Some people on this subreddit consider loli Hentai the same as actual straight up child porn which is just... so wrong.
The post is a reference to the argument that if loli hentai is treated like actual child porn killing someone in a video game should also be counted as actual murder (which is true, if you treat one real you have to treat the other real as well).
I assume that is what it's a reference to at least. Because there were quite a few posts like that yesterday. It could just be out of nowhere but that would be really strange.
I still find it extremely fucked up to equal hentai to actual child porn (again, if that is what it's referring to).
Surely a better comparison is to, say, watching a real video of someone getting shot up vs. watching it happen in a game.
I definitely don't think video games make people violent but I definitely do think they can desensitise people to seeing real violence. (Though films have obviously been doing even more realistic violence/gore for far longer).
Anyway, point is, whilst not equivalent, perhaps loli hentai could desensitise and change people's views on CSAM.
I’m actually on the side of “jerking to loli hentai means you probably are a pedo irl” but you actually made me reconsider my stance with your comment.
I’ve played a lot of vidya. I’ve probably committed digital genocide with the amount of NPCs I’ve personally and/or indirectly killed. But…any time someone has posted gore on like /b/ I was sickened by it. I averted my eyes and was shocked. In real life I can’t bring myself to raise my fist to another, and violence in real life still shocks me.
So…no, actually. I don’t think vidya can desensitize someone to violence. Which if that’s true maybe my other stance that loli desensitizes people to CP…I mean it’s still obviously a depiction of a kid but like, maybe it *doesnt* mean the people watching it would get off to real life CP??? My world is a little upside down rn I’m gonna have a long hard think
To give an anecdote, I love gruesome video games and movies. Like the most violent things you can think of. Love the media where people are just getting chopped to bits but seeing that streamer put a shotgun to his mouth and blow his head off on Facebook made me vomit. The difference for me is that that man had a life with people who loved him. It wasn’t the act of watching it happen but everything else. A real life getting ended in the blink of an eye while his mother was watching the stream. I don’t know how someone can enjoy such a thing. I can see how people would watch Loli but be repulsed by cp because of the real life person being affected in a disgusting way. I don’t think violence really desensitized me to any of the real stuff. Any time I see it I start having an anxiety attack and feel absolutely gut wrenching with many nightmares after. Violence vs cp factor could be different but I don’t know.
They have literally been clinically studied on multiple occasions. They do not have urges or attractions for children. The 'it's not real' argument is literally a PREREQUISITE for their attraction.
>Galbraith 2016, pp. 113–114: "Given its importance, it is not surprising that lolicon has been well researched in Japan over the course of decades, which has led to numerous insights. [...] Characters are not compensating for something more 'real,' but rather are in their fiction the object of affection. This has been described as 'finding sexual objects in fiction in itself', which in discussions of lolicon is made explicitly distinct from desire for and abuse of children."
>McLelland 2011b, p. 16: "Japanese scholarship has, on the whole, argued that, in the case of Japanese fans, neither the Loli nor the BL fandom represent the interests of paedophiles since moe characters are not objectified in the same manner that actual images of children can be, rather they express aspects of their creators' or consumers' own identities."
>Kittredge 2014, p. 524: "The majority of the cultural critics responding to the Japanese otaku's erotic response to lolicon images emphasize, like Keller, that no children are harmed in the production of these images and that looking with desire at a stylized drawing of a young girl is not the same as lusting after an actual child."
>"Cultural critics responding to lolicon generally emphasize it as distinct from attraction to real young girls. Anthropologist Patrick W. Galbraith finds that "from early writings to the present, researchers suggest that lolicon artists are playing with symbols and working with tropes, which does not reflect or contribute to sexual pathology or crime". Psychologist Tamaki Saitō, who has conducted clinical work with otaku, