/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

The age limit is now 80 years, what now?

They're actually 18 but aged slowly

>>3901812
wrong, not even 2000 years old are old enough to consent today, all sex is rape, all form of interactions between males and everything else is a form of rape

>>3901811
Yeah, its pedophiles. It’s pedos trying to normalize it.

>>3901812
>IF THE TITS AREN'T SAGGIN,
>SHE AIN'T WORTH BAGGIN.

>>3901814
That's just a justification, thus coped to appeal to the younger bodies and forms.

There are hidden connotations to drawing their younger bodies, which essentially boils down to the perpetuation of children within pornographic media, slowly justifying sexuality within younger and younger audiences from Fetishes to Quirks to Personalities then finally to justified means of intimacy, all justified with the slippery slope of justifying said sexual acts with images of minors, then, actual minors.

I'm not saying there aren't grey areas, but of all things on this Earth, there is a lot more black and white than grey in this specific arena.

Adding shifted ages, hormone imbalances, "she's actually another race/robot/ etc with customs close to pedophilia, etc..." is all a smoke cover to justify using forms of minors to satisfy sexual tastes.

I fear all these looser sentiments towards the sexualization of younger peoples and children can lead to a slow decline to state/culturally mandated sexual acts with children ( but by now I sound like a raging nut, I understand ).

Its just all so...disheartening.

>>3901811
Why couldn't you ask your stupid question in one of the several other threads dealing with this topic? I'll tell you why, it's because you really only made this thread to signal to everyone ''I am a virtuous upstanding citizen loli is bad look at how good I am''

But it's funny that every time, the kind of person that does this turns out to be worse than the people they pretend to be against

>>3901827
That's just thinking shifted to the extreme. I'd recommend you place your sentiments upon this thread in a more balanced and paced light rather than stretching out the sentiments of ones you'd disagree with inane claims.

>>3901833
why are you taking this so seriously

are u a grill? r u qt?

>>3901811
Same reason art depicting rape porn, cripple porn, bestiality, guro porn and whatnot isn't banned. Those fucking drawing, get over it bro. It's escapism, a fetish, it's not real.
>inb4 "b-but drawings influence people too!!"
Yes, but even taking that into account you don't want to fuck with people for thought they may or may not have that may or may not push them to commit crimes and abuse real people. People who jerk it to loli don't necessarily want to diddle real kids.

>>3901833
I would rather worry more about trans, gays and soccer moms to fuck up kids than pseudo pedos

If americans still allow furry and blatantly traced porn cartoons to get money on patreon and paypal, I'll keep drawing lolicon/shotacon hentai fuck your american rules.

>>3901839
Forgive me for irritating you, never intended on that.
I just wanted a thread specified on the specific increase of pedophilia art masquerading as experimental fantasy art.
However, it concerns me that you consider thinking that Shotacon and Lolicon art as hidden pedophilia is prudish.
And for your final sentiments of people who raise said thread like this being worse than the persons who create said art, do you have any examples or is it just an attack on my character rather than on the argument itself?

>>3901844
Furry/blatant tracing and Forced gender politics on their bullshit platforms. Foegot to add that one.

>>3901845
From my pov its the ones crying wolfs which increased, and not the actual wolfs. The internet was like this long before normies such as you

>>3901849
started using it*.

>>3901841
I just wanted a serious conversation on this. Not too much to ask, I suppose.

>>3901842
This is wholly true, yes. I suppose I should also make threads such as this on subjects on plain pornography or just the large proliferation of violence and war within many art forms.

But I'm making a thread on Shota and Lolicon art because I suppose its one of the few avenues of artistic forms/subjects that still squeezes my heart into sickness when thinking about it.

(BTW that guy sounds pretty close to what you said; Im not advocating a Thought Police state, knowing full well once one opens that vase its hard to put it back in place. I just want to have a discussion about this subject.)

>>3901843
That is honestly a much larger threat, yes. Child pageantry is sickening, and one of the large reasons I am distrustful against the recent Trans-movement is the constant redefinition of gender and sexual roles placed upon young persons by older individuals seeking to justify and live out their ill convinced lives in the bodies of other persons.

>>3901844
I respect that, keep drawing I suppose.

>>3901811
Do you think george r.r. Martin is also a pedo for writing about underage girls getting raped?
I mean in both cases it's just people expressing his art thorugh a medium(art or writing)

>>3901849
Huh, yeah that's an interesting point. I suppose more well behaved and contextualized persons/artists don't require to paste their art in favor of such practices as they are mostly firmly based in their convictions in the separation of fantasy and reality in said circumstances.

Its similar to politics or any divisive subject I suppose; two or more sides with more specified and less even-cut out sentiments are seen arguing or shouting louder than most populations which are evened out or just silent to avoid said kerfuffles.

>>3901851
>(BTW that guy sounds pretty close to what you said; Im not advocating a Thought Police state, knowing full well once one opens that vase its hard to put it back in place. I just want to have a discussion about this subject.)
I may have spoken too fast then, generally when people come here to spit on some fetish they advocate for it to be banned or something. I've seen people here saying thought policing is needed, lmao. I'm not even a lolifag, the thought of children getting dicked sounds quite unappealing to me, but what I tell to myself is- ultimately you don't really control your fetishes, do you? Mine are normalfag tame tier, but I can't stop myself from liking them. That's how I empathize with these people in some way, and think that it's better for people to jerk it to loli porn that's not harming anyone rather than trying to get hold of CP or whatnot to satisfy their kinks.

>>3901852
I wouldn't say hes an outright pedophile, but his subjects do tackle a wide variety of life from peace and war in a real of fantasy that allows both the writer and reader to delve into said subjects without the constraints of our place and time. Thus, I suppose within said context, and if his stories, or any stories within this subject created by anyone praise or essentially portray said practices within a bright and giving light, then yes, I'd say they have pedophillic intentions/sentiments.

>>3901855
That is definetly a better avenue than damaging an innocent child(ren) to satiate a temporary sexual lusts.

And to better understand the condition, I definitely wouldn't call Pedophilia a Fetish, rather a very harmful series of sexual assaults born from farmed sexual desires or a series of mental disadvantages/disabilities/conditions that need to be addressed.

My main concern in raising said subject is as a creator puts out said subject matter into the world, said connotations present in his/her/their works can be construed/proliferated (I'm saying this word a lot) towards wider avenues of human thinking connected to sexuality in respect to children and their relations to the condition/acts of Pedophilia, as well as the future relations of children and adults to come.

bump btw

>>3901856
So if i write/draw a comic about an underage courtesan in a fantasy setting, it's all good.
but individual illustrations("panels") means pedo.

>>3901874
I suppose that's where context comes into play.
Say if I showed you a drawing of a child having sexual intercourse with other children or adults, it would most likely leave you concerned or even jarred, and if not you, the general public.
But if context is introduced to the fray, I might alleviate concerns of pedophilia.
All I'm saying is, context or not, all these images related to said subject matter paint pedophilia in a lighter depiction than they should be.
But this is all an experiment and I'll see where we all go with it.

>>3901811
>clearly younger than the legal age limit?
For starters, what age limit? Countries an states have different ages of consent.
And what's clearly younger? It's not slavs and asians' fault that their women remain young into their 30's while americows already look like crack veterans at 16.

>>3901876
>lighter depiction than they should be.
but you can say that about anything moralfag,

just to clarify, do you mean actual loli / shota stuff or things like the op ?

>>3901859
Pedophilia =/= Child molestation

>>3901886
actual

>>3901881
i suppose

>>3901880
age limit of the respective gov, but always older than 17/18 in international understandings and never under 16 despite said laws

>>3901859
kek why don't you try changing pedo for gay and see if you think the same
baka

>>3901889
its not exactly equal but very interconnected

>>3901886
Rapunzel is 18

>>3901892
in your mind

>>3901891
Because homosexuality and even yes transgender-ism doesn't advocate/rely upon sexual intercourse with children to get its points across, although some individuals see this shift in sexual practices and attitudes to push their pedophilia agenda.

Even both homo-heterosexual relations MUST obey consent laws in relation to age limits and just age limits on whole.

When you clump groups such as Homosexuals and their persecutions to acts of pedophilia, you disregard their struggle and issues to a one sided argument that can only paint them as evildoers seeking to exploit weaker and more innocent children.

>>3901894
yes, just used said image to attract attention of users as well as use the image's illustrator as one who readily creates questionable content

>>3901896
both in my mind as well as in reality

>>3901899
They all abuse children by confusing them about sex/gender and in worst case, mutilating them/ giving them hormones.
>>3901902
>as well as in reality
sauce? or is this one of those videogames makes people violent?

>>3901899
>Kids as young as 4 can chose to take hormones that will ruin their lives and drastically increase their likeliness to commit suicide
>16-17 year olds can't in any way chose to fuck older men
The hypocrisy is what angers me the most.

>>3901908

Also when a 40yo actor dates his 21yo girlfriend it's okay, but a 21yo making love with a 17yo it's pedo.

Western society is so fucked up.

>>3901908
>Kids as young as 4 can chose to take hormones

Dumb shit spreading misinformed lies, age limit is 16 to start hormone therapy after years of professional mental and physical consultation.

It's not possible to properly answer the question because you're using shota/lolicon and "people clearly younger than the legal age limit" as if they were the same thing.

>>3901915
It's also clearly misandrist because female pedos are never punished with even 1/10th of the severity by either society or the law.

Pedo's are looking for sexual release that aren't real children. Would it be better to have closeted pedo's running around the daycares with their boners for babies?

ITT retards trying to define pedos and pedos attempting to justify and normalize pedophilia because fucking children is okay.

Nigga Disney makes nude models all the fucking time. Same with video game designers and manga and shit.

>>3901944
t brainlet trying normalize

>>3901832
>>3901940
Ever noticed how the term "normalize" is almost exclusively applied to things the speaker doesn't like, even though logically it can and should be applied to things the speaker likes as well? It's because it's a shitty stand in for "thing I don't like". If a person has nothing other than "normalization", you can assume they're full of shit and ignore anything else they say. Seriously, try it and then think of this post when it finally hits you. 80% of the uses of the word I have seen are feminists complaining about porn or other media. This is not a coincidence.

>>3901811
Why not?
>legal age limit?
That doesn't apply to thoughts, no matter how much you want it to.

>>3901949
We've already established anything that brings men pleasure is rape.

>>3901949
normalize is like when betas call other betas cucks or when sjw's call people nazi. Its just a word that means nothing now. Most people staright up hate lolicon anyways.

>>3901949
No pedophilia is an aberration and definitely not normal or approved on by the wider society.

This normie is comparing god-tier lolicon content to real dirty disgusting children... i have no words you ignorant.

>>3901949
And the solution is always banning certain "toxic" and "unnatural" depictions of beauty in favor of "realistic" and "natural" others which happen to always be the way the whiners look IRL.

>>3901811
Art is divisive and political by nature as well as an act of exploration into the metaphysical. The establishment says "you can't do that." and the artist says "hold my beer."

There's also the fact that it isn't real, isn't realistic, doesn't exist, and is merely a visual trick coming from the void. I don't have to justify shit to someone who barks at illusions. The line, as such, exists nowhere in nature and any interpretation holds the same weight as what one sees in an ink blot.

>>3901811
>clearly younger than the legal age limit?
What even does this mean?

>>3901971
>Art is divisive and political by nature
Fuck that bullshit, art is millenia older than politics as we know them and the only bastards who espouse "everything is political" beliefs are subversives and politicians themselves.

There was a world without politics once, and in the path of enlightment we'll eventually find ourselves in a world without politics again.

