Lolicon 419038 225922962 2008-07-16T01:05:36Z 65.183.135.231 caption [[Image:Lolicon Sample.png|thumb|right|250px|Lolicon art often depicts childlike characteristics in erotic settings]] {{nihongo|'''Lolicon'''|ロリコン| }}, also [[romanization|romanized]] as '''rorikon''', is a [[slang]] [[portmanteau]] of the phrase "Lolita complex".<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-25145481_ITM | title = Shopping rebellion; what the kids want. (Letter from Tokyo) | work = [[The New Yorker]] | date = [[2002-03-18]] | accessdate = 2008-01-13 }}</ref><ref name="sanseido">{{cite web|url=http://www.sanseido.net/User/Dic/Index.aspx?TWords=ロリコン&st=0&DailyJJ=checkbox|title=ロリコン|language=Japanese|publisher=[[Sanseido]]|accessdate=2008-01-07|quote={{nihongo|''An abbreviation for "lolita complex".''|ロリータコンプレックスの略.|Rorīta Konpurekkusu no hobo.}}}}</ref> In [[Japan]], the term describes an attraction to young girls,<ref>Darling, 82.</ref> or an individual with such an attraction.<ref name="WWD" /><ref name="alc">{{cite web|url=http://eow.alc.co.jp/ロリコン/UTF-8/?ref=sa|title=ロリコン|publisher=SPACE ALC|language=Japanese|accessdate=2008-01-07}}</ref> Outside Japan, the term is less common and most often refers to a [[genre]] of [[manga]] and [[anime]] wherein childlike female characters are depicted in an erotic manner. The phrase is a reference to [[Vladimir Nabokov]]'s book, ''[[Lolita]]'', in which a middle-aged man becomes sexually obsessed with a 12-year-old girl.<ref>Kinsella, 305.</ref> The equivalent term for the sexualization of or attraction to young boys is [[shotacon]]. Some critics claim that the lolicon genre contributes to actual [[child sexual abuse|sexual abuse of children]],<ref name="Japan Today" /><ref name="comic relief" /> while others claim that there is no [[evidence]] for this,<ref name="Internet Association Japan" /><ref name="comic relief" /> or that there is evidence to the contrary.<ref name="Diamond and Uchiyama" /> Several countries have attempted to criminalize lolicon's sexually explicit forms as a type of [[child pornography]]. Canada has succeeded in doing this. ==In Japan== Generally, lolicon is a term used to describe a sexual attraction to younger girls, or girls with [[neoteny|youthful characteristics]]. In other words, it can refer to actual or perceived [[pedophilia]] and [[ephebophilia]]. Strictly speaking, ''Lolita complex'' in [[Japanese language|Japanese]] refers only to the [[paraphilia]] itself, but the abbreviation ''lolicon'' can refer to an individual that has the paraphilia as well.<ref name="WWD">{{cite news | url = http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-31844488_ITM | title = On the drawing board. (Lehmann Maupin gallery) | author = Rosemary Feitelberg | work = [[Women's Wear Daily]] | date = [[2007-06-22]] | accessdate = 2008-01-13 }}</ref> Lolicon is a widespread phenomenon in Japan, where it is a frequent subject of scholarly articles and criticism.<ref name="adultmanga">Kinsella, Sharon. Adult Manga. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2000. ISBN 0-8248-2318-4</ref> Many general bookstores and newsstands openly offer illustrated lolicon material, but there has also been police action against lolicon manga.<ref name="adultmanga"/> There are also stores that specifically target the lolicon audience.<ref name="Japan Today">{{cite web | url = http://www.japantoday.com/jp/kuchikomi/292 | title = 'Rorikon' trade nurturing a fetish for young females | publisher = [[Japan Today]] | date = [[2004-03-22]] | accessdate = 2008-01-13 }}</ref> The consumers are said to be [[white-collar worker]]s in their 20s and 30s who do not complain about the high prices of lolicon merchandise such as figurines and accessories.<ref name="Japan Today" /> The "[[kawaii]]" style (which in Western terms could roughly be translated as "cute") is extremely popular in Japan, where it is present in all the manga/anime styles.<ref>"The Darker Side of Cuteness," ''The Economist'', May 8, 1999.</ref> The school-aged girl in a school uniform is also an erotic symbol in Japan, comparable to the image of a woman in a mini-skirt in the United States. [[Burusera]] shops cater to men with lolicon complexes by selling unwashed panties, men can make dates with teenagers through [[terekura]] ("telephone clubs"),<ref>"Breaking the Mold," ''Sydney Morning Herald,'' October 7, 1995</ref> and school girls moonlight as prostitutes in [[Tokyo]].<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-56844390.html | title = Teen prostitutes sell favors after school in Tokyo | author = Willis Witter | work = [[The Washington Times]] | date = [[1997-04-06]] | accessdate = 2008-01-13 | format = fee required }}</ref> Together, these create the "strange [[collusion]] which exists in Japanese culture between the hentai (pervert) and the kawaii (cute)."<ref>"TURNING JAPANESE? ;TURNING JAPANESE? I REALLY THINK SO," by Nick Currie. The Herald (Glasgow), September 26, 1998.</ref> Conversely, the [[Etiquette in Asia#Elders|great cultural respect]] associated with old age would make it incompatible with portraying [[ecchi]] behavior in manga, except in a greatly exaggerated farce context (typical examples being "Dirty Old Men", ''[[Dragon Ball (franchise)|Dragon Ball]]'''s [[Muten-Rôshi]], Master [[Happosai]] in ''[[Ranma ½|Ranma 1/2]]''). Sexual manga featuring children or childlike characters are called lolicon manga.