline.

1 Like

I don’t want to give them more traffic. What specifically does it say?

No comment.

Taiwan Amends Regulation to Prevent Digital Violence

As technology advances, sexual violence affects everyone in new and unexpected ways. To prevent digital sexual violence more effectively, Taiwan Government amended four laws, including the Criminal Code, the Child and Youth Sexual Exploitation Prevention Act, the Sexual Assault Crime Prevention Act and the Crime Victim Protection Act, in early 2023.

According to the amendments, computer/digitally generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM), such as pseudo-photograph, comics or anime, is prohibited. This amendment not only increases the penalty for filming and distributing child sexual exploitation material but also includes the penalty for overseas distribution. More importantly, anyone possessing child sexual exploitation material will now face a criminal liability of no more than one-year imprisonment, instead of an administrative liability.

The significance of these changes shows that possessing CSAM, whether involving a real child or not, is an intolerable crime. Additionally, with “sexual image” clearly defined, any person who records or distributes sexual images (which include false sexual images, for instance, Deepfake images) without one’s agreement will face a maximum of five years in prison. Furthermore, a chapter on “crime victim protection orders” was added; any sexual images of the victim shall be confiscated, and any harassment to either victim or the victim’s family is prohibited. As to the sexual images uploaded to the Internet, a newly created removal regulation specified the Internet service provider is obligated to restrict access and remove the related information but retain relevant data for judicial investigation. The Internet service provider will be fined or their access will be restricted if they refuse to collaborate.

The amendments strengthen the prevention and treatment of digital violence and take a step to improve child protection and gender equality in the digital environment.

Taiwan Amends Regulation to Prevent Digital Violence

  • by ECPAT Taiwan
1 Like

Prisoner A: “What are you in for?”
Prisoner B: “I like anime”
Prisoner A: *face turns into an expression of shock and disgust*

1 Like

“Digital violence” sounds like some Matrix bullshit. More unhinged than “words are violence”.

1 Like

This has nothing to do with protecting children from abuse. If the supposed ‘minor’ does not exist, then it is not CSAM.

This is nauseating to see… freedom is an afterthought in the context of moralist and fear-based policy.

5 Likes

At this point, it’s not even fear, but “public morals”… Whatever those are. LOL, gender equality AKA they’re only going after lolis, not shotas. Once again, it’s stuff, like this, that makes me no longer afraid of full blown fascism because what good is freedom, if I can’t enjoy it?

2 Likes

Laws are made to protect women and “children” (mostly female). Society holds women on a pedestal, but children, specifically girls. The belief girls and women need protecting. Boys/males, ah heck with them, they’ll figure it out! I almost start to feel like it’s ok to be mysogynistic since the pendulum is so far against males. That men are the “enemy”. The belief that men’s feelings don’t matter, as supposing we have any?
Taking away every outlet males have to fulfill natural desires in a “safe” environment, where no one is harmed, creates an imbalance. Leaving men with no outlet, no choice, but to act out irl. So much MORE harmful banning and outlawing such things that the moralists and religious types find distasteful. Too bad! That’s life! People should be allowed to make choices. If God said he would never infringe upon our freewill; who do these men think they are dictating mandates? Making up rules. Telling people what they can and can’t do that is absolutely a harmless endeavor!

5 Likes

It is. Women today want freedom without responsibility. Back in the day, they had no freedom but also no real responsibility, while men have both. Regardless of their bodies, it seems that those women are still children in mind, given what they want… Yes, I’m paraphrasing Darth Jadus what with that line about children wanting freedom without responsibility:

2 Likes

At this point, and how society is evolving and how hard it is to find a mate, I would rather have a tulpa girlfriend.

Welcome to the doll life.

3 Likes

Are you replying to me?