>>3901971
Alright, this guy wins

>>3901851
>Im not advocating a Thought Police state
Lolicon is already illegal in America and a lot of other countries, doesn't make it a fucking thought police state
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A

and it's a good thing it's illegal because it encourages pedophiles to commit child sexual abuse
https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2017-06-17/saitama-man-arrested-for-obscenity-claims-he-was-imitating-dojin-manga/.117488

inb4 some dipshit brings up the "do u think vidya causes violence???" shit. false equivalency since loli is porn and vidya isn't, if you want to argue violence then snuff porn is the correct violent comparison, and yea i would be ok with that being banned too.

>>3901811
This isn't a pipe
The word isn't the thing
The map is not the territory
A drawing isn't a person

A pedophile is someone who's attracted to children, not someone who's attracted to drawings, dolls, books or statues. Only a brainlet with 0 understanding of philosophy of art would claim that shotacon and lolicon are pedophilia.

>>3901974
>art is millenia older than politics
Anon, what?
>There was a world without politics once, and in the path of enlightenment we'll eventually find ourselves in a world without politics again.
Anon, what? The only time this was true was when we were hunter gatherers, and even then, intra-tribe conflicts and leadership disputes could easily be identified as a form of proto-politics.

>>3901974
Politics is deeper than the implications of present day two party systems or systems of government, as various groups of persons seeking various goals require and seek to attain various resources, of which power is one of the greatest products. Politics will always exist.

>>3901978
>inb4 some dipshit brings up the "do u think vidya causes violence???" shit. false equivalency since loli is porn and vidya isn't, if you want to argue violence then snuff porn is the correct violent comparison, and yea i would be ok with that being banned too.
The research regarding violent videogames and the research regarding violent pornography use the same methodology to come to the same conclusions. Since child porn and loli are illegal, the effect loli has on the viewer is extrapolated from the research on violent video games and violent porn. They cannot be reasonably seperated because you think porn is magic.

>and it's a good thing it's illegal because it encourages pedophiles to commit child sexual abuse
Jefferemy Dahmer said that porn drove him to kill. Better ban porn! In the real world, the Japanese cops have said there is no association between loli and crimes against children and no study has been able to conclusively prove a causal effect between viewing real child porn and subsequent sexual offending against children, nevermind loli.

>>3901978
You are the one of the first people on this thread that gets what I'm talking about.

Pretending that these images are separate entities that don't encourage such pedophilic acts and tendencies is not very wise, as it straight up depicts sexual acts with children under the guise of fantasy and or illustrations, but nevertheless originate from pedophillic desires and biases.

>>3901811
>tfw petite asian and shortstacked
>also likes size difference
>tfw I self insert as the short one getting fugged
>inb4 tranny
I don't care if noone believes it but yea that's my reason. It really is a gray area 2bh. I get creeped out by obvious kid characters sexualized with an art style really close to realism but I'm ok with semi chibi (3-4 head ) characters as long as I also know the context that these are adult characters but heavily stylized

>>3901989
Those are some interesting points, anon.

>>3901980
Yes, obviously that's not a pipe. But if your sentiments on the false equivalency of images and the connotative subjects they are related to don't exist, then most/all advertising is not effective.
One could place an advertisement of a watch and say, obviously, this is not a watch, but it is there to promote or simply place the notion of possessing said property/service/products, just like said images of underage individuals denote a sense of sexual thrill of attaining pedophillic acts.

>>3901978
>>3901991
>Pretending that these images are separate entities that don't encourage such pedophilic acts and tendencies is not very wise
When the US first tried to ban loli they used these arguments in court. The US Supreme Court told them to get fucked because there is basically zero evidence that loli actually causes or encourages crime against real children. The US government then retreated and passed a law that says only obscene loli is illegal because obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment and they needed to get away the Supreme Court's ruling that they cannot blanket ban loli until they come up with some solid evidence which they, to this day, still have not.

As a side note, this also makes everyone that says "loli is legal in the US" or "loli is illegal in the US" simultaneously right and wrong. Utter nonsense.

>>3901978
Criminals say shit that they think will thug at the heartstrings of the jury, not the truth.

>>3901996
That's actually an interesting point I did not know about, thank you anon.
Furthermore, what constitutes "obscenity"?
Is it more on the argument on what constitutes Pornography as in: "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" argument?

>>3901996
>>3902000

I just sourced this section from a link provided from a previous anon above:

(a)In General.—Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) is obscene; or
(2)
(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A(b)(1), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.
(b)Additional Offenses.—Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly possesses a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)
(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and
(B) is obscene; or
(2)
(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and
(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;
or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A(b)(2), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.
(c)Nonrequired Element of Offense.—
It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.

>>3902003
(d)Circumstances.—The circumstance referred to in subsections (a) and (b) is that—
(1) any communication involved in or made in furtherance of the offense is communicated or transported by the mail, or in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, or any means or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce is otherwise used in committing or in furtherance of the commission of the offense;
(2) any communication involved in or made in furtherance of the offense contemplates the transmission or transportation of a visual depiction by the mail, or in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer;
(3) any person travels or is transported in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of the commission or in furtherance of the commission of the offense;
(4) any visual depiction involved in the offense has been mailed, or has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer, or was produced using materials that have been mailed, or that have been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer; or
(5) the offense is committed in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or in any territory or possession of the United States.

>>3901981
>>3901983
Institutionalized politics are 2772 years old. Purposeful art is decamillenial at the earliest.

Politicians are the only ones pleading the utility and necesity of institutionalized politics in human society and it's time we stop listening.

>>3902004
(e)Affirmative Defense.—It shall be an affirmative defense to a charge of violating subsection (b) that the defendant—
(1) possessed less than 3 such visual depictions; and
(2) promptly and in good faith, and without retaining or allowing any person, other than a law enforcement agency, to access any such visual depiction—
(A) took reasonable steps to destroy each such visual depiction; or
(B) reported the matter to a law enforcement agency and afforded that agency access to each such visual depiction.
(f)Definitions.—For purposes of this section—
(1) the term “visual depiction” includes undeveloped film and videotape, and data stored on a computer disk or by electronic means which is capable of conversion into a visual image, and also includes any photograph, film, video, picture, digital image or picture, computer image or picture, or computer generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means;
(2) the term “sexually explicit conduct” has the meaning given the term in section 2256(2)(A) or 2256(2)(B); and
(3) the term “graphic”, when used with respect to a depiction of sexually explicit conduct, means that a viewer can observe any part of the genitals or pubic area of any depicted person or animal during any part of the time that the sexually explicit conduct is being depicted.
(Added Pub. L. 108–21, title V, §504(a), Apr. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 680.)

>>3902000
>Furthermore, what constitutes "obscenity"?
>Is it more on the argument on what constitutes Pornography as in: "I can't define it, but I know it when I see it" argument?
Yeah basically. Obscenity is a subjective judgement based on "community standards", which leads to all sorts of weird bullshit like something being legal in one town but illegal the next town over.

>>3901811
1. it's a drawing
2. it wont hurt anyone
3. i have no morals and it's nice pay when commissioned

>>3901989
I think it's possible vidya causes violence, but it has too much artistic value to be banned. The same is not true for loli, the only point of loli is to give creepy pedos boners. Vidya can touch on serious philosophical and political issues (and if you find loli porn that can do that, note that would actually be legal under 1466A, but you have to convince a jury that may include soccer moms and fundies that your loli shit is "intellectual high art").

>>3901996
>there is basically zero evidence
Read the fucking link
https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2017-06-17/saitama-man-arrested-for-obscenity-claims-he-was-imitating-dojin-manga/.117488

>>3902000
Pedos will try to tell you it's super hard to define obscenity because they want to push the narrative that the law doesn't make sense, but it isn't. It's basically "if you showed this to your mom would she think it was porn". The US government never wanted to protect loli, the reason for the obscenity thing is because banning all drawings of kids in sex acts would ban stuff like south park, so they needed to specify it was porn they were banning. Obscenity is just legal speak for porn.

ban everything ban ban ban

>>3902010
doesnt make it right

>>3902011
>I think it's possible vidya causes violence
i too remember the 90s, soccer mom

>>3902010
>1. it's a drawing
Yes it is.

>2. it wont hurt anyone
I suppose, but its not a surefire bet I'd be willing to place.

>3. i have no morals
You do, but you choose to justify its existence to satiate your tastes, thus your morals are twisted/altered to satiate lusts that are not moral, thus will eventually increase the risks of farming tendencies that can both harm you and others connected to said images.

>and it's nice pay when commissioned
Damn, we got a rich boy here. But seriously, yeah its generally nice getting to commission art you like. Makes you feel like a rich aristocrat from Florentine Renaissance commissioning artists.

>>3902013
Not an appropriate and even reaction. I'm not trying to ban anything, I just want to have a discussion and grow my perceptions and understandings based upon the arguments and facts and insight placed by users within this thread.

>>3902017
Morality is a spook.

>>3902011
>I think it's possible vidya causes violence, but it has too much artistic value to be banned. The same is not true for loli, the only point of loli is to give creepy pedos boners. Vidya can touch on serious philosophical and political issues (and if you find loli porn that can do that, note that would actually be legal under 1466A, but you have to convince a jury that may include soccer moms and fundies that your loli shit is "intellectual high art").
Yeah dude we're on an art board - I'm not going to argue that things should be banned because wider society think it's not "artistic" enough.
>Obscenity is just legal speak for porn.
You're right in that it was probably originally targeted at porn, but nowadays most porn is not obscene. What would be prosecuted 10 years ago is not prosecuted not, and what was not prosecuted 10 years ago would have been prosecuted 100 years ago. Huh.

>>3901997
did you read the fucking link? if you're talking about the saitama man he was imitating the exact plot of a lolicon manga, there is undeniable evidence he got the idea from the loli shit. the police even admonished the author to not draw more violent loli because they thought it was encouraging violent behavior (he's still allowed to draw loli with less violence though, that's japan for you).

>>3902016
Those were the days. I usually spent those years succin' on titties and shitting my pants with no job prospects.

>>3902011
>there is basically zero evidence
>Read the fucking link
I did. Did I miss something? One anecdote is not evidence.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/5839237_Characteristics_of_Internet_Child_Pornography_Offenders_A_Comparison_with_Child_Molesters
>However, as yet, there is no empirical support for a direct causal link between internet sex offending and the commission of contact offenses.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stefan_Bogaerts/publication/264783629_From_child_pornography_offending_to_child_sexual_abuse_A_review_of_child_pornography_offender_characteristics_and_risks_for_cross-over/links/56a3461d08ae232fb204e8a9/From-child-pornography-offending-to-child-sexual-abuse-A-review-of-child-pornography-offender-characteristics-and-risks-for-cross-over.pdf
>findings of low rates of child sexual abuse among child pornography offenders
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-795.ZO.html
> The Government has shown no more than a remote connection between speech that might encourage thoughts or impulses and any resulting child abuse. Without a significantly stronger, more direct connection, the Government may not prohibit speech on the ground that it may encourage pedophiles to engage in illegal conduct.
https://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0
>Most significantly, they found that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.
>The findings support the theory that potential sexual offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex crimes against children. While the authors do not approve of the use of real children in the production or distribution of child pornography, they say that artificially produced materials might serve a purpose.

>>3902019
To live morally is to live free.

(holy shit I spent 6-7 Captcha verifications on this post

>>3902019
rather be a spook than a pedo.

>>3902021
what is anecdote?

>>3902021
Did you know that Canada still prohibits the depictions of any crime in comics in case it influence kids or someone gets an idea from it? Perhaps we should follow their enlightened path.

What's important is the context in which loli characters are used. If they're stand-ins for gullible elementary school girls that's a lot different than mentally mature 1000 year old succubi. Fetishising underaged behavior is way more disturbing to me than flat chests and hairlessness.

