Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

UK man sentenced for having manga images of children

No, we don't live in a perfect world. But the rates of recidivism among prosecuted child abusers is scarily high, even after 'treatment'. I think the only way to deal with it is to make it completely socially unacceptable not least because it cuts down the trade of 3rd world kids being pimped for 1st world pleasures. No, it's not a 100% solution but it seems to me to be the least bad.

There are charities who support people with paedophile tendencies to help them address and deal with their proclivities but I suspect that a predator needs to really feel that they need help with their issues before they will seek it. This all feels a bit like 'can't get a real live kid? This is the next best thing!'.

As a society, we cannot ever condone sex with a child because a child can never consent. Any images are always abuse.
I pretty much agree with what you're saying but the harm that is done to kids in the third world demonstrates that making it unacceptable hasn't worked because people understand, it's not ok to do this in my own country and they start taking holidays in Thailand or whatever. Pure condemnation doesn't work, I think you have to work with people prone to offending. It's like the war on terror or the war on drugs, you have to be really smart about it.
 
I really don't think a serbian film is wank material.

The point is they both depict the same thing, everyones unified that child abuse should not be tolerated in any kind of depiction, yet people will defend this particular film....

What was the intent of the maker's of the serbian film compared to manga guy?
 
I really don't think a serbian film is wank material.

The point is they both depict the same thing, everyones unified that child abuse should not be tolerated in any kind of depiction, yet people will defend this particular film....

No, everyone is not unified that child abuse should not be tolerated in any kind of depiction, it depends very much which the nature and intention of that depiction is.

There's a world of difference between a documentary examining and depicting child abuse, on the one hand, and child porn produced for sexual gratification through wanking.

Anyway, I get the impression that despite the attempts of a number of people to listen to you, understand you and explain where/how you're confused, your confusion is such that this is now a fruitless exercise.
 
I really don't think a serbian film is wank material.

The point is they both depict the same thing, everyones unified that child abuse should not be tolerated in any kind of depiction, yet people will defend this particular film....
I haven't seen the film, so I can't comment on it but I think you're missing the point completely. The film wasn't made to be shared and wanked over by a pedo ring. The child-rape manga images were.
 
Ah, okay, so what law was used here? Obscenity? I can sort of agree with that.

All images depicting child rape are now illegal. Yer man was handed a suspended rather than real prison sentence as the judge acknowledged it was a victimless crime but, none the less, these images aren't welcome. And rightly so. Seems the judge was level headed and I say that despite despising the fucking beak.
 
How would anyone know? Some people consider ASF pure exploitative trash - others think it much better than that and at least an attempt at a serious film.

You really can't tell the difference between artistic intent (however controversial or misguided) and pornographic intent?
 
Both of their intentions are to depict child rape.

Yet one attempts to do it using realism and one attempts to do it with an interpretation of.

Oh ffs, Sim.

That's not the substantive difference in the context of this discussion is it?

One has been produced to depict the horror of child rape, the other has been produced so nonces can get sexual gratification from child rape imagery.

Why don't you get this?
 
Last edited:
You really can't tell the difference between artistic intent (however controversial or misguided) and pornographic intent?

I think it's a line that can be blurred (not necessarily in this instance). Can art never be porn and porn never be art? Have you never seen a 'film' that was really just an excuse for the actors to get nekkid?
 
There's child rape in The War Zone (actually I'm unsure of her age, but it's his daughter and it's rape anyhow) but it isn't in any way porn.

Eta she's an 18 year old. But it covers sexual violence.
 
Last edited:
sim667 I am a bit confused about the stance you are taking in this tbh.

Manga has long walked the line and is overly sexualised in it's depiction of women etc many of whom look bearly legal...

Manga images that involve the sexualisation of children are just that..regardless of whether they are cartoons...seriously to defend this is to say that any of us can draw a picture of a child being abused or sexualised and we shouldn't be called on it...

Child abuse has moved with the times and technology, as such depictions of it have moved on...creating or getting off on CGI of children in sexualised/abusive situations is the same thing.
 
sim667 .seriously to defend this is to say that any of us can draw a picture of a child being abused or sexualised and we shouldn't be called on it...

But would we be called on it (legally)? Why would this be so much worse than a drawing (yes, a drawing) of someone being stabbed or beheaded, for example? Would prosecution also depend on the artistic ability of the artist?
 
But would we be called on it (legally)? Why would this be so much worse than a drawing (yes, a drawing) of someone being stabbed or beheaded, for example? Would prosecution also depend on the artistic ability of the artist?

Wasn't someone done for drawings last year?
 
But would we be called on it (legally)? Why would this be so much worse than a drawing (yes, a drawing) of someone being stabbed or beheaded, for example? Would prosecution also depend on the artistic ability of the artist?
I think, as someone mentioned earlier, 'intent' would be the key factor.
 
Itziko ran away from the boards when she was making similar arguments. I guess she never came back.
That's the name of the person i was grasping for - she did say that she would think about it and had missed lots of stuff in her original position. There's an honesty there.
 
sim667 I am a bit confused about the stance you are taking in this tbh.

Manga has long walked the line and is overly sexualised in it's depiction of women etc many of whom look bearly legal...

Manga images that involve the sexualisation of children are just that..regardless of whether they are cartoons...seriously to defend this is to say that any of us can draw a picture of a child being abused or sexualised and we shouldn't be called on it...

Child abuse has moved with the times and technology, as such depictions of it have moved on...creating or getting off on CGI of children in sexualised/abusive situations is the same thing.

There's a bit more to this that I'm not willing to discuss publicly. But believe me, I do have reasons for my stance..... The thread has dragged up some things from growing up, let's just leave it at that please.
 
Back
Top Bottom