Posts Tagged ‘immorality’

Another Thoughtcrime Victory! Manga Porn = 15 years

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2009

Just when you thought it was safe to possess a pen and paper, we hear about the disturbing case of Manga1 collector Christopher Handley’s prosecution and guilty plea (disappointing the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund) for violating the 2003 Protect Act, which outlaws cartoons, drawings, sculptures or paintings depicting minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct, and which lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” The maximum sentence is 15 years. It’s likely that Handley pled that down significantly.2 What did he possess to get him in so much trouble? Depictions of cartoon children being sexually abused.3

Some call him sick for collecting such things. Some feel he should be locked up. They feel that sick things should be prohibited. What is this really a case about? Sexuality? Pedophilia? Puritanism? Regardless, there has been an uproar in the comic book community, and the point I made last December is being reiterated.4 My “underage” stick-figure sex depiction (daring someone to prosecute me) has been, in a variety of ways, repeated.5

Where’s the victim? The ink? The paper? Are the prosecutors the type of people who believe that fictional characters have feelings or rights? And why isn’t everyone who has a copy of Nabokov’s Lolita (in book or movie form, or, heck, is there a graphic novel?) currently being prosecuted? Heck, why isn’t the government clamping down on Amazon and Barnes & Noble for selling both artistic and literary depictions of underage sex, rape, and torture? If you think it doesn’t exist, if you think it’s not purchasable by the general public, perhaps you’re the myopic kind of person who would cheer to see Handley thrown in jail while you simultaneously forgive the Catholic Church for harboring men who actually stuck their penises in the mouths and anuses of the innocent boys in their care.

Was that statement too obscene for you? Funny, because it really happened to real children by real priests (and lots of other people who don’t even know what Manga is). Why on earth would a man like Handley, who merely possessed drawings of things you don’t like, be subjected to more years in prison than the men who perform the acts you cannot bear to read upon REAL CHILDREN? That, not Handley, is what is disgusting in this society and world. Perhaps if Handley suddenly found Jesus he would be treated with real justice in a nation that touts its freedom of thought while failing to practice what it preaches.

Worth reading is the BoingBoing post about Handley’s unfortunate situation. Also some of the comments are right on target, and I’m going to quote a few of my favorites right here:

-verde-

Thought Police at the door sir:

-Have you ever in your head pictured an infant being raped?

-No.

-Not even now that we brought up the subject?

-Well, mmm I guess so.

-Could you come with us?

—

-spazzm-

And who exactly decides what is artistic or immoral?

Erotica is artistic, porn is immoral, smut is illegal.
Erotica is what excites me, porn is what excites you, smut is what excites them.

—

-anonymous-

One of the questions I have is why the assumption is that such content serves the sole purpose of titillation or arousal for the reader. Yes, its principle intent may be that, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the reader views it that way. I have books of Toshio Saeki’s work that I have brought back from Europe in the last ten years (and not without concern they would be confiscated at customs or worse). His work is *extremely* difficult to look at, and often incorporates children in sexual situations with adults. I do not find this at all arousing, and in fact, I find it shocking and disturbing. But I find his work incredibly beautiful, challenging and it inspires me to ask questions of myself as I look at it. So, where is that part of it? We must be allowed to examine the work of others that we ourselves may not agree with or even like…And I don’t want to live in a world where we’re not allowed to express even the darkest parts of our psyche…which no one is above. Some just keep it to themselves better than others.

Spare the whole “it inspires others to act”. Pete Townsend has a quote about that.

Then there’s that whole problem of suppressing thoughts and artistic expression. You know. That kinda poses ongoing problems. Telling people what they can / can’t think / express / consider doesn’t really work so great.

And, I highly agree with what was said earlier about cultural misunderstandings related to the taboo depiction of pubic hair making these characters appear to be children.

This is tragic. Very scary, very sad that he pled guilty without proper counsel. (I’m a mid-30’s white female, btw).

—

-anonymous-

Wow. I guess I better get ready for prison. I drew a picture of myself having sex with a cartoon girl (…after cutting her cartoon head off). By this standard, I’m guilty of sex crimes against children. I didn’t even get to “play doctor” as a kid. :(

If we really wanted to protect children, the US Catholic Church should be (temporarily) shut down and have all the clergy FBI checked and registered (fingerprints and DNA, you pervy bastards). Let’s start with the real criminals. Remember the psychologist in Happiness who was a pedophile? He jerked himself off to a male teen magazine in the back of his car (one of my all-time favorite cringe comedy moments). Those are the PEOPLE you should be worried about having pictures fuel their desire. It won’t be the loli.

I am a victim of child sexual abuse in two ways. I was abused as a teen, and my first attempt at intercourse was destroyed by my adult partner’s sobs of physical and psychological pain. She had been raped as a young girl. I carried that crushing guilt with me for several years after that.

