First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
The International Anime Subcultural Online Community
Posted 10/24/09 , edited 10/24/09
This is of course, my own personal opinion. So if you would some how agree to disagree, come as you are an individual.

The Sankaku Complex, an internet blog site that "intended to capture something of the relationship between anime, manga and games, as well as such media forms as eroge and the visual novel", had recently posted an article based on the news report about two Canadians who got arrested for possessing virtual child pornographic materials on their computers at their home in Nova Scotia, Canada.

By completely deviated from their own source, Sankaku Complex made false claims in their article when they wrote these comments:

Two twins who downloaded a variety of shotacon materials have been jailed for possessing “virtual child pornography,” with the judge condemning them for “victimising” imaginary children.

The state prosecutor insists that victimising fictional children is a very serious offence:

“Every one of these images involves the victimization of children. The victimization wouldn’t happen in the first place if there weren’t people there to look at this material.”

The judge was equally scathing, saying the drawings “victimize” children:

“This is a crime that victimizes young people around the world. It creates a market which then re-victimizes the most vulnerable in society.

The images can only be regarded as disgusting and perverse.”


The judge handed down a three month prison sentence for each of the twins, ordering they be registered as sex offenders, provide DNA samples and refrain from contact with children, presumably including imaginary ones as well. A sex offenders’ treatment programme will attempt to cure them of their deviant lusts.

In a final twist to the case, the court accepted arguments that the pair, having been branded pederasts for the rest of their lives, would likely be in danger if housed amongst the general prison population. As a result they get to serve their sentence only on weekends, and in protective custody.
Which none of those were true, when the news report itself that served as their source didn't have any of those said claims:

Last updated at 8:43 AM on 22/10/09

Twins get identical sentence for identical crime print this article
The News

NEW GLASGOW – Twin brothers, twin offences, twin sentences.

David Scott Hammond and James Corey Hammond, both 20, were each ordered to serve a three-month intermittent sentence and 18 months of probation for downloading Japanese anime images and live images of child pornography.

The brothers were charged last November after their sister-in-law saw some “distressing” images of children “as young as two years of age” on two computers in the New Glasgow home where the twins resided, special Crown attorney Craig Botterill told New Glasgow provincial court Wednesday.

Both men admitted to downloading images.

“It’s impossible to tell which young man did what from a forensic perspective,” Botterill said. “Both acknowledge they had been accessing and downloading these images.”

The images included “videos depicting sexual assaults of barely pubescent boys, around 12 years old, some pictures and cartoon drawings,” Botterill said. Approximately 90 per cent of the images were of cartoon drawings called Japanese Anime, while the remainder were of actual children. An examination of the computer showed that one or both of the Hammond twins had done Google queries to see if anime was legal, Botterill said. While it is legal in the United States, Canada has taken a firm stance that the representations constitute child pornography.

Both Corey and David had been sent for a risk assessment through the provincial sex offender treatment program. David’s report was fairly positive and indicated he had a low risk to re-offend, prompting the Crown to reduce his charges to a summary offence, which lowers the mandatory minimum sentence that comes with a guilty plea. Corey’s report, however, was not as bright. The report’s author said that Corey admitted that he was attracted to 12-year-old boys and sometimes, while walking down the street, “thought of using toys to approach boys of that age in the community, which is of some concern to the Crown,” Botterill said.

An examination of the computer showed that one twin had visited an American site that assists people with approaching young teen boys and advocates relationships with young boys. Further, psycho-somatic testing showed that when Corey was presented with visual stimuli, he indicated strong physiological preferences to pre-pubescent boys between the ages of 12 and 15 and had strong responses to sexual abuse of children as young as eight years old. Corey was placed at just below a moderate risk to re-offend. During the course of the testing, he needed help, a sentiment he echoed during his court appearance Wednesday.

David’s report indicating he had less of a predatory bent, but he also expressed a desire for help.

The Crown recommended both twins receive the same sentence, although the mode of trial was different for both boys.

A mandatory minimum sentence of 14 days in jail is required for a summary conviction of this crime – which David is subject to – while the mandatory minimum sentence for an indictable conviction, like Corey’s, is 45 days.

The Crown pressed for four months in jail, saying the sentence has to serve as a deterrent for others and denounce the crime publicly as well as punishment for the brothers, but both defence attorneys argued against the sentence. Both defence attorneys pushed for a lighter sentence. Corey’s lawyer, Steve Robertson, expressed concerns about how the twins would handle jail.

