Originally Posted by
Deathhappens
I don't know why I came back to this thread, but I was informed just last week that as per obscenity laws lolicon is absolutely illegal in federal terms. California, I think it was, has precedent against it, but I wouldn't bet my continuing freedom and existence as not-a-pariah-of-society on that if I were you.
- - - Updated - - -
to wit:
Again, not child porn laws of the federal government. Obscenity is subjective and vary by state. Also, you just jumped from "criminal" to "pariah". Not offending the law is one thing, but frankly, I don't give a shit about the putrid nagging of the witch-burning rabble. Blazes with them. Actual child porn requires actual children and actual porn. Fictional loli does not have the first. Being a "minor" requires being under 18. Judging by appearance alone for this purpose is utter nonsense. Again, you posted that, and I'll just post this again:
https://forum.prostasia.org/t/is-lol...l-in-the-us/63 The concise answer is that lolicon is legal if it is (a) not visually indistinguishable from a real minor (which means things like deep fakes and possibly very realistic 3DCG are questionable) and (b) is not obscene under state obscenity law. But “obscene” has a loose definition and that is where differences of opinion can come in.
You seem to neglect that the US has something called the First Amendment. In other words, it's only illegal if it's passed off as the real thing. Not to mention that Jast
USA has quite a few loli works. Also:
https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/bbs...c.php?t=580487 For example, California law actually allows obscene materials, though only to be sold to 18+, and explicitly exempts "drawings, figurines, statues, or any film rated by the Motion Picture Association of America" from any child porn charges (ca code 311.11).
The federal law in question (1466a) part of which that banned specific speech or visual depictions was struck down, now entirely relies on the legal definition of obscenity--which itself relies on a process that cannot determine that fact by itself (i.e. cannot judge something inherently so or anything beforehand)--and uses interstate commerce. Thing is, all porn can be subjected to the same treatment since legal obscenity is classed as "unprotected" speech (not banned or illegal, just not immune from prosecution) It doesn't make it illegal though even if you're the unlucky bastard who gets charged (where for the same material, someone else can get away with it--a CA court or DA may and has dropped such charges), which is why most except the most zealous prosecutors/LEO go after it.
When it comes to §1466A specifically, there are two parts of the law you should be aware are explicitly unconstitutional, even if they have not yet been removed. 1466A(a)(2) and 1466A(b)(2) go beyonds the bounds of obscenity, and as such were the parts of the law deemed unconstitutional in United States v. Handley, as well as in several other cases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Handley
Originally Posted by
OverMaster
While I can understand both sides of the equation when it comes to the rather blurry issue of fictional children (or adult fictional people who happen to look like children), I'd like to point out that this very type of reasoning also as used once to demonize violence in pop culture because 'while not phsyical violence, it still causes trauma'. This was, of course, before we collectively decided that actually, fictional violence was okay after all, it's just fictional sexuality that is wrong unless it conforms to the tendency we are trying to support at the time.
Making "making people mildly uncomfortable" a crime is literally charging a crime for looking at people funny.
Now for something completely different:
I feel like this is less about white people and black people and more about winners and losers (though, I suppose you could also call it master morality vs. slave morality, or even those with talent vs. imbeciles, I guess). Of course, if you can't manage things, like time, money, people, etc. you'll find yourself in a less than fortunate situation. The Sima family is all about purging imbeciles, and they're Asian (they also won their respective war):