>>3902016
http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/boy_killed_mom_and_shot_dad_ov.html

>>3902027
pedos can't argue so they have to resort to strawmen, nobody said anything about banning anything besides loli and snuff porn.

>>3901811
>implying you need artists to sexualize children
>implying girls(cause be honest, no one cares about bois) don't sexualize themselves
>implying they don't have such a low self steem that they would do anything for views and likes on social media
Have you heard about omegle/periscope/younow, etc?
even if you get your dream come true an all this is banned, what do you think will happen?

>>3902031
It's not a strawman. If loli and snuff porn need to be banned because some mentally ill idiot might look at it and try replicate it, why shouldn't other things be banned for the same reason? Especially when other countries have already done it? Either they don't actually believe drawn depictions are causing crimes, in which case they're bullshitting, or they think that it's fine to glorify crimes and let cartoon inspired crime happen as long as it's not the kind of porn they feel personally icky. It's not "pedos" fault that their worldview and arguments make no sense. You have no morally and empritically consistent reasoning why only those things should be banned.

>>3902030
>http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/boy_killed_mom_and_shot_dad_ov.html

It seemed like he had a weapon in the house before purchasing said game, with the key in reach. (Granted millions of Americans do have one/multiple weapons within their house. I don't know if they have the keys to the safe containing said weapon ready on hand, or even if they are in safes at all.)

There are no notes on the relationship of the video game to the murder and the attempted murder, but a line can be drawn, but it must establish a direct factual connection.

Have they looked at the psych profile of the child before the ruling of the trial (if they did sorry for asking)?

>>3902029
But that's one of my questions: How much, if any, can contextual information justify the production and distribution of images utilizing underage individuals acting/participating/subjected to sexual acts?

>>3902033
>implying you need artists to sexualize children
They clearly can. Look at most of the images, say, related to the Incredible and Rule 34 frequently placed on /aco/ /co/ or even here. Granted the steady sexualization of children is not solely attributed to said artists, but what constitutes an artist? A photographer, a free lance illustrator, a film maker, a producer?

>implying girls(cause be honest, no one cares about bois) don't sexualize themselves
I don't think I specified on the gender/sex of the individual, rather on their age. Of course they do, so do males, but the attention is more on girls rather than boys.

>implying they don't have such a low self steem that they would do anything for views and likes on social media

Not all of them, but some of them are clearly present. Look at ticktock nowadays.

All interesting points, anon. Thanks for participating.

>>3902037
That is a good point, surrendering liberties and artistic freedoms due to the actions of deranged individuals is usually a pitfall for most societies.

Great thread BTW everyone, lots of discussion :)

>>3902017
Drinking water has killed people so we must ban it because it's possible someone will get hurt!

>>3902046
>Appeal to ridicule (also called appeal to mockery, ab absurdo, or the horse laugh) is an informal fallacy which presents an opponent's argument as absurd, ridiculous, or humorous, and therefore not worthy of serious consideration.

fuck normalfags and this pedo agenda, it was always just a simple matter of 2D>3D

>>3902026
What is goalpost moving? it's concrete evidence that loli shit has led to several kids being molested (because he molested several iirc). here's more evidence:
https://youtu.be/HaZWGq_KvIU?t=146
2:26

>>3902023
Admittedly I can't counter that because I haven't had time to read and verify academic papers on the subject, I know other people who have read about it though and say there is research proving a link between fictional cp and child abuse. But I don't expect you to believe me on just my word, so I can't argue against you on that.

>In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.
Abusing children by making real life erotica of them is still legal in japan as long as genitalia is clothed
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcthree/article/57eaaf23-0cef-48c8-961f-41f2563b38aa
If loli causes pedos to not offend then why does child erotica of a five year old sell well enough to make the producers five million yen in profit? Loli is completely legal in japan yet all these pedos choose to instead buy dvd's of real kids to jack off to, kids who probably will get mental issues when they grows up and realize their family pimped them out to pedos. I say "kids" because this isn't an isolated incident https://japantoday.com/category/features/lifestyle/innocence-lost-the-dark-side-of-akihabara

>>3902049
Thanks!

>>3902049
Appealing to extremelly fringe cases in the absence of empirical evidence to push for a specific result while claiming you "don't want to ban anything" sure is less shady than basic intellectual fallacies

>>3902052
>five year old
meant six year old.

>>3902051
Not to defend normalfags and retards, but you can always argue that 2D is just idealized 3D.
It's not completely disconnected.

>>3902039
There's a lot of factors I'd have to consider before answering that question. The level of stylization, for example, makes a considerable difference.

>>3902056
That's also another point I'm trying to make. There is a clear connection between both objects of the same notion/subject, and they are often easily disregarded in favor of content that skirts the line between legal and illegal material of individuals underage participating/subjected to sexual practices.

The same people wanting to ban loli to protect children are pushing for prepubescent gender reassignation therapy. Children's safety is the least they care about, politicking is just the 2010's version of tribal warfare.

>>3902057
Exactly, that's one of the reasons its such a decisive issue within this thread, but not so much in the outside world beyond this site and the people who frequent here.

But overall, I can't believe that various technicalities can justify placing underage individuals in sexual situations within any mode of media.

Just curious, can you think of any that might justify it?

>>3901859
>>3901859
You could say the exact same thing about being gay, and look how well the “treatment” worked on them. Unfortunately these people simply exist, but until they start hurting real people no crime has been committed. Laws banning the creation of drawn pornography does not change the number of pedos out there, it just puts them into an even more sexually frustrated position. I think you have the wrong takeaway from the proliferation of robot/ancient vampire/underdeveloped workaround porn. It shows that there are a whole lot more of them out there that simply weren’t consuming the porn because they felt it was wrong, but as soon as there was a safe way to do so they opened up to it

>>3902059
Is this a general bias/observation you have developed or do you have any legitimate sources/examples on that?

Yes, politics has bastardized even their (trans movements) intentions and journeys, making the further sexualization of children a more important goal rather than focusing on the issue which is a psycho-sexual issue within a very small minority of the general population. Thus, it makes it seem like a larger issue than it is, spreading its corrosive influences on other modes of media under the guise of free expressions.

>>3901833
>>3901843
Read Brave New World. We already have drag queens in kindergarten teaching kids about being inclusive. What's stopping us from going further? Everyone belongs to everyone. If you're not having casual sex with anyone and everyone then something is wrong with you. Terrifying.

>>3901811
pretty sure rapunzel is over 18.
How do you feel about people aging up characters?

>>3902037
>why shouldn't other things be banned for the same reason?
Already answered that.
Vidya has too much artistic value to be banned. The same is not true for loli, the only point of loli is to give creepy pedos boners. Vidya can touch on serious philosophical and political issues (and if you find loli porn that can do that, note that would actually be legal under 1466A, but you have to convince a jury that may include soccer moms and fundies that your loli shit is "intellectual high art").

The only emotion loli is meant to incite is joy at the thought of molesting a child, several vidya games that include murder actually intend you to feel disgust at the act (undertale) or sadness.

Also there are justifiations for murdering someone irl, self defence, trolley problem (kill one, save a hundred), war. Most vidya that include murder has good justifications for you doing it (most fps take place during wars).

There is not a single real life justification for raping a child.

>>3901811
1. It's not real
2. Law =/= Moral
3. It's not real

If I somehow knew a friend was into works by artists like Quzilax, I probably would feel uncomfortable leaving my kids with them, alone or otherwise; just to be safe.

>>3901811
>it's a resetera tranny discovers /ic/ and tries to force the board to adopt xer twisted worldview thread
*yawn*

>>3901980
>A pedophile is someone who's attracted to children, not someone who's attracted to drawings, dolls, books or statues

>A heterosexual man is someone who's attracted to women, not someone who's attracted to drawings, dolls, books or statues

This is how retarded your post is.

>>3901833
HURR SEX EVIL

I'm curious OP, do you think being aroused by feral furry artwork (of, say, a quadruped cat with anime eyes sucking a dick) makes the person a zoophile? Or is it an entire separate fetish?

>>3902070
Both statements are true

>>3902060
You have to recognize the difference between lolita as a bodytype (lolitas aren't necessarily literally children; milfs aren't necessarily literally mothers) and lolicon, the these-are-little-girls fetish. Morally, there's some distinction to make. I don't support the idea of exploiting childlike innocence, however, I think most lolita art is visually ambiguous enough to remain separate from child pornography. Most, but not all. I also acknowledge that many people are intellectually dishonest about what they produce. Regardless, you can't paint all art that qualifies as "lolita" with the same brush. An intellectually adult-like character with self-agency being treated as such doesn't worry me. I'm female and draw it occasionally.

>>3902059
False equivalency, pedoshit. Plenty of right wingers who hate the trans agenda also want loli banned (see gab.com).

>>3902061
I suppose one CAN say that about homosexual/non-heterosexual individuals. But their movement and identity has been linked with any sexual movement not related to heterosexual tendencies (goodness I keep using this word).

But homosexual movements within the past few decades have been about the legalization of marriage among consenting ADULTS, not the integration of children within other people's sex lives. But pedophilia does exist as an aberration upon human society, where it has done much more harm than it does good, kind of unlike the legalization of homosexual relations.

Catering to a population that has tendencies that actually HARM individuals, mostly unlike the homosexual movements, should not be based on backwater illustrations of children in sexual positions/situations, but must be treated as a public health issue.

Pedophiliacs are not mainly driven back by the lack of proper outlets for their sexual frustrations, but the violent fallout and response of other individuals when they are revealed to do so, thus cornering them in smaller and smaller avenues until they take it upon themselves and rape/assault/molest children to satiate their needs, which ultimately hurts everyone.

There's this neat German advertisement for the public understanding of Pedophellia as a public health issue that beckons people with this sexual desire to come out and help address this issue rather than immediately brand said individuals as monsters before they even act upon their desires (of which most fear to do so, I believe).

Don't Offend (English subtitled)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck3uOCyWB50

The new commercial of the Prevention Network "Kein Täter werden" (Don't Offend) is to show that therapeutic treatment of people who feel sexually attracted to children is effective to prevent child sexual abuse.

>>3902052
>Admittedly I can't counter that because I haven't had time to read and verify academic papers on the subject, I know other people who have read about it though and say there is research proving a link between fictional cp and child abuse. But I don't expect you to believe me on just my word, so I can't argue against you on that.
Fair enough. Porn research in general is a mess, which is why the arguments surrounding it have gone on for decades. One study says this on the issue:
>There exist a number of studies supporting both propositions, the most plausible conclusion based on scientific evidence, appears to be that each individual is unique in their response to VCP. For some it encourages and legitimises their desires; for others it provides an outlet for a dangerous sexual urge.
One paper says this on the subject of violent porn:
>They claim there were ‘some harmful effects from extreme pornography on some who access it’
It makes the whole thing borderline useless and leaves enough space to find evidence either way if you go looking.

>>3902077
Hey that's pretty cool. Can you place examples of imagery that falls under the non-child related Lolita art you have drawn (or any you might have in reach as an example)?

Wow i sound like a creep RN but I want to establish a ground for imagery and style many have had.

>>3902052
>If loli causes pedos to not offend then why does child erotica of a five year old sell well enough to make the producers five million yen in profit? Loli is completely legal in japan yet all these pedos choose to instead buy dvd's of real kids to jack off to, kids who probably will get mental issues when they grows up and realize their family pimped them out to pedos.
There are pedos who refuse to look at loli or real kids. There are pedos who look at only loli. There are pedos that look at loli and real kids. There are pedos that only look at real kids. There are varying reasons why each them of them do this, and not really that much research on why. The most straight forward answer would be that no one ever said that loli would eliminate all child abuse forever, and the fact that it didn't does not inherently prove or disprove whether or not loli helps. As a rough comparison, I would consider it similar to asking why if nicorette replacement therapy provides a less harmful alternative to smoking then why does smoking still exist. After all, why wouldn't it?

