Is Lolicon illegal in the US?

Art and fiction
38

Like if you were to create your own adult or fictional loli content, it would be immune from obscenity because it wasn’t introduced within the chain of interstate or foreign commerce, meaning people who were charged for “possession” of it, like that Eychaner guy you mentioned from 2018. That’s not really “possession”, that’s receipt through interstate commerce.
Yeah… it’s really bloody confusing.

Stanley was written to basically be the calling card that overturned Roth because pornography itself is harmless, as a study commissioned by the Senate at the time concluded. In Stanley, the state of Georgia attempted to assert a paternalistic interest over people’s private thoughts.

But Congress didn’t really like the answer they were given by actual scientists, and were infuriated that SCOTUS would dare base their decision on private porn possession on something like science, logic and reason and not their interpretation of “common sense”, so when Nixon was elected, he packed the Supreme Court full of bigots and conservative, anti-porn zealots who essentially tried to nullify the primary holding of Stanley, and use pointless semantics and other bullshit to shamelessly impose their ideas on the people.
Under the logic I’ve presented to you, if you were to stream a BangBros video depicting adults in a state where such graphic depictions were likely to be considered ‘obscene’, it could legally jeopardize you.

Yeah… it’s extremely depressing and wholly un-American to fracture the freedom of speech like this, then come at us with double speak like this. They assume that people just instinctively “know” what’s right and wrong as it should be applied to media, which isn’t true at all. They shafted logic and reason.

I know it seems like a lot of opinionated crap I’m saying, but it’s all objectively true.

3 Likes
40

Well… there is hope.

Loli is. by default, legal. It does not meet the requirements for child pornography and for an obscenity judgement to be made, it requires a sitting judge to make the arbitrary determination that it meets the threshold of obscenity, which is never the same between states. States like Oregon, in fact, found that obscene speech was protected by their state constitution, so it’s very unlikely that anything would be found obscene there. Other states, like California, Washington, and Maine literally refused to take up obscenity cases relating to fictional anime or loli content, while a handful of others simply haven’t done so.

The obscenity doctrine is a plain-as-day example of bad precedent. It’s honestly baffling to me that it could even exist, and the hideous and complicated history behind it only furthers the fact that it should be overturned, just like segregation and marriage inequality were.

We will see the First Amendment restored to its proper glory. Whether these conservatives like it or not, the freedom of speech does include the obscene, as it did so long ago.

Innocent people have been severely harmed and disenfranchised by this prime example of bad precedent. Filmmakers, artists, novelists, and consumers of this type of material are all potential victims of this callous attack on American individualism and freedom.

It wasn’t designed to address sexual exploitation, but to be used as a weapon in an ongoing culture war between sex-positive progressivism and puritan moral-fallacy conservatives during a precarious time before the Internet, when things like homosexuality were far more taboo.

1 Like
42

I looked up more info regarding obscenity and found that the definition that is given would make most types of pornography on the web today illegal. So websites like PH, Rule 34, and even Reddit would all be considered illegal, At least if im looking at this correctly. If that’s the case then im sure 70% of America is guilty at this point.

2 Likes
43

Sure as hell may seem that way, but you’d be surprised. The obscenity doctrine has no valid applications that can’t be accomplished by other less restrictive, more reasonable means that don’t involve the use of an arbitrary, outdated, and useless invention.

There are companies that sell and distribute lolicon hentai and games, like Steam, Amazon (despite going after figurines), Fakku, MangaGamer, Denpasoft, Jast, the list goes on, and these companies have been around for so long there’s no way nobody’s noticed them.
But that doesn’t mean it still can’t be an issue for somebody in a state or predicament less fortunate.

Censorship of the arts is never justifiable. Period.

44

Rule 34 has been around since 2007 and has tons of obscene content. A group of internet personalities on YouTube used to have a web series where they would play demo disks and then look up rule 34 and flash games of characters and content from the games they played, mind you the pornographic images were censored for youtube but it still shows them clearly on the site viewing obscene material. There’s 100% no way someone hasn’t taken notice of that. I’m sure everyone has looked at porn at least once in their lifetime i mean i sure as hell know my parents did, but blows my mind they would rather bust people for non CP rather then the real stuff. CP is wrong on so many levels and makes me sick to think about but i can tell the difference between a real child in pain and an animated image of a chibi character.

1 Like
45

Wasn’t those laws in Australia passed by the moderates? Meanwhile, in Denmark, it appears to be the conservatives who are more liberal about art and fiction these days: Looking for Research The point is never to latch onto any part of the political spectrum. Only look for specific politicians with specific views.

1 Like
46

I find the fact Denpasoft (Sekai Project) in that list ironic since they themselves actually hate lolicon.