Judge Theodore Tax said that imposing a minimum sentence would not make clear that anime child pornography was illegal in Canada.

“The images creates a market, whether anime or live images, and victimizes the people that are most vulnerable,” said Tax.

Since Sankaku Complex obviously weren't telling the truth, the resulting reactions from the international anime subcultural online community are irrational and therefore, truthful only to the entire online community themselves nonetheless.

It started with some false claims made by a blog article due to lack of online journalism ethics, which then triggered waves of dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community. Personally, I see them either as a bunch of immature and childish sore losers, or worst. For they could be fully matured by they meant what they said, and therefore they're a bunch individuals with a personality trade called schizotypy. And they're obviously not the creative type of schizoids.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 10/24/09 , edited 10/24/09
Wait, an internet article on a blog site is misleading?? omg this is unheard of, I feel so enraged, we can't even trust the internet now? And just based on that, your opinion is that the entire 'international Anime subcultural online community' is irrational and are somehow 'sore losers,' immature, and have 'schizotypy'? Well, this is a very important topic for us to discuss here on ED, and clearly not just a very odd personal issue you have.

Ok, I agree that the article is misleading. I know, I'm shocked that we can't fully trust internet blog sites too.

It's misleading, but it does have a point, the government should not have been concerned at all with the manga. And the reactions to it are not really surprising, seeing how it is misleading, remember? Your posts are so interesting:


It started with some false claims from a blog article due to lack of online journalism ethics, which then triggered waves of dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community. Personally, I see them either as a bunch of immature and childish sore losers, or worst. For they could be fully matured by they meant what they said, and therefore they're a bunch individuals with a personality trade called schizotypy. And they're obviously not the creative type of schizoids.

Lack of online journalism ethics, lol, ok. And I thought we could fully trust everything on the internet.

By wave of "dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community" do you mean the comments anonymous people posted? And then you're somehow saying all these anonymous people who posted comments, or this 'online community' they represent are 'sore losers' (very nice link there) and have 'schizotypy'? Wow.

Don't go on Youtube, or a forum, or anywhere on the internet where people can post comments, you would be shocked and enraged. I imagine you would be studying the posts under every Youtube vid and coming up with new personality traits for the posters and finding "dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community" there on every video.

Honestly, it's very hard to believe you're being serious. You're basically complaining about the integrity of an internet blog and comments made by anonymous online posters. Are yo new to the internet or something? And then the "sore losers" and "schizotypy" with your links makes it actually seem like you're just trying to be funny.
Posted 10/24/09 , edited 10/24/09

DomFortress wrote:

This is of course, my own personal opinion. So if you would some how agree to disagree, come as you are an individual.

The Sankaku Complex, an internet blog site that "intended to capture something of the relationship between anime, manga and games, as well as such media forms as eroge and the visual novel", had recently posted an article based on the news report about two Canadians who got arrested for possessing virtual child pornographic materials on their computers at their home in Nova Scotia, Canada.

By completely deviated from their own source, Sankaku Complex made false claims in their article when they wrote these comments:

Two twins who downloaded a variety of shotacon materials have been jailed for possessing “virtual child pornography,” with the judge condemning them for “victimizing” imaginary children.

The state prosecutor insists that victimizing fictional children is a very serious offense:

“Every one of these images involves the victimization of children. The victimization wouldn’t happen in the first place if there weren’t people there to look at this material.”

The judge was equally scathing, saying the drawings “victimize” children:

“This is a crime that victimizes young people around the world. It creates a market which then re-victimizes the most vulnerable in society.

The images can only be regarded as disgusting and perverse.”


The judge handed down a three month prison sentence for each of the twins, ordering they be registered as sex offenders, provide DNA samples and refrain from contact with children, presumably including imaginary ones as well. A sex offenders’ treatment programme will attempt to cure them of their deviant lusts.

In a final twist to the case, the court accepted arguments that the pair, having been branded pederasts for the rest of their lives, would likely be in danger if housed amongst the general prison population. As a result they get to serve their sentence only on weekends, and in protective custody.
Which none of those were true, when the news report itself that served as their source didn't have any of those said claims:

Last updated at 8:43 AM on 22/10/09

Twins get identical sentence for identical crime print this article
The News

NEW GLASGOW – Twin brothers, twin offences, twin sentences.

