The Forbidden Media: A Lesser Recognised Threat to Freedom of Expression Part 2

In 2008, an NSW man was convicted of child porn for possessing, of all things, cartoon porn of The Simpsons. Lisa Simpson and Bart Simpson may be fictional characters but, under NSW legislation, such material is classified as child porn. In fact, it is lumped in with actual child porn because apparently a cartoon is a person (actual court ruling) and the man faced the same charges as someone in possession of actual child porn.

This case isn’t just unreasonable government overreach, but is also a waste of taxpayer time, money and resources that could have been used to protect a child from genuine sexual abuse or a sex crime with an actual victim.

Whether this person is even a paedophile is debatable. I suspect the person found these images and saved them because he found them funny or shocking, and it is more likely that whoever created the Simpsons porn did so for shock value rather than with pornographic intent.

Drawn porn of all sorts of random and crazy things is common on the internet because of a popular internet phenomenon known as Rule 34. The rule is that if something exists, it is used for porn. This leads to a wide range of pornographic parodies of fictional characters. It is not undertaken for sexual pleasure but ‘for the lulz’.

Like many people who use the internet, I save things I find shocking or funny. I suspect there are many people in Australia who have saved cartoons and drawings they find amusing, blissfully unaware that the Australian Government classifies it as child abuse material.

Another more famous example known to gamers and fans of South Park such as myself is the censorship of the videogame South Park The Stick of Truth. The Australian Government wouldn’t allow the game to be released unless the game censored specific scenes. One of those scenes was of a child getting an anal probe from aliens in true South Park fashion.

The Australian Classification Board decided that this particular scene depicted sexual violence against a minor; the fact that it was intended as comedy did not matter. Although the creators of South Park had to comply, I admire their malicious compliance in which they alerted Australian gamers to the fact the censorship had occurred.

Above is a caption of the image and message that appears in place of one of the censored scenes. As you can see, censorship also includes the adult characters getting anal probes. I’m surprised the Australian government hasn’t demanded retroactive censorship of South Park episodes such Cartman Gets an Anal Probe.

As someone who is fan of anime, with friends who are fans of anime, I am aware of the tendency of the Australian authorities to arbitrarily classify various anime as child exploitation material or demand that anime be censored. Even anime that is not intended to be pornographic.

Anime characters can often be ambiguous when it comes to their age and appearance and may appear youthful to Western audiences. Unlike a real person, you can’t always put an age on a cartoon character. Even in anime not intended as porn, there is often more nudity compared to a Western publication. Anime fans can be perceived as easy targets, and some Australian courts have even taken the view that amine is a gateway to actual child porn.

A high-profile case relating to this issue was in August 2007 when the Australian Border Force decided that eight anime DVDs ‘contained child abuse material’. Cases like this have led to some anime retailers refusing to ship any anime to Australia. This is an example of the censorship of one thing leading to the censorship of media that wasn’t even meant to be censored. Australians now have access to even less anime than before as a result.

In the last part of this series, I will discuss what I consider to be the most concerning application of this legislation.