Nope. He's just an average guy who owns manga depicting children in sexually graphic situations.
Mr. Handley was charged and recently sentenced to six months in prison followed by five years probation for owning "obscene" manga. Personally, I don't approve of the depiction of underage people in sexual situations, so I don't read it. However, like many artists and authors, I believe there is a hard line between drawings and live action when it comes to pornography. One features animated, fictional characters. The other features real human beings, quite often abused or unable to comprehend what is happening.
THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE!
People have been up in arms over this because it sets a precedent for artwork and freedom of speech. Check out Neil Gaiman's reply to a letter he received about the case. The courts have ruled, and now you can get arrested for owning certain forms of art that do not in any way, shape, or form, portray actual, real children. So if you own loli, heck perhaps even innocent moe, there's now standing precedent that can land you in prison depending on who's feeling "righteous" (and by righteous, I mean "who says to hell with your first amendment rights for their own narrow range of vaaaaaaalues.")
The kicker? Read the bottom of the ANN article about his references and psychological profile. He's normal! Just like you and me. Most people like porn. I think it's swell as long as all parties involved in the production are consensual. Oh right, it's physically impossible for it to be non-consensual when it's ANIMATED!
Good job American justice system.
4 comments:
I'm glad you came to that conclusion, because by the title I was thinking "Wait you don't freedom of speech in manga?", and was going to proceed to profess the rights of the first amendment blada blada bla.
But you are right, and they are wrong. It's a similar situation regarding burning the flag, or publicly carrying around a swastika (though I'm not certain if that is legal >_> it'd certainly get your ass handed to you).
Still, I believe that I should be allowed to carry/read/look at/wank to any form of art, no matter how "unethical" the government/people may deem it, simply because it is art, and doesn't involve any real person.
PS: I also personally think people should be allowed to carry around swastikas because SUPPRESSING that right is just another form of censorship, and would only breed further ignorance of both parties.
*edit (as I seem to be incapable of finding an edit button in the comment*
"Wait you don't (WANT) freedom of speech in manga?"
There is no edit button. In this particular case, the courts said the manga in question had no literary or intellectual "value" and thus it was unprotected or some crap. My argument is that it's still just drawings. No real children were involved whatsoever. In the end, he was prosecuted for holding "obscene" manga, so now who gets to decide what's obscene?
"no literary or intellectual value"
So is today's entertainment.
Post a Comment