<ref>Gelder, Ken. ''The Subcultures Reader'', 2nd ed. Oxon: Routledge, 2005. p. 547. ISBN 0-415-34415-8</ref><ref name="adultmanga"/> These are generally legal in Japan, although [[child pornography]] was outlawed in 1999.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/05/18/kiddie_web_porn_banned/ | title = Child porn banned in Japan | author = Tim Richardson | work = [[The Register]] | date = [[1999-05-18]] | accessdate = 2008-01-18 }}</ref> Lolicon manga are usually short stories, published as [[dōjinshi]] or in magazines specializing in the genre.<!-- Examples would be nice, but I'm pulling redlinks here.--> Common focuses of these stories include taboo relationships, such as between a teacher and student or brother and sister, while others feature sexual experimentation between children. Some lolicon manga cross over with other [[hentai]] genres, such as [[crossdressing]] and [[futanari]].<ref name="adultmanga"/> ''[[Kodomo no Jikan]]'' is an example of a series that, while not pornographic, draws on lolicon themes for its plot. Lolicon is a subject of study in the [[Superflat]] exhibition.<ref>Darling, 82.</ref><ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-76667059.html | title = "Superflat" art from Japan collapses hierarchies by merging "high" and "low" art, populist and elite genres, advertising and noncommercial media, even 2-D and 3-D concepts | author = May Abbe | work = [[Star Tribune]] | date = [[2001-07-20]] | accessdate = 2008-01-20 | format = fee required }}</ref> ===Origin=== The use of the term "Lolita complex" in Japan began in the early 1970s with the translation of [[Russell Trainer]]'s ''The Lolita Complex''. Shinji Wada used the word in his {{nihongo|''Stumbling upon a cabbage field''|キャベツ畑でつまづいて|Kyabetsu-batake de tumazuite|}}, an ''[[Alice in Wonderland]]'' manga parody in 1974.<ref name="KyabetsuBatake">[[Shinji Wada]], "Kyabetsu-batake de tsumazuite" in ''[[Bessatsu Margaret]]'', June, 1974, p.121</ref> However, the "lolicon manga" genre closely related to manga media began with [[Hideo Azuma]]'s works, such as {{nihongo|''The machine which came from the sea''|海から来た機械|Umi kara kita Kikai|}}, in the early 1980s. Azuma had been publishing some sexual manga featuring young girls in his own self-published magazine ''Cybele'' prior to that time.<ref name="ReviewOfLoliconDojinshi">{{ja icon}} Maruta Hara and Kazuo Shimizu, {{nihongo|"The Lolicon Dōjinshi Reviews"|ロリコン同人誌レビュー|Rorikon dōjinshi rebyū}}[http://azicon1.at.infoseek.co.jp/1980S.htm] in ''Apple Pie'', March, 1982, p.116</ref> Azuma's works became popular among schoolboy readers because most of the pornographic manga up until then had featured mature women influenced by [[gekiga]], but Azuma's works are not pornographies in a strict sense though they contain many sexual elements. Following Azuma's success, some pornographic manga magazines, such as ''[[Manga Burikko]]'' and ''[[Lemon People]]'', began featuring prepubescent girls. Throughout the 1980s, notable lolicon mangaka who published in these magazines include [[Nonki Miyasu]], [[Kamui Fujiwara]], [[Yoshito Asari]] and [[Aki Uchida]]. ===Lolicon manga and gender roles === [[Image:Lolimanga.JPG|thumb|Lolicon manga.]]Sharon Kinsella claimed that lolicon manga was a late-1980s outgrowth of girls' manga,<ref>Kinsella, 305.</ref> which included male homosexual love stories and parodies of boys' and adult manga.<ref>Kinsella, 304.</ref> This occurred as more men attended amateur manga conventions and new boys' amateur manga genres appeared at [[Comiket]]. Kinsella distinguished between the attitudes toward gender of amateur lolicon manga and that of male fans of girls' manga.<ref>Kinsella, 305.</ref> While parody manga created by women ridicule male stereotypes and appeal to both male and female fans, lolicon manga "usually features a girl heroine with large eyes and a body that is both voluptuous and child-like, scantily clad in an outfit that approximates a cross between a 1970s bikini and a space-age suit of armor."<ref>Kinsella, 305.</ref> This latter feature expresses both fear and desire for young women, who have become increasingly powerful in Japanese society.<ref>Darling, 82. Kinsella, 306.</ref> Kinsella noted that the dominant British and American genres and imports of animation video in the 1990s are derived from lolicon manga, suggesting that women in all of these countries have gone through similar social and cultural experiences.<ref>Kinsella, 307.</ref> Female mangaka who draw what has been interpreted as lolicon include [[Chiho Aoshima]] (''The red-eyed tribe'' billboard),<ref>Darling, 85–6.</ref> [[Aya Takano]] (''Universe Dream'' wall painting),<ref>Darling, 86.</ref> [[Kaworu Watashiya]] (''[[Kodomo no Jikan]]''),<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/industry-comments/2007-05-29/jason-deangelis-nymphet | title = Seven Seas Entertainment Talks about ''Nymphet'' | author = Jason DeAngelis | work = [[Anime News Network]] | date = [[2007-05-29]] | accessdate = 2008-01-18 | quote = "...those who are speaking out against Nymphet seem to be disturbed by the relationship between two characters in the story, namely an elementary school student and her adult teacher." }}</ref> and [[Yukiru Sugisaki]] (''[[Rizelmine]]'').<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-15697680_ITM | title = Rizelmine (book review) | work = [[Publishers Weekly]] | date = [[2005-09-19]] | accessdate = 2008-01-18 | quote = "...this irrational and unsettling love story will disturb all but the most dedicated shonen manga otaku." }}</ref> Males include [[Henmaru Machino]] [''Untitled (Green Caterpillar's Girl)''], [[Hitoshi Tomizawa]] (''[[Alien 9]]'', ''Milk Closet''), and Borne (sculptures).