This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jmh123 (talk | contribs) at 01:38, 8 June 2007 (→Controversy and legal issues: keep suspected - clarify connection between CASPER and murders). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 01:38, 8 June 2007 by Jmh123 (talk | contribs) (→Controversy and legal issues: keep suspected - clarify connection between CASPER and murders)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Lolicon (ロリコン, rorikon), in the Western world, is a genre of manga-style sexualized drawings involving childlike female characters. The term Loli is derived from Vladimir Nabokov's book, Lolita. In Japan, Lolicon is a slang portmanteau short for Lolita complex. In Japan, it refers to an attraction to girls below the age of consent, or an individual attracted to such a person. The equivalent genre focused on male characters is shotacon. Some people consider its sexually explicit forms to be a type of child pornography, and their legality in some Western nations is ambiguous.
Lolicon in Japan
Generally, lolicon it is a term used to describe a sexual attraction to a girl who is under the legal age of consent, both perceived and actual pedophilia and ephebophilia. Strictly speaking, Lolita complex in Japanese refers only to the paraphilia itself, but the abbreviation lolicon can refer to an individual that has the paraphilia as well. Lolicon is a widespread phenomenon in Japan, where it is a frequent subject of scholarly articles and criticism. Many general bookstores and newsstands openly offer illustrated lolicon material, but there has also been police action against lolicon manga.
Sexual manga featuring children or childlike characters are called lolicon manga. These are generally legal in Japan, although child pornography was outlawed in 1999. Some lolicon manga cross over with other hentai genres, such as crossdressing and futanari.
Lolicon in the West
The meaning of lolicon has evolved much in the West (as have the meanings of other words such as anime, otaku and hentai). In the West, lolicon refers to anime or manga that contains sexual or erotic portrayals of prepubescent or childlike characters, and is thus close cognate to the Japanese term lolicon manga. The use of the word lolicon is an indication that the material is overtly—even if not explicitly—erotic.
Controversy and legal issues
Opponents of illustrated lolicon pornography claim that even fictional material encourages viewing children as sex objects and can contribute to actual sexual abuse. However, others such as Liebert, Neale and Davison argue there is no direct evidence to support these claims of causality. Most lolicon artwork is produced in Japan, but Diamond and Uchiyama argue that there is no evidence that it has caused an increase of violent crimes against children and teens. They cite statistics that show that the number of reported incidents of crime against children in Japan, as well as violent crime in general, is well below that of most other developed countries. Their research has found that there appears to be a strong correlation between the dramatic rise of pornographic material in Japan from the 1970s onwards and a dramatic decrease in reported sexual violence, especially crimes involving juveniles and non-impulsive rape cases. Based on their research, Diamond and Uchiyama argue that widespread availability of sexually explicit material can in fact reduce the rate of sexual crimes.
A non-profit organization called CASPER was founded in Japan in 1989 to campaign for regulation of depiction of minors in pornographic magazines and video games. This group has claimed that lolicon and other anime magazines and games do encourage sex crimes. The group was formed as a part of a significant public reaction against these genre when four girls between the ages of 4 and 7 were kidnapped and murdered by a suspected lolicon in 1988 and 1989. The Tokyo High Court ruled Tsutomu Miyazaki sane, stating that "the murders were premeditated and stemmed from Miyazaki's sexual fantasies," and he was sentenced to death for his crimes.
Legal status in Canada
Section 163.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code defines child pornography as "a visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means", that "shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity", or "the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of eighteen years." The definitive Supreme Court of Canada decision, R. v. Sharpe, interprets the statute to include purely fictional material even when no real children were involved in its production. From paragraph 38 of the decision:
Interpreting "person" in accordance with Parliament's purpose of criminalizing possession of material that poses a reasoned risk of harm to children, it seems that it should include visual works of the imagination as well as depictions of actual people. Notwithstanding the fact that 'person' in the charging section and in s. 163.1(1)(b) refers to a flesh-and-blood person, I conclude that "person" in s. 163.1(1)(a) includes both actual and imaginary human beings.
— Supreme Court of Canada, R. v. Sharpe, Paragraph 38
In October 2005, Canadian courts sentenced an Edmonton, Alberta, man to one year of community service for importing manga depicting child sex, possibly the first manga-related child pornography case in Canada.
In April 2006, an American was sentenced to 30 days in jail for bringing child pornography to Canada. While he had possession of three videos and three images of real children, a criminal investigator cited the 13,000 "mostly cartoon" or "anime" images in his possession and the "prohibitive nature of these goods".
So far, no one has been prosecuted solely for possessing or importing fictional Japanese lolicon in Canada. The current law has primarily been used to compound charges for real child pornography. However, the current law does criminalize possession of purely fictional material, could be applied in cases featuring only images of fictional children in the future, and has been used to prosecute possession of fictional stories with no pictures of real or imaginary children.
