/jp/ - Otaku Culture

>>34323713
It is not pedoness. Biologically a girl who is 16 or 18 or 20, it makes no difference. If she is 20, she is the same as 16. If she is 16, she is the same as 20. The fact that 18 is in the middle does not mean that 18 is the natural line, only what it means is that it is a middle line between the ages 16 and 20 during which a girl is most fertile and biologically attractive from the perspective of reproduction. Maybe if you want to argue about reproductive fitness being part of the quality defining success in the idol industry, whether this makes sense or not, then we can engage in this argument and I will agree with you that it is not. Appeal to reproductive fitness is connected with the flawed capitalism, this is not in doubt for anybody except those in denial about their motives within the industry. These are real abusers in music business, behind the scenes, at the top level. For them it is not an issue of cuteness or connected sexiness. For them it is an issue of money, and personal power over idols.

You can rague it is a more serious problem if an idol who is 16 is raped than an idol who is 18 and an idol who is 14 is more serious than an idol who is 16. I will not argue about this. But, this is not connected with the cuteness or its connected sexiness of the idol. This is how it is possible that the wider flawed capitalism of the idol industry is creating problems for idols and their fans with the linking of their reproductive fitness into the equation. The problem is not the perception of underage idols as sexy, because this is integral to the concept of an idol who is young. To remove it, you must also remove the component of cuteness. This is not possible with idols. Therefore, it is not a problem. What is the problem is flawed capitalism creating moods for exploitation, such that top level industry men are free to harass and abuse and even rape idols they see sexually. This is not unique to idols. It is everywhere in every entertainment industry. Its solution is not #MeToo or such, however, this is on a case basis. No, it must be rooted from its source of flawed capitalism.
>>34323749
Of course that is not natural. I am talking about 16, 18, 20. Maybe 14 or 15 if she looks at least 16 in development. Before 14, this is not even possible at all. Anybody who says 13 is natural to be attracted to, is stupid and twists facts. 13 is not the same as 14 even. If she looks 14, it is not natural to see her sexually. If she is 14 but looks 16, then it is natural. There are important differences here. If she is 20 and looks 14, then it is not natural to see her sexually but there is nothing wrong with it because she is 20. Do you understand these differences?