<ref>Darling, 82.</ref> Japanese animator [[Hayao Miyazaki]] said in a 1988 interview with ''[[Animage]]'' that while he prefers to have female [[protagonist]]s, "It's difficult. They immediately become the subjects of rorikon gokko (play toy for Lolita Complex guys). In a sense, if we want to depict someone who is affirmative to us, we have no choice but to make them as lovely as possible. But now, there are too many people who shamelessly depict (such heroines) as if they just want (such girls) as pets, and things are escalating more and more." He expressed concern as to what this might mean for "[[human rights]] for women."<ref>[http://www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/interviews/heroines.html#s3 original source: ''Animage'', vol. 125, November 1988] Retrieved 2007-06-08.</ref> ==Outside Japan== {{Expand|section|date=January 2008}} The meaning of ''lolicon'' has evolved much in the [[Western world#Modern definitions|Western world]], as have the meanings of other words such as ''[[anime]]'', ''[[otaku]]'' and ''[[hentai]]''. In the West, ''lolicon'' refers to anime or manga that contains sexual or erotic portrayals of [[puberty|prepubescent]] or childlike characters, and is thus close cognate to the Japanese term ''lolicon manga''. The use of the word ''lolicon'' in the West is an indication that the material is overtly, even if not explicitly, erotic.<ref name=amrgloss>[http://amr.nextstudio.net/html/gloss_lolicon.html Glossary Entry: Lolicon] ''Anime Meta-Review''. Website accessed [[May 13]], [[2006]] and again on 6 Jan 2008</ref> ==Controversy== Laws have been enacted to criminalize "obscene images of children, no matter how they are made," for inciting abuse.<ref>{{cite press release | title = President Signs PROTECT Act | publisher = White House | date = [[2003-04-30]] | url = http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/04/20030430-6.html | accessdate = 2007-06-11}}</ref> An argument is that obscene fictional images portray children as [[sex object]]s, thereby contributing to [[child sexual abuse]]. This argument has been disputed by the claim that there is no scientific basis for that connection,<ref>In [http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/Supreme_Court/briefs/00-795/2000-0795.pet.aa.html Free Speech Coalition v. Reno] (later Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition), the court held that "[f]actual studies that establish the link between computer-generated child pornography and the subsequent sexual abuse of children apparently do not yet exist."</ref> and that restricting sexual expression in drawings or animated games and videos might actually increase the rate of sexual crime by eliminating a harmless outlet for desires that could motivate crime.<ref name="Internet Association Japan">{{cite web | url = http://www.iajapan.org/hotline/center/20060531public.html | title = 「ホットライン運用ガイドライン案」等に対する意見の募集結果について | publisher = Internet Association Japan | date = [[2006-05-31]] | language = Japanese | accessdate = 2008-01-10 }}</ref> This is exemplified in a case involving a man, from [[Virginia]] who, while arrested after viewing lolicon at a public library, asserted that he had quit collecting real child pornography and switched to lolicon.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-85976 | title = Man will serve 10 months for child porn | author = Mike Allen | work = [[The Roanoke Times]] | date = [[2006-10-07]] | accessdate = 2008-01-07 }}</ref> Cultural critic [[Hiroki Azuma]] said that very few readers of lolicon manga commit crimes. In the [[otaku]] culture, lolicon is the "most convenient [form of rebellion]" against society.<ref name="comic relief">{{cite news | url = http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20040427zg.html | title = Does comic relief hurt kids? | author = Tony McNicol | work = [[The Japan Times]] | date = [[2004-04-27]] | accessdate = 2008-01-18 }}</ref> [[Milton Diamond]] and Ayako Uchiyama observe a strong correlation between the dramatic rise of pornographic material in Japan from the 1970s onwards and a dramatic decrease in reported sexual violence, including crimes by juveniles and assaults on children under 13. They cite similar findings in [[Denmark]] and [[West Germany]]. In their summary, they state that the concern that countries with widespread availability of sexually explicit material would suffer increased rates of sexual crimes was not validated; and that the reduction of sexual crimes in Japan during that period may have been influenced by a variety of factors they had described in their study.<ref name="Diamond and Uchiyama">{{cite journal | url = http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/online_artcls/pornography/prngrphy_rape_jp.html | title = Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan | author = [[Milton Diamond]] and Ayako Uchiyama | journal = International Journal of Law and Psychiatry | volume = 22 | issue = 1 | pages = 1–22 | year = 1999 | accessdate = 2008-01-06 | doi = 10.1016/S0160-2527(98)00035-1 }}</ref> Sharon Kinsella observed an increase in unsubstantiated accounts of schoolgirl [[prostitution]] in the media in the late 1990s, and speculated that these unproven reports developed in counterpoint to the increased reporting on [[comfort women]]. She speculated that, "It may be that the image of happy girls selling themselves voluntarily cancels out the other guilty image." <ref name="comic relief" /> A Japanese non-profit organization called CASPAR has claimed that lolicon and other anime magazines and games do encourage [[sex crime]]s. The group, founded in 1989, campaigns for regulation of depiction of minors in pornographic magazines and video games.