Besides. What do you suppose the OP wants to see pics specifically of a former U-15 idol naked for?
I have an idea: in order to discuss the credibility of the so-called link between U-15 modeling and AV. If, for instance, it were established that a great number of U15 girls were in fact being pressured to move into nude modeling or AV after turning 18 (eg: a cheap way to channel girls into AV), then there would be incredible incentive from all sorts of groups, including many members here at AO, to put a stop to such a practice.
The question as to whether pre-1999 nude modeling is "wrong" (vis-a-vis moralist argument) or the same as "pornography" (by unclear definitions/interpretations of legal terms) is still open for discussion, but it
is a separate debate -- and one that has been discussed dozens of times in other threads, which I encourage you as a new member to look at.
While it is true that Japan has not enacted a strict ban on possession (which in itself is
another separate debate), production and distribution
is illegal, which you ought to interpret as a measure against "exploitation". Or in other words, we can't change any exploitation that has already happened in the past, but the revised law is in place in order to prevent further exploitation.
I would like to briefly put forth a counter argument, however -- and if you only read one thing thoroughly, let it be this:
Just becacuse "nude U15 photography" is now illegal doesn't mean "clothed U15 models" aren't exploited. And vice-versa: just because girls were nude in pre-1999 content does not mean that every single one was subject to (unconscious) exploitation. Simply put, nudity is not the sole factor in determining whether exploitation is at play.
Lest the discussion get too serious, allow me to press fast-forward:
Next thing, someone will say that nudity is immoral, the work of satan, that we should all return to good Christian values, elect another social conservative Republican leader for the "free world", that people should go to church to learn "right" from "wrong", the government should regulate what material we can and can't see for the sake of society, etc. And some poor chap will be sent to death row for taking pictures of his children playing in the back yard naked, nevermind the fact that you don't have to "get" a child to "bend over naked" because they do that anyway, those damned free-spirited uncivilized kids. Hitler, the commies, ad nauseum.
By the way, I was just curious about where you saw "a ten year old [bending] over naked for a photo". I'm no expert on pre-1999 content, but with what I've seen it is
far more reserved even with nudity considered, than the T-back, low-angled close-up gratuitous shots that have worked their way into the current
clothed JI content. With
that as a benchmark, it would seem to me the
true culprit of this is mainstream pop culture image of beautiful, spoiled party girls (and the resulting phenomenon of
every single schoolgirl wanting to emulate those "role models"), not some tired legalese in a law book somewhere which self-proclaimed vigilantes use for their ammunition on online forums because for some reason it's really going to make a difference.
*cough*
