This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Raneklint (talk | contribs) at 15:13, 27 September 2006 (→Lolicon in Japan). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 15:13, 27 September 2006 by Raneklint (talk | contribs) (→Lolicon in Japan)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Lolicon (ロリコン), in the western world, means manga-style sexual artwork involving childlike characters. The term is borrowed from Japan, where it is slang, short for Lolita Complex, that refers to an attraction to any girl below the age of consent, or to an individual attracted to such a person. Lolicon images are of girls; see shotacon for the male equivalent.
Lolicon in Japan
Lolicon is a Japanese portmanteau of Lolita complex, a term derived from Vladimir Nabokov's book Lolita. Generally, it is a term used to describe an attraction to any girl beneath the 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. Many general bookstores and newsstands openly offer illustrated lolicon material.
Sexual manga featuring children or childlike characters are called lolicon manga. These are generally legal in Japan, although child pornography was outlawed in 1999.
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 loli-manga. The use of the word lolicon is an indication that the material is overtly—even if not explicitly—erotic.
Controversy & legal issues
Opponents of illustrated lolicon pornography claim that fictional material encourages viewing children as sex objects and can incite actual sexual abuse. However, there is no evidence to support these claims of causality. Despite the fact that most lolicon artwork is produced in Japan, there is no evidence that it has caused an increase of violent crimes against children and teens. 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.
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. The man was on probation at the time for possession of child pornography that featured real children.
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".
Legal status in Germany
In Germany, the contribution of pornographic depictions of children is forbidden, both realistic and fictive (§ 184b Abs. 1 StGB). But the only possession of fictive depictions of children is allowed (§ 184b Abs. 4 StGB).
Legal status in Hungary
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.
Legal status in Norway
Any images or videos that depict pornography in a childish context (which also even would include i.e. 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 the United Kingdom
UK law has dealt with simulated images quite differently since 1994, when the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act introduced the legal definition of an "indecent pseudo-photograph of a child", which is prohibited as if it were a true photograph (it should be noted, however, that this law is unlikely to include lolicon, as the Act goes on to define a pseudo-photograph as an image "which appears to be a photograph"). The application, if any, to lolicon is as yet untested.
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. In December 2005, Dwight Whorley was convicted under this law for receiving both "...obscene Japanese anime cartoons that graphically depicted prepubescent female children being forced to engage in genital-genital and oral-genital intercourse with adult males," and "...digital photographs of actual children engaging in sexually explicit conduct." Neither Whorley's, nor any other conviction under this law has been reviewed by the Supreme Court. However, the reason that "lolicon" was used against him in his trial was because he was on parole from prison, and the charge that put him there was having child porn also. Having any depiction of "child porn", this includes lolicon, violated his parole.
See also
- Legal aspects
Footnotes
- Sharon Kinsella, Adult Manga: Culture and Power in Contemporary Japanese Society. 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, 2006
- 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.
- 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)
- 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
- "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, 2003.
- "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) - "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)
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)