Obviously it's the right thing to do, but that law seems to go further than US laws in that it prohibits the drawing of children in sexual situations. I'm not exactly sure how that would be enforced ("Officer, I swear I thought that drawing was eighteen!"), but I'm not up on Japanese culture and I don't read or watch anime and manga. Am I not understanding this correctly?
Since anime and manga are (wrongly, in my opinion) exempted, I'm not sure you're understanding it correctly, and I'm not sure I am either for that matter since 'exempting anime and manga' and 'prohibiting the drawing of children of sexual situations' seem to be mutually exclusive. I'd also point out that US law does in fact have that provision too (although it only applies to drawings that fail the Miller test), which I didn't know either until looking it up just now.
Oh, you mean they
are exempted. My mistake - I though this law went as far as to ban art depicting child pornography, which I don't consider practical from a legal standpoint simply because art is subjective.
I, for the record, don't agree with the "I know it when I see it" rule because of that and I find it impossible to prove direct harm caused by virtual depictions of child sex. (And apparently "virtual child pornography" is legal in the United States provided that it is not "obscene." No idea what that's supposed to mean...)
