In the intervening days since the original post, even John Grisham has managed to step in it on this global issue. Wet your finger, put it in the air, and detect which way the wind is blowing. The issue being discussed in this specific post is a Japan, today, issue with many Japanese and a handful of guests against, and only a handful of Japanese, and even fewer guests, in favor of.
No one, man, lady or child, should be exposed to the materials referred to above when entering the words candy or キャンディ in the search bar of mainstream (and weep if you wish, but these are all mainstream now) sites. Criminal or criminal, indicted or unindicted, it doesn't matter. Underage splayed crotch nonsense is exactly what it looks like and any defense of it is beyond the pale.
It shouldn't take much more effort to shame Mikitani, Son and Bezos into doing the right thing. One starts by making an impact on these organizations' financials, with increasing amounts of shame and societal exclusion if it continues to fail to be addressed. Won't take a single lawyer. As John Grisham unfortunately demonstrated, it doesn't matter how famous or powerful you are, or even if you are an attorney -- the wrong side of this issue is the wrong side.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
Seriously. The photo provided shows a young girl with her leg raised and panties showing. This is not intending to be cute. It is intending to provoke. Since I have a little familiarity with school guidance on this issue, I can assure you this young lady would be wearing bloomers (short shorts designed to insure that panties are never seen beneath the uniform dress) if the picture was taken of a young lady adhering to normal school dress practice in Japan. Minnie Mouse bloomers would be cute. This goes beyond cute.
8 ( +12 / -5 )
I don't know what I find more disturbing, Amazon's reluctance to more carefully control access to adult materials or some of the comments attempting to "understand" i.e. tacitly approve of these practices. To me, this is no different from someone commenting "yeah, the Taliban shot Malala, but they have their own customs, so its all good." It's beyond not cool. It's not good. And you know it's not good.
Yes, parents should be more protective of their daughters. But it takes everyone, and any attempts to ameliorate or apologize for it unfortunately fail at the "well if she had only just dressed more conservatively" level.
Guys -- and I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume the "free market/we have to accept it" comments are from folks I share a y chromosome with -- we can and should do better. It's 2014. If you're just trolling, shame on you, but it's the internet, so I get it. However, if you're serious . . .
Let's see. Does it pass the role reversal test? I'm certain material sexualizing young males would be slapped down in a heartbeat. So no free market or "cultural acceptance" there. If our free market for boy porn is on the socially unacceptable list, why don't we have a similar one for girls? It's because not enough of us are making this a losing proposition for all involved. "Well they have to get it from somewhere" is not helping.
The Oliver Wendell Holmes test is also a good one. We can't define it, but we bloody well know it when we see it. So no excuses.
Finally, for the "for someone who runs a nail-bar" -- and let me translate for you, "woman"-- arguer, you are not only not helping, you are actively contributing to an environment of disrespect towards women everywhere. I'm not writing this because I think Janica specifically or women in general need to be "ridden to the rescue" for. I'm writing this because I'm just tired of it. And because I don't want my daughter or nieces to grow up in an environment where this treatment is acceptable.
10 ( +16 / -6 )