I, um. Well, er. I ah, I read "Lost Girls."

[Screwtape]

So, upon hearing that I was going to have to wait until 2007 for LoEG, and because I had birthday money burning a hole in my pocket, and because my comic book store had me down for a $20 discount on my next purchase, I wound up buying (with cash, thank you) a copy of Alan Moore and Melinda Gebbie's Lost Girls.

The art is beautiful.

The writing is subtle and nuanced and well-phrased, as always.

The scenes are perfectly realized and beautifully, lovingly executed. Moore has gone a long way out of his way to make sure that everyone knows he understands that pedophiles are fucking perverts. The book is structurally perfect, just like Watchmen.

But I'm still not sure I want the damn thing in my house.

It reads very well, certainly. There's a great deal in it that is thought-provoking, and as one of the more erudite guys who works at my comic book shop said, "It's about how we mythologize the childhood experiences that make us who we are," which I think is totally fascinating. Certainly, Moore is not the first guy to deal with sexual awakening during childhood among children - it's not even (I discovered to my horror) the only book I OWN that contains thoughts on that awakening; there's a great Ray Bradbury story about a guy who has his first sexual experience at fourteen. That story is not at all titillating and it's kind of sweet. But it is fundamentally different from Lost Girls. How?

Lost Girls has pictures.

I am disturbed and upset by the pictures of the physically mature (but still underage) kids fucking. I am REALLY disturbed by the pictures of adults raping children (it's fair to say that this part of the book, at least, is not supposed to be sexy, but it's still there on the page). Nothing in the book is covered up coyly, like Jon's penis in most of Watchmen (or the rape scene in Watchmen, come to think of it). The whole thing is exposed - presumably, Moore and Gebbie want to discover something by exposing sexual activity in all its forms - and I do mean ALL its forms. Pretty much all the characters engage in pretty much every sexual activity with pretty much all the other characters, which results in some interesting stories, certainly. Moore clearly thinks that non-consensual sex is wrong, and that pedophilia is evil (but we knew that from Top 10, right?). The question this book poses to me goes like this: Given that the images are created without models, is it morally responsible to produce images of underage people having sex?

I'm going to go with probably not, actually. It seems to me that, honorable as his intentions are, Moore's book is a hop, skip, and a jump from producing images of children that are meant to titillate and arouse adults. That, frankly, is wrong. I don't think those pictures are actually in this book, but it creates the possibility for them to exist.

What do other people think?

[heystacy]

I want to read Lost Girls so I can crittique the material proper. The price has kept me away, and I don't buy my comics for porn, unless you count the issues of Tarot Witch of the Black Rose I own. Naughty comix. ;) Is LG artistic porn? Underage sex? It'd make a great paper, I am sure of that.

I don't know. Economicly I've been forced to leave comis alone for a undetermined length of time, and I don't think LG will be on the top of my list when (or if) I get back to buying on a monthly basis.

Slightly OT: I think I opened another door when I took myself out of buying comics.

[Crowley]

I think actual crimes and sexual fantasies are really VERY seperate.
The movies Lolita and American Beauty both deal with the same subjects...

Furthermore, I think roleplay is a large part of some people's sex lives. Sub, Dom.. Teacher, Student...etc. At Halloween you see plenty of naughty schoolgirls... So I think that's a large part of the sexual psyche.

In fantasy as stories or with consenting adults... it's fine.

[Arawn]

The thing is, not everyone can seperate fantasy from reality. And as things like Lolicon and LG have become more available, the crimes against children have risen. I'm not saying, or even sugesting that most people are influenced by what they see. But some are, and those that might not have been set off can be by this kind of material.

Ultimately I don't think that it should be available at all, we as a people are not to a point where we can handle it. 99% of the time I side with freespeach, but when it can effect those that can't protect themselves I am more for restricting it.

Now you can argue that it is restricted, but amazon, ebay and a few hundred other places will still let you order it without any sort of an age check. Again I don't belive the average person would ever copy any of this material in a real life setting, but without a better way to restrict it, I dont really want it available either.

[Crowley]

The thing is, not everyone can seperate fantasy from reality. And as things like Lolicon and LG have become more available, the crimes against children have risen. I'm not saying, or even sugesting that most people are influenced by what they see. But some are, and those that might not have been set off can be by this kind of material.

Ultimately I don't think that it should be available at all, we as a people are not to a point where we can handle it. 99% of the time I side with freespeach, but when it can effect those that can't protect themselves I am more for restricting it.

Now you can argue that it is restricted, but amazon, ebay and a few hundred other places will still let you order it without any sort of an age check. Again I don't belive the average person would ever copy any of this material in a real life setting, but without a better way to restrict it, I dont really want it available either.

what's Lollicon and LG?

and isn't the "some people can't recognize the difference between reality and fantasy" one of the arguments cited in prohibiting Eminem and GTA and other music,videogames and movies that have "questionable" content?

[Spike-X]

I believe in freedom of expression. Anything after "but..." is bullshit.

[Spike-X]

Given that the images are created without models, is it morally responsible to produce images of underage people having sex?

The question is irrelevant. Art has a responsibility only to itself. Certainly not to any kind of 'morality'.

Given that the images are created without models, it would be morally irresponsible for anyone who claims they believe in freedom of expression to want these images supressed (which is not what you're arguing for here, I realise, but others are). It is absolutely your right to not want to view these images, or to have them in your house. But nobody has the right to tell me I can't read this, or any other, book.

[kingdom2000]

The thing is, not everyone can seperate fantasy from reality. And as things like Lolicon and LG have become more available, the crimes against children have risen. I'm not saying, or even sugesting that most people are influenced by what they see. But some are, and those that might not have been set off can be by this kind of material.

Ultimately I don't think that it should be available at all, we as a people are not to a point where we can handle it. 99% of the time I side with freespeach, but when it can effect those that can't protect themselves I am more for restricting it.

Now you can argue that it is restricted, but amazon, ebay and a few hundred other places will still let you order it without any sort of an age check. Again I don't belive the average person would ever copy any of this material in a real life setting, but without a better way to restrict it, I dont really want it available either.

"There are lies, damn lies, and statistics" - Mark Twain

Have crimes against children increased? Is it because of the above theory? Can it even been proven? What is this increase based upon? Best guess from last 20 years? 50? In many of those years often these kinds of crimes where hidden and unreported, the victim often as astrozied as the criminial. Its only been more recently where that has reversed. Could that lead to the so-called increase? Then consider the population explosion, that to can lead to increase across the board in many things. More people, more crime is not an unheard theory.

My point, don't just point to some random stat and go "A-ha!". Question the shit out of it cause if it can't hold up to the questions, the data probably isn't valid.

[Spike-X]

I don't belive the average person would ever copy any of this material in a real life setting, but without a better way to restrict it, I dont really want it available either.

Why do you think you get to decide what I can or can't read?

[Arawn]

Why do you think you get to decide what I can or can't read?

I never said I did, but it's nice to see that you ignored everything I typed just to try and ppick a fight.

And as per the previous question about Lolicon (thats the correct spelling) it is a for of Manga or Anime involving porn dealing with children 8 years of age or less. Over the past 15 years there was a dramatic rise in it's availablility in Japan, and they went from less than 3% of their sex crimes involving children of this age to about 18% of sex crimes. But no there couldn't be any connection at all...

In fact since I tried to present a level arguement as to why this material needs to be at least monitored in some way...

Lets ignore that like Spike and try to flagrantly lie about what I said and demand that I am trying to censor your material. I mean why tell the truth or discuss something when unfounded accusations are so much more fun.

Ignore list now at 3!

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Over the past 15 years there was a dramatic rise in it's availablility in Japan, and they went from less than 3% of their sex crimes involving children of this age to about 18% of sex crimes. But no there couldn't be any connection at all...

But is there a proven connection that this material caused the raise in sexual crimes?

It's one thing to take two seperate stats and place them next to each other, but that doesn't prove a connection.
I could lay down some stats on the rise of intrest rates this year, and some stats showing a rise in teen pregnancies that year, but I doubt the two are linked.

[Spike-X]

Lets ignore that like Spike and try to flagrantly lie about what I said and demand that I am trying to censor your material.

You said you didn't want to see it available. How am I supposed to read something if it's not available?

Ignore list now at 3!

Good work. Saves you having to answer my question, at least.

[Lester C.]

I'm sorry but the people who wrote, drew and published Lost Girls out to have their teeth kicked in.

[Lester C.]

Let me clear up my pervious post. I’m an advocate of free speech and believe that only the market should censor books. The last thing I want is for anyone, particularly the government, telling me what I can or can’t read. However children having sex with themselves and adults, even if they actors are made of color and ink, should never have been published. I guarantee you there are people other than the ones that posted in this thread that bought Lost Girls so they can have something to pleasure themselves with that won’t put them in jail. It’s sick.

I wished he phrased it differently but John Byrne may be correct to question Alan Moore’s sanity regarding this project. This is child porn and it really bothers me that the number of copies sold has been very high and it’s going into multiple printings.

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Let me clear up my pervious post.

Looking like an ignorant bumpkin isn't your style then?

I’m an advocate of free speech and believe that only the market should censor books. The last thing I want is for anyone, particularly the government, telling me what I can or can’t read.

Then that should be the end of your post right there.

However children having sex with themselves and adults, even if they actors are made of color and ink, should never have been published.

So then you don't believe in what you just said - you have no love/want for free speech in other words.

I guarantee you there are people other than the ones that posted in this thread that bought Lost Girls so they can have something to pleasure themselves with that won’t put them in jail. It’s sick.

If they wanted to whack off to little kids, I'm sure they could just pick up a mag aimed at teenage girls or boys.
If they want to do that, they'll find away to do that that doesn't cost a lot of money, and isn't a drawing.

I wished he phrased it differently but John Byrne may be correct to question Alan Moore’s sanity regarding this project.

He's not.

This is child porn and it really bothers me that the number of copies sold has been very high and it’s going into multiple printings.

Do you honestly think it's because of the children having sex that people are buying the book?
If so, I think that assumption says more about you, than it does about someone who has a copy of the book.