Show me comics/drawings of someone’s fantasy/nightmare of raping and killing children, I may enjoy it. I may abhor it. I might fantasize about killing the person who made it. I might masturbate to it and cry afterward. In the privacy of my home and in my mind, I should be able to do anything I want with it.

Should I go to jail for thoughts?

In the meantime, I’m going to be renaming all of my folders “midget porn.”

—

-Redsquares-

In other news, millions arrested for owning copies of Gauguin’s works and early sketches.

I’d hate to see what happens to Scheile collectors.

God dammit, under this sort of law, my paper on Bellmer I wrote for art history is enough to throw most of that class in jail. Dude drew bisected nude girls, in a clearly sexualized nature. Damn good drawings, aesthetically and technically: well done, good composition, and were done to fuck with the Nazis to boot, but still… what does that prove?

It’s obvious you are a sick fuck, no matter what the hell you do. Someone, somewhere, is against it for the pure purpose of being against it, the only question is: can they convince others to be against it too?

—

-blueelm-

What a strange situation. It was my understanding that the posession of photographic child pornography was illegal because it encouraged the assault and mistreatment of the children in the picture. In other words it is documentation of abuse.

It is a strange and tough argument about manga and I don’t know exactly how I feel, but while our children are fetishised to a large degree in the US there is a distinction between a predatory pedophile, your nasty uncle, and people who collect drawings of little girls being split in half by squid with hardware. I’m not sure that the latter influences the former, as the person molesting one’s child is more likely to be a good friend or spouse than a sexually-frustrated comic collector.

I think the Gacey clown of pain model sticks in people’s heads, but remember that he actually interacted with kids… not drawings of them. Secondly while we may be stigmatizing our kids by putting them in beauty pageants and American Apparel ads, the objective of some one who compulsively rapes small children is not to worship the adult-like beauty of a little girl but rather to have sex with her because it fufuls a compulsive need. As far as sympathy for them, I’m not sure about these teach-a-lesson type laws, but I see no problem with confining a serious enough offender from the rest of society, but some one with some drawings? Really?

By the same token it makes me sad that there is probably some one who has actually raped a little girl who will serve less jailtime than this guy will for having some troubling drawings. As far as the drawings, as an artist, I can’t help but think that these things must be tolerated.

—

Okay, that’s enough for now. Check out the BoingBoing comment thread and KOS for a lot more on both sides of the issue.

If you have some extra money, donate it to CBLDF. If you know someone who is about to get in trouble for possessing cartoons (or a book, etc.), refer the person to CBLDF and the ACLU.

  1. “Comics and print cartoons (sometimes also called komikku コミック), in the Japanese language and conforming to the style developed in Japan in the late 20th century.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga [<]
  2. Here’s a link via Wired of his actual plea agreement. I think he screwed himself. [<]
  3. I’m sure that statement will get some unwanted Google hits to my blog. [<]
  4. If you missed it, the argument was about Lisa Simpson, the cartoon character, being depicted in sexual situations, and a law in Australia was being applied. My earlier article also referred to the U.S. Protect Act and related laws that have arisen in the Handley case. [<]
  5. No, I’m not taking credit for it, but I did post it in December, damnit! [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Government, Law, Sexuality | 3 Comments »

Atheism, a Positive Pillar

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008

In this article Atheism, a Positive Pillar by Tom Krattenmaker, the idea is explored that in the future, declaring yourself an atheist might not be committing political suicide.

It’s not easy not believing in God in the USA. That’s why a group of non-believers is trying to shed the strident image of past atheists by promoting a better side of those sitting on religion’s sidelines.

Being an atheist is not easy in this age of great public religiosity in America. Not when the overwhelming majority of Americans profess some form of belief in God. Not when many believers equate non-belief with immorality. Not when more people would automatically disqualify an atheist for the presidency (53%, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll) than a gay candidate (43%), for example, or a Mormon (24%).

Anti-atheism might have found its ugliest public expression during an episode in the Illinois Legislature this spring. As atheist activist Rob Sherman attempted to testify against a $1 million state grant to a church, Rep. Monique Davis railed, “This is the Land of Lincoln where people believe in God, where people believe in protecting their children. … It’s dangerous for our children to even know that your philosophy exists! … You have no right to be here! We believe in something. You believe in destroying!”

Lest we dismiss the legislator’s harangue as an anomaly, consider the organizations that bar atheists from membership — the Boy Scouts of America and American Legion, to name two, as well as some local posts of the Veterans of Foreign Wars — and the conspicuous absence of openly atheist politicians on the national stage.

