“Vice News dropped a hit piece on the manga industry, essentially claiming that manga was mostly filled with “p-word” and that it caused child abuse. Japan will not have it. In fact, many Japanese are FURIOUS with Vice, who might’ve even broken the law by filming a shop without the shop owner’s consent.”
It does not cause child abuse. On the contrary. If you read the paper Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan, by Milton Diamond and David Uchyama, you will see that statistics show that manga not only does not increase child sexual abuse, but is correlate with a decrease in such events.
It’s been well acknowledged for decades, among those who read and respect the research and data, that even full on child pornography functions as a pacifier, and reduces physical sexual contact with children.
Art which does not even involve actual children, yet depicts very young, child like characters in a sexual setting, do the same.
People who stubbornly ignore the research, continue to ignorantly dictate that “it’s a gateway to assault”…which is a demonstrable load of bunk.
Many people will tell you “you’ve got your imagination and hands, so you don’t need any visual/audio stimulation”…Which leads me to the question, why don’t they consider imagination and self stimulation a “gateway” as well?
Of course…the die hard crazies consider even “the thought” to be a gateway…But the point is…if you’re ultimately going to get to the same place of satisfaction, then what is the difference if you have visual/audio stimulation?…most especially when it’s just drawings, or text?
You might find the occasional case where they claim to have needed continual progression…But what fraction of the concerned demographic does that group even make up?
That’s always struck me as an unsubstantiated sexual superstition, when looking at the full picture.
It does not cause child abuse. On the contrary. If you read the paper Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan, by Milton Diamond and David Uchyama, you will see that statistics show that manga not only does not increase child sexual abuse, but is correlate with a decrease in such events.
Thank you for that!
It’s been well acknowledged for decades, among those who read and respect the research and data, that even full on child pornography functions as a pacifier, and reduces physical sexual contact with children.
Art which does not even involve actual children, yet depicts very young, child like characters in a sexual setting, do the same.
People who stubbornly ignore the research, continue to ignorantly dictate that “it’s a gateway to assault”…which is a demonstrable load of bunk.
Many people will tell you “you’ve got your imagination and hands, so you don’t need any visual/audio stimulation”…Which leads me to the question, why don’t they consider imagination and self stimulation a “gateway” as well?
Of course…the die hard crazies consider even “the thought” to be a gateway…But the point is…if you’re ultimately going to get to the same place of satisfaction, then what is the difference if you have visual/audio stimulation?…most especially when it’s just drawings, or text?
You might find the occasional case where they claim to have needed continual progression…But what fraction of the concerned demographic does that group even make up?
That’s always struck me as an unsubstantiated sexual superstition, when looking at the full picture.