Landmark obscenity case for Japanese comics

[Inkthinker]

As some of you might be aware Japan has some... interesting... laws regarding what is "obscene" in comics. Over the last few years (and espescially in the last decade, with the emergence of the Internet) however, these laws have been pretty relaxed.

Until now, that is.

Japan Today article


A little excerpt:

Kishi, 54, president of comic book publisher Shobunkan Co, received a one-year imprisonment suspended for three years from the Tokyo District Court for distributing 20,544 copies of the comic "Misshitsu" (Honey Room) in April 2002. He was indicted in October 2002.

His lawyers have insisted that Article 175 violates Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression. They had prominent scholars and critics such as Yasuhiro Okudaira, professor emeritus at the University of Tokyo, testify in Kishi's defense.

Okudaira, a constitutional scholar, told the court it is not a matter for state authorities to judge if certain materials are obscene, adding any restrictions on expression are unconstitutional.

Presiding Judge Yujiro Nakatani ruled that Article 175 is constitutional, adding, "It has indirectly contributed to maintaining sexual morality and healthy sexual behavior in society, and it should not be considered unconstitutional to restrict expression, including sexual expressions, if they harm the public good."

Nakatani also said, "We cannot overlook the fact that the defendant brought about harmful influences on sexual morality" by distributing the comic.

Kishi and his lawyers immediately appealed to the Tokyo High Court, calling the decision unfair.

While his lawyers had insisted Article 175 does not clearly define obscenity, Nakatani judged the comic obscene based on three prerequisites under a 1957 Supreme Court ruling.

Lots more in that article, including commments from Westerners living in Japan.

It's interesting that it's not the content of the works which determines "indecency", but the way in which that content is actually depicted.

[Carter]

More here from the BBC.

"Bodies were drawn in a lifelike manner with little attention to concealment (of genitalia), making for sexually explicit expression and deeming the book pornographic matter," Mr Nakatani said.

--Carter--

[Inkthinker]

As far as I can tell, this guy isn't doing anything new, but he is the one that the courts are deciding to make an "example" of. It should be interesting to see how this plays out, because frankly I've been wondering how much longer the Japanese obscenity laws would stand up... a lot of artists who draw adult material there are finding out that they can publish their work uncensored in other countries, for one. And what with the Internet and everything, those laws are largely being held up by old morality and not much practical enforcement.

[The unknown artist]

oh no!! Not genitalia!!!

[Carter]

I'm curious as to how this will affect the gigantic Japanese porn industry as a whole rather than the manga publishers. I love manga as much as the next guy, but I'd slit my own mother's throat without my Minori Aoi and Hitomi Hayasaka.

--Carter--

[MC Fumunda]

So is that comic any good, Ben?

I know you have it.

[Carter]

Yeah, pony up, beeyotch! I'm killing myself looking for scans.

--Carter--

[Inkthinker]

What, Misshitsu?

Nah, I haven't got it... but I bet I can get it.

I'll have to do some hunting... I'm vaguely curious myself to see what could get the attention that good old demon tentacles raping schoolgirls doesn't.

I'm actually not that huge a fan of Japanese porn-comics... it has to be really well-drawn to get my attention in the first place, and I tend to be uncomfortable with subject matter like rape and so on... forceful sex (if not outright rape) features a LOT in hentai, for reasons I never understood.

[astrocity20]

yeah I'd like to see what the fuss is about. Either way personally I could care less. No one should tell anyone else what is moral and what isn't when it isn't something that infiltrates anothers rights. And of course when the issue of obsenity and pornography hits I always fall back to Bill Hicks...

"Supreme Court says pornography is anything without artistic merit that causes sexual thoughts, that's their definition, essentially. No artistic merit, causes sexual thoughts. Hmm... Sounds like...every commercial on television, doesn't it? You know, when I see those two twins on that Doublemint commercial? I'm not thinking of gum. I am thinking of chewing, so maybe that's the connection they're trying to make. "

I still love you Bill.

[Mike]

I read that one online once I heard about that lawsuit and I really can't see what the fuss is about. Other hentai manga artists (like a couple I was going to mention but withheld due to mods most likely going to censor the names out anyway) draw their figures in extremely lifelike ways (depending on the situation), so I think this is really a case of singling out someone who presided over the production or publication of Misshitsu.

Granted, the subject matter was fairly extreme, there have been other (much worse) manga publications to come out from Japan.

One thing I'd noticed about Misshitsu compared to other stuff I've seen online is that the censorship over the "privates" which usually occurs in Japanese hentai manga was there, but not in large "coverage". There seems to be a double standard in effect due to other adult manga being published without the censorship at all.

The subject matter in Misshitsu seemed to cover the range from ******* to gang rape to one on one and [buttloving]. I didn't notice any of the other, very prevalent, themes like scat and pissing, which is one reason I think Misshitsu was just singled out.. or maybe luck of the draw.

The art was very (very) well done, except for being pretty tasteless.