Mindful of atheism’s reviled reputation, a new current in non-belief is intent on showing the public what atheists are for. You might be surprised by what’s on their short list. Because, save for the belief-in-a-deity part, it sounds a lot like what most Americans value. Care for one’s community and fellow human beings, love of country and cherished American principles, the pursuit and expansion of knowledge — these are the elements of the new “positive atheism.

Read the full article here

-HAL

Please Visit the Atheist Think Tank

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism | No Comments »

Mourning Cards and Tornadoes

Wednesday, February 6th, 2008

The father of a co-worker on a different floor died the other day, and another co-worker got a card and started a collection for flowers for the funeral. No big deal. Passed the card around. I was one of the later persons to receive the card to jot down something. We do this all the time for birthdays, and it’s fairly easy to come up with something to say for a birthday. “Happy Birthday!” “Best Wishes!” “Hope you get laid!” You know, something like that. Cheery or morose, doesn’t matter for a birthday card. “Hey, at least you still have your hair! Most of it, anyway!”

Well, for a “Your father died. I didn’t know him. I barely know you. I’m sorry he’s dead, but only in that faintly ‘we’re all humans here and share some sort of emotional bond’ sort of way” card, it’s not so easy. I was the 16th or 17th signer on the card. I glanced casually at the other notes, just to get an idea of what others were saying. And what I saw kinda shocked me, although perhaps it shouldn’t have.

Out of 16 notes, 12 used the word “prayer” or “prayers” and 1 used “God.” Yes, I know that for most people, “you’re in my prayers” really only means that “you’re in my thoughts.” Which, of course, makes the use of both redundant but perhaps more encouraging? “You’re in my thoughts and prayers.” What’s that really mean? I’m thinking of you, and, oh, by the way, I’m thinking of you. It’s worse when it even remotely means actual prayer. What, seriously, is prayer going to accomplish in that situation? What, exactly, are these people praying for? “I pray your daddy comes back from the grave so you can say your final farewells.” “I pray that you die soon so that you can see your dad in heaven.” “I pray that you understand that God really loves you and your dad, and death is just His way of showing it. Really.”

Many State of Protest readers are former Christians. Here are some questions for you. When you told someone that they were in your prayers, what did you really mean? And then what did you do? Did you ever actually pray for someone after you said you would? Did you clasp your hands together and close your eyes and start praying with that person in mind? And, if you did, what did you say? For what did you pray?

And why does it so utterly disturb me that so many of my co-workers are praying for someone who just lost a father?

If, say, a member of my immediate family were to die, would I take the assertions of prayer by others as insults or just innocent ways of expressing their attempt at shared mourning? In other words, is someone who knows that I’m atheist intentionally infringing upon my beliefs by stating that they will pray for me, for my family member?

It reminds me of a classic dead-end conversation:

Theist: “It was nice talking to you. God bless!”

Atheist: “I don’t believe in God.”

Theist: “But He believes in you, and He wants you to know that He loves you!”

Why do we dislike salespeople who knock on our doors on Saturday morning, or who pester us in stores while we’re trying to look at something? Because they won’t take “no” for an answer. They’re rude, imposing, and have absolutely no care about your feelings, your thoughts, your beliefs. Same reason we don’t like evangelicals. Now, these 13 or so co-workers who felt the need to indicate (out of piety or self-righteousness) that they were praying for the card’s recipient probably wouldn’t consider themselves evangelical. However, aren’t they?

Are prayers useful? Apparently some prominent people would like to continue to encourage that belief. Some frighteningly prominent people.

In 2000:

At the White House, President Clinton said he was “saddened by the terrible loss of life” in Georgia, and asked Americans to pray for the victims.1

The vice president [Gore] told tornado victims they could count on the prayers and resources of the nation.2

In 2003:

I express my sincerest condolences to the victims of the tornadoes that ripped through Arkansas and Kansas and Missouri, Tennessee, Nebraska and South Dakota. Our prayers and I hope your prayers are with those who — the loved ones who lost life or those who lost their home. The federal government, the local state and local authorities need to know the federal government will be moving as quickly as we possibly can to provide help where help is needed, and where help is justified. Nature is awfully tough at times. And the best thing to do right now is to pray for those who have suffered.3

In 2007:

I bring the prayers and concerns of the people of this country to this town.4

Today:

US President George W. Bush on Wednesday offered prayers and disaster relief to the victims of dozens of tornadoes that killed at least 48 people and injured hundreds more in southern US states.

“Prayers can help, and so can the government,” Bush said. “I do want the people in those states that the American people are standing with them.”

Twenty-four people were killed in Tennessee, 13 in Arkansas, and seven in Kentucky, officials in the three states said.

US media reported hundreds injured, and CNN said four people were killed in Alabama. Local authorities were not immediately available to confirm that death toll.

