Law (for once this is not a fic)

[iamisaac]

From a fandom point of view, I feel rather uncomfortable about this legislation which is looking set to be brought in.

Let me get this straight. I am not a paedophile nor do I condone any abuse of children. But... I have been known to look at art which may involve underage characters portrayed having sex. I'm sure I've seen the odd Harry/Draco

Comments

[tattooedsappho]

::clicks & reads::
i understand their point, about the manipulation of real people into "cartoons" or whatever. but...damn...it's not like they are even going to consider differientating (sp?) between fanfic type stuff that is intended for adults and amusement versus stuff that is developed to "groom" kids for sexual exploitation. :/

[iamisaac]

Exactly. There is definitely a valid point to the manipulation of real images being illegal, and I think it should be.

But... not fanfic drawings. Because if the art ought to be illegal, surely so should the stories, and that would make books like Lolita illegal and we're moving back into the dark ages.

It also reminds me of the way when there's been a murder, the media says "the murderer was obsessed by violent computer games" - well, I know a lot of people who play violent computer games (not me, I'm too much of a wuss) and that doesn't actually make them into murderers.

[tattooedsappho]

::facepalm:: ugh.

and yeah, totally get the video game thing. that's right up there with blaming marilyn manson for columbine. ::sigh::

[versipellis]

I think there needs to be clearer definition of what constitutes a 'work of art', definitely; and what they're actually trying to ban - any images of cartoon children involved in sexual situations or 'real' pictures that have been retouched?

I'm also curious about how such images would be used to 'groom' children. Not that I think they're lying, I'm just curious (and NOT because I'd want to do it myself, ew ew).

*is rather worried, as pretty much everyone she writes about is sixteen and under*

[iamisaac]

I think it's ANY cartoon pictures, not just 'retouched' ones (which I don't have a problem with being illegal).

I suppose they might be used by an adult saying to a child "do you see what these children are doing? Do you think you could do that?..." or something like that.

And yes, it concerns me, because I know lots of people who write/draw/read chan and... we're not sick and we're not violent and we're not about to harm anyone, thank you.

(I'm so glad I've got a couple of sympathetic comments. I was absolutely terrified about posting this.)

[versipellis]

This is gonna... make fanart sites a lot more wary, I guess.

I guess all we can do is keep an eye on the situation...

[dahliablue]

Pictures are used to groom children when the adult shows the child the picture and says that whatever they're seeing in the picture is completely normal and ok. It lets down the child's guard and also subconsciously pressures them into feeling like they must do what is in the picture.
It is a very powerful, effective act.