<ref name=AnimeNewsNetwork>[http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-01-13/lolicon-backlash-in-japan "Lolicon Backlash in Japan"] Anime News Network 01/13/2005. Retrieved 2007-06-07.</ref> Public attention was brought to bear on this issue when [[Tsutomu Miyazaki]] kidnapped and murdered four girls between the ages of 4 and 7 in 1988 and 1989, committing [[necrophilia]] with their corpses.<ref>[http://search.japantimes.co.jp/member/nn20060118a2.html "Serial killer Miyazaki must hang: Supreme Court"], ''The Japan Times''. 01/18/2006. Retrieved 2007-07-07.</ref> The Tokyo High Court ruled him sane, stating that "the murders were premeditated and stemmed from Miyazaki's [[sexual fantasy|sexual fantasies]]",<ref>[http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20010629a1.html "Court rules serial killer Miyazaki sane"], ''The Japan Times,'' 06/29/01. Retrieved 2007-06-07.</ref> and he was [[Capital punishment|executed]] by [[hanging]] for his crimes on [[June 17]], [[2008]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/06/17/asia/AS-GEN-Japan-Execution.php|title=Reports: Japan executes man convicted of killing and mutilating young girls in 1980s|publisher=[[International Herald Tribune]]|date=2008-06-17|accessdate=2008-06-17}}</ref> Public sentiment against animated child pornography was revived in 2005 when a convicted [[sex offender]], who was arrested for the murder of a seven-year-old girl in [[Nara, Nara|Nara]], was suspected as a lolicon.<ref name=AnimeNewsNetwork/> Despite media speculation, it was found that the murderer, [[Kaoru Kobayashi]], seldom had interest in manga, games or dolls.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fd20050206t3.html|title=Otaku harassed as sex-crime fears mount|accessdate=2008-01-06 |author= |date=2005-02-06 |work= |publisher=[[The Japan Times]]}}</ref> He claimed, however, that he had become interested in small girls after watching an animated pornographic video as a high school student.<ref name="Nakamura">[http://search.japantimes.co.jp/member/member.html?nn20050518f1.htm "Child porn, if animated, eludes regulators"], by Akemi Nakamura, ''The Japan Times''. 05/18/2005. Retrieved 2007-06-07.</ref> He was sentenced to death by hanging. According to Michiko Magaoko, director of a non-profit organization in [[Kyoto]] called Juvenile Guide, founded in 2003, approximately half of the 2,000 pornographic animation titles distributed in Japan every year, including films and video games, feature [[schoolgirl]] characters. Mitsui Kondo, representative of an [[Osaka]]-based [[Child Protective Services| Child Protection Agency]], argues that these films may distort attitudes towards girls: "Such a situation makes our society more dangerous to girls....We've got to think about it before talking about freedom of expression."<ref name="Nakamura"/> On [[March 11]], [[2008]], [[UNICEF]] Japan issued a statement calling for further tightening of [[child pornography]] laws in Japan, including the ban of sexual depictions of minors in manga, anime and computer games.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUKT20430220080311|title=UNICEF says Japan failing to control child porn|last=Reynolds|first=Isabel|work=[[Reuters]]|accessed=2008-03-11}}</ref> Such a ban, however, is not being considered by Japan officials for the time being.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/10/japan|title=Japan to outlaw possession of child porn|last=McCurry|first=Justin|work=[[The Guardian]]|accessed=2008-03-11}}</ref> ==Legal issues elsewhere== ===Australia=== All sexualised depictions of children under the age of 16 (or who appear to be under that age) are illegal in [[Australia]], and there is a 'zero-tolerance' policy in place, which covers purely fictional children as well as real children.<ref name="WorldofYaoi">McLelland, Mark. [http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1152&context=artspapers The World of Yaoi: The Internet, Censorship and the Global “Boys’ Love” Fandom] ''Australian Feminist Law Journal'', 2005.</ref> In August 2007, an [[Australia]]n was sentenced to pay an [[AUD]] $9,000 fine for attempting to import eight [[DVD]]s of Japanese anime found to contain pornographic depictions of children and 14 found to contain depictions of sexual violence. No images of real children were involved. "Customs National Manager Investigations, Richard Janeczko, said that it was important to understand that even cartoons or drawings such as those depicted in anime were prohibited if they contained offensive sexual content."<ref>[http://www.customs.gov.au/site/page.cfm?c=9256 Australian Customs Service: Man fined $9,000 for smuggling child pornography]. Retrieved [[August 17]], [[2007]].