Dont' bring manga into Canada

[Barrister]

But forget (frankly unsafe) BDSM play for a minute.  What the SCC doesn't seem to realize (or doesn't care because they were following Parliament's lead) is that they turned a goodnight kiss on your sleeping girlfriend's forehead into a sexual assault.  Excellent work, top legal minds of an entire nation!

[Valmy]

But forget (frankly unsafe) BDSM play for a minute.  What the SCC doesn't seem to realize (or doesn't care because they were following Parliament's lead) is that they turned a goodnight kiss on your sleeping girlfriend's forehead into a sexual assault.  Excellent work, top legal minds of an entire nation!

[Ideologue]

But forget (frankly unsafe) BDSM play for a minute.  What the SCC doesn't seem to realize (or doesn't care because they were following Parliament's lead) is that they turned a goodnight kiss on your sleeping girlfriend's forehead into a sexual assault.  Excellent work, top legal minds of an entire nation!

Well, 6 out of 3 of them, anyway.

[dps]

But forget (frankly unsafe) BDSM play for a minute.  What the SCC doesn't seem to realize (or doesn't care because they were following Parliament's lead) is that they turned a goodnight kiss on your sleeping girlfriend's forehead into a sexual assault.  Excellent work, top legal minds of an entire nation!

Well, 6 out of 3 of them, anyway.

That math seems a bit suspect.

[Ideologue]

But forget (frankly unsafe) BDSM play for a minute.  What the SCC doesn't seem to realize (or doesn't care because they were following Parliament's lead) is that they turned a goodnight kiss on your sleeping girlfriend's forehead into a sexual assault.  Excellent work, top legal minds of an entire nation!

Well, 6 out of 3 of them, anyway.

That math seems a bit suspect.

Sorry, out of 9.

[The Brain]

I've been thinking about BDSM cartoons vs child porn cartoons. I can't think of any obvious big differences between them. Maybe I'm missing something?

[Barrister]

I've been thinking about BDSM cartoons vs child porn cartoons. I can't think of any obvious big differences between them. Maybe I'm missing something?

BDSM (the activity, no the comics) has consenting adults.  Child sexual abuse has no consent.

[viper37]

Actually, they've gone after real-life BDSM in Canada, criminalizing some gray area play: R. v. J.A, 2011 SCC 28.  I'm not sure how I feel about that ruling myself, although it is clear that it's one of those instances that the dispute should have been left private--the "victim" got mad (for unrelated reasons) and filed a complaint for sexual assault regarding a gentleman choking her into unconsciousness (consensually) and then inserting a buttplug into the eponymous receptacle (with what was understood to be her prior consent).  She later changed her mind, and wanted the charges dropped (because she was not evil to the bone, and realized what a life-fucking beast she had let loose), but by this time it was in the state's hands.  The basic rule seems to be that consent is continuously granted throughout a sexual encounter, and unconsciousness renders previous consent invalid.

But forget (frankly unsafe) BDSM play for a minute.  What the SCC doesn't seem to realize (or doesn't care because they were following Parliament's lead) is that they turned a goodnight kiss on your sleeping girlfriend's forehead into a sexual assault.  Excellent work, top legal minds of an entire nation!

They haven't gone after BDSM, they have gone after an accusation of rape.  Not that I'm an expert, but not all BDSM involves one of the participant to lose consciousness.

The case is really silly.  The woman, married/dating her "rapist" complained about it only a few months later, after their couple splitted.
It stinks of falsa accusation, but that was a difficult ruling.

Ruling like this may attack legitimate consensual sex if one of the partners is a bitch.
Ruling against the women might have meant anyone could strangle a woman, claim she had given consent before and rape her.

That's the kind of case that should never have reached the court to get such stupid rulings.  But it will emphasize the need for people to carefully select their sexual partners when they want to something a little more spicy.

[Martinus]

I've been thinking about BDSM cartoons vs child porn cartoons. I can't think of any obvious big differences between them. Maybe I'm missing something?

BDSM (the activity, no the comics) has consenting adults.  Child sexual abuse has no consent.

Frequently BDSM cartoons and written porn depict non-consensual situations, though.

And what about infantilist porn? The line between that and depictions of sex with children without actual children being involved is rather blurry, too.

[Barrister]

I've been thinking about BDSM cartoons vs child porn cartoons. I can't think of any obvious big differences between them. Maybe I'm missing something?

BDSM (the activity, no the comics) has consenting adults.  Child sexual abuse has no consent.

Frequently BDSM cartoons and written porn depict non-consensual situations, though.

And what about infantilist porn? The line between than and depictions of child porn without actual children being involved is rather blurry, too.

And from what I understand, written child porn depicts oddly precocious and sexually consenting children.

It's the risk of that behaviour being transferred into real life that is considered, not the risk of the activity being displayed in the written work.

I'm not sure what "infantilist porn" is - porn involving characters who are of age, but dressed and acting younger?

[Martinus]

I'm not sure what "infantilist porn" is - porn involving characters who are of age, but dressed and acting younger?

That's the problem with you square prosecutor types - you do not know the subject well enough yet you seem to have opinions on it that have rather far reaching consequences.

Infantilist porn is porn where at least one of the participants dresses up as a child or a baby (I guess it's to child porn what furry porn is to bestiality porn). I suspect there isn't much overlap between consumers of that porn/fetish and pedophiles but who knows - in any case if you go after depictions of child sex in text, why not go after a badly disguised adult pretending to be a baby?

[dps]

I'm not sure what "infantilist porn" is - porn involving characters who are of age, but dressed and acting younger?

That's the problem with you square prosecutor types - you do not know the subject well enough yet you seem to have opinions on it that have rather far reaching consequences.

Infantilist porn is porn where at least one of the participants dresses up as a child or a baby (I guess it's to child porn what furry porn is to bestiality porn). I suspect there isn't much overlap between consumers of that porn/fetish and pedophiles but who knows - in any case if you go after depictions of child sex in text, why not go after a badly disguised adult pretending to be a baby?

I would think that would be something that might be prosecuted as kiddie porn under US law.  As I've posted before, if you have a porn movie in which a 20-something port star portrays a character that's supposed to 17, you can get prosecuted for kiddie porn.  Actually, as I understand it, it's a gray area, there's not a lot of case law on the matter, and what there is varies (nothing from the Supreme Court that I'm aware of, just lower court opinions that differ).  I would think that in general, the stuff you are talking about would actually be safer from prosecutions, because it would be more visually obvious that the person playing the part isn't really that young.

[HVC]

What the hell kind of porn are you watch, marti?

[Barrister]

I'm not sure what "infantilist porn" is - porn involving characters who are of age, but dressed and acting younger?

That's the problem with you square prosecutor types - you do not know the subject well enough yet you seem to have opinions on it that have rather far reaching consequences.

Infantilist porn is porn where at least one of the participants dresses up as a child or a baby (I guess it's to child porn what furry porn is to bestiality porn). I suspect there isn't much overlap between consumers of that porn/fetish and pedophiles but who knows - in any case if you go after depictions of child sex in text, why not go after a badly disguised adult pretending to be a baby?

So I need to watch a lot of porn in order to prosecute child porn cases?

And do you really need all the ad hom insults Marti?

I think I've heard of that particular kink.  I think it has a lot more to do with submission and power - kind of just a particular twist on S&M - rather than an attraction to infants.  Plus I'm, unaware of anyone progressing from that kind of porn to child sexual abuse.

[Slargos]

What the hell kind of porn are you watch, marti?

You faux-prude. Don't tell me you've never jerked off to a vid of a 50 year old man in diapers nursing from a hideously ugly woman.