David Scott Hammond and James Corey Hammond, both 20, were each ordered to serve a three-month intermittent sentence and 18 months of probation for downloading Japanese anime images and live images of child pornography.

The brothers were charged last November after their sister-in-law saw some “distressing” images of children “as young as two years of age” on two computers in the New Glasgow home where the twins resided, special Crown attorney Craig Botterill told New Glasgow provincial court Wednesday.

Both men admitted to downloading images.

“It’s impossible to tell which young man did what from a forensic perspective,” Botterill said. “Both acknowledge they had been accessing and downloading these images.”

The images included “videos depicting sexual assaults of barely pubescent boys, around 12 years old, some pictures and cartoon drawings,” Botterill said. Approximately 90 per cent of the images were of cartoon drawings called Japanese Anime, while the remainder were of actual children. An examination of the computer showed that one or both of the Hammond twins had done Google queries to see if anime was legal, Botterill said. While it is legal in the United States, Canada has taken a firm stance that the representations constitute child pornography.

Both Corey and David had been sent for a risk assessment through the provincial sex offender treatment program. David’s report was fairly positive and indicated he had a low risk to re-offend, prompting the Crown to reduce his charges to a summary offence, which lowers the mandatory minimum sentence that comes with a guilty plea. Corey’s report, however, was not as bright. The report’s author said that Corey admitted that he was attracted to 12-year-old boys and sometimes, while walking down the street, “thought of using toys to approach boys of that age in the community, which is of some concern to the Crown,” Botterill said.

An examination of the computer showed that one twin had visited an American site that assists people with approaching young teen boys and advocates relationships with young boys. Further, psycho-somatic testing showed that when Corey was presented with visual stimuli, he indicated strong physiological preferences to pre-pubescent boys between the ages of 12 and 15 and had strong responses to sexual abuse of children as young as eight years old. Corey was placed at just below a moderate risk to re-offend. During the course of the testing, he needed help, a sentiment he echoed during his court appearance Wednesday.

David’s report indicating he had less of a predatory bent, but he also expressed a desire for help.

The Crown recommended both twins receive the same sentence, although the mode of trial was different for both boys.

A mandatory minimum sentence of 14 days in jail is required for a summary conviction of this crime – which David is subject to – while the mandatory minimum sentence for an indictable conviction, like Corey’s, is 45 days.

The Crown pressed for four months in jail, saying the sentence has to serve as a deterrent for others and denounce the crime publicly as well as punishment for the brothers, but both defense attorneys argued against the sentence. Both defense attorneys pushed for a lighter sentence. Corey’s lawyer, Steve Robertson, expressed concerns about how the twins would handle jail.

Judge Theodore Tax said that imposing a minimum sentence would not make clear that anime child pornography was illegal in Canada.

“The images creates a market, whether anime or live images, and victimizes the people that are most vulnerable,” said Tax.

Since Sankaku Complex obviously weren't telling the truth, the resulting reactions from the international anime subcultural online community are irrational and therefore, truthful only to the entire online community themselves nonetheless.

It started with some false claims made by a blog article due to lack of online journalism ethics, which then triggered waves of dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community. Personally, I see them either as a bunch of immature and childish sore losers, or worst. For they could be fully matured by they meant what they said, and therefore they're a bunch individuals with a personality trade called schizotypy. And they're obviously not the creative type of schizoids.


hows about we go after real pedos and live this alone i mean i read that stuff from time to time and does it make me a bad person? cartoons do not need rights nor do they need to be protected because of the fact they are not real hell i could draw half the stuff if i wanted too but meh i am too lazy so that will send me prison for lines on paper meh don't really care if they do my life has no meaning anymore to begin with, and i have lost most hope. Dom not to sound like an butt hole but you are just figuring this out really? Sanu is bias just like any forms of media they distort and put up their own options on things just like any news source in America have you ever watched fox news or msnbc they are hugely bias either on the left or the right wing of political spectrum, i usually tread away from sanu whenever i can unless it is just something really really funny, on a side note i don't know how much longer i am going to be alive since i don't feel like living anymore to being with =-=, also they were jailed for the most part for having REAL CHILD PORN as well on top of the drawings that is what made it worse and i hope they get what they deserve for having such sick shit T.T
Posted 10/24/09

Yei wrote:

Wait, an internet article on a blog site is misleading?? omg this is unheard of, I feel so enraged, we can't even trust the internet now? And just based on that, your opinion is that the entire 'international Anime subcultural online community' is irrational and are somehow 'sore losers,' immature, and have 'schizotypy'? Well, this is a very important topic for us to discuss here on ED, and clearly not just a very odd personal issue you have.

