(A) the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that taken as a whole appeals to the prurient interest in sex;
(C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, and scientific value.
(4) Patently offensive means so offensive on its face as to affront current community standards of decency.
I don't see these supposed "community standards" as anything but "conservative standards"
That's not what the SB20 law references though. If that was the case, I would agree with all yall. But it's not the case.
Here is the pertinent text for SB20:
A person commits an offense if the person: (1) knowingly possesses, accesses with intent to view, or promotes obscene visual material containing a depiction that appears to be of a child younger than 18 years of age engaging in activities described by Section 43.21(a)(1)(B), regardless of whether the depiction is an image of an actual child, a cartoon or animation, or an image created using an artificial intelligence application or other computer software;
It doesn't use the entirety of Section 43 to make judgment in the bill (Section 43 being an old penal law defining obscenty that has been in effect for years).
It references a VERY SPECIFIC section of Section 43.
engaging in activities described by Section 43.21(a)(1)(B)
Here is that specific part:
(a) In this subchapter:
(1) Obscene means material or a performance that:
(B) depicts or describes:
(i) patently offensive representations or descriptions of ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, including sexual intercourse, sodomy, and sexual bestiality; or
(ii) patently offensive representations or descriptions of masturbation, excretory functions, sadism, masochism, lewd exhibition of the genitals, the male or female genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal, covered male genitals in a discernibly turgid state or a device designed and marketed as useful primarily for stimulation of the human genital organs
That's it. That's the entirety. It's about straight up sexual acts. Intercourse and masturbation between minors. BDSM, sexual stimulation, etc.
This wouldn't ban Dragon Ball. I just can't see it. It's very specific about the kind of content that is now illegal in drawing form. It's not a judgement call or a general morality issue or up to a conservative judge to make the decision. It's laid out very specifically.