Legal status in Germany
 | This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Lolicon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (June 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
German law does prohibit the propagation of any kind of pornographic material involving children. In this it does not discriminate between actual and fictitious. Possession is forbidden only for real and realistic sexual depictions of children. In Germany, only minors below the age of 14 are considered as children.
Legal status in Hungary
| This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Lolicon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (June 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
According to the latest definition of the act (Law 1997/LXXIII., Penal Code 195/A. §), "Production of Forbidden Pornography" is only forbidden if an underage person actually suffered through the production process. Due to this, any sort of graphics that were produced without using actual live models, or those using live models that were not sexually abused is legal. (Similarly it is legal if the resulting graphics is not original but a derivative of two or more pictures, in where the original picture of the underage person contains no matter violating the above paragraph of the Code. It does not need to bear any express label that the material was produced by any of those methods; and it is the task of the State to prove guilty, not of the defendant to prove innocent, which, with the recent developments in computer graphics, might be a burdensome if not impossible task.)
Legal status in the Netherlands
On October 1, 2002, the Netherlands introduced legislation (Bulletin of Acts and Decrees 470) which deemed "virtual child pornography" as illegal. The laws appear to only outlaw "realistic images representing a minor engaged in a sexually explicit conduct," and hence lolicon is not included.
Second Life (the US based virtual world) is currently being investigated by the public prosecutor. A number of Second Life users engage in age play where their online avatars dress, act and look like underage children while engaging in virtual sexual acts. Although there is no Dutch law that legislates against under age depictions of sexual acts for computer generated images, the public prosecutor is investigating this on the basis that these virtual actions may incite child abuse in the real world.
Legal status in Norway
Any images or videos that depict pornography in a childish context (which would include, for example, an adult model with childish clothes/toys/surroundings) are to be considered child pornography. Lolicon are therefore counted as child pornography, and not legal, in Norway (although this has not been proved by Norwegian court). So far, however, this law has only been used to sentence individuals in possession of real child porn.
Legal status in South Africa
With the promulgation of the "Films and Publications Amendment Bill" in September 2003, a broad range of simulated child pornography became illegal in South Africa. For the purposes of the act, any image or description of a person "real or simulated" who is depicted or described as being under the age of 18 years and engaged in sexual conduct, broadly defined, constitutes 'child pornography'. Under the act, anyone is guilty of an offence punishable by up to ten years imprisonment if he or she possesses, creates or produces, imports, exports, broadcasts, or in any way takes steps to procure or access child pornography.
Legal status in Sweden
Any images or videos that depict children in a pornographic context are to be considered child pornography in Sweden, regardless of how realistic or abstract they are. This means that lolicon is considered to be child pornography and is therefore illegal in Sweden. It has, however, not yet been tried in court.
Legal status in Denmark
| This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "Lolicon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (June 2007) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
Any "visual reproduction" of children in a pornographic context are to be considered child pornography in Denmark. This means that lolicon is considered to be child pornography and is therefore illegal in Denmark. This law has only been put to use in real child porn cases, and has yet to be tested against cartoons.
Legal status in the United Kingdom
Non-photographic images of children have never been illegal in the United Kingdom, and on 23 November 2006, Vernon Coaker, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, stated that "Although cartoons depicting child abuse are deeply offensive, they do not in themselves constitute abuse of a child. The 1978 Act is well understood by those who work with it and enforce it and there are substantial arguments against extending its scope to cover cartoons of child pornography."
However, on 13 December 2006, UK Home Secretary John Reid, announced that the Cabinet was discussing how to ban computer-generated images of child abuse — including cartoons and graphic illustrations of abuse — after pressure from children's charities. The Government published a consultation on 1 April 2007, announcing plans to create a new offence of possessing a computer generated picture, cartoon or drawing with a penalty of three years in prison and an unlimited fine.
Legal status in the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States decided in 2002, and affirmed in 2004, that previous prohibition of simulated child pornography under the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 was unconstitutional. The majority ruling stated that "the CPPA prohibits speech that records no crime and creates no victims by its production. Virtual child pornography is not 'intrinsically related' to the sexual abuse of children."
On 30 April 2003, President George W. Bush signed into law the PROTECT Act of 2003 (also dubbed the Amber Alert Law) which again criminalizes cartoon child pornography. The Act introduced 18 U.S.C. 1466A which criminalizes both Miller Test obscene cartoon depictions of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct, and, as noted by the 11th Circuit in United States v. Williams, cartoon depictions of a minor or what appears to be a minor engaging in overt sexual intercourse (not merely sexually explicit) and need satisify only the third part of the Miller Test, that it lack serious artistic value.