Ok, I agree that the article is misleading. I know, I'm shocked that we can't fully trust internet blog sites too.

It's misleading, but it does have a point, the government should not have been concerned at all with the manga. And the reactions to it are not really surprising, seeing how it is misleading, remember? Your posts are so interesting:


It started with some false claims from a blog article due to lack of online journalism ethics, which then triggered waves of dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community. Personally, I see them either as a bunch of immature and childish sore losers, or worst. For they could be fully matured by they meant what they said, and therefore they're a bunch individuals with a personality trade called schizotypy. And they're obviously not the creative type of schizoids.

Lack of online journalism ethics, lol, ok. And I thought we could fully trust everything on the internet.

By wave of "dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community" do you mean the comments anonymous people posted? And then you're somehow saying all these anonymous people who posted comments, or this 'online community' they represent are 'sore losers' (very nice link there) and have 'schizotypy'? Wow.

Don't go on Youtube, or a forum, or anywhere on the internet where people can post comments, you would be shocked and enraged. I imagine you would be studying the posts under every Youtube vid and coming up with new personality traits for the posters and finding "dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community" there on every video.

Honestly, it's very hard to believe you're serious about this.

Remember I said before that "if you would some how agree to disagree, come as you are an individual"? So from now on, you shall be known as a skeptic. And a very good one at that.

However, your skepticism notwithstanding, it does look like you based on your disagreement with the pretense of "I thought we could fully trust everything on the internet". While I OTOH just proved that "the international anime subcultural online community are irrational". Therefore the only one who's caught in a paradox is none other than you, when you became a skeptic on something that you thought we could fully trust; my comment.

So if you have any doubt in my seriousness about my own topic in an extended discussion forum, you can either do the ethical thing of STFU, or the rational thing of proving that my sources were wrong based on facts. Not with your bias opinions about the Canadian government. When the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law had this to say about CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN CANADA:

1. In Canadian constitutional law, legislation that violates a right under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is permissible if the government can justify it under s. 1. The analytical framework for assessing Charter violations is set out in R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, 26 D.L.R. (4th) 200 (S.C.C.), and has two conditions. First, the objective of the legislation must be pressing and substantial. Second, the means chosen to attain this legislative end must be reasonable and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. This test is met by showing that the violation is rationally connected to the aim of the legislation; that the impugned legislation minimally impairs the Charter right; and that there is a proportionality between the effect of the measure and its objective so that the attainment of the legislative goal is not outweighed by the contraction of the right.

3. In describing the scope of rights protected under the Charter, the Supreme Court of Canada has broadly interpreted “freedom of expression” to protect virtually any expressive activity. Therefore there is little debate that this protection extends to child pornography. What is in question is whether restricting the right of an individual to possess or use child pornography will be constitutionally justifiable.

6. Two experts gave evidence for the Crown. One testified that the Internet has facilitated an explosion in the availability of child pornography. The other was a clinical psychiatrist who offered four reasons why child pornography was harmful.

7. He testified that some paedophiles show sexually explicit depictions of children with adults in order to lower inhibitions and to make the depicted conduct appear to be normal. Second, pornography excites some child molesters to commit offences. Third, child pornography augments or reinforces the “cognitive distortions” of paedophiles. Lastly, children are abused in the making of pornography and the material is a record of that abuse.

8. Tendered into evidence were two studies supporting the expert evidence. One found that child molesters have a greater exposure to pornography than do those who commit sexual assault on adults. On the other hand, child molesters were more likely than others to employ pornography as a means of relieving an impulse to commit an unlawful act.

9. There was no evidence led that the “cognitive distortions” referred to above cause any significant increase in danger to children.