</ref> ===Canada=== [[:Category:Canadian law|Canadian laws]] addressing this are addressed in the [http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46 C-46] amended [[Canadian Criminal Code]] passed in 1985. Specifically, under Part V: Sexual Offences, Public Morals and Disordery Conduct: Offences Tending to Corrupt Morals. [http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec163.1.html Section 163.1] defines child pornography to include "a visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means", that "shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity", or "the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of eighteen years." The definitive [[Supreme Court of Canada]] decision, ''[[R. v. Sharpe]]'', interprets the statute to include purely fictional material even when no real children were involved in its production. [[Chief Justice of Canada|Chief Justice]] [[Beverley McLachlin]] wrote, {{quote| Interpreting "person" in accordance with Parliament's purpose of criminalizing possession of material that poses a reasoned risk of harm to children, it seems that it should include visual works of the imagination as well as depictions of actual people. Notwithstanding the fact that 'person' in the charging section and in s. [http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec163.1.html 163.1](1)(b) refers to a flesh-and-blood person, I conclude that "person" in s. [http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec163.1.html 163.1](1)(a) includes both actual and imaginary human beings. |[[Supreme Court of Canada]]|''[[R. v. Sharpe]]'', Paragraph 38<ref>[http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2001/2001scc2/2001scc2.html R. v. Sharpe] ([[26 January]] [[2001]]). Retrieved [[February 20]], [[2006]].</ref>}} In October 2005, Canadian courts arrested a 26 year old [[Edmonton, Alberta]] man named '''Gordon Tshun Chin'''<ref>[http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/editorial/2005-10-20 Dear Edmonton Journal] by [[Chris Macdonald]] of [[AnimeNewsNetwork]]</ref> for importing Japanese magazines <ref>[http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Edmonton/2005/10/20/1270701-sun.html Conviction for child toon porn - May be a first for Canadian courts] by [[Tony Blais]], [[Court Bureau]], [[Edmonton Sun]]</ref> (manga) depicting explicit [[child sexuality]].<ref>[http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2005-03-04/canadian-arrested-for-importing-loli-porn-manga Canadian Arrested for Importing Loli-porn Manga] ([[March 4]], [[2005]], [[Anime News Network]]). Retrieved [[June 23]], [[2008]].</ref> Chin's attorney [[Darcy Depoe]] claimed Chin did not know it was illegal, that he was naive. Despite this, Chin was sentenced by Judge [[David Tilley]] to an eighteen-month conditional sentence. This involved eighteen months being barred from use of the internet in which he would perform 100 hours of community service and receive mandatory counseling. He was also placed on the sex offender registry for five years, was forced to provide a DNA sample, and was fined $150. This is the first known manga-related child pornography case in Canada. It is also the first known that exclusively prosecutes this offense, not in being used in conjunction with other laws to increase sentencing, which happened the following year.<ref>[http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/article.php?id=7644 Canadian Sentenced over Loli-Porn Manga] ([[October 20]], [[2005]], [[Anime News Network]]). Retrieved [[January 20]], [[2006]].</ref> As this suspect did not receive jail time for the offense, given leniancy due to the no children being harmed by it. As explained by [[Crown prosecutor]] [[Steven Bilodeau]]<ref>[http://www.ynot.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=news_article&sid=9883 Canadian Convicted of Possessing Hentai Kiddie Porn] by Darklady of YNOT</ref>, on November 1st of the same year, less than two weeks later, jail sentencing was made not only possible, but mandatory, for this crime. There is no data on what the minimum sentencing time is. In April 2006, a 21 year old American man from [[Long Island]], [[New York]] named '''Dominic Sousa''' was sentenced to 30 days in jail (made mandatory by the judgement in November 2005) for bringing child pornography to [[Yarmouth#In Canada|Yarmouth]], Canada. While he had possession of three videos and three images of real children, a criminal investigator cited the 13,000 "mostly cartoon" or "anime" images in his possession and the "prohibitive nature of these goods".<ref>[http://www.cbc.ca/ns/story/ns-porn-anime20060404.html Jail time for man with cartoon child porn] ([[April 4]] [[2006]], [[CBC News]])</ref> Current minimum prison time for this offense is forty-five days for either possession and accessing of the material.<ref>http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/c-46/sec163.1.html C-46 Criminal Code of Canada Section 163.1</ref> The current law criminalizes possession of purely fictional material and has been applied in the absence of any images of real children, including to possession of fictional stories with no pictures of children at all.<ref>[http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/decisions/2005/april/C41354.htm R. v. Beattie] ([[8 April]] [[2005]]). Retrieved [[March 12]], [[2007]].</ref> ===Netherlands=== On [[October 1]], [[2002]], the [[Netherlands]] introduced legislation (''Bulletin of Acts and Decrees 470'') which deemed "virtual child pornography" as illegal.<ref> [http://www.justitie.nl/english/press/press_releases/archive/archive_2002/Virtual_child_pornography_made_punishable_as_of_1_October_2002.asp Justitie] ([[1 October]] [[2002]]). Retrieved [[January 20]], [[2006]]. </ref> The laws appear to only outlaw "''realistic'' images representing a minor engaged in a sexually explicit conduct," and hence lolicon is not included.