I saw in another similar thread this thing about a news story about J porn, and I don't think there's anything wrong with Japanese porn other than the fact that IN SPITE OF THE FACT that it's not meant for kids to see they STILL have to censor it (as that news story pointed out)! Now while hentai is the most well known in the west, it seems Japan has live action porn as well. And you know what? I don't care. Why is this a news story even? Later on in the story they have something about Japanese equivalent to CP featuring real girls, but it ain't CP because the girls are wearing clothes. Yeah they have them standing in what some might call provocative poses and/or they are wearing clothes as skimpy as bikinis, but it ain't porn. Porn by definition must be both sexual in nature AND involve nudity. Is it intended as art actually? The article says the photographer says it is. If that's true then I have no problem with it as art. If it was meant to be sexual then I think whoever made it is pervy, but it's NOT porn and therefore NOT CP (CP has 2 words, child, and porn, and children in bikini's ain't CP). Whoever decided to file it in the porn section of the store (as that news story said) is a complete moron. Do I think anyone who'd fap to pics of little kids in bikinis is a perv? YES I DO! However that doesn't make it porn. I've jerked it to pictures of fully clothed adult women if they are attractive enough though (normally I only jerk it to porn), but does that mean that those pictures of fully clothed women are porn? NO! Being sexually desirable (either in a normal, or a perverse way) does not alone, make it porn. It must involve nudity (and actually show body parts that are deemed inappropriate to show) AND be of a sexual nature. For example Miley Cyrus posed nude (no clothes, only a sheet covering her) for a picture in a magazine but her back was turned to the camera so you couldn't even possibly see any of her "bad" parts, and guess what she was only 15 at the time. Controversial? You better believe it. And many parents no longer wanted their kids to watch Hannah Montana as now they saw her as a bad role model for kids. But it was NOT CP, because in spite of her being underage, and in a pose even that might be regarded as suggestive, the body parts they couldn't show were indeed NOT shown. This is not porn any more than what that news story said was the Japanese equivalent to CP. It should NOT have been filed in the porn section of that store. Only thing I think is odd is that an ordinary convenience store in Japan even has anything that normally would ONLY be sold in an "adult entertainment" store. But really was any of this news worthy? NO WAY IN HECK IS ANY OF THIS NEWS WORTHY!
Overall this story is a non-story. Only someone running out of REAL news stories would post something like this on their news website.