10. Mr. Justice Shaw, who was the Trial Court Judge summarized his findings of fact as follows:
1. Sexually explicit pornography involving children poses a danger to children because of its use by pedophiles in the seduction process.
2. Children are abused in the production of filmed or videotaped pornography.
3. "Highly erotic" pornography incites some pedophiles to commit offences.
4. "Highly erotic" pornography helps some pedophiles relieve pent-up sexual tension.
5. It is not possible to say which of the two foregoing effects is the greater.
6. "Mildly erotic" pornography appears to inhibit aggression.
7. Pornography involving children can be a factor in augmenting or reinforcing a pedophile's cognitive distortions.
8. There is no evidence which demonstrates an increase in harm to children as a result of pornography augmenting or reinforcing a pedophile's cognitive distortions.
9. The dissemination of written material which counsels or advocates sexual offences against children poses some risk of harm to children.
And true enough, one individual who's a pedophile did "show sexually explicit depictions of children with adults in order to lower inhibitions and to make the depicted conduct appear to be normal", when "John Robin Sharpe acting as own lawyer at trial" as he "challenged Canada's child pornography laws in the nation's highest court" for his "sex charges dating back more than two decades".
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 10/24/09

DomFortress wrote:

However, your skepticism notwithstanding, it does look like you based on your disagreement with the pretense of "I thought we could fully trust everything on the internet". While I OTOH just proved that "the international anime subcultural online community are irrational". Therefore the only one who's caught in a paradox is none other than you, when you became a skeptic on something that you thought we could fully trust; my comment.

So if you have any doubt in my seriousness about my own topic in an extended discussion forum, you can either do the ethical thing of STFU, or the rational thing of proving that my sources were wrong based on facts. Not with your bias opinions about the Canadian government. When the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law had this to say about CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN CANADA:

1. In Canadian constitutional law, legislation that violates a right under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is permissible if the government can justify it under s. 1. The analytical framework for assessing Charter violations is set out in R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, 26 D.L.R. (4th) 200 (S.C.C.), and has two conditions. First, the objective of the legislation must be pressing and substantial. Second, the means chosen to attain this legislative end must be reasonable and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. This test is met by showing that the violation is rationally connected to the aim of the legislation; that the impugned legislation minimally impairs the Charter right; and that there is a proportionality between the effect of the measure and its objective so that the attainment of the legislative goal is not outweighed by the contraction of the right.

3. In describing the scope of rights protected under the Charter, the Supreme Court of Canada has broadly interpreted “freedom of expression” to protect virtually any expressive activity. Therefore there is little debate that this protection extends to child pornography. What is in question is whether restricting the right of an individual to possess or use child pornography will be constitutionally justifiable.

6. Two experts gave evidence for the Crown. One testified that the Internet has facilitated an explosion in the availability of child pornography. The other was a clinical psychiatrist who offered four reasons why child pornography was harmful.

7. He testified that some paedophiles show sexually explicit depictions of children with adults in order to lower inhibitions and to make the depicted conduct appear to be normal. Second, pornography excites some child molesters to commit offences. Third, child pornography augments or reinforces the “cognitive distortions” of paedophiles. Lastly, children are abused in the making of pornography and the material is a record of that abuse.

8. Tendered into evidence were two studies supporting the expert evidence. One found that child molesters have a greater exposure to pornography than do those who commit sexual assault on adults. On the other hand, child molesters were more likely than others to employ pornography as a means of relieving an impulse to commit an unlawful act.

9. There was no evidence led that the “cognitive distortions” referred to above cause any significant increase in danger to children.

10. Mr. Justice Shaw, who was the Trial Court Judge summarized his findings of fact as follows:
1. Sexually explicit pornography involving children poses a danger to children because of its use by pedophiles in the seduction process.
2. Children are abused in the production of filmed or videotaped pornography.
3. "Highly erotic" pornography incites some pedophiles to commit offences.
4. "Highly erotic" pornography helps some pedophiles relieve pent-up sexual tension.
5. It is not possible to say which of the two foregoing effects is the greater.
6. "Mildly erotic" pornography appears to inhibit aggression.
7. Pornography involving children can be a factor in augmenting or reinforcing a pedophile's cognitive distortions.
8. There is no evidence which demonstrates an increase in harm to children as a result of pornography augmenting or reinforcing a pedophile's cognitive distortions.
9. The dissemination of written material which counsels or advocates sexual offences against children poses some risk of harm to children.
And true enough, one individual who's a pedophile did "show sexually explicit depictions of children with adults in order to lower inhibitions and to make the depicted conduct appear to be normal", when "John Robin Sharpe acting as own lawyer at trial" as he "challenged Canada's child pornography laws in the nation's highest court" for his "sex charges dating back more than two decades".


