Quote:
Originally Posted by Bani
It seems like this case here is more about Amazon objecting to one of the characters being 17 years old. What's funny to me though is that if the character were 18 or even 25, I doubt they would look all that different.
|
I've never really gotten into manga - the few times I've encountered it (like in the magazine Monocle) I've always ended up reading it the wrong way, right to left. But who knows, maybe now that I know about the gay erotic stuff, I might have to take another look.
The aspect that really puzzles me about this is, as far as I know, that the main reason behind laws on child pornography are to protect children from sexual exploitation, which is why the age of consent for sexual relations can be 14 or 16, but the age of consent for participation of pornography can actually be 18 or 21. You don't want kids to be drawn into the world of being porn objects, especially when they're too young to understand the consequences. Personally I tend to favor the minimum age of 21 for this, but it seems I'm in a minority.
Nonetheless, the part that puzzles me is this: how can a fictional drawing be exploited? Photos and video, yes, they exploit the model, but a cartoon?
Edited to add: just reviewed the legal cases, and the laws introduced over the last 10 years. I see the argued theory is that cartoon depictions can lead to copycat abuse.