From: peterc@lsil.com (Peter Cirigliano)
Newsgroups: rec.humor
Subject: Dichotomy in Japanese Censorship Standards
Date: 6 Nov 92 22:29:37 GMT
Reply-To: peterc@lsil.com
Organization: LSI Logic Corporation

In article 92Nov2141742@vancouver.stars.flab.Fujitsu.co.jp, vander@flab.fujitsu.co.jp (Mike van der Velden) writes:
>In article <robg.720426443@citr.uq.oz.au> robg@citr.uq.oz.au (Rob Geraghty) writes:
>> Apologies to any Japanese people who may take offence to this...
>> 
>> I just came across this in a post elsewhere -
>> 
>> : You know - in Japan it is illegal to publish pictures showing any
>> : pubic hair. (But pictures without pubic hair are ok - e.g. shaved
>> : genetials!) Strange people, the Japanese...
>> 
>> Which reminded me of a story which is claimed to be true -
>> 
>> When Playboy was first released in Japan, it was not permissable to show
>> photographs of pubic hair.  Consequently, each individual magazine was
>> airbrushed to remove the offending part (not artistically I believe, but
>> just blacked out).  Who did they hire to do the job?  University
>> students.  Why?  The principle was that university students were already
>> corrupt and therefore this would not make any difference to them.
>> 
>> The upshot of this was that where the magazines were sold, vendors
>> sold paint-remover side-by-side with Playboy...
>> 
>> (presumably later issues had the air-brushing done *before* printing? ;)
>
>
>Yes, it is true that it is not permissible to show photographs of
>pubic hair here in Japan.  This restriction even extends to X-rated
>videos, believe it or not.  But, the offending parts are not simply
>"blacked out" or painted over, as that would be too easy to undo.
>Rather, the offending parts are *scratched* out using some sort of
>knife or other sharp object, so that there is no way of undoing the
>removal.  The paint remover must either be an urban legend, or a first
>attempt at removing the offending parts.  It certainly is not the case
>now.
>
>Madonna's new book, _Sex_, is not permitted into Japan, as the customs
>people have deemed it obscene.  I gather then, that there is some
>pubic hair visible in the book?
>
>Who is hired to do the removal?  I don't know, but in my mind's eye I
>picture some righteous old women sitting at a desk, knife in hand,
>vigourously removing the vile from the pages before them.
>
>Lest you think this practice is limited to pornographic publications,
>I should tell you about a mainstream French magazine (forgot the name,
>sorry) that contained an advertisement which featured a naked woman.
>The pubic hair was scratched out on that, too.  These people are
>thurough.
>
>Not that the Japanese are prudes, mind you.  What they allow on TV
>would not pass any North American censor's criteria.  As far as I can
>tell, anything goes, as long as there is no pubic hair.  Even in prime
>time.
>
>
>objoke (courtesy /usr/games/fortune):
>
>
>   Honk if you love peace and quiet.
>    
>   Hardware, n.:
>        The parts of a computer system that can be kicked.
>
>   I can resist anything but temptation.
> 
>--
>Mike van der Velden
>Distributed Systems Laboratory, Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd., Kawasaki, Japan
>e-mail: vander@flab.fujitsu.co.jp
>
>ps. If you send me a picture postcard      Mike van der Velden
>    from your area to the address at       Fujitsu Unoki Dormitory, room 227
>    right, I'll send you one from Tokyo.   2-17-18 Unoki, Ota-ku, Tokyo 146
>    Postcards must be received by          Japan
>    November 15, 1992



I understand that while there is some censorship in photos of naked men and women,
many of their adult comics are quite racy and explicit (and popular).  Whether
drawn pubic hair is similarly banned, I don't know.