You're basically complaining about the integrity of an internet blog and comments made by anonymous online posters.

And from that you concluded "the international anime subcultural online community are irrational."

And is that your whole point?
Posted 10/24/09

CecilTheDarkKnight_234 wrote:
hows about we go after real pedos and live this alone i mean i read that stuff from time to time and does it make me a bad person? cartoons do not need rights nor do they need to be protected because of the fact they are not real hell i could draw half the stuff if i wanted too but meh i am too lazy so that will send me prison for lines on paper meh don't really care if they do my life has no meaning anymore to begin with, and i have lost most hope. Dom not to sound like an butt hole but you are just figuring this out really? Sanu is bias just like any forms of media they distort and put up their own options on things just like any news source in America have you ever watched fox news or msnbc they are hugely bias either on the left or the right wing of political spectrum, i usually tread away from sanu whenever i can unless it is just something really really funny, on a side note i don't know how much longer i am going to be alive since i don't feel like living anymore to being with =-=, also they were jailed for the most part for having REAL CHILD PORN as well on top of the drawings that is what made it worse and i hope they get what they deserve for having such sick shit T.T

I knew it a long time ago how the community was like. It's just that this time around they made so obvious, they stopped being funny altogether.

Which is also why real pedophiles can not just hide themselves among the international anime subcultural online community, but to also find support for being who they are.


Yei wrote:


DomFortress wrote:

However, your skepticism notwithstanding, it does look like you based on your disagreement with the pretense of "I thought we could fully trust everything on the internet". While I OTOH just proved that "the international anime subcultural online community are irrational". Therefore the only one who's caught in a paradox is none other than you, when you became a skeptic on something that you thought we could fully trust; my comment.

So if you have any doubt in my seriousness about my own topic in an extended discussion forum, you can either do the ethical thing of STFU, or the rational thing of proving that my sources were wrong based on facts. Not with your bias opinions about the Canadian government. When the International Society for the Reform of Criminal Law had this to say about CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN CANADA:

1. In Canadian constitutional law, legislation that violates a right under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is permissible if the government can justify it under s. 1. The analytical framework for assessing Charter violations is set out in R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, 26 D.L.R. (4th) 200 (S.C.C.), and has two conditions. First, the objective of the legislation must be pressing and substantial. Second, the means chosen to attain this legislative end must be reasonable and demonstrably justifiable in a free and democratic society. This test is met by showing that the violation is rationally connected to the aim of the legislation; that the impugned legislation minimally impairs the Charter right; and that there is a proportionality between the effect of the measure and its objective so that the attainment of the legislative goal is not outweighed by the contraction of the right.

3. In describing the scope of rights protected under the Charter, the Supreme Court of Canada has broadly interpreted “freedom of expression” to protect virtually any expressive activity. Therefore there is little debate that this protection extends to child pornography. What is in question is whether restricting the right of an individual to possess or use child pornography will be constitutionally justifiable.

6. Two experts gave evidence for the Crown. One testified that the Internet has facilitated an explosion in the availability of child pornography. The other was a clinical psychiatrist who offered four reasons why child pornography was harmful.

7. He testified that some paedophiles show sexually explicit depictions of children with adults in order to lower inhibitions and to make the depicted conduct appear to be normal. Second, pornography excites some child molesters to commit offences. Third, child pornography augments or reinforces the “cognitive distortions” of paedophiles. Lastly, children are abused in the making of pornography and the material is a record of that abuse.

8. Tendered into evidence were two studies supporting the expert evidence. One found that child molesters have a greater exposure to pornography than do those who commit sexual assault on adults. On the other hand, child molesters were more likely than others to employ pornography as a means of relieving an impulse to commit an unlawful act.

9. There was no evidence led that the “cognitive distortions” referred to above cause any significant increase in danger to children.

10. Mr. Justice Shaw, who was the Trial Court Judge summarized his findings of fact as follows:
1. Sexually explicit pornography involving children poses a danger to children because of its use by pedophiles in the seduction process.
2. Children are abused in the production of filmed or videotaped pornography.
3. "Highly erotic" pornography incites some pedophiles to commit offences.
4. "Highly erotic" pornography helps some pedophiles relieve pent-up sexual tension.
5. It is not possible to say which of the two foregoing effects is the greater.
6. "Mildly erotic" pornography appears to inhibit aggression.
7. Pornography involving children can be a factor in augmenting or reinforcing a pedophile's cognitive distortions.
8. There is no evidence which demonstrates an increase in harm to children as a result of pornography augmenting or reinforcing a pedophile's cognitive distortions.
9. The dissemination of written material which counsels or advocates sexual offences against children poses some risk of harm to children.
And true enough, one individual who's a pedophile did "show sexually explicit depictions of children with adults in order to lower inhibitions and to make the depicted conduct appear to be normal", when "John Robin Sharpe acting as own lawyer at trial" as he "challenged Canada's child pornography laws in the nation's highest court" for his "sex charges dating back more than two decades".


