Talk:Child pornography laws in Japan

A few issues (Aug 19, 2009)

Hello, I welcome User:Wetfinder's additions to the article, but I think there a few things to be discussed.

• The lack of laws prohibiting possession is quite unusual, and I think is important enough to be noted in the lead paragraph.
• Statistics regarding rape is not the same as statistics regarding child sexual abuse, so I can't see why they would be appropriate here.
• Finally, I don't understand the sentence "People who opposite to posse control have wariness of false accusation.", could you clarify?

Cheers, ~ AMorozov ^〈talk〉 05:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello AMorozov, You'd better to read the article ja:児童買春、児童ポルノに係る行為等の処罰及び児童の保護等に関する法律. These issues are discussed. In addition:

• ja:児童ポルノ#単純所持規制に固有の論点
• Did you read the Quayle's report?　She doesn't use the word "sex crime" in a limited sense for child.
• The meaning of "false accusation" is ja:冤罪. See Question 8 and answers　for the general election.

Wetfinder (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• There is no parliament in Japan.
• "Junior Idols" related description cannot be found in the transcripts of the Diet.
• Encyclopedic content must be verifiable. Description around the issue in the Bangkok Post should be quoted. Article 2-(3)-(iii) of the current law is applicable to "Junior Idols" and brought someone to trials.
• If the verification is impossible, following text should be deleted.

In 1998, parliament refused to pass a law banning the production of Junior idol related media, :apparently citing business reasons.

Wetfinder (talk) 15:04, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello, unfortunately I cannot read Japanese, and you cannot use another Wikipedia article as a source. I've improved the English a bit, but haven't made any real changes yet.

• English sources do say that possession is not illegal in Japan, and I still believe it is more than significant enough to be in the lead paragraph.
• I cannot find the Bangkok Post article, and thus the sentence was removed.
• Do you have a link to Quayle's report anywhere? This needs to be verified.
• "People who opposite to posse control have wariness of false accusation." - does this mean something like "People who oppose possession control are often accused of being [criminals]"?
• "the Democratic Party of Japan presented a counterproposal to prohibit the　taking over from anyone" - did you mean "The DPJ presented a counterproposal to block the proposal set by the LDP and NKP"?
• And also, someone's blog is not really a reliable source.

~ AMorozov ^〈talk〉 15:43, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

• Really? Please study Japanese language at first. The subject of this article is "Child pornography laws in Japan". By the way, have you ever read the law? And why did you say "you cannot use another Wikipedia article as a source"?
• Please read the Article 7-(2) in the law.
• If you don't have the Quayle's report, I recommend to read the book written by her and someone, e.g. Only Pictures?: Therapeutic Work With Internet Sex Offenders (ISBN 9781903855683).
• Examples of false accusations: accidental visiting of child pornography sites makes cache files in the computer, infecting computer virus to download child pornography automatically. And juristic discussion around "nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali" is in process.
• Someone's comment to the news is just a example. The problem is shown in method of the polling (p. 6).
• The meaning of block is ambiguous. This issue is complex. Transcripts of the Diet can be read at the National Diet Library site.

Wetfinder (talk) 22:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Did they pass laws against possession of child porn yet?

• http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/03/11/oukin-uk-japan-pornography-idUKT20430220080311 says they were considering it. I've been looking for news about this, but don't see whether a law was passed or not. I found where previous laws were shot down. Dream Focus 03:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Strictly enforced?

I'm going to remove the part about their laws being strictly enforced, since all news I find says otherwise. *http://www.economist.com/node/606404

“ Adults who engage in child prostitution will face up to three years in jail and a fine of ¥1m ($8,300). Anyone caught distributing or selling child pornography could face three years in jail or a fine of ¥3m.

The law may not turn out to be as tough as it sounds. For one thing, the powerful publishing industry has managed to get its pornographic comic-books exempted from the ban. And understaffed Japanese courts are notorious for taking years to pronounce sentences. Junko Miyamoto, a veteran campaigner, says much will depend on how seriously the police choose to enforce the new law. In practice, they will be able to act only inside Japan, and proof of wrongdoing will, as now, be difficult to obtain. Outside the country, it will presumably be business as usual.

”

That article is from 1999. Is it still only three years or less, possibly no jail time if caught just a fine? Dream Focus 03:37, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

A recent article from 12 october 2012

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japans-child-porn-addiction-8208043.html

The article says that the law isn't being enforced and attitudes in japan are pretty lax, with it being common among many men in japan to own child porn.Shining stark (talk) 19:58, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Jeez, do your homework... shoutacon is MRS ROBINSON / STIFFLERS MOM type stuff

...not kiddie pron (lolicon totally is though). Shouta is the housewives/teachers with huge gag boobs genre. Teenage guy fantasies stuff about older ladies. They draw the guy as a small bumbling wimp for humorous/nostalgic impact to get the reader reminiscing about back in the day when his own head was chock full of such awkward fantasies about every hot adult woman in sight...lol — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.70.219 (talk) 13:54, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding hentai

File:Hentai - yuuree.jpg

Some might consider this "child pornography".

Although all of it technically IS illegal: Hentai was too ambiguous, and was excluded to prevent abuse. For example, the Japanese Police might consider this picture to be "child pornography," and use the law to ban it. Some anime characters might be 30-years-old, but still look like they're only 13. So they modified the law to prevent it from being misinterpreted and abused. But if there's a hentai where the characters are confirmed to be underage, then it'd definitely be banned, because in that case, it wouldn't be ambiguous anymore. Sandenig (talk) 04:41, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Child pornography laws in Japan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090924101116/http://www.shugiin.go.jp:80/itdb_gian.nsf/html/gian/honbun/g16901032.htm to http://www.shugiin.go.jp/itdb_gian.nsf/html/gian/honbun/g16901032.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.dpj.or.jp/news/?num=15504
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090206003854/http://news.livedoor.com:80/article/detail/3416297/ to http://news.livedoor.com/article/detail/3416297/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090722073940/http://sankei.jp.msn.com:80/affairs/crime/090719/crm0907191744010-n1.htm to http://sankei.jp.msn.com/affairs/crime/090719/crm0907191744010-n1.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:44, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Legal status of psilocybin mushrooms which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:46, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 8 June 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: TBD. Redundant. See Talk:Legal_status_of_psilocybin_mushrooms#Requested_move_8_June_2017 В²C ☎ 18:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

---

Child pornography laws in Japan → Legality of child pornography in Japan – Several different formats exist for the titles of articles regarding the legality of a particular thing. I believe that all of these should be consistent with each other and that that format should be "Legality of X" (instead of "Legal status of X, Laws regarding X, etc.) Others have noted that "legality" is a more common term when referring to whether something is legal or illegal than "legal status". Michipedian (talk) 02:04, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

On the illegalization of simple possession of child pornography in Japan

He is the one who edited the article earlier. I am sorry if there is something.... http://www.asahi.com/sp/articles/ASJ9H5FPCJ9HUTIL01Y.html http://www.sankei.com/smp/affairs/news/170301/afr1703010009-s1.html This means that both are penalizing simple possession. I do not present a source, I'm sorry indeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by クライフ真琴 (talk • contribs) 06:08, 22 July 2017 (UTC)