<ref>[http://www.iwar.org.uk/law/resources/eu/cybercrime.htm Draft Convention on Cyber-crime] ([[25 April]] [[2000]]). Retrieved [[January 20]], [[2006]].</ref> [[Second Life]] (the [[US]] based virtual world) is currently being investigated by the public prosecutor. A number of Second Life users engage in [[ageplay]] where their online [[avatar (computing)|avatars]] dress, act and look like underage children while engaging in virtual sexual acts. Although there is no Dutch law that legislates against under age depictions of sexual acts for computer generated images, the public prosecutor is investigating this on the basis that these virtual actions may incite child abuse in the real world. [http://ca.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2007-02-21T163635Z_01_L21147166_RTRIDST_0_TECH-DUTCH-PORNOGRAPHY-COL.XML] So far this has not led to any successful prosecutions. In March 2008, a 52 year old male was convicted for owning lifelike computer animations of a child performing sexual acts. He has been convicted to a two-year suspended jail sentence, with a ten-year probation period. Prosecution claims that this animation could have been used to entice young children into sexual acts with grown-ups, due to the title and the contents of the animation. The CGI in the clip was life-like, thus falling under the 2002 legislation. <ref>[http://www.ad.nl/binnenland/2128370/Virtueel_filmpje_geldt_ook_als_porno.html]</ref> ===New Zealand=== In [[New Zealand]], the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 classifies a publication as "objectionable" if it "promotes or supports, or tends to promote or support, the exploitation of children, or young persons, or both, for sexual purposes." Making, distribution, import, or copying or possession of objectionable material for the purposes of distribution are offences punishable (in the case of an individual) by a fine of up to NZ$10,000 on [[strict liability]], and 10 years in prison if the offence is committed knowingly.<ref>[http://gpacts.knowledge-basket.co.nz/gpacts/reprint/text/2005/an/042.html Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993] Retrieved [[August 23]], [[2007]].</ref> In December 2004, the Office of Film and Literature Classification determined that ''[[Puni Puni Poemy]]'' - an anime series not usually thought of as pornographic by fans, but which could be described as just barely lolicon - was objectionable under the Act and therefore illegal to publish in New Zealand. A subsequent appeal failed, and the series remains banned.<ref>[http://www.hikari.org.nz/stuff/otaku/ppp/ Puni Puni Poemy: Banned in New Zealand] Retrieved [[August 23]], [[2007]].</ref> ===Norway=== In [[Norway]], any images or videos that depict pornography in a childish context (which would include, for example, an adult model with childish clothes/toys/surroundings)<ref>{{no icon}} [http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-19020522-010-023.html#204a Lovdata - Straffeloven, 19. kapittel, Seksualforbrytelser, § 204a]</ref> are to be considered child pornography. Lolicon are therefore counted as child pornography, and not legal, in Norway (although this has not been proved by Norwegian court). So far, however, [http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-19020522-010-023.html#204a this law] has only been used to sentence individuals in possession of real child porn.<ref>{{no icon}} [http://www.lovdata.no/all/tl-19020522-010-023.html#204 Lovdata - Straffeloven, 19. kapittel, Seksualforbrytelser, § 204 - "Pornoloven" ("The porn law")]</ref> ===South Africa=== With the promulgation of the "Films and Publications Amendment Bill" in September 2003, a broad range of simulated child pornography became illegal in [[South Africa]]. For the purposes of the act, any image or description of a person "real or simulated" who is depicted or described as being under the age of 18 years and engaged in sexual conduct, broadly defined, constitutes 'child pornography.'<ref>{{cite web|title=Films and Publications Amendment Bill of 2003 (104kb pdf file)|url=http://www.info.gov.za/gazette/bills/2003/b61-03.pdf|accessdaymonth=14 January |accessyear=2006}}</ref> Under the act, anyone is guilty of an offence punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment if he or she possesses, creates or produces, imports, exports, broadcasts, or in any way takes steps to procure or access child pornography. ===Sweden=== Any images or videos that depict children in a pornographic context are to be considered child pornography in [[Sweden]], regardless of how realistic or abstract they are.<ref>{{sv icon}} [http://www.police.se/inter/nodeid=33909&pageversion=1.html Frågor och svar om sexuella övergrepp mot barn]</ref> This means that lolicon is considered to be child pornography and is therefore illegal in Sweden. It has, however, not yet been tried in court. ===United Kingdom=== Non-photographic images of children have never been illegal in the [[United Kingdom]], and on [[23 November]] [[2006]], Vernon Coaker, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department, stated that "Although cartoons depicting child abuse are deeply offensive, they do not in themselves constitute abuse of a child. The 1978 Act is well understood by those who work with it and enforce it and there are substantial arguments against extending its scope to cover cartoons of child pornography."