You're basically complaining about the integrity of an internet blog and comments made by anonymous online posters.

And from that you concluded "the international anime subcultural online community are irrational."

And is that your whole point?

It would be so boring to me if that's the whole point for my topic, when an online community that lack integrity can pose so much troubles for others. Otherwise I wouldn't be saying this in the topic description: "What an immoral and dishonest bunch of sore losers, or aren't they?"
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 10/24/09 , edited 10/24/09

DomFortress wrote:
It would be so boring to me if that's the whole point for my topic, when an online community that lack integrity can pose so much troubles for others. Otherwise I wouldn't be saying this in the topic description: "What an immoral and dishonest bunch of sore losers, or aren't they?"


An online community that lacks integrity can pose so much trouble for others? Are you knew to the internet?

And also, I don't know what you mean by "the international anime subcultural online community." I like anime and I talk about it online sometimes, so am I part of that community?

And you came to the conclusion that this community is irrational, immature, are 'sore losers' (I still don't understand that), etc. all from just looking at some random, anonymous comments on this blog post? Is that a good way to judge an entire international community of people?
Posted 10/24/09

Yei wrote:
An online community that lacks integrity can pose so much trouble for others? Are you knew to the internet?

And also, I don't know what you mean by "the international anime subcultural online community." I like anime and I talk about it online sometimes, so am I part of that community?

And you came to the conclusion that this community is irrational, immature, are 'sore losers' (I still don't understand that), etc. all from just looking at some random, anonymous comments on this blog post? Is that a good way to judge an entire international community of people?

I did offered alternative views:

DomFortress wrote:
Since Sankaku Complex obviously weren't telling the truth, the resulting reactions from the international anime subcultural online community are irrational and therefore, truthful only to the entire online community themselves nonetheless.

It started with some false claims made by a blog article due to lack of online journalism ethics, which then triggered waves of dishonest, slanderous, almost borderline hateful reactions from an online community. Personally, I see them either as a bunch of immature and childish sore losers, or worst. For they could be fully matured by they meant what they said, and therefore they're a bunch individuals with a personality trade called schizotypy. And they're obviously not the creative type of schizoids.
Or did you think I was born yesterday?

If you don't know who you are as an individual and thus, not sure if you actually belong to this so called "international anime subcultural online community". I too made a reply to your comment:

DomFortress wrote:
Remember I said before that "if you would some how agree to disagree, come as you are an individual"? So from now on, you shall be known as a skeptic. And a very good one at that.
Or are you skeptical at you being a skeptic? When that's what philosophical skepticism is all about.

Therefore when you simply cannot make judgment because you're being skeptical on the empirical knowledge that's my observation on "the international anime subcultural online community", and the priori knowledge of a "sore loser". Who are you to judge my comment with your skepticism? When all you can do is question your own individuality.
Posted 10/24/09 , edited 10/26/09


most online community you are refereeing too are either from 2chan or 4chan believe me i have been there long enough to know how they think and operate sigh i am so sick so i am going to back to bed bye bye ~
Posted 10/24/09 , edited 10/26/09

I was curious about the term "cognitive distortions" and I begin to wonder what could they be. And I found out that "Cognitive distortions -- where your mind puts a ‘spin’ on the events you see, and attaches a not-so-objective interpretation to what you experience -- happen all the time. They are especially common in people with depression and other mood disorders".

So this means that the online communities such as 2chan, 4chan, and Sankaku Complex are constantly distorting their surroundings and their experiences with ideas, values, and standards based on virtual anime pornography. This also makes sense that while cognitive distortions "are especially common in people with depression and other mood disorders", the members of 2chan, 4chan, and Sankaku Complex do tend to complain a lot often than usual about the same issues. Which quite frankly makes me think that they're a bunch of pessimists.