Even one of their staff said anyone who likes Noumi Kudryavka from Little Busters! (which is a SFW VN anyway) is a pedophile.

Personally I believe they would get away with censoring their releases if they could.

And MangaGamer also hate their customers, so I have a feeling they’d be no different either.

47

Well, MangaGamer released Maggot Baits and a version of Dies Irae not reliant on Steam, so I have to give them credit. As for their private messages, look, I, too, work in a company that has customer service. Fortunately, I don’t deal with the customers myself. I just process their documents, but even from that, I must admit that some (not all, fortunately) customers are kind of dumb.

49

It’s illegal here so I just engage in civil disobedience.

Punishing people for fictional art/literature is borderline retarded behavior no matter how anyone tries to cut it.

4 Likes
51

I think he’s from the UK.

53

It should absolutely be protected on artistic grounds. After all, the more people are “offended” by it, the more artistic it is. Art Should Comfort the Disturbed and Disturb the Comfortable.

2 Likes
54

it technically is legal, but again, the obscenity doctrine was never designed with logic or objectivity in mind.

When I first heard of the Miller test, I laughed. I laughed because of how…wrong it is, on so many levels, both logically and legally, especially with regard to the Constitution.
Even on an academic sense, the test is immediately invalid because pornography, especially the kind that caters to deviant tastes and triggers outrage, IS a form of art. Something is considered art when it’s the product of human imagination, ingenuity, and creative skill, but also when it provokes an emotional response from its audience. There’s no official rule that states pornography can’t be or isn’t a form of art. It is. Even the most obvious, generic types are on the basis that they are audiovisual works designed to satisfy emotional desire.
Sexual arousal, desire, lust, and eroticism are all valid emotions and subjects worth exploring, expressing, and indulging with as far as art goes.
Even if it’s just a 12 second video on some porn site, it’s still technically art.
Appealing to the ‘prurient interest’, by default, lends it serious artistic value.

America would be better without the obscenity doctrine. A Constitutional exception to the First Amendment should be based on harm, not morality or personal offense. That trivializes the justice system, undermines the freedoms guaranteed, and invalidates the purpose of the First Amendment, which was to foster freedom of the mind and conscience from coercion or intrusion by the state, and to do so, assuring the unfettered exchange of ideas is necessary. Sure, there are exceptions, like real child pornography, libel, and incitement. But these are not arbitrary exceptions, nor are they contingent on arbitrary variables, but rather objective questions regarding facts that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
The very fact that obscenity prosecutions don’t even require a lack of reasonable doubt to get a guilty proof that it’s a farce, and will be overturned.
The obscenity doctrine truly has no place in this country’s legal system, no different from ‘Separate but Equal’, marriage inequality, and sodomy laws. It will be next to fall.

56

Sadly yeah. “mere possession” means that you possess it within the confines of your private home and receiving or purchasing it can open up up past that. Same logic applies if you sell it.

It’s how they were able to go after and arrest people for buying and selling rap music in the 90s.

I’m telling you. The obscenity doctrine is a cancer.

59

That’s not the part that really matters, it’s the “is obscene” part that matters. Keep in mind that even images of adults can meet this bar if the character they’re playing is a minor, despite the fact that there is no minor involved.

It’s basically on the same level of legality as any kind of pornography that doesn’t use actual minors. The obscenity hook is unfortunate, but it differs by state and case-by-case. There’s absolutely zero consistency.
It’s presumed legal.

2 Likes
61

could content with Adults violate Obscenity Laws?

62

Yes. That’s why obscenity laws are so stupid. They aren’t even evenly enforced.

1 Like
64

The obscenity doctrine was originally created to enable the government to eradicate porn because conservatives, Evangelicals, Catholics, etc. fallaciously believed it was harmful to the “moral fabric of our nation”. When this was proven false, they claimed it was because it was a nuisance.

Obscenity laws are mostly unenforced, but that doesn’t mean they should still exist.

Loli/shota pornography is functionally identical to adult pornography in terms of legality, since there is no real child, hence why loli is protected by the First Amendment unless proven obscene.

It’s really confusing and contradictory in many cases, I know.

1 Like
65

it’s because they have no merit. They undermine the rule of law by juxtaposing an opinion as though it were fact. Obscenity laws are literally just blasphemy laws but with a different god, an equally arbitrary and fantastical god.

2 Likes
66

Giving pedos more fake cp is not the solution… As much as I hate pedos, there needs to be middle ground solutions beyond the typical “Just kill them all” nonsense, but I don’t see any reason why fake cp would solve their problems.

67

It’s about freedom of expression and there being no valid reason for their criminalisation. It doesn’t need to be a “solution” it’s as simple as “they don’t hurt anyone so there’s no reason they should be banned”.

2 Likes