<ref>{{cite web|title=House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for [[23 November]] [[2006]]|url=http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm061123/text/61123w0015.htm|accessdaymonth=6 December |accessyear=2006}}</ref> Home Secretary [[John Reid]] and Parliamentary under Secretary of State for Justice [[Maria Eagle]] both specifically cited Lolicon as something they want to ban under this new law {{Fact|date=June 2008}}. <ref>{{cite news|title=UK to outlaw cartoons of child sexual abuse|url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/28/government_outlaws_pictures/|publisher=[[The Register]]|date=[[2008-05-28]]|accessdate=2008-05-29}}</ref> However, on [[13 December]] [[2006]], UK Home Secretary [[John Reid (politician)|John Reid]], announced that the Cabinet was discussing how to ban computer-generated images of child abuse — including cartoons and graphic illustrations of abuse — after pressure from children's charities.<ref>{{cite news|title=Ban urged on child abuse images|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6175441.stm|publisher=[[BBC News]]|date=[[2006-12-13]]|accessdate=2007-02-12}}</ref> The Government published a [http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-2007-depiction-sex-abuse consultation] on [[1 April]] [[2007]], announcing plans to create a new offence of possessing a computer generated picture, cartoon or drawing with a penalty of three years in prison and an unlimited fine.<ref>{{cite news|title=Plan to tighten child abuse law|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6518103.stm|publisher=[[BBC News]]|date=[[2007-04-02]]|accessdate=2007-05-28}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/cons-2007-depiction-sex-abuse |title=Consultation on the possession of non-photographic visual depictions of child sexual abuse |publisher=[[Home Office]]|date=2007-04-02 |accessdate=2007-11-23 }}</ref> ===United States=== {{Wikisource|Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996}} The [[Supreme Court of the United States]] decided in 2002, and affirmed in 2004, that previous prohibition of simulated child pornography under the [[Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996]] was unconstitutional.<ref>{{cite web|title=Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition|url=http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-795.ZS.html|accessdaymonth=12 January |accessyear=2006}}</ref> The majority ruling stated that "the CPPA prohibits speech that records no crime and creates no victims by its production. Virtual child pornography is not 'intrinsically related' to the sexual abuse of children." On [[30 April]] [[2003]], [[President of the United States|President]] [[George W. Bush]] signed into law the [[PROTECT Act of 2003]] (also dubbed the ''Amber Alert Law'')<ref>{{cite web|title=Bush signs child protection bill|url= http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/04/30/bush.amber|accessmonthday=May 1 |accessyear=2003 }}</ref> which again criminalizes all forms of pornography that shows people under the age of 18 regardless of production. The Act introduced {{UnitedStatesCode|18|1466A}} "Obscene visual representations of the sexual abuse of children", which criminalizes material that has "a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture or painting", that "depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and is obscene" or "depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in ... sexual intercourse ... and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value" (the third test of the [[Miller Test]] obscenity determination). In December 2005, [[Dwight Whorley]] was convicted<ref>{{cite web|title=Richmond man first convicted under expanded child-porn law|url=http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD/MGArticle/RTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128768481527|accessdaymonth=12 January |accessyear=2006}}</ref> under 18 U.S.C. 1466A(a)(1) on twenty counts for receiving "...obscene Japanese anime cartoons that graphically depicted prepubescent female children being forced to engage in genital-genital and oral-genital intercourse with adult males."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usab5407.pdf|title=Prosecuting Obscene Representations of the Sexual Abuse of Children|accessdate=2007-02-12|last=Flannery|first=Sara E.|coauthors=Damon A. King|year=2006|month=November|format=PDF|work=Internet Pornography and Child Exploitation|publisher=[[United States Department of Justice]]|pages=50}}</ref> At the time of the violations, Whorley was on parole for earlier sex crimes, although the ensuing convictions were independent of his violation of the terms of the parole. He was also convicted of possessing child pornography involving real children. <ref>{{cite web|title=Virginia Man Sentenced in Landmark Obscenity Case|publisher=Federal Bureau of Investigation|accessdate=2006-09-15|url=http://www.fbi.gov/page2/march06/obscenity031006.htm}} ([[March 10]] [[2006]])</ref> Later, U.S. Attorney's Bulletin, which was requested in November 2006 by the [[Freedom of Information Act (United States)|Freedom of Information Act]], describes the repercussions of this conviction. It recommends that the precedent set by the Whorley case be used as a basis for future prosecutions for possession of such obscene cartoons. On [[April 6]], [[2006]], the arrest of one Michael Williams for child pornography was upheld by the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit]], but the portion of the arrest which pertained to the PROTECT Act was overturned. Specific cartoon depictions of what appears to be a minor engaging in overt sexual intercourse (not merely sexually explicit) were deemed insufficient to actually fulfill the requirements of the PROTECT Act, as the content described in subsections (i) and (ii) of § 2252A(a)(3)(B) is not [[constitutional protection|constitutionally protected]], speech that advertises or promotes such content does have the protection of the [[First Amendment]]. Accordingly, § 2252A(a)(3)(B) was held to be unconstitutionally overbroad. The Eleventh Circuit further held that the law was unconstitutionally vague, in that it did not adequately and specifically describe what sort of speech was criminally actionable.