Just be glad that you're no longer among them. For you don't need them to distort your surroundings and experiences, when you can start learning to be more positive and optimistic with "cognitive restructuring".
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 10/25/09 , edited 10/25/09

DomFortress wrote:


Yei wrote:
And also, I don't know what you mean by "the international anime subcultural online community." I like anime and I talk about it online sometimes, so am I part of that community?

And you came to the conclusion that this community is irrational, immature, are 'sore losers' (I still don't understand that), etc. all from just looking at some random, anonymous comments on this blog post? Is that a good way to judge an entire international community of people?


You didn't answer who this online community is and how you came to your conclusions on them.
Posted 10/25/09 , edited 10/26/09
Now tell me, can you think of other international anime online communities that "constantly distorting their surroundings and their experiences with ideas, values, and standards based on virtual anime pornography"? And do you identify with those online communities? By you distorting your surroundings and experiences with anime subculture?

Have you ever wondered why anime subculture just stopped it's advancement into mainstream culture both inside and outside of Japan? Despise the legal adaptations, licensing, publishing, and not to mention the illegal fansubbings, downloading, streaming. It's not like the world population stopped expanding, while at the same time the worldwide anime market continues to shrink. So somethings within the anime subculture itself is preventing its own advancement into the rest of the world that we're in. Could it be that the majority of the ideas, values, and standards presented in today's anime mediums are only entertaining to a specific type of minority people? While this minority group is shrinking both inside and outside of Japan.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 10/25/09 , edited 10/26/09


Jesus Christ, is this really a huge issue that we need to be concerned with? The anime market is shrinking? I don't care if it is, I can still enjoy my anime.

Some online communities are losing integrity? Well I'm not new to the internet, so I'm not surprised some people on the internet are not the most trustworthy, and I'm not surprised some anonymous people post bad comments. Who cares??? I sure don't care about what people on blogs and anonymous posters are saying, this is not a serious issue.

I love how you analyze these 'online communities' and come up with specific mental traits for them. When you still haven't even explained who these communities are or how you judge them. If I go to 4chan and make a post, am I part of the community? Or is it only regular posters? Did you just make your judgments based on some anonymous comments you seen? I don't even know who you're talking about yet.

"constantly distorting their surroundings and their experiences with ideas, values, and standards based on virtual anime pornography."

What does that even mean???^ Their moral values are somehow affected by hentei? I can't even comment on that because I still don't know who "they" are. And again, again, again, how did you come to that conclusion?? You read a couple random comments on a blog and decided all people who go on all these sites are 'constantly distorting their surroundings and their experiences with ideas, values, and standards based on virtual anime pornography'??

Honestly, why are you really so concerned with this? Is this some sort of indirect bashing of Japan since Anime is from Japan and so you're trying to somehow find some way to attack it? It's very hard to believe you're really this concerned about online blogs and anonymous posters on the internet, and analyzing it all so much.
Posted 10/25/09 , edited 10/26/09

It's because I want my future children to share my interest in anime, that I'm now looking so deeply into today's anime subculture. Just who are interested in today's anime subculture? What's affecting today's anime subculture mediums? How will all these play out in the future of anime subculture?

Perhaps you don't have the same future prospect such as I do for myself. But if you think everything I do here is to bash Japan, that's your personal hatred towards my person, that distorted my comments with your ignorance and intolerance. Which is not my problem, quite honestly.
Yei
9137 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
116
Offline
Posted 10/25/09

DomFortress wrote:

It's because I want my future children to share my interest in anime, that I'm now looking so deeply into today's anime subculture. Just who are interested in today's anime subculture? What's affecting today's anime subculture mediums? How will all these play out in the future of anime subculture?

Perhaps you don't have the same future prospect such as I do for myself. But if you think everything I do here is to bash Japan, that's your personal hatred towards my person, that distorted my comments with your ignorance and intolerance. Which is not my problem, quite honestly.


This topic is about what you think of some internet blogs and anonymous comments made by posters, and your in-depth analysis of the "online community" they somehow represent.

From the beginning I thought it was ridiculous to be upset over a blog and some anonymous comments people made on the internet, and much more ridiculous to come up with the odd analysis you came up with for the "International Anime Subcultural Online Community" just from this one blog.

And since throughout this entire time you still haven't cleared up any of the ridiculousness of the topic that I've been asking about, I don't see the point in continuing either.
First  Prev  1  2  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.