Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 46

Thread: U.N fails again

  1. #21

    Default

    Honestly? No clue. I guess it depends on how much the UN is pressuring the Japanese government, right?

    I can't seem to find any information on Yamada's group outside of articles all sourcing the same Reddit post, so I have no idea if the organization is involved in the discussions at all.

    I did find a pretty detailed DualShockers article that explained that Yamada's comments are based on an earlier, stricter request by the UN committee in question, and not the revised comments they made later on: http://www.dualshockers.com/2016/03/...against-women/

    Like I said: Details are always nice things to include when sharing news about events on the forums.

  2. #22
    PSO-W leаder AND оwner Sp-24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    On this blue planet
    Posts
    2,284

    Default

    Dug around their blog, and it looks like WMC-JPN is an anti-censorship organization that's only active when the UN try to do anything. They are basically reiterating themselves from two years ago, when UN tried to extend the pressure on Japan's loose pedophilia laws to manga and videogames, with their current statement. Not entirely sure what to make of them, but they did spend 4 months over 10 different conventions (with attendance of only ~20 people) discussing the issue in 2013. The only thing of note they did in over a year of downtime was a discussion on freedom of expression after a girl artist got arrested for sharing obscene picture as what I assume was a part of her performance.

  3. #23

    Default

    Gotcha. I mean, even a small group of people can have important things to say on a divisive topic, but I think this definitely settles whether or not the organization has any formal connection with the Japanese government. Thanks for digging into it.

  4. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Outrider View Post
    The fact that women suffer from sexual threats and violence more than men probably has something to do with it. It's about addressing a problem that disproportionately affects a specific group of people.
    That's besides the point. You can't justify allowing attacks on one gender simply because the other gender already has enough, the ends do not justify the means. Fact of the matter is, men get as much (if not more) threats that women. Granted, they're not sexual threats in most cases, but violence is violence, period.

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the_importer_ View Post
    That's besides the point. You can't justify allowing attacks on one gender simply because the other gender already has enough, the ends do not justify the means. Fact of the matter is, men get as much (if not more) threats that women. Granted, they're not sexual threats in most cases, but violence is violence, period.
    If this was in any way an action that justifies "allowing attacks" on one gender by adding additional scrutiny to attacks on the other gender, then you would be correct.

    It isn't.

    The entire point of committees and task forces is to put special attention to a topic or group that is experiencing a disproportionate number of problems versus others. When something like that happens, it needs special attention instead of just bundling it up in other initiatives. That's how you tackle problems like this.

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Outrider View Post
    If this was in any way an action that justifies "allowing attacks" on one gender by adding additional scrutiny to attacks on the other gender, then you would be correct.

    It isn't.

    The entire point of committees and task forces is to put special attention to a topic or group that is experiencing a disproportionate number of problems versus others. When something like that happens, it needs special attention instead of just bundling it up in other initiatives. That's how you tackle problems like this.
    These media are all about violence, just like GTA, any sort of crime that you could commit, you see. Yes, sexual assaults against women is something that does happen in real life unfortunately (not as often as gendered feminist would like you to believe, but that's an entire other beast to tackle), hence why it's in there just like murders and mugging. Not putting these things in fictional media would not make these things go away in real life.

    The issue is that if you're going to bring the sexual assaults that you see in "adult" mangas, might as well bring up the rest of the violence in there. This is what happens when you cherry pick and then present that as an issue. If they would present the entire media to the public, they would see that the entire book would be covered from front to back with violence, making the rape section, ironically, look right at home in there.

    If the U.N. is going to focus on fictional media instead of solving the real world problems that women in 3rd world countries are facing everyday (acid in the face rings a bell?), then I don't see why we need them honestly.

  7. #27

    Default

    We are not talking about the United Nations organization as a whole.

    We are talking about the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Their request to Japan to prevent acts of sexual violence from appearing in published works is a small part of what the committee is doing. The way depictions of women in published media may or may not be discriminatory is exactly what this committee is supposed to be doing.

    The implication that a single project of theirs is somehow indicative of what the organization as a whole is working on is far from accurate. This is one of the many reasons why I take major issues with the hyperbole that's been surrounding this topic.

  8. #28
    Scarlet Spirit PhotonDrop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    the hearts of millions
    Posts
    1,447

    Default

    Oh, but you are wrong there, this committee is an accurate reflection of the organization as a whole; a tremendous waste of resources. All the existence of such a committee says is that they have a grossly inflated/mismanaged budget. Undoubtedly it is stacked with individuals that are already doggedly sure of themselves, and won't look for an objective truth. Gotta justify those tax dollars at work, right?