“I’ve just called the governors of the affected states,” said Bush. “I wanted them to know that this government will help them, but more importantly I wanted them to be able to tell the people in their states that the American people hold those who suffer up in prayer.”5

I’m stymied. Does Bush, does anyone really, honestly think that it’s more important that victims of natural disasters are “receiving”6 prayers from fellow Americans than it is for the government to help?7 I suppose knowing how the government “helped” after Hurricane Katrina, people might be somewhat distrustful of such intervention. Also, from the look of the trend — these tornadoes aren’t stopping — it would seem, from a rational point of view, that not only do the requested and given prayers not work, but from a corollary perspective, might even be the actual cause of the perpetuation of these wretched storms. Well, it’s just as realistic as the conjecture that AIDS is God’s punishment for homosexuality.8

I find prayers devoid of usefulness. Ten million Americans can go home tonight after work, hold hands with their loved ones, and utter a solemn, moving prayer. They can go to church this evening, if they’re Catholic they can receive an ash cross, they can mass pray for the victims. They can close their eyes, and ask God in the most imploring inner voice they have to help the victims. All this accomplishes is the exact same thing it accomplished in 2007, 2003, 2000, and all the years between and since — absolutely nothing but the smug satisfaction of those praying that they somehow advocated on behalf of the victims. That they’ve done something useful. Heck, if the president says it’s more important, it must be.

On the other hand, ten million Americans can send a dollar each to a victims’ relief fund. Ten American entrepreneurs can send a thousand dollars each. Five American corporations can send a million dollars each. People nearby can send themselves. People at a distance can send canned food, fresh water, or organize relief donations that maximize what the victims actually receive.

I’m going to pray to President George W. Bush to explain why he thinks that prayer is more important than the myriad other ways these people and all other victims of disasters and war can be helped. I doubt, however, that such a prayer would ever be answered.

—————————–

Follow up!: Apparently “Prayer is among the increasingly creative ways that schools and the community are encouraging Central Florida students to excel on the annual FCAT….”

Perhaps the highest stakes, though, are at Evans High, where students hope to avert another failing school grade.
This week, FCAT prayers will be said at home. Next month, however, when students tackle the reading, math and science portions of the test, Kimbrough of Rising Sun Baptist plans to have church members walking, kneeling and joining hands in prayer on the sidewalks outside Evans and its ninth-grade center. The vigil is intended to last throughout test-taking.

There’s even a special FCAT prayer service March 2 at 3 p.m. at the Evans ninth-grade center that’s open to all. The faithful will pray for good grades but also that the students stay focused and confident.

“God could care less about the FCAT, but he cares about his people,” Kimbrough said. “He cares about what concerns his people.”9

If I were a kid failing a standardized test, would I want my parents and community to help tutor me or stand outside and pray for me? Perhaps they’re doing both. However, this is certainly violative of the First Amendment in addition to creating a form of intimidation for non-Christian students. Oh, and it’s “God couldn’t care less…” Apparently the praying hasn’t been working.

  1. Death toll rises to 19 from Georgia tornadoes, CNN, February 14, 2000, http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WEATHER/02/14/storms.05/index.html [<]
  2. CNN, February 16, 2000, http://archives.cnn.com/2000/WEATHER/02/16/storms.04/ [<]
  3. Transcript of President George W. Bush, CNN, May 5, 2003, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0305/05/wbr.00.html [<]
  4. President George W. Bush, Bush visits Kansas town flattened by tornado, CNN, May 9, 2007, http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/09/kansas.bush/index.html [<]
  5. Bush offers prayers, government help for storm victims, Yahoo, February 6, 2008, http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/080206/usa/us_weather_tornado_bush [<]
  6. What is the process by which someone receives a prayer? How would someone know a prayer has been made on that person’s behalf unless the pray-er informs the recipient? So, are prayers really just modern-day condolences, with no real supernatural affiliation? If so, why push prayer in school? [<]
  7. If I went to the site of the devastation from those tornadoes, and I walked around to each victim and asked them to choose: I would either give them $5,000 in cash for recovery or I would have 5000 affiliates pray for them, which option would the victims choose? Which would you choose? How is prayer effective again? How is it more important than government assistance? [<]
  8. 23% See AIDS as God’s Punishment for Immorality, Pew Research Center, http://pewresearch.org/databank/dailynumber/?NumberID=311; see also Jerry Falwell quotes, http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/jerry_falwell.html [<]
  9. Physical, emotional and spiritual support pumps up kids for FCAT, Orlando Sentinel, February 10, 2008, http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/consumer/orl-prayforgrades1008feb10,0,7753098.story [<]

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Atheism, Government, Religion | 13 Comments »