XPost: rec.arts.anime.misc   
   From: dhstranger@hotmail.com   
      
   I'm going to break from netiquette for once and top post because. These   
   grubbing about content ratings, as demonstrated below, is a perfect   
   example of misplaced hysteria and people not having a clue as to what   
   the hell they are talking about.   
      
   Let me be blunt, all manga has had a content rating printed on their   
   back covers for the last decade. Each company used their own style, but   
   the ratings are pretty much the same. So now that TokyoPop published a   
   flyer explaining their system, these ratings—which were fine for the   
   last 10 or more years—suddenly become a Bad Thing®. This thread is   
   nothing more then stupid people complaining because they haven't been   
   paying attention. The only difference between now and before the flier   
   was published is that we now now the specifics of how TokyoPop applies   
   their ratings to their books. But nothing has really changed.   
      
   Farix   
      
   Dave Watson wrote:   
   > Galen Musbach wrote:   
   >> On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 23:17:10 -0500, Dave Watson   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>> Sorry, san, but I stick by my argument--the only manga that currently   
   >>> can't be bought by people under 18 is that which contains explicit   
   >>> sexuality.  That's how it should stay.   
   >>   
   >> Ah. So you intend to argue that labeling content is   
   >> a slippery slope toward restricting it? I think Dark Horse   
   >> made the same argument, and I am somewhat inclined   
   >> to agree. If a 9 year old goes to buy Negima (16+), and   
   >> the clerk sells it to him, does the content label create   
   >> a premise of liability?   
   >   
   > That's a big part of it, yes.  This sort of thing tends to lead to more   
   > censorship.  I'm perfectly capable of thinking for myself about which   
   > sort of content I'm able to handle seeing, and I get very offended when   
   > somebody tries to make those decisions for me.  Especially if it's due   
   > to a climate brought about by politicians who I don't vote for.   
   >   
   >> In practice, my local comics store wouldn't sell to children   
   >> below an apparent age of 13 without a parent, and tended   
   >> to eject them. But I think that was a merchandise damage and   
   >> shoplifting concern rather than the notion that kids were too innocent.   
   >   
   > One of the things about the proposed ratings that makes me mad is what   
   > they threw into 18+.  Explicit language (which is more often than not   
   > the fault of the anime/manga company's own "adapters"), explicit   
   > violence, any reference to incest (even if it's not made in a prurient   
   > manner), and "explicit fanservice" (AKA nipples and cameltoes) are now   
   > in the same category as explicit sexuality?  No other artistic medium   
   > has these restrictions placed on them, especially live-action movies,   
   > which circulate much more than manga does.  This must not be allowed to   
   > stand.   
      
   ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet   
   News==----   
   http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+   
   Newsgroups   
   ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)