In December 2005, Dwight Whorley was convicted under 18 U.S.C. 1466A(a)(1) on twenty counts for receiving "...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 also convicted under 18 U.S.C. 2252(a)(2) on fourteen accounts for receiving "...digital photographs of actual children engaging in sexually explicit conduct." Whorley was on parole for earlier sex crimes at the time of the violations, although these convictions were independent of Whorley's violation of the terms of his parole. The same FOIA-requested November 2006 United States Attorney's Bulletin describing the details of the conviction, concludes by suggesting that the precedent set by the Whorley case be used as a basis for future prosecutions of possession of such obscene cartoons. It is worth noting that Whorley's charges were coupled with charges for possession of conventional child pornography and that he was on parole at the time making the legal possibility of appealing the charges far less feasible and far less attractive to civil rights groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union.
Neither Whorley's, nor any other conviction under this law has been reviewed by the Supreme Court.
In February 2007, Senator John McCain introduced S.519, which would add a mandatory 10-year sentence in jail to anyone who uses the Internet to violate the PROTECT Act.
See also
- Shotacon, the male equivalent of lolicon.
- Bishōnen, often the subject of female desire towards underage boys.
- Shōnen-ai, or 'Boys Love'. Mostly drawn by women and marketed to a female audience.
- Moe, a similar aesthetic but less sexual in nature.
- Legal aspects
Footnotes
- http://www.comipress.com/article/2006/11/17/1027
- ^ Kinsella, Sharon. Adult Manga. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2000. ISBN 0-8248-2318-4
- Gelder, Ken. The Subcultures Reader, 2nd ed. Oxon: Routledge, 2005. p. 547. ISBN 0-415-34415-8
- Tim Richardson, "Child porn banned in Japan". The Register, 18 May 1999
- Lolicon entry at Wiktionary
- Glossary Entry: Lolicon Anime Meta-Review web site URL accessed May 13, 2006as
- President Signs PROTECT Act: President's Remarks Upon Signing of S. 151, the Protect Act (30 April 2003). Retrieved January 28, 2006.
- The Early Window Liebert, R. M., Neale, J. M., & Davison, E. S. ISBN 0-08-017091-9
- Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 22(1): 1-22. 1999.
- [http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-01-13/lolicon-backlash-in-japan "Lolicon Backlash in Japan" animenewsnetwork.com Retrieved on 06-07-2007
- "Court rules serial killer Miyazaki sane," The Japan Times 06/29/91 Retrieved 06/07/2007
- R. v. Sharpe (26 January 2001). Retrieved February 20, 2006.
- Anime News Network (20 October 2005). Retrieved January 20, 2006.
- CBC News (April 4 2006)
- R. v. Beattie (8 April 2005). Retrieved March 12, 2007.
- Justitie (1 October 2002). Retrieved January 20, 2006.
- Draft Convention on Cyber-crime (25 April 2000). Retrieved January 20, 2006.
- Template:No icon Lovdata - Straffeloven, 19. kapittel, Seksualforbrytelser, § 204a
- Template:No icon Lovdata - Straffeloven, 19. kapittel, Seksualforbrytelser, § 204 - "Pornoloven" ("The porn law")
- "Films and Publications Amendment Bill of 2003 (104kb pdf file)" (PDF). Retrieved 14 January.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=ignored (|access-date=suggested) (help) - Template:Sv icon Frågor och svar om sexuella övergrepp mot barn
- "House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for [[23 November]] [[2006]]". Retrieved 6 December.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); URL–wikilink conflict (help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=ignored (|access-date=suggested) (help) - "Ban urged on child abuse images". BBC News. 2006-12-13. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - "Plan to tighten child abuse law". BBC News. 2007-04-02. Retrieved 2007-05-28.
{{cite news}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - "Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition". Retrieved 12 January.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=ignored (|access-date=suggested) (help) - "Bush signs child protection bill". Retrieved May 1.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=ignored (|access-date=suggested) (help) - "United States v. Williams" (PDF). Retrieved 2007-02-12.
- "Richmond man first convicted under expanded child-porn law". Retrieved 12 January.
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help); Unknown parameter|accessyear=ignored (|access-date=suggested) (help) - Flannery, Sara E. (2006). "Prosecuting Obscene Representations of the Sexual Abuse of Children" (PDF). Internet Pornography and Child Exploitation. United States Department of Justice. p. 50. Retrieved 2007-02-12.
{{cite web}}: Unknown parameter|coauthors=ignored (|author=suggested) (help); Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help) - "Whorley Sentencing" (PDF) (Press release). U.S. Department of Justice, Eastern District of Virginia. 2006-03-10. Retrieved 2006-05-14.
{{cite press release}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - "Whorley Verdict" (PDF) (Press release). U.S. Department of Justice, Eastern District of Virginia. 2005-11-30. Retrieved 2006-05-14.
{{cite press release}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - "Virginia Man Sentenced in Landmark Obscenity Case". Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved 2006-09-15. (March 10 2006)
- CNET News.com, Senator to propose surveillance of illegal images
External links
- "'Virtual child' pornography on the Internet: a 'virtual' victim?" Duke Law & Technology Review, 9/23/2002,
- "Does comic relief hurt kids?" at ecpat.net Japan Times (April 27 2004)
- "New Law Banning Lolicon?" ComiPress (November 17 2006)