>>3902075
Not OP, kind of does but i rather have someone jerk it to a drawing than going out raping cats irl.

>>3901833
>slowly justifying sexuality within younger and younger audiences
The aoc was as low as 13 until very recently. If anything we're not dragging children into adulthood earlier but infantilizing adults into way older ages than ever before.

>>3902069
way to make resetera look good by informing us they're anti-childporn.

>>3902077
>lolita as a bodytype

You mean the incredible range of pre-pubescent to pubescent girls? Cool.

>>3902075
This is a good point. Does caricature/cartooning/fantasy make depicted reprehensible acts any less serious/real, or is it really only the thought that counts and cartoon drawings are no different than actually doing what you're depicting? Is sex a one way street and anything we fantasize must be based on an inherent desire to perform it in real life?

>>3902075
Not op but yes it does if it's feral. I wouldn't leave my pet alone with someone who jacks off to that. Look up kero the wolf and his friends in the zoophile scandal.

>>3902066
>Vidya has too much artistic value to be banned.
That's bullshit. You can find plenty of boomers that will argue that a game about driving around fighting in gang wars and murdering prostiutes has no artistic value. A subjective judgement of whether or not you personally think something has artistic value is a shitty metric and you know it. Some of the guro porn that gets posted is highly artistic.
>The only emotion loli is meant to incite is joy at the thought of molesting a child, several vidya games that include murder actually intend you to feel disgust at the act (undertale) or sadness.
And several of them don't. Why should a game that actively glorifies murder and other crimes not be illegal? Maybe you should make it so that obscene vidya are illegal. Afterall, if people will only ban the truly obscene games, what's your problem?

>>3902076

Cartoons and statues is not a separate sexual orientation retard.

>>3902085
I regularly jack it to feral furry porn. I've never had any sexual thoughts about actual animals and find zoophilia absolutely reprehensible. If I see a cat or dog walking around outside I don't think "damn, that's sexy". Am I still a zoophile?

>>3901811
Think by yourself about it for a moment, not by laws and what everyone tells you to think.
What are the latest scientific researches on this subject?
Pedophilia is nowadays said to be a mental disorder but no real proof has been provided. Tests have been made on... criminals. On the rapists. It's hard to define if a sexual attraction is natural or not if you only take extreme cases. We don't know much about it.
But, like for any other sexual attraction, the vast majority of people are not raping every piece of meat they see.
We need to do real experiments and throw away those taboos. Not so long ago and still today in some countries, homosexuality was a crime / a mental illness.
But for our modern society it is scary to do that. If it turns out to be natural, what are we going to do? The baddies would turn out to only be humans. And that's a problem because we can't treat bad another human, right? Society is like /ic/: afraid of quitting the comfort zone, afraid of the truth.

If it turns out to really be a disorder, then we'll have to find a way to cure it. But we must understand first.

To conclude, we sure need to protect children but as long as no real ones are involved, let people draw what they want to draw. You know you live in a sad world when you lose your right of imagination.

>>3902088
They are against free will. That includes being anti-loli rn but you can bet your virgin ass they'll be pro pedos as soon as lgbt+ adopts them too.

>>3902075
In my understanding, most Furry artwork centers around the hybridization of the aesthetics of both homo sapien sapien and other species. I personally don't understand it's appeal, but it gets closer and closer to absolute zoophelia in illustrated form when a human individual or a furry individual is engaged in sexual acts with another 100% animal.

This also ties in with my argument with Loli/Shotacons, whereas their proximity to the figures and aesthetics of childlike innocence and bodily form creates a direct/curved albeit connected line/path to both the pedophellic intentions of both the creator and the user.

I understand there are hybrids of these forms as well. Portraying a 17 year old is far better than a 7 year old, but both fall in the same boat of pedophillic artwork that exploits either the aesthetics of said child (ie: innocence; underdeveloped bodily features such as flat chests, smaller genitalia, softer voices and smaller bodily sizes; as well as the concept of "deflowering" said individuals, both male and female).

>>3902066
Oh, don't forget, you should at least be making furry porn, bestiality porn and rape porn illegal too. There is no justification for rape in real life, right? Maybe the next big cultural debate will be over slavery porn since slavery is now seen as completely unacceptable. /d/ doesn't know what's about to hit them.

>>3902096
not really but i can still see some people not trusting their pets around you.

>>3902070
I still get erections when I see a beautiful naked woman both in person (I suppose in my case its a theory) and in samples of media.

I don't think its very different in Pedophiles.

>>3902095
Cartoons and statues are not sexual preferences, they're fetishes. Thans for undermining your point yourself.

>>3902052
>Loli is completely legal in japan yet all these pedos choose to instead buy dvd's of real kids
Don't you think that there is a big difference between them? Maybe even that they are produced to the two distinct audiences, people who enjoy art and actual paedos who want to diddle the real kids?

To argue about that topic, you have understand what actually makes paedophilia wrong.
I hope we can agree that it's because the child is not completely finished the developed yet.
But there is an important distinction to make, that most people usually fail to recognize, it's not about the development of the physical body, like someone could naively believe, but the development of the mind.
For example, sexing the 5 years old in 30 years old body vs. sexing the 30 years old in 5 years old body. If you actually think about it, the former is much worse than the latter.

Now, that we made this distinction clear, you can argue that there is nothing wrong with admiring beauty found in the young body by itself, as long no real kids are harmed.
Creation swimsuit's gravure you talked about could harm children (i can personally see the possibility), but it's absurd to say that drawings can harm anyone.

Humans become sexually developed by ~13, above this age you're both ready and compelled to fuck and others will become increasingly compelled to fuck you. Current victorian standards go against human biology. Sex is evil and the pure, safe, clean infancy is to be extended ad absurdum.
The only gray area here is sex with prepubertals, and as such probably best remain illegal. However if you pass judgment over someone because they're into teens you're a spooked fucking sheep.

"those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither"

>>3902082
The character Tanya Degurechaff is physically but not mentally a child. You can look at her r34 material and see both types of art. Some emphasize her strong personality while others emphasize her physical vulnerability at the expense of her personality.

>>3902089
>women can't be flat and non curvaceous

there's beauty in a rock, theres beauty in the female body, theres beauty in the male body, theres beauty in the animal body, theres beauty in the child body. explain to me (regardless of your opinion) why I should be afraid of study and depict such beauties under the grounds that such acts are criminal? why should there be a list of stuff I am not allowed to draw? why should there be a list of stuff I am not allowed to write about?

>>3902089
I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make.

>>3902072
No, I'm saying sexual acts with children is evil.

When you establish your argument in such fashion, you paint yourself as an individual either too afraid/unsure to place his/her opinions to the wider argument, or someone who really wants to place a win in their lives on a dilapidated website at the early hours of the day (depending where you are).

I'd recommend placing a worthwhile argument.

And more specifically, one could clearly con notate that your reply places your sentiments as one that is appealing to Pedophilia related tendencies.

But I'm also arguing on this shitty website instead of living life so...I don't know who is the clear winner here.

>>3902100
An enormous ammount of asian and slavic women are relatively short and flat chested. You're sitting right on the slippery slope of denying those people's sexual freedom for your moralizing virtue signaling.

>>3902114
>sexual acts with children is evil
How about you elaborate why exactly they are evil, you dumb reddirtspacer?

>>3902069
>resetera
I am not a transvestite. I've known about /ic/ for a while and I mostly like its content and users as most are well invested in their skills and ambitions in the arts.

>Xer
kind of funny though. Of all the letters, why X? Why not T for Trans?
TER?
TIM? oh...

>>3901839
This is one of the best posts in the whole thread. lf you're not a fan of it, whatever, but why do people insist on LARPing as the moral compass of the universe. Of all the bad shit in the world, why obsess over loli/shota in particular? Hell, even actual pedophilia. Many people have an odd fixation on pedos and say the same old virtue-signaling phrases
>"Pedos need to be SHOT"
>I wanna MURDER a pedo"
Where's that aggression for literally anything else in the world or life? I've got better things to do than obsess over some kid I never met, let alone a fucking fictional one.

>>3902114
cool tl;dr ramble, all those words for "ur a creep cuz u dont buy into my flagrant moralism"

>>3902085
That is not an unpopular opinion I'd gladly share with you, tired yet optimistic cat.

>>3902088
Just curious what is Resetera? Going to google it.

>>3902091
First off, Sex in this case is Consensual between both/all parties participating. But consent is not/should not be accounted for in individuals under the legal age limit (under 18 in general). Thus anyone participating in sexual acts (or benefiting off of imagery denoting sexual acts between children and children/adults/furry/etc...) benefits off of the essential rape of children to satiate their lusts.

>>3902096
Just curious from a non-Furry appealed standpoint, what is so appealing about that kind of pornography?

I'd recommend anyone who has attraction/appeal to the Furry category to answer.

>>3902119
They're assholes with criminal urges seeking justification and approval by lashing against popular targets. Today it is pedos, before it was commies, nazis, jews...

>>3902106
Don't you think that "victorian standards" are there for a reason?
People are not animals, they are not operating solely on instincts.
Sex is an important topic and is actually a big deal. It's a mistake to devaluate it.

>>3902128
What reason?

>>3902129
Because sex is an important topic.
You wouldn't ask me why, right?

>>3902125
Escapism. People self-insert as things that don't exist and therefore cannot fail to become/properly emulate that thing.

>>3902131
Ok, there actually is no reason. Good to know you have no argument.

>>3902064
>Slippery slope

That assumes that drag queens and pedophilia are causally linked. No one is saying adults have an unadulterated right to the bodies of children outside of maybe nambla and that one philipino guy.

>If you're not having casual sex with anyone and everyone then something is wrong with you

I think you watch too much TV,no one is saying that, and not everyone is having constant casual sex. Even if they were it's a far cry from child molestation.

>>3902131
Sex being an important topic does not mean that the Victorian's standards are more correct than what came before them or what came after them. Honestly, they just kinda made shit up and happened to stumble on a few things that might be accurate on accident.

>>3902132
>People self-insert as things that don't exist and therefore cannot fail to become/properly emulate that thing.
I failed to become/properly emulate a cute anime girl and it tears me apart every day Anon

>>3902098
I believe its a disorder in general, why or what from it exists I don't know. Maybe said individual wants to overcome a sexual frustration heaped upon him/her at a early age (either in the form of sexual/romantic rejection or molestation that skews their understanding of what they desire romantically/sexually).

And yes, even the most horrific offenders are human. To say they are not is to deny yourself of the reality of the human condition, where it does not bow to your/anyone's perceptions.

Imagination and the illustration of children within sexual positions are different things. One can imagine doing so, one can even imagine raping children and even destroying the universe in the most horrendous ways.

But allowing said pieces of media that feature said pedophyllic artworks and subjects in a bright non-condemnational light not only emboldens said ideas and fantasies to surface, but can also plant said seeds in those seeking greater thrills within pornographic imagery. Thus the protection of children as well as adults suffering from Pedophilia starts in the thoughtful regulation and discussion on said pieces of media.

I know it is always a bit/very irritating when governments and/or cultures condemn artwork in the name of general safety and unity, as even the most offensive artwork might say something constructive.

Thus everything is permissible. But one must understand that not everything is beneficial. That's when the restrictions start.

>>3901811
It's just lines on a digital canvas, who gives a shit?

>>3902140
>That's when the restrictions start.
If you start dictating what's allowed or not then everything isn't permissible, retard.

>>3902134
Are you saying that sex is not important topic?
Sex is a way for people to create new life. You became responsible not only for yourself, but also for a child.