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0415128p.pdf|title=United States v. Williams|accessdate=2007-02-12|format=PDF}}</ref> The [[United States Department of Justice|Department of Justice]] appealed the Eleventh Circuit's ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case review docket is listed as 06-0694 and was scheduled for [[October 30]], [[2007]] on the 2007-2008 schedule.<!-- per [[PROTECT Act]] -->[http://docket.medill.northwestern.edu/archives/004381.php] The Supreme Court heard arguments on the case and overturned the Eleventh Circuit's ruling 7-2 with Justices [[David Souter|Souter]] and [[Ruth Bader Ginsberg|Ginsberg]] dissenting. The court stressed that virtual child pornography remained under the protection of the First Amendment, except when it was offered or solicited under the mistaken impression that actual children were depicted.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-694.pdf|accessdate=2008-05-19|format=PDF|title=Decision in US v. Williams}}</ref> In February 2007, Senator [[John McCain]] introduced S.519, which would add a mandatory 10-year prison sentence to anyone who uses the Internet to violate the PROTECT Act.<ref>[[CNET]] News.com, [http://news.com.com/2100-1028_3-6156976.html Senator to propose surveillance of illegal images]</ref> It's currently unknown if lolicon content is against the PROTECT Act, as it doesn't cover purely artificial constructs, such as animated characters. However, the PROTECT Act. does state that 'visual depictions produced wholly or in part by electronic, mechanical, or other means, including by computer, which are virtually indistinguishable to the unsuspecting viewer from photographic images of ''actual children''' is considered. ==See also== *[[Shotacon]], the male equivalent of lolicon. *[[Moe (slang)|Moe]], a similar aesthetic but less sexual in nature. *[[Junior idol]]<ref name="JTthongs">{{cite web |url = http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20070503f1.html |title = Photos of preteen girls in thongs now big business |accessdate = 2008-03-26 |last = Hongo |first = Jun |authorlink = |date = 2007-05-03 |work = The Japan Times Online |publisher = The Japan Times |archiveurl = |archivedate = |quote = }}</ref> ===Legal aspects=== *[[Legal status of Internet pornography]] *[[Cartoon Pornography#Legal status of Cartoon Pornography|Legal status of Cartoon pornography]] *[[Child pornography]] *[[Pedophilia]] ==Notes== {{reflist|2}} ==References== * {{cite journal | url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3249%28200123%2960%3A3%3C76%3APTDOS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3 | title = Plumbing the Depths of Superflatness | author = Michael Darling | work = Art Journal | volume = 60 | issue = 3 | pages = 76–89 | date = Autumn 2001 | accessdate = 2008-01-20 | quote = Lolicom imagery is well-documented in Superflat, and relies on the angelic stare of the young girl for its erotic charge. [...] Kinsella writes, "The little girl heroines of Lolicom manga simultaneously reflect an awareness of the increasing power and centrality of young women... }} * {{cite journal | url = http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0095-6848%28199822%2924%3A2%3C289%3AJSIT1O%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6 | title = Japanese Subculture in the 1990s: Otaku and the Amateur Manga Movement | author = Sharon Kinsella | journal = Journal of Japanese Studies | volume = 24 | issue = 2 | pages = 289–316 | date = Summer 1998 | month = Oct | year = 1998 | doi = 10.2307/133236 }} Titled "[http://www.kinsellaresearch.com/nerd.html Amateur Manga Subculture and the ''Otaku'' Panic]" by Kinsella on her website. Retrieved on [[2008-01-14]]. ==External links== {{wiktionary}} {{commonscat}} *[http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/2002dltr0019.html "'Virtual child' pornography on the Internet: a 'virtual' victim?"] ''Duke Law & Technology Review'' ([[September 23]] [[2002]]) *[http://www.darkmirage.com/2006/09/09/japanese-titbits-2-hentai-vs-ecchi/ Japanese Titbits #2 - Hentai vs. Ecchi] (discussion of the difference between usage in Japan and the West) ([[September 09]] [[2006]]) *[http://www.comipress.com/article/2006/11/17/1027 "New Law Banning Lolicon?"] ''ComiPress'' ([[November 17]] [[2006]]) <!-- Imageboards such as Renchan, not4chan, etc. are NOT permissible as outside links due to copyright violation concerns. DO NOT ADD THEM.--> {{paraphilia}} [[Category:Japanese sex terms]] [[Category:Anime and manga terminology]] [[Category:Pedophilia]] [[Category:Hentai]] [[ast:Loli-con]] [[ca:Lolicon]] [[de:Lolicon]] [[es:Lolicon]] [[fr:Lolicon]] [[ko:로리콘]] [[id:Lolicon]] [[it:Lolicon]] [[ja:ロリータ・コンプレックス]] [[no:Lolicon]] [[pl:Lolicon]] [[pt:Loli-con]] [[ru:Лоликон]] [[sh:Lolicon]] [[fi:Lolicon]] [[sv:Lolikon]] [[th:โลลิคอน]] [[zh:蘿莉控]]