    If you don't like hyperbole and sensationalizing the topic, perhaps you should consider dropping that loaded language. It's a dishonest attempt to paint your side as self-evident.

    the_importer_ is exactly right, singling out the sexual violence is skirting around the greater debate. But that's the hitch right there, isn't it? By allowing them to break down "depictions of violence in (media)" into "depictions of (adjective) violence against (minority) in media", more progress can be made. One small concession at a time until it is completely subverted and no one's the wiser.
    http://www.pso-world.com/forums/signaturepics/sigpic25144_2.gif
    It's either real or it's a dream. There's nothing that is in between.

  9. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PhotonDrop View Post
    Oh, but you are wrong there, this committee is an accurate reflection of the organization as a whole; a tremendous waste of resources. All the existence of such a committee says is that they have a grossly inflated/mismanaged budget. Undoubtedly it is stacked with individuals that are already doggedly sure of themselves, and won't look for an objective truth. Gotta justify those tax dollars at work, right?

    If you don't like hyperbole and sensationalizing the topic, perhaps you should consider dropping that loaded language. It's a dishonest attempt to paint your side as self-evident.

    the_importer_ is exactly right, singling out the sexual violence is skirting around the greater debate. But that's the hitch right there, isn't it? By allowing them to break down "depictions of violence in (media)" into "depictions of (adjective) violence against (minority) in media", more progress can be made. One small concession at a time until it is completely subverted and no one's the wiser.
    Damn, just got back home and I had a huge reply constructed in my head, but I'm not gonna top that

    Just gonna add a few things:

    This is happening because a small, but loud, minority doesn't like something and nowadays, people think that because they do not like something, that it should not exist. I gave examples of violence and brought GTA in the discussion, but in reality, I'm not the biggest fan of pointless violence in media.

    I do not play GTA games or any games like it, I always preferred Street Fighter's anime style and fair tournament combat style over Mortal Kombat's focus on blood and gore, I hate that since the last generation of video games, that FPS have become the poster child of my hobby instead of mascots like Mario. I don't watch dark and gory Anime and I can't really stand the average shōnen, I like comedies, slice of life, romance and magical girls.

    That being said, not because I do not like something means that I will go out of my way to try remove it from other people's hands. You know what's my secret, I simply don't consume the media that I don't like, that's some crazy idea right?

  10. #30

    Default

    I think it's a stretch to argue that the United Nations is a waste of resources, but okay, sure.

    Now, unless I'm mistaken, I don't recall ever saying whether or not I agree with the argument to ban the content in question. But the suggestion that this - a committee saying that illustrated kiddie and pro-rape porn is maybe a bad thing that (they argue) is too common in Japanese media and maybe the Japanese government should address it - is some huge hyperbolic international censorship campaign is where I find myself chiming in.

    Assuming the criticism is accurate, that doesn't seem like an unreasonable criticism to make. In a perfect world any sort of idea could be presented as it is without any risk, but in the real world media normalizes both good and bad behaviors and ideas. That doesn't necessarily mean certain media should be banned - which is a super difficult and dangerous line to draw - but it does warrant a discussion of how we as a society should deal with this content.

    Aside from some parts of the internet trying to bring this up as part of the wholly separate discussion of sexy pre-teens in JRPGs, the main discussion that's going on surrounding this issue is:

    1.) Is it okay for this content to be published?
    2.) Is the language of the request so broad that it begins censoring important creative works?

    The point of the larger argument is that the language they're using is broad enough that it could include things such as a writer or artist dealing with their own sexual assault. That's a huge issue! That's the main point of contention here. That's largely what Yamada's response was based around. For example, if something like this was enacted in the US, depending on the strictness of the language, work by authors like Toni Morrison would be banned, which would obviously be a bad thing.

    So you know, there are some good points to be made. That being said, suggesting it's a case of "people should just ignore what they don't like" is a gross oversimplification.
    Last edited by Outrider; Mar 17, 2016 at 04:22 PM.

Similar Threads

  1. Well, sega failed again.
    By Telina in forum Cheaters (Closed)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Feb 23, 2008, 03:44 PM
  2. Once again SEGA's Servers are made of FAIL
    By Sylpheed in forum PSU General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: Oct 26, 2007, 09:50 AM
  3. Sega fails again for not keeping up with the servers.
    By IceBlueNinja in forum Rants: Dead horse Society
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: Oct 10, 2007, 07:52 PM
  4. 9 star Kotoha-Senba board Fails again.(Please Reply )
    By Ryno in forum PSU: Gameplay, Guides & Walkthroughs
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: Jul 18, 2007, 06:49 AM
  5. PSU: ST failes to do what it said it would (AGAIN!)
    By SStrikerR in forum Rants: Dead horse Society
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Mar 20, 2007, 05:23 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •