Legal frameworks around fictional pornography depicting minors vary depending on country and nature of the material involved. Laws against production, distribution, and consumption of child pornography generally separate images into three categories: real, pseudo, and virtual. Pseudo-photographic child pornography is produced by digitally manipulating non-sexual images of real minors to make pornographic material. Virtual child pornography depicts purely fictional characters for example, lolicon manga.
Some analysts have argued whether or not cartoon pornography that depicts minors is a victimless crime. Currently, countries that have made it illegal to possess as well as create and distribute sexual images of fictional characters who are described as or appear to be below eighteen include New Zealand, Australia, Canada, South Africa, South Korea, and the United Kingdom.
There is debate as to, whether cartoon pornographies example: comics, illustrations, anime sexually depicting purely fictional minor characters or young-looking purely fictional adult characters, really lead to sexual crimes against minors, and whether legally regulating such cartoons is a violation of freedom of expression and creation. Cultural anthropologist Patrick W. Galbraith based his research on Japan's crime statistics [ 4 ] , showing that sexual abuse of minors has decreased in Japan since the spread of lolicon media increased in the s and s, argued that cartoon pornographic images do not necessarily influence crime.
A report by the Sexologisk Klinik for the Danish government claimed that there is no evidence that individuals that view cartoons and drawings depicting fictitious child sexual abuse are more likely to engage in child sexual abuse in the real world. Those in favour of legally regulating that cartoon pornographies, argue that simple comparison of crime statistics is meaningless due to the possibility of actual crimes that are not captured in statistics, and that there are cases that actually led to sexual abuse against child because of such creations, such as Tsutomu Miyazaki 's case.
Legal scholar Hiroshi Nakasatomi argues that lolicon material can distort consumers' sexual desires and induce crime, [ 8 ] a view shared by the non-profit organization CASPAR, whose founder Kondo Mitsue argues that "freedom of expression does not allow for the depiction of little girls being violently raped, depriving them of their basic human rights".
