Perverts Are Rejoicing All Over the United States

You know, as much as I hate almost everything in this world, the only thing that makes me so furious are the fucking perverts who watch a certain genre of porn. Yep, I hate fucking perverts who watch and read hentai. But not ordinary hentai, it is the stupid hentai “Lolicon”.

For the stupid idiots who doesn’t even have any single idea what “Lolicon” is, “Lolicon”, or “Rorikon” (that’s how the perverted Japanese pronounce it) is a Japanese abbreviation of Lolita complex, which is pretty much pedophilia. But hey, “Lolicon” or “Loli”(another fucking word for it) in Japanese talks about the brain disease that makes perverts like children.

The word “Lolicon” or “Loli” is often referred to sexual debauchery anime-style artwork, which we will talk about. The “Lolicon” or “Loli” art can be seen pretty much anywhere, such as manga, which portray children having sex. Pretty much all of this nasty stuff came from the land of the rising sun, Japan. They usually show girls that have prepubescent bodies doing nasty stuff. You name it, they got it. “Lolicon” art that features scat, they got it. “Lolicon” art that shows tentacles sex, check. Whatever the shit these perverts like their child porn.

But as much I hate “Lolicon”, these bullshit they call “art” are generally legal in Japan. Yep, Japan is way fucked-up country, especially when that country also has used panties vending machine.

But you know, this “Lolicon” disease isn’t just contained in Japan. Its’ germs have spread to a lot of places, mainly America. Generally speaking, every stupid male anime “otaku” freak with internet access in America has a lot of “Lolicon” illustrations in his computer.

But as all idiots and stupid fucks that try to stop “Lolicon” failed. You want to know why? If you read the Protect Act, you’ll know why. If you don’t, then you’re fucking stupid.

Here is the exact text of SEC. 502. of Protect Act:



SEC. 502. IMPROVEMENTS TO PROHIBITION ON VIRTUAL CHILD PORNOGRAPHY.

(a) Section 2256(8) of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) so that subparagraph (B) reads as follows:

`(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or';

(2) by striking `; or' at the end of subparagraph (C) and inserting a period; and

(3) by striking subparagraph (D).

(b) Section 2256(2) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), `sexually explicit conduct' means actual or simulated--

`(i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex;

`(ii) bestiality;

`(iii) masturbation;

`(iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or

`(v) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;

`(B) For purposes of subsection 8(B) of this section, `sexually explicit conduct' means--

`(i) graphic sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex, or lascivious simulated sexual intercourse where the genitals, breast, or pubic area of any person is exhibited;

`(ii) graphic or lascivious simulated;

`(I) bestiality;

`(II) masturbation; or

`(III) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or

`(iii) graphic or simulated lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person;'.

(c) Section 2256 is amended by inserting at the end the following new paragraphs:

`(10) `graphic', when used with respect to a depiction of sexually explicit conduct, means that a viewer can observe any part of the genitals or pubic area of any depicted person or animal during any part of the time that the sexually explicit conduct is being depicted; and

`(11) the term `indistinguishable' used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.'.

(d) Section 2252A(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(c) It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violating paragraph (1), (2), (3)(A), (4), or (5) of subsection (a) that--

`(1)(A) the alleged child pornography was produced using an actual person or persons engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and

`(B) each such person was an adult at the time the material was produced; or

`(2) the alleged child pornography was not produced using any actual minor or minors.

No affirmative defense under subsection (c)(2) shall be available in any prosecution that involves child pornography as described in section 2256(8)(C). A defendant may not assert an affirmative defense to a charge of violating paragraph (1), (2), (3)(A), (4), or (5) of subsection (a) unless, within the time provided for filing pretrial motions or at such time prior to trial as the judge may direct, but in no event later than 10 days before the commencement of the trial, the defendant provides the court and the United States with notice of the intent to assert such defense and the substance of any expert or other specialized testimony or evidence upon which the defendant intends to rely. If the defendant fails to comply with this subsection, the court shall, absent a finding of extraordinary circumstances that prevented timely compliance, prohibit the defendant from asserting such defense to a charge of violating paragraph (1), (2), (3)(A), (4), or (5) of subsection (a) or presenting any evidence for which the defendant has failed to provide proper and timely notice.'.

Not that all of the fucking text matters. You just need to read the fucking section 2256. If you can read that, it says:

“`(11) the term `indistinguishable' used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.'.

It just means that any fucking “drawing” or “art” that shows prepubescent girls having sex is completely legal. Man, Americans are sick. So, moralists and other advent groups in America that want these “Lolicon” art be abolished in their land have no hope in doing so.

But hey, Lolicon art or Loli doesn’t even directly use children so any fucking pervert can be excused when they are caught masturbating at Lolicon art.

Man, I thought that people were only stupid and idiotic. But seeing the United States Supreme Court ruled that “Lolicon” hentai is legal is way fucking stupid.

Listed in Technorati under humor, politics, random stupidity