Underaged girls in anime nude.. Is it child porn?

[amvwizard]

Ok this topic is gonna attract some weridos. Alright then i have noticed that their are little girls in anime around the age of uhh lets say maybe 10 years old. They show these girls in sexy outfits and sometimes nude. I was wondering if this is considered child pornography. I would like intelligent answers please. No stupid crap like " haha your a child rapist".

[Super Shanko]

I know of someone that can give a much better than mine. This is going on a limb here but.....

The way i see it is that seeing how over there the way they have considerably violent things on kid anime like DBZ or Detective Conan, their views on scantily clad youngun's is no different.

But of course its only a theoretical opinion.

[O-Kagachi]

Child Pornography= REAL children depicted nude and/or engaging in sexual acts.

Scantily clad and/or nude young anime girls= JAPANESE ANIMATION, NOT REAL CHILDREN.

So, in my opinion, I wouldn't consider it the same. I'm not into that stuff, but still... It's only anime.

[Joe88]

Well the japanesse are not allowed to show pubic hair in any animation show.
So thats why we always see these underage girls.

[hypes]

Diffrent culture equates to diff'rent things being allowed. For instance, here FOX isn't allowed to show realistc guns, but man, the things those Japanese will do. Nudity over there, much like in Europe, is much more accepting, so to them, it's all right. However, there's also the fan service, which they make a point out of in Nurse Witch Komugi.
Porn, by the way, is sex or sexual actions. The only ones that have little girls doing that is hentai, which is porn.

[Super Shanko]

that make a bit of sense.

But wouldn't it be easier to just not have any at all, for instance...Shaving.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Well the japanesse are not allowed to show pubic hair in any animation show.
So thats why we always see these underage girls.

riiiiiiiight... we'll go with that.

And to the OP, therehas been a clear distinction made that even virtual children (those made in 3d rendering programs) are still not real, so are legal to create. The illegality of child porn has to do with the fact that there are "child victims." Ink and paper are not victims.

[Joe88]

Thats true.
I was watching some show on G4 about anime. And it said that.
It might have been x-play when they were reviewing an anime game but Im not sure what show it was.

[BasharOfTheAges]

Your first line was correct, but the reasoning for the prevalence of youth-fan service and, hell, lolicon, has more to do with people ignoring others' sexual preferences in Japan.

[Psygnius]

According to the PROTECT Act of 2003

Title V - Obscenity and Pornography
Subtitle A - Child Obscenity and Pornography Prevention
Section 502, page 77, paragraph 11, lines 3-10 of the PROTECT Act of 2003, it states that "(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."

“child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(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
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

“identifiable minor”—
(A) means a person—
(I) who was a minor at the time the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or
(II) whose image as a minor was used in creating, adapting, or modifying the visual depiction; and
(ii) who is recognizable as an actual person by the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature; and
(B) shall not be construed to require proof of the actual identity of the identifiable minor.

So basically, unless the underaged animation is drawn based on the image of a real person, it's not considered child porn.