>>3902137
What's wrong with victorian's standards? You can summarize by "Sex is a big deal, be very careful about it".
And on the opposite side you have "Sex is whatever. Don't care about anything."
You think it will make people's life happier? I think it's the opposite, by devaluating sex and making people think that it's not a big deal, you are destroying something beautiful.

>>3902116
But are they adults? Yes.
Is it made clear in their facial constructions and or works? Yes.
Can it get hard to see the diffrences like you said? Yes.
Am I sounding like an idiot answering easy questions to make himself sound smart? Maybe.

But they themselves would/might see the argument placed forth here not solely on the shape/proportion of the bodies, but that the figures placed in Loli/Shota artwork as specially the appeal of integrating children/young underage persons within compromising sexual situations/activities.

If these women/men do take this issue as a personal attack, then I must say they have missed the point of this exercise. And thus don't offer a, dare I say it, based and unbiased platform of arguments and perspectives on this matter (although I can still empathize with their perspectives where their bodily forms are removed from erotic artwork b/c as you said, cuckolds to the idea of Virtue like myself and morally corrupt individuals deemed them too dangerous for public health).

>>3902094
>Why should a game that actively glorifies murder and other crimes not be illegal?
You want me to argue for a subject I don't care about, I don't play murder simulators so I have no idea why others play and them and what value they get out of it. I don't even know what game you're talking about that you want me to defend? I haven't played Hatred but it could probably be seen as an exploration into the philosophy of nihilism. You'd have a hard time pulling any sort out of philosophical message or political statement out of loli porn (if you do find lolishit like that the law makes exemptions for it if you can convince a jury).

>>3902139
Cute anime girls are real life idealized. Of course you failed. Furries aren't close enough to real animals or human beings to harm the ego.

>>3902145
I would summarize it as "virgins are chaste, chastity is virtuous, sex is corrupting" which is nonsense. Even if you think sex is a big deal, you can do so without subscribing to the Victorian's nonsense.

>>3902145
>Deliberately avoiding the point so you won't have to explain yourself
As expected of a dumb moralist. Come down from that high horse, you fucking lost this one.

>>3902113

That trying to defend jerking off to loli by saying that it crosses over to hebephilia territory is pretty weak desu.

>>3902094
>Maybe you should make it so that obscene vidya are illegal.
Would be ok with me as long as it's obscene vidya about raping kids. I mean that's already illegal under 1466A but whatever.

>>3902104

Your spank material reflects on your sexuality. If you're straight you don't jerk off to cartoons of guys fucking each other in the ass. Masturbating to cartoon porn is not a rare fetish you absolute mongoloid.

>>3902154
I meant obscene vidya that isn't about raping kids. Why should they be illegal while other obscene games remain legal?
>>3902148
>You want me to argue for a subject I don't care about,
I want you to come up with a position that I can call consistent. "Some obscene things are illegal because they're unforgivable crimes and other obscene things aren't even if they're also the unforgivable crimes because reasons" is not really that consistent.

>>3902150
>sex is corrupting
Sex can corrupt. Pleasure without restraints will inevitably corrupt.
But sex is a invaluable part of the human nature, you cannot live without it.

>>3902151
How about instead of calling me names, you actually make your point clear?
I'm not avoid, you are just not saying anything.

>>3902152
Nice strawman. Plenty of sexually mature women have loli-like features. People criticize fucking children because they're mentally incapable of consent, not because a-cups are intrinsically bad.

>>3902158
Objectively, there is nothing wrong with admiring the young body beauty, as long as real children are not harmed.

>>3902158

The "petite woman" defence is retarded. Lolis are literally meant to portray children and young teenage girls.

>>3902157
I asked you very clearly why do we need to go against human sexual biology?
Then you spout some vague shit about how sex "is important" and pregnacy (contraception exists, adults get pregnant too, your "point" is invalid) but fucking nothing as to why a 15-year old having sex is the fucking tragedy of the century.

>>3902117
I suppose anyone you don't agree with is a soiboi.

Sexual acts are a series of actions/activities meant to bring CONSENTING individuals to a state of bearing offspring or closer romantic/sexual relations to bring their union closer together, or simply attain a sense of bodily and mental pleasure within one another's sexually complacent company.

In order to do so, both individuals must be at an age where the consequences of sexual acts must not be damaging to their bodily functions, although this still occurs in grand form . And most importantly, said activities must be undertake by individuals Morally sound enough and mature enough to understand both the process and the consequences of their actions.

Now biological sexual maturity within Homo Sapien Sapiens occurs in the ages of 12/13 to 18 both in males and females.

But in the manner of mental maturity in the face of sexual activity lands between the ages of 18 and 25 within both sexes.
Source: https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708

Thus, one might say the act of having sexual relations with people as young as 13 is physically viable, but considering sexual relations with people as young as that contains not only biological measures but mental measures as well.

Say if a person has sexual relations with a 12 year old (either sex), it is seen as an act of rape on behalf of the adult, and even on the child who consented if it is an object of child/child relations. But we are specifically talking adult/child relations.

When said child is unable to fully and maturely process the idea of sexual intercourse as they would when they are 18 and beyond, their understanding of sexual intercourse lands on roads which lead to greater psychological confusion and turmoil, as they had not given proper consent to said activities due to the lacking of their mental maturity and their more primitive reward systems compared to adults with fully formed prefrontal sectors.

>>3902161
Don't pretend like that is even close to universally the case.

>>3902122
Why is it flagrant moralism?

>>3902119
No one deserves to

>>3902166
>>3902119

Got disconnected.

Anyways, not one deserves to be shot. Pedopheliacs who act upon their impulses and harm individuals such as children need to be prosecuted under the law, and those that don't act upon said desires deserve to be helped by specialists and physicians and psycologists to better aleviate their struggles.

>>3902126
>jews
people telling you youre gross for wanting to fuck kids is comparable to the holocaust, great take.

>>3902119
fuck off youre being deliberately disingenuous if you claim you don't see people post violent threats everywhere. cringe art threads are usually full of "i want to murder this person" and "gas them" just because a tumblrina drew an anime character ugly and fat.

pedos have the biggest victim complexes.

>>3902165

I'm sure you're aware that the term "loli" comes from a book about a 12 year old girl named Lolita who gets fucked by an older man.

>>3902162
The point is not about going against biology, the point is about control.
Humans are conscious, the have the ability to control the instinct.

People need to eat, it's part of human biology, but it's wrong to eat uncontrollably like a big.
People need to rest, it's part of human biology, but it's wrong to sleep and do nothing 24 hours a day.
You understand where i'm going?

>nothing as to why a 15-year old having sex is the fucking tragedy of the century
I have never said or implied that.
I just think that it's naive and dumb to say "fuck victorian's standards". They contain some important ideas, it's just necessary to find a middle ground.

>>3902170
I guess Gothic Lolitas must be 12 year old girls. Oh wait. You know that words can mean a bunch of different things.

>>3902123
A videogame forum full of sjw's and trans people. They probably complain about child sexualization since they complain about everything else but claiming you must be from there if you're anti pedo is braindead since lots of right wing sites like gab also hate pedos.

>>3902139

>>3902170
Google "appeal to definition"

>this thread

>>3902164
You are missing the crucial point.
Yes, it's wrong to have sex with children. But it's not because their body is not developed, but because their mind is not.
Admiring beauty of the young body is not wrong by itself.

>>3902142
That's what I specifies on when I said: But not everything is beneficial.

>>3902171
>You understand where i'm going?
Yes, we should just enforce control for the sake of control. A 15-year old enjoying sex is out of control and needs to be put in line.

>>3902179
And my crucial point is, said artworks eventually lead to the promotions of behaviors that lead to acts of pedophilia.

Yes, sexually admiring the human body in all its shapes and forms can be innocent, but denying its connection to the respective mental states of the connotations involved is not very wise.

Even the persons who shifted the name of said type of artwork to LOLITA understood the reality that they intended on benefiting off of the sexual exploitation of the bodies and minds of people younger than 18 (children).

>>3902173

They are dressing up to look like 12 year old girls, yes.
But I guess it's just a giant coincidence that loli characters always look like either pre-pubescent children or young teenage girls. But in any case, do post your lolis that are meant to look like "petite women"

This thread is a great example of how pedos cope with what they are.

>>3902189

They are not pedo, they are just 2000 year old vampire-o-philes

>>3902178
Tell me about it. This is what it probably feels like sitting in a broken car in the middle of a Chinese 12-lane traffic jam.

>>3902184
Yeah, no. The point is not about control. Its about the tailoring of said artworks ( I guess control, but not for its own sake ) to reduce the corrosive impact they have on wider society.

>>3902156
Obscenity under miller requires it to be porn ("appeals to the prurient interest"). You're asking me why violent obscene games should be legal. Those games would fall under snuff porn, which I said I'd be ok with banning.

What game in particular is it you're asking me why it should be legal?

>>3902191
>>3902189
Said pedos pictured here

>>3902184
You are strawmanning my point.
15-years girl sleeping around can potentially destroy her life. She should know it and be very careful about, instead of thinking "whatever, it's okay".

>>3902164
What exactly is the inherently damaging aspect of sex to a teen? More than the bullshit connotations society will force upon you?
Why do you assume sex with an older partner is inherently predatory? Why do you assume sex with a peer will be on equal terms? If anything an older partner will be better prepared to develop your sexual counsciousness in a healthy manner.

Why not make legal age 25 given your reasoning?

>>3902194
>Obscenity under miller requires it to be porn
To be specific, I'm thinking about violent murder games with no porn. It would be really dumb if if violent murder games with no artistic merit were legal because they weren't porn or if they were legal as long as you put some babby philosophy in it try give it "artistic merit".

>>3902197
What are your point then? Because I don't see any other point.
>15-years girl sleeping around can potentially destroy her life.
And so could a 25 year-old.
Besides, she is legally allowed to do so as long as it's not with someone "overage". Are teen sex to be illegalized period according to you?
Also it won't be the sex that does destroys her life, it's will be the society around her. Sexual conservatism will make her life hell. Sex will not.

>>3902185
>said artworks eventually lead
That's a leap. You have no evidence to think so.

But let's entertain the idea of "thought policing" anyway.
Do you think that banning 2D loli art will help to stop mentally ill individuals from molesting kids?
You can argue that they will be even MORE inclined to do that.
So basically you are restricting creative freedom, what is already a terrible thing to do by itself, to potentially hurt the situation even more.

>>3902187
>They are dressing up to look like 12 year old girls, yes.
Oh wow, is this what a 12 year old looks like? Darling, refrain from giving your opinion of subjects you know nothing about.

>>3902105
>Don't you think that there is a big difference between them? Maybe even that they are produced to the two distinct audiences, people who enjoy art and actual paedos who want to diddle the real kids?
Pedos argue loli prevents harm to real kids. Going by japan the effect is negligible since loli is legal there unlike the US and japan is still worse than the US when it comes to sexualized child abuse being accepted by society, as selling toddler erotica dvd's is legal there.

Before someone brings up desmond (yea what is happening to him is abuse), read the linked dark side of akihabara article, at least desmond didn't strip down to his underwear.

>it's absurd to say that drawings can harm anyone
Drawings lead to harm because drawings are ideas. See the saitama man and cnn interview linked earlier.

>>3902198
I know I'm sourcing Wikipedia, but its the best I can do and the sources for said paragraphs/claims are listed below, so here goes.


Damages to Sex with Children-

Psychological effects:

Child sexual abuse can result in both short-term and long-term harm, including psychopathology in later life.[14][26] Indicators and effects include depression,[9][27][28] anxiety,[11] eating disorders,[29] poor self-esteem,[29] stomatization,[28] sleep disturbances,[30][31] and dissociative and anxiety disorders including post-traumatic stress disorder.[10][32] While children may exhibit regressive behaviours such as thumb sucking or bedwetting, the strongest indicator of sexual abuse is sexual acting out and inappropriate sexual knowledge and interest.[33][34] Victims may withdraw from school and social activities[33] and exhibit various learning and behavioural problems including cruelty to animals,[35][36][37][38] attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), conduct disorder, and oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). Teenage pregnancy and risky sexual behaviors may appear in adolescence.[39] Child sexual abuse victims report almost four times as many incidences of self-inflicted harm.
A well-documented, long-term negative effect is repeated or additional victimization in adolescence and adulthood.[13][42] A causal relationship has been found between childhood sexual abuse and various adult psychopathologies, including crime and suicide, in addition to alcoholism and drug abuse.[41][42][48] Males who were sexually abused as children more frequently appear in the criminal justice system than in a clinical mental health setting.[33] A study comparing middle-aged women who were abused as children with non-abused counterparts found significantly higher health care costs for the former. Intergenerational effects have been noted, with the children of victims of child sexual abuse exhibiting more conduct problems, peer problems, and emotional problems than their peers.

>>3902086
I would agree with that sentiment though I think there's a big difference between sexualizing a 6 year old and a 13 year old. I think it's also important to note the social expectations of sex were much different 50 years ago. I don't see anything wrong with a six year old knowing what sex is in the context of love/marriage. The problem is that modern sexuality is all about being a nihilistic whore.

>>3902200
>To be specific, I'm thinking about violent murder games with no porn.
Yeah and I'm asking you what games you'e talking about. You want me to defend them so give me names so I can look them up.

What is attractive about loli/shota that is not directly related to their child like features? There is no reason to choose loli over their legal contenders unless you are attracted to children.

Get help anons.

>>3902214
No, it won't stop them, but it may reduce its effects in emboldening said subconscious/conscious desires and remove the possibility of placing said desires in others from its artistic merits and features.

That is true, restricting these works can be as similar as when the 18th amendment was passed. Demand was still present and consumers utilized more unregulated and unsafe methods that actually ended up killing a lot of people.

I don't want to restrict creative freedom. I don't want someone telling me the superheroes I draw are too violent and too escapist for my and the viewer's good.

I'm just seeing what everyone's thoughts are and if my suspicious and founded in well placed morality or just personal biases and misunderstandings.

Nigga it's lines on paper. Like the "child" didn't go through a vagina. Dude if breastmilk touched the paper it would die. It's not a child, it's graphite on dead trees.

The only child here is the women who refuse to have said child blame the manchildren for drawing a fantasy that for a secluded subgroup of people to wank off real children from their testicles.

>>3902207
You are not arguing against my points. I think everyone should be careful about sex.
But i can say that your argument are naive. You don't see the whole picture.
It's not society that will turn her life into hell, she will do it herself, by devaluating important part of her life.
There are some consequences that you cannot directly see.

You have to understand that there is middle ground between "no sex" and "all sex".

>>3902219
>>3902198
Followup:
A specific characteristic pattern of symptoms has not been identified,[51] and there are several hypotheses about the causality of these associations.[9][52][53]

Studies have found that 51% to 79% of sexually abused children exhibit psychological symptoms.[45][54][55][56][57] The risk of harm is greater if the abuser is a relative, if the abuse involves intercourse or attempted intercourse, or if threats or force are used.[58] The level of harm may also be affected by various factors such as penetration, duration and frequency of abuse, and use of force.[14][26][59][60] The social stigma of child sexual abuse may compound the psychological harm to children,[60][61] and adverse outcomes are less likely for abused children who have supportive family environments.

Here is the Source btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse#Psychological_effects

>>3902228

>Realife breastmilk touching lolis

I think you just created a new fetish for /gif/ and /aco/

>>3902223
My wife is Korean. She is 4’11 with an A cup and 90 pounds soaking wet and would look very kiddish if drawn in a anime/cartoonish style...I am not aloud to draw her nude or in sexual acts?

>>3902228

>The only child here is the women who refuse to have said child blame the manchildren for drawing a fantasy that for a secluded subgroup of people to wank off real children from their testicles

vro what the hell are you talking about lol pls elaborate

>>3902125
I wish I could give you a better answer, but really, it's because I really like cute, soft and fluffy things. Like >>3902132 said, there's an escapism aspect to it, though not really in the self-insertion way (I'm fairly content with both my life and my looks and don't really wish to be anything but a human), but more because the real world can at times be an extremely bleak and boring place.

It's also partly because a lot of "real" porn is fairly extreme and vulgar. I can understand why it's appealing to people, but I'm not really into the super hyper girl-spreading-her-cum-filled-asshole-while-the-dude-calls-her-a-whore porn. I like happy, cutesy feel-good porn.

This is a long ass thread that needs a conclusion soon.

>>3902233
Your wife does not have the face of a child. Your wife does not act like a child. Anatomically, your wife does not mirror a puberscent child.

>>3902225
>No, it won't stop them, but it may reduce its effects in emboldening said subconscious/conscious desires and remove the possibility of placing said desires in others from its artistic merits and features.
You have to understand that if you want to regulate it, what you do it's basically a thought policing for questionable benefits and big potential harm.

The better bet would be prosecuting actual criminals and mentally ill people who harm actual children.

>>3902200
>It would be really dumb if if violent murder games with no artistic merit were legal because they weren't porn or if they were legal as long as you put some babby philosophy in it try give it "artistic merit".
It would be dumb in your opinion, the people who wrote the law disagrees. That's the law regarding loli being banned and why some loli may theoretically be legal (to my knowledge nobody has succeeded in defending their loli porn on artistic merit).

>>3902217
http://www.bobc.uni-bonn.de/index.php?action=resource_RESOURCEVIEW_CORE&id=6549
>Instances of sexual abuse in Japan are low, only 754 cases in 2000 compared to 89,500 cases in the U.S. in 2000 This is not a conclusive comparison, of course, as the size and population of the two countries is vastly different, and there is the concern of possible underreporting in Japan. However, the point stands. Despite criticism of Japan for its virtual content, North America hosts the majority of sites for real and pseudo child pornography – 48 percent compared to 7 percent in Asia.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229646969
>The vast majority of both sexes of children depicted in the new pictures of level 7 and above are white Caucasian, with Asiatic children more likely to appear in posed images (levels 5 and 6). There is a marked absence of black children in any of the age groups, and as yet there is little evidence as to why this should be the case
I hope you're not a white American Anon

>>3902238
The way most anime is stylized, you can't even distinguish between the faces of a woman and a child. This whole argument only applies to realism, which most people here undoubtedly would not defend.

>>3902238
Did not say anything about how she acts. And if drawn in thos styles yes she would.

>>3902222
GTA, Hitman, Hatred, Postal, etc. take your pick. I'm asking you about a general concept not any specific game. Why should non-pornographic games be allowed to glorify sexual exploitation and violence?

>>3902241
You do know there is a difference between disallowing publications depicting children having sex to be on sale and “thought policing”. Like, its illegal for me to purchase napalm but I can still think about it.

>>3902244
Shit in these styles it’s sometimes hard to distinguish faces between male and female.

>>3902236
Ah, I get it.
The marriage of sexual joy and pleasure with the reassurance of your childhood toys that only denoted adventure, wonder, safety, and most importantly, innocence.

The closest thing that comes to my mind is my weird attraction to Roxanne from A Goofy Movie as a kid. I don't see it anymore.

What do you see?

>>3902219
"Abuse" can literally mean anything.
Confirmation bias is probably strong.
If society keeps telling you that you were RAPED by a PEDOPHILE of course you'll develop an unwarranted victim complex. After indoctrination any mishap in your life will be blamed on that time you were RAPED by a PEDOPHILE.

>>3902248
There is a difference between disallowing something because "it hurts my feeling" and disallowing something because "it does actual harm".
And 2d loli is not in the category of "does actual harm".

>>3902241
I'm not advocating thought police. Just tighter regulations on artwork that feature children in sexual acts.

>>3902243
lol instances of sex abuse is low in japan because they don't report it. this is the country where women have to use separate trains from men because the men can't restrain themselves. making toddler erotica is fucking legal there so why would anyone report it? and no I'm not an amerifat.

>>3902246
How? Does your wife not possess any curve at all? Does she not have the fat distribution of an adult woman? Are her breast and hips not capable of baring child?

A prepubescent child or a child undergoing puberty does not have these things fully developed. They will lack a woman's mature figure - and may even be anatomically difficult to differentiate from their male counterparts.

She may physically resemble a teenager - but that is a different discussion no?

>>3902253
It will do more harm than good.

>>3902253
You're not thought policing - you just think that the people making it have bad thoughts and that it might encourage bad thoughts in the people looking at it?

>>3902229
You haven't made a point. You're being purposefully vague.
>But i can say that your argument are naive. You don't see the whole picture.
WHAT PICTURE
>by devaluating important part of her life.
WHAT MAKES IT SO IMPORTANT? HOW IS SHE DEVALUING IT BY ENJOYING IT?
>There are some consequences that you cannot directly see.
WHAT CONSEQUENCES
>You have to understand that there is middle ground between "no sex" and "all sex".
And you have to understand vague moralistic mumbles does not make good arguments for a debate.

>>3902251
https://www.rainn.org/articles/child-sexual-abuse

Child sexual abuse is a form of child abuse that includes sexual activity with a minor. A child cannot consent to any form of sexual activity, period. When a perpetrator engages with a child this way, they are committing a crime that can have lasting effects on the victim for years. Child sexual abuse does not need to include physical contact between a perpetrator and a child. Some forms of child sexual abuse include:

>Exhibitionism, or exposing oneself to a minor
>Fondling
>Intercourse
>Masturbation in the presence of a minor or forcing the minor to masturbate
>Obscene phone calls, text messages, or digital interaction
>Producing, owning, or sharing pornographic images or movies of children
>Sex of any kind with a minor, including vaginal, oral, or anal
>Sex trafficking
>Any other sexual conduct that is harmful to a child's mental, emotional, or physical welfare

But what if you were actually raped by a pedo? Are you saying you wouldn't know? B/c the children don't when the pedos convince them its a fun and safe thing to do. They only know they hated it and are unsure of what happened. Thus they develop an uneasy psychological set of issues as stated in my first address to your question.

>>3902257

>>3902250
Basically, but without the overly psychoanalyzed-to-hell tone. I think it's a bit sad that there's a fairly prevalent attitude in the west that adults (especially adult males) should not be allowed to enjoy cute and innocent things.

>>3902231
>Studies have found that 51% to 79% of sexually abused children exhibit psychological symptoms.
So 21% to 49% do not exhibit psychological symptoms? That's a weird stat;

>>3902258
Do you really believe that sex is not important?
>HOW IS SHE DEVALUING IT BY ENJOYING IT?
It's in human nature. To put it bluntly, the harder something to get, the more valuable it is.
By making something is easy and not important you automatically devaluate it.
>WHAT CONSEQUENCES
Consequences of unrestricted pleasure on the young mind?

The main purpose of sex is to have children. It is deeply rooted in our nature to associate it like that, even if unconsciously.
You can bring up the birth control, but if you think about it, it's a very new invention, how old it is like 60 years old? "Human nature" still did not adapted to that change.
Just saying "oh fuck it, sex is not important now" is not a way to go.

>>3902033
wtf isthe source

>>3902259
Most of the data reaching these statistics are from dysfunctional relationships with minors. Healthy sexual relations obviously won't because there is no incentive to report it. It's like looking at the trauma of rape victims and conluding sex ought to be illegal.
>But what if you were actually raped by a pedo? Are you saying you wouldn't know? B/c the children don't when the pedos convince them its a fun and safe thing to do. They only know they hated it and are unsure of what happened. Thus they develop an uneasy psychological set of issues as stated in my first address to your question.
What if it's peer and they hate it? Why isn't that rape by the very same standards?

>>3902252
That’s debatable. I would say catering to pedos wants while they claim unless we dont, they will fuck kids, is harmful.
Pedos dont hold society hostage.

>>3902265
It is. Forgive me, but my energy in participating in this thread has worn thin, as I must now go to sleep.
I hope you get something useful out of this as I have.
Always wanted a thread of mine to grow and have lots of its users participate weather in good spirit or malicious intent.

>>3902272
Thank you all. Have a wonderful day.

>>3902254
If I recall correctly Japanese citizens in the UK also report higher rates of physical and sexual crime against them to the Japanese embassy than any other country in Western Europe. Since that's Japanese people reporting it directly to their embassy, the underreporting should not be too much of an issue. So I would assume that Anglo countries just have a higher crime rate in general, even when underreporting is accounted for. This can also be observed by comparing them to the neighbours.

>>3902272
Good night Anon. This thread was surprisingly good.

>>3902270
Is it possible to have a truly healthy with a minor? Wouldn't the sheer power dynamic and the possibility of the minor being unable to make an educated decision forgo any possibility of it being equal? Something something hegel slave and master theory.

Pedo shit vro

>>3902271
It's different. Actively catering to paedos is not the same as maintaining the status quo.
And it's better to maintain the status quo, if changing it does not bring any benefit.

>>3902268
>By making something is easy and not important you automatically devaluate it.
So if I do something I enjoy I'm devaluating it? What a fucking miserable world you live in.

>Consequences of unrestricted pleasure on the young mind?
YES YOU STUPID NIGGER WHAT ARE THESE

>Just saying "oh fuck it, sex is not important now" is not a way to go.
WHY??!?! What happens when we go this way???? You keep empty making statements but have fucking zilch arguments (No. Referring to some vague moralistic conception about "human nature" is not an argument)

>>3902274
real life toddler erotica is legal in japan though. kids who get abused in that industry don't get reported on. selling dvd's of real life toddler erotica is not legal in us or uk.

So we can all agree that:

>1. There is a difference between 2d and 3d.
>2. Drawing and enjoying 2d loli/shota is alright.
>3. Molesting real children is wrong and should be prosecuted.

>>3901811
>ITT

>>3902285
You sound upset, take a deep breath.

>What are the consequences of indulging in unrestrained pleasure?
>What is addiction?

>>3902278
There are other dynamics than age. Should we have an IQ limit on sex? Is a rich guy having sex with a poor person a rapist? Are men rapists by default because they are stronger? Is a socially affluent person having sex with a lonely weirdo a rapist?

It's navel gazing. And again you do it under the assumption of an inherent evil to sex.

Sex can never be equal, anyway.

>>3902287
UK, sure. US, are you 100% sure? The laws in the US are a lot looser.

>>3902215

A victorian overclass girl or a doll, I guess. The use of the word "lolita" in this case refers to the goal of conveying a sense of youth and innocence. Obviously, there's nothing inherently sexual about that, just as there isn't anything sexual about finding young anime characters endearing, but when loli characters are drawn to convey a sense of youth and innocence whilst also being sexually arousing, then they are appealing to pedos.

>>3902293
>Should we have an IQ limit on sex?
We should, to be honest. World would be a better place.

>>3902292
Yes, I admit being upset at such gross display of obtusity, yes.
>addiction
So if a 15 year-old has sex a couple of times she's an addict? You lack anything resembling a line of reasoning.

>>3902178
>underrated post

>>3902298
How is "had sex couple of times" equal to "sleeping around"?
Can you actually read what i'm saying instead constantly strawmanning me?
We cannot have a discussion if you keep doing it.

>>3902300
I'm not the one inferred teen sex equals nymphoniania. You did.
Given your gold fish perception I'm not surprised you can't remember this.

This thread is brought to you by Coca Cola.
Grab a bottle of Coke and enjoy a discussion about loli, pedophilia and moral grandstanding.

>>3902302
>You did
Where did i do that?
Link the posts directly.

>>3902304
Cheers

>>3902045

Fuck off and kill yourself, pedo.

I got a bigger set of morals than all of you convined.

Is this a virtue signaling contest?

>>3902293
Sorry vro forgot I was in this thread

I think it matters if the person is obviously using their status to manipulate a person who cannot or is not currently in a position to freely consent. It may not be rape, but it doesn't mean it's good lol. I do agree it gets fuzzy fast and that sex is rarely equal. But I think there's some situations where the 'master' is well aware of their power and is using it maliciously.

It's similar to having sex with a disabled person. Sure they said yes - but did they really have the mental capacity to say so?

In regards to financial reasons that's iffy too. Is the person in a place where they can financially say no? Is the person consenting out of desperation, fear, or necessity for quality of life reasons?
Sure, these are all legal consents. But morally? Idunno vro.

>>3902300
Different anon here, just got to say that its glaringly obvious that youre starting to bring the “all women are whores” meme to life here and to me, I believe that’s a whole symptom of being a pedo. All that wishing for subservient pure partners and then finding that in a child who is a virgin and easy mode mentally controlled.

>>3902306
Me, talking about teen sex in general:
>>3902162
(You), inferring out of control mania from nowhere:
>>3902171

>>3902304

While the lady is very beautiful, her dress is cute and the south european (?) backdrop is comfy, the tilt of the tray is making me anxious. It looks like the bottles are about to fall over a micro second from now.

>>3902023
This post summarizes it nicely.
There is no statistical data that proves "lolicon media causes child abuse" -- it's an argument that falls apart if you stop to think about it for more than one minute. In any case, nothing justifies censorship. Stop resorting to law and politics when you don't like something.

>>3902316
?
in >>3902171 i literally said
>>nothing as to why a 15-year old having sex is the fucking tragedy of the century
>I have never said or implied that.

And how is being aware of what you are doing is a "control mania"?
You don't understand the implications of
>People need to eat, it's part of human biology, but it's wrong to eat uncontrollably like a pig.
>People need to rest, it's part of human biology, but it's wrong to sleep and do nothing 24 hours a day.
?
Everything is good in moderation. And you are trying to say "moderation is a control mania". Absurd.

>>3902314
>that youre starting to bring the “all women are whores” meme to life here
I couldn't imply that because i don't think so. Don't project.

>>3902325
> the tilt of the tray is making me anxious. It looks like the bottles are about to fall over a micro second from now.
Don't worry, bottles are photoshopped.

>>3902295
>but when loli characters are drawn to convey a sense of youth and innocence whilst also being sexually arousing, then they are appealing to pedos.
Being young and innocent is a desirable trait among Women, it is not specifically related to pedophilia. Why do you think Women put on pounds of makeup and act as if they're a delicate little flower?

>>3902313
The trauma of being "used" is overstated. Unless you're chained to a wall, just walk out if you don't want it. Don't cry about it later. You are responsible for your own life. Grow a spine and some dignity.

>>3902247
Haven't played any of those but my assumption of what one can get out of them is.
>Hitman
Contemplation of life and death, what it means to take a life.
>GTA
Exploration of the realities of gang life.
>Hatred, Postal
An exploration of nihilist philosophy. Comedy. Not the best defenses perhaps but you would have to ask a fan of these what value they get out of them.

What message can you get out of loli porn? "naked kids gives pedo boner". Games can be intended to cause many emotions in the player, the only emotion intended in loli porn is orgasm for the pedo reading it.
If you can find loli porn with a message and convince a jury of it it's legal.

>Why should non-pornographic games be allowed to glorify violence?
Violence can be justified in real life (self defence and war for example). You can't justify raping a kid in real life. You can bring up murder in games that aren't justified but the act in general can actually have real life justifications and so is less bad to glorify, unlike child rape.

Banning violent games because they supposedly contribute negatively to society by causing more violence could lead to games that contribute positively getting banned.

The pedo argument is that loli supposedly contributes positively by making pedos stay away from real kids but I don't believe that, I think the opposite is true. As >>3902271 said.

>>3902337
Uh, stop. If you think makeup is to look young only and not just to their specific beauty ideals then youre a moron.

>>3902341
Yet part of the very attraction pedos have to kids is the fact that can use them as they wish. Kids dont just walk out of being raped.

>>3902347
Not him but if you think makeup CANNOT BE USED to look young, you are a moron too.
And you basically admit that "young and innocent" is one of the acknowledged beauty ideal.
Makeup by itself is irrelevant.

>>3902346
>Violence can be justified in real life (self defence and war for example). You can't justify raping a kid in real life. You can bring up murder in games that aren't justified but the act in general can actually have real life justifications and so is less bad to glorify, unlike child rape.
>If you can find loli porn with a message and convince a jury of it it's legal.
Why shouldn't violent games without a message be illegal? Since you're so focused on the message. Why does it actually matter whether you can theoretically justify genociding the galaxy?
>Banning violent games because they supposedly contribute negatively to society by causing more violence could lead to games that contribute positively getting banned.
As above, if you're not willing to ban all of them, just do the same with loli. Set up a commission to determine which games are artful or thoughtful enough to not get banned.

>>3902347

To be fair women use makeup primarily to make their skin look better, aka more youthful. It's essentially what the beauty industry is about. To make yourself look younger.

>>3902331
>Everything is good in moderation. And you are trying to say "moderation is a control mania". Absurd.
No. This is a strawman construced by none other than you. Point me to anywhere I've claimed otherwise.

>>3902350
Are you a pedo?

>>3902350
Also, my point is this discussion was in regards to teens, not children.

finally, 300 posts, this thread cant die sooiner

>>3902365
I'll make a new thread just for you.

>>3902360
>Point me to anywhere I've claimed otherwise.
You implied it multiple times
>>Consequences of unrestricted pleasure on the young mind?
>YES YOU STUPID NIGGER WHAT ARE THESE
By saying stuff like that you already discredited yourself.
Now all of the sudden you are trying to "No U" and say say that "moderation is actually important". Cute.

You can't stop me!

>>3902369
>You implied it multiple times
In your mind maybe.
How am I to know what you mean by "unrestriced pleasure"? To dumb conservatives it could mean to masturbate one time as far as I know. You keep shit deliberately ambiguous and imprecise to stifle productive debate. Because deep down you know that expressing yourself clearly would end up in you losing. But instead we can do fun semantics instead and arguing who said what, like now.

Also I'm not even arguing in favor of moderation either. Nice strawmanning. Again, YOU brought it up. I consider the quantity of sex irrelevant to my original point.

>>3901852
Glorification of pedophilia or rape =/= writing about pedophilia or rape.

>>3901811
Isn't this character canonically underage?

>>3902308
lol, no

>>3902376
>trying to slide that hard
Man, you literally said "control mania" in >>3902316 when referring to my post >>3902171 about moderation.

You lost the argument. Suck it up and move on.

>>3902377
In other words it's a bout intent, aka thought policing.

>>3902365
>p-please, protect me from this thread.
faggot

I'm addicted to drawing shotacon.
At least I'm a girl so I don't feel as guilty.

>>3902367
dont

>>3902388
sh

>>3902341
Best case scenario is that it is immoral on the grounds that there is a disparity of power and of knowledge. Regardless of whether an individual is informed, they are deemed incapable of making an informed decision and there are enough studies on the PFC in children and teens to back that up beyond any anecdote you can throw out. Caveat emptor does not apply in the moral sense. There is no way not to take advantage of a minor in a sexual context. Being "used" is actually the perfect descriptor, one can be led to do all sorts of things in absence of information and later come to regret it deeply. The difference between this and you getting a shitty deal on a car or fucking a fat chick when you were drunk is that you can at least theoretically give informed consent. But then I'm a hypnotist so I don't really believe any of that is true and we're all essentially children, but that ruffles feathers when someone needs killing and it's up to daddy state to make sure there's a good reason so the world doesn't fall apart.

.>>3902294
Bring me an example of someone in the US selling erotic videos of toddlers in the modern day. You can't because they don't, unlike Japan.

>>3902388
Send nudes

>>3902382
Learn to read retard? Learn analyze basic progression of dicourse? That's "out of control mania".
I'm discussing whether or not a 15 year-old having sex with an older guy is okay and then you start talking about the need to control oneself, implying, a 15 year-old having sex is out of control.
You put it equal with sleeping for 24 hours, to "eat uncontrollably like a pig". The 15 year-old is an out of control nymphomaniac.

What a poor fucking performance. Get back to your special needs homework.

>>3902394
What exactly do you need to be informed about?

>>3902358
>Why shouldn't violent games without a message be illegal?
Because banning violent games because they supposedly contribute negatively to society by causing more violence could lead to games that contribute positively getting banned.

>just do the same with loli.
Theoretical "high art" loli is legal, but you're gonna have a hard time convincing a jury of it.

>Set up a commission to determine which games are artful or thoughtful enough to not get banned.
I don't see the point since I could still pull plenty of messages from your "worst examples of gaming". Porn has one message, that something is arousing. Games about murder frequently have more messages than murder being fun.

>Why does it actually matter whether you can theoretically justify genociding the galaxy?
Fiction influences reality (look up how jaws led to the killing of sharks) so it matters what message fiction is sending us and what we get out of it. Looking up Postal I noticed it says the game stops the player just before he is about to shoot up an elementary school, almost as if the creators thought that sending the message that shooting up an elementary school is fun could be particularly harmful.

>>3902399
The emotional consequences of fucking the first adult to give you attention and tell you what to think about it. It's all very manipulative.

>>3902390
Today's opposite day

>>3901811
If an 18 year old makes a lewd drawing of a 16 year old, how exactly is he in the wrong? He's in the same age group as the character.

>>3902404
Assumptions.
Also, how would you learn anything about these things without experiencing them? Why would a dumb teen be more capable to provide safe, nurturing sex than an experienced adult?
If there is a way to learn without experience - what would stop say, a 7 year-old who took the course to make an "informed decision"?
Or should we just assume everyone's first to be a rapist?

>>3902379
maybe but this guy drew the disney version and that girl is 18 or over.So the pic related is not underage.

>>3902391
It's fucked to say but I feel more shame in posting on /ic/ than I do drawing little boys taking cock. So, no.

>>3902398
Having argument with you it's like having argument with a child.
From the very beginning you keep acting like a dumb nigger, calling me names and screaming.
in >>3902376
>To dumb conservatives it could mean to masturbate one time as far as I know.
you are basically admitting that you were too busy strawmanning me instead of actually reading what i wrote.
And you keep doing it.

Maybe it's fun for you to keep acting like a nigger, but it's really embarrassing to read.
Specimens like you will never admit defeat, so i would rather stop this clown fiesta myself. I wouldn't reply to you anymore. We both know who is right and who is wrong here.

>>3902402
>Looking up Postal I noticed it says the game stops the player just before he is about to shoot up an elementary school, almost as if the creators thought that sending the message that shooting up an elementary school is fun could be particularly harmful.
Should it banned if they went through with it, or do you think we shouldn't incase they have a particular compelling message?
>Fiction influences reality (look up how jaws led to the killing of sharks)
Surely Jaws should be banned then, since the negative of killing sharks outweighs the benefit of exciting the audience?

>>3902425
>Should it banned if they went through with it, or do you think we shouldn't incase they have a particular compelling message?
Postal 1 had such bad graphics the kids didn't even have faces so it wouldn't be a realistic kid killing simulator. I'd be ok with it if it had a compelling message, not that I know what that'd be.

In regards to other games it depends on what the point of the game is and if it would actually influence people to kill kids. Say someone released a kid killing simulator with hyper realistic graphics where the only point was to torture kids to death with no story/message and it wasn't satire, and there was concrete evidence people had been influenced to kill kids by it, then I don't think I'd object to it being banned.

>Surely Jaws should be banned then, since the negative of killing sharks outweighs the benefit of exciting the audience?
Jaws clearly has artistic value, along with Vertigo it has the most famous use of the dolly zoom. I'm sure PETA members would say Jaws was bad for society while people in the film industry would say it was good. Depends on how much you care about sharks.

Banning things only based on if their influence on society is good isn't a great idea because it's so subjective (it obviously wouldn't be subjective in the fictional kid killing simulator example). Loli porn is an exception because the only good it could give society is if it prevented pedos from preying on real kids, which I don't believe it does. If a piece of loli porn does includes a deep message it is protected under 1466A.

>>3902070
>A heterosexual man is someone who's attracted to women, not someone who's attracted to drawings, dolls, books or statues

This is correct

>>>/pol/210826387

>>3901811
Far as I'm concerned, I'm lewding adults cosplaying as teenagers.

>>3901811
Simply put.
I'd fuck a loli, but I'd never fuck a little kid. Kids aren't attractive, nor are they sexual. They're not trying to be, nor are they meant to be. They're just kids.

Lolis are. It's kid of like minimalism. Taking what's attractive about a normal female, and simplifying it and making it cute.
At the end of the day, lolis are just drawings. They're not any more real than Godzilla, Chewbacca, or your parent's love.

>>3902573
you're like a furry saying they'd fuck marmaduke but they'd never fuck a real dog.

>>3902255
>She may physically resemble a teenager - but that is a different discussion no?
No, just because you refuse to aknowledge the slide you're on doesn't mean some governments haven't already acted against petite women's sexuality to "protect children".

>>3901833
> condemns slippery slope fallacy
> commits slippery slope fallacy

OP...

>>3902327
>Stop resorting to law and politics when you don't like something.
This

>>3902250
Many grown women can testify that when they were younger they were attracted to simba from the lion king. I think most furries/furry porn interested people would have had a similar experience in childhood. Count robin hood in too and other disney stuff and it all makes sense why there are a lot of anthro erotica artists and fans out there.

>>3902293
Yes, nobody should be able to have sex but me, give me all the cocks.
-op

>>3902379
All 21st century Disney princesses are 18 or older and I wouldn't be surprised if it was because of faggots like OP.

>>3902743
I sometimes wonder how many people are closet furries. The ones ranging from "x sure is cute" to "I wanna fuck that bunny" that aren't a part of the community or even aware of the porn. Just normal people with a fetish that never bloomed.

>>3902712
sometimes I get a boner when petting my cat, but I would never fuck my cat (inspite of all the "a cat is fin too" jokes) so I believe that anon. could somebody be attracted to both lolies and kids? yes. could one be attracted to just one or the other? absolutely

>>3902935
>sometimes I get a boner when petting my cat
>but I would never fuck my cat
ah ok ok. people still have the right to not leave their pets around you if they knew that info. Even though you wouldn't

>>3902983
good, because I got sick of babysitting kids and pets

>>3901980
>>3902070
>>3902095
>>3902155
>>3901995
about his argument:
Of course, what he says is correct. You would be falling for an illusion to say otherwise.

about ya'll counter-argument:
But you guys argue that fap material is very much connected to the fetishism that it represents, in which case, the fetishism in the fap material could be connected to the fetishist him / herself. After all, an unappealing fetish wouldn't make the viewer come back unless it *was* appealing.

In the end, even with all the mental gymnastics, people in the end are inclined to project real world objects onto something that may be interpreted as its representation.

Logically speaking yes, the argument is right, but actually no, psychology doesn't work that way.
It's the thought that counts. After all, you don't travel from unidentified sexual orientation to straight / gay *only after* you've had your first sexual experience. Therefore, you can still be a pedophile even if you only indulge in the artificial experience, not the real thing.

my rebuttal:
Loli and shota are almost completely different from the real thing it originally represented. Take for example, chibis. To say that a person who loves chibis is also a person who has a high affinity with babies / todders is a very bold and presumptuous presumption. In the same manner, lolis and shotas, while infantile in aesthetics, almost never act like a real child.
1. they're cartoons. They're cuter in the sense that they have big ol eyes and big ol heads and big ol hair. Younger folk don't really have that much hair desu.
2. they're not smelly and they don't poop everywhere. I say this because in almost every media showcasing its appeal, loli and shota don't usually act that way. They can be paired with scat / piss fetishists, but that's a whole different thing in itself.
3. they're clever and can be intelligently conversed with most the time. Usually they're a lot more mentally mature
1/2

>>3903068
4. If you argue that they exhibit childlike tropes like cutesy ditzy moe kinds of things, you're ignoring the fact that there are also many non-cutesy non-ditzy characters which don't act that way.
Overall what I'm trying to say is that the aesthetic has generally shifted / evolved in such a way that it doesn't line up very conclusively with what it originally represented.
For example your watch advertisement example you used, people equate the watch in the commercial with a watch in real life because it very closely resembles the real thing in both aesthetic and function. Heck, the smell it's supposed to represent is the same too. Now imagine if you were selling a watch that didn't tell time in a conventional manner and you wear it as a full-on hat rather than an accessory on your wrist. People who *really* like watches may or may not be into it, but many would argue it's not really the same as the watch they once knew was. While it can still be called and represented as a watch, it could be argued that it evolved into something of its own, with vestigial decor which speaks of its past, more primitive form.
2/2

a tl dr pls?
what conclusion have we reached?

>>3903691
Everyone is more sure their side is correct, and the rest are immoral dummies.

>>3903691
A conclusion on this topic could never be reached for a few reasons. Proper, extensive research on pedophiles will never be conducted. The demonization of pedophiles without the understanding that it's an affliction like any sexual fetish or sexuality quirk one might have prevents any further discussion on the fact. There's a side that believes every single pedophile exists as an immediate threat to children, and a side (likely fully of pedophiles) that are too quick to defend the media and artwork they create or consume as wholly innocent. It's impossible to talk about with most western communities thanks to how uncomfortable the US is with sex.

>>3902019
You're telling me what's a spook? I don't listen to spooks like you.

>>3903691

disappointed at lack of art here

>>3902416
j...just a little bit? An unrecognizable close up?

>>3904258
might reveal styles that people could track

>>3901811
Alright, I’ll just quickly drop my opinion about this subject.

Reality and Fantasy should never be linked together. And morally wrong this such as shota/loli purely exists in fantasy. As long as no actual child is being exploited I’m completely okay with the concept.

Now, I know part of the concern is that we are “normalizing” pedophillia and that pedophiles are grooming children. You can argue in circles about this all day. I personally think shota/loli porn was never intended for minors to see and we should inform children from the beginning that it is a distortion of real life. The internet isn’t safe and to blame the artist’s expression is kinda eh to me.

On the other hand though hyperealistic renderings creep me the fuck out

>>3901842
to add to your post, take into consideration those who are victims of rape, molestation, and pedophilia. People who have survived it have also used art, in one format or an other, to depict those things as a form of therapy. I know from my own personal experience, it helped me understand the twisted mind set of my abuser.

>>3901876
what if I write or make a comic about the evils of sex ring and a minor just so happens to be the main character?

Am I a pedo because porn and kids or am I a moralfag for bringing to light a topic like that which still happens in real life.

>>3904745
I've seen a number of artists in the more extreme communities who admit to using it as therapy. I think that grants it artistic merit as an exploration of experience in addition to being more than a mere fetish.

>>3904595
>Reality and Fantasy should never be linked together.
If that was true we wouldn't have computers to make shitposts at others, like in this thread. Get fucked, all fiction will be nonfiction with enough time.

>>3901811
i would do it if someone payed me god i wish someone payed me

>>3905115
shit forgot to put -john
-john