Japan’s record on women’s rights to face review by UN Committee
GENEVA (10 February 2016) – Japan’s record on women’s rights will be examined by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) on 16 February. Japan has ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and so is reviewed regularly by the Committee on how it is implementing the Convention.
Among the possible issues for discussion between CEDAW and a delegation from the Japanese Government are: Banning the sale of video games or cartoons involving sexual violence against women; employment equality, illegal dismissal of women due to pregnancy and childbirth; sexual harassment in the workplace; reintegration into school textbooks of issue of “comfort women”; compensation for women with disabilities sterilised against their will; effect on women, particularly pregnant women, of health programmes introduced after the Fukushima nuclear disaster; difference in pension benefits for men and women, poverty among older women.

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=17028&LangID=E
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Japanese Response - We are absolutely in agreement that the protection of the rights of women in Japan is important. On the other hand, we think it should be carefully and seriously evaluated whether the measures taken to ensure those protections are valid ones or not. If we are asked to consider whether "Protecting Women's Rights in Japan" requires us to "Ban the Sale of Manga and Video Games Depicting Sexual Violence," then we must reply that that is an absolute "no."
Reasons for Our Opinion:
Reason #1 - The so-called sexual violence in manga and video games is a made-up thing and as such does not threaten the rights of actual people; therefore, it is meaningless in protecting the rights of women.
Reason #2 - In Japan, and especially when it comes to manga, these are creative fields that women themselves cultivated and worked hard by their own hand to create careers for themselves. If we were to "ban the sale of manga that includes sexual violence," it would do the opposite and instead create a new avenue of sexism toward women.
Detailed Explanation of Reasons:
About Reason #1 - It goes without saying that the -blam!- and other crimes of actual real people who experience sexual acts from partners without consent is an actual violation of their rights concerning sexual violence and should obviously be forbidden by law, and that it's necessary to protect and support victims. However, the figures in manga and video games are creative fictions that do not actually exist, and thus this is not a violation of any real person's human rights. We should focus on attacking the problems that affect real women's human rights as quickly as possible.
About Reason #2 - ... Already in the 70s there were women-focused manga magazines and many talented women manga writers came from them
Among the manga for women in our country, there were titles that took up the history of women's sexual exploitation and slavery. "The Cliff For Those Would Be Parents" by Fumiko Sone was one such work. Against the backdrop of the real history, it is a work that paints the life of a girl who lived in poverty and was sold into service as a prostitute for Bakusai Harem in Hokkaido's Muroran, and how she lives through the experience.
For the people who live in these times, it is manga like this that creates an opportunity for people to imagine the pain of women living in that era. However, because this work contains depictions of sexual violence, if we employed on a ban on the sale of "manga that depicted sexual violence," it would go out of print and eventually people would lose that chance.
.... (Note that while both listed works contain sexual violence toward men, sexual violence is not a problem limited to only women, and therefore should not be treated as exclusively a women's rights issue.)
In this way, it can be predicted that if we were to ban the sale of "manga that depicts sexual violence," a great deal of publishers would cease publication of a huge amount of works. In the creative field of manga, the effect would be that women who have worked so hard to create a place for vibrant careers would have that place shrink right in front of them, as well as have their efforts negated. In addition, if we were to put ourselves in the places of manga readers the chance to know about the history of the sexual exploitation of women would be lost and method for them to come to know about it. If the creative fields of manga were attacked, trampled on and destroyed with such prejudice, it would damage not only the women manga writers, but also spread to other women creators in the field, as well as the female readers. This would be a sexist punishment that only narrows the career possibilities of Japan's women.
It is noted that on the other hand when it comes to "manga that depicts sexual violence" a certain segment of people are going to find it unpleasant. Nevertheless, to ban expression and commerce unilaterally based on feelings of whether or not something is unpleasant, or viewpoints on what should be moral, is a practice not to be condoned. The basis for feelings about what is or is not repulsive, and moral viewpoints, will differ based on the individual or their region and that culture's segmented local society.
There is nothing to be gained from regulating fictional sexual violence. However, while you're trying to fix the rights of fictional characters, you're leaving the human rights of real women in the real world left to rot. As well, in Japan, the entire reason we have a media genre such as manga that developed to take on themes such as the sexual exploitation of women came from an attitude to tolerate "drinking the pure and the dirty without prejudice." It's because we had the freedom to express our views and with that to express the view of a world of humans that live and die, that there are pure and wonderful things and dirty and nasty things mixed with each other.
Manga is a field where women have put in their hard work and effort to cut forward paths and cultivate a place of their own. We believe that in order to protect this place from being trampled on, it will need our continued hard work to pass it on to the next generation, and it is this effort that will link to the greater freedom and rights of women.

- Kumiko Yamada, Women's Institute of Contemporary Media Culture Representative and Designer
Not Translated - http://wmc-jpn.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/blog-post.html?spref=tw
Translated - https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/48ed9t/opinion_japan_womens_institute_of_contemporary/d0iypiz

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
This was only the latest attempt by the UN to censor Anime/Manga for the sake of "Women's Rights". They have being trying for years and will continue. But it is misguided, their actions will only cause harm to women in Japan and censor mediums displaying eras where society was wrong. The UN would rather have real women rot while targeting fictional depictions of women is just wrong, and shows how corrupt an backwards the UN really are. If the Community ignores this, Japan will consistently be pressured censor their culture, to change for the sake of the West.

TL;DR - UN would rather have real women suffer just so they can censor anime/manga cause some people are "offended". And if the ban were to be applied, Japanese women would be worse off, having their accomplishments over the years made worthless, being put of occupations, and another avenue of sexism.

- Some of yous probably already know about teh UN attacks, but Flee suggested to post it.

Silly UN. The only way to get Japan to change their mind is a couple nukes.

Lol the Nips told the UN to fuck off. Why is Japan so based in politics?

I think the UNs time would be better spent trying to combat things like the underground sex slave trade going on in North America and Europe instead of trying to protect the rights of cartoon women and children.

relative privation, etc.

Quote from: LC on August 06, 2016, 01:29:31 PM

Incorrectly throwing out fallacies doesn't make you correct.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy#Fallacy_fallacy_fallacy

Quote

Or is this another "I don't like it so therefore it's objectively wrong" episode from Verbatim?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Dude, his points were were perfectly sound and guided.

That's regular debate progression you're witnessing.

I know you usually forget there's someone else there.

Quote from: Verbatim on August 06, 2016, 01:32:31 PM

Quote from: LC on August 06, 2016, 01:29:31 PM

Incorrectly throwing out fallacies doesn't make you correct.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy#Fallacy_fallacy_fallacy

Quote

Or is this another "I don't like it so therefore it's objectively wrong" episode from Verbatim?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Dude, his points were were perfectly sound and guided.

That's regular debate progression you're witnessing.

I know you usually forget there's someone else there.

I think he barely gets the opportunity to behave like an ass outside of this site. Allow him to post links.

That's my theory as well. I imagine verbatim is a shy quiet boy who mumbles to himself because he's afraid of real life conflict.

Sep7agon is his only release, besides the stop motion claymation films about sexism in a post liberation society.

how heartbroken would you be if you discovered that you were wrong

(you are, by the way)

Quote from: Dietrich Six on August 06, 2016, 01:50:26 PM

That's my theory as well. I imagine verbatim is a shy quiet boy who mumbles to himself because he's afraid of real life conflict.

Sep7agon is his only release, besides the stop motion claymation films about sexism in a post liberation society.

how heartbroken would you be if you discovered that you were wrong

(you are, by the way)

Do not ruin my headcanon. We get together in the end.

Quote from: Arky on August 06, 2016, 01:36:27 PM

Dude, his points were were perfectly sound and guided.

the UN may be against hentai because they think it harms women and children, but i don't
i'm against it for other reasons
therefore, pretending that i agree with the UN would be a strawman argument

claiming that there are bigger problems for the UN to worry about is a fallacy of relative privation

trying to dismiss me based on my attitude towards hentai alone is an ad hominem

and finally, he seems to be under the impression that i'm committing a fallacy fallacy, but i'm not, because i never once claimed he was wrong based solely on the fact that he's making fallacious arguments--so, he's committed a fallacy fallacy fallacy

mmmmmmmm

The UN has limited resources, so how they choose to allocate those resources is always relevant to the matter at hand.

You're credibility is also on the line, because its important to discourage people from placing faith in someone who is consistently self serving or otherwise wrong.

The fallacy in your argument is that you believe that a constructive discussion on opposing viewpoints on the functions of the world government must adhere to a more logical form of discussion and not a more human one.

We do business by Robert's Rules of Order, not by the rules of a term paper.

why is verby so obsessed with fallacies