[108008] in Cypherpunks
Re: children, porn, automata
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (jei@zor.hut.fi)
Sun Jan 31 22:19:48 1999
From: jei@zor.hut.fi
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 05:08:25 +0200 (EET)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
In-Reply-To: <199902010014.BAA23021@replay.com>
Reply-To: jei@zor.hut.fi
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Anonymous wrote:
> At 11:42 PM 1/30/99 -0500, mgraffam@idsi.net wrote:
> >On Sun, 31 Jan 1999, Anonymous wrote:
>
>
> >Next time you want to wave the flag for liberty, do so responsibly.. you
> >do more harm than good by posting this.. it makes you sound like a damn
> >psycho.
>
> Who is more psycho, me being puerile or people who can't tell the
> difference between
> reality and a CRT making laws?
>
> >I agree that this case is yet another chip out of our liberty, but to be
> >honest, it is not easy for many people to see this, and I can't
> >particularly blame them.
> >
> >Having an image of some something should not be illegal. It should be (and
> >is) illegal to _make_ child porn, but not illegal to own it. Making it
>
> What if there are *no* children involved? Just an artist and a drawing
> tablet?
>
> Then no one is hurt. So there is no crime.
>
> Mere illustrations for a book, say, Lolita, would be outlawed in Maine.
>
> Obviously, sexual interest about prepubescents is ill. But equating
> *fictional* synthetic images, or text with actual violence against people is
> sicker.
A note:
In japanimation, and especially 'hentai-anime', the characters are
usually 15-16 years old (by their own words). However, the ages
are translated to be 19, etc, in the US subtitled versions.
In anime computer-games the situation is much worse. Just see a
few images in the abpea, and you can see games where the player's
character is doing very questionable things to images representing
presumably 'underage' persons.
I would imagine these games are quite popular among some people,
since AFAIK, there are several hundreds of them. It's a whole
industry in Japan, which is also booming in the US.
I would think that these would become illegal to possess under
this law, along with lots of japanimation currently in the shops.
Also, I wonder about those nude angels and other youngish looking
ladies in those paintings in the museums... I bet quite a few of them
are underage... And they probably had real persons posing for them
painters! Maybe we should go and paint some clothes on them, for
decency's sake, and to protect future generations and our children.
I'm sure they will appreciate our doing so.
And, if we're really going to do it, then let's be thorough:
It shouldn't matter whether an image was done with a computer,
paintbrush, sprayed, by a hand, or by all of these. The best artists
today use any and all methods available to them, when creating an
image. but we really shouldn't limit this only to good artists. A
pedophile is a pedophile, no matter how good an artist he may be.
To take things to their logical limit, I would surmise that a few
lines drawn on a piece of paper can represent an underage person
having XXX.
So, in order to weed out this childpornography, any circular and
straight lines that can be interpreted to present a butt and a penis,
be it done by hand or by a computer, must also be interpreted as
child-pornography.
We must really draw the line here and get all of these pornographers
and pedophiles while we're at it. Also, I must note that all hidden
images, for example those taken of people's faces that have lines in
them, that can be cut with a computer or scissors so that they look
like pre-pubescent genitalia, must be outlawed... In fact, some faces
should be outlawed. These childpornographers sending subconscious
images are abundant among the publishers and photographers! Maybe
suitability and lie-detector tests should be conducted to job
applicants, and while we're hunting the childpornographers and
pedophiles, we could expand a bit and deal with the homosexuals,
lesbians, the disabled & handicapped people, invalids, niggers,
latinos, and the jews and the commies! Just like the good old nazis
did: start small, and expand little by little. We've already done
away with the real childpornographers, now are working on the
imaginary ones.
The nazis knew where and how to start; To get the public support for
it: first, get pedophiles, continue with the castration of homosexuals
and step by step, end with gassing of the jews! Lord knows what else,
since I'm no expert on this, but when we're on the subject of
thought-crime and convicting people based on thought-crimes, I don't
see why we should limit ourselves only to computer-generated
child-pornography and people dealing with it, when we have all these
other criminal elements in the society. Meine Freunde, let's get them
*all* this time!!! Sieg Heil!!! :-P
Well, that's how it goes in the history, anyway; Intolerance has a
habit of always starting with the pedophiles, and then moving into
imaginary pedophiles, homosexuals, disabled, and other disgusting
minorities that nobody really cares about or would ever openly admit
of being one.
Well, we'll see where it stops this time, if it does. I think we have
the majority of nations doing the pedophile hunt this time, and thus
we have a much better chance! The only problem is that those jews are
really pissing on those Palestinians, so maybe we should just take it
on the arabs, instead of the jews this time... especially, since the
Jews have those nasty nukes.. And the Israelis are really giving hell
to those palestinians.. One certainly thinks that hey've clearly
learned their lesson from history: Taking the rights to vote on
matters concerning themselves, destroying their houses, driving them
away from their homes, etc... just see the news for more examples
of Jews shooting & driving the palestinians from their homes. This
time, with the open US support of the Jews doing things like this,
the neo-nazism can really trive!!
I demand that we discriminate the minorities indiscriminately!
++ J
> >On my shelf, I have several books that describe acts of horrible
> >brutality, and murder; some of those books have images of those acts. It
> >is not, and should not be illegal to own these Holocaust history books.
>
> I think your point here is that possession of images isn't the same as
> perpetrating the violence depicted. And you uphold that for kiddie porn
> --I admire this
> ability to uphold principles for others, no matter how disgusting,
> and I agree with you. But my point was about real (ie, evidence of an
> actual assault) vs. fictional and the conceptual difficulty this poses
> for legislators in Maine.
>
> Ever since the caves of france, we have been free to depict what we will,
> with whatever tools we find, on whatever surfaces we like.
>
> Bits are bits. First they restrict 2-D bits, then 1-D bits, to hell with
> that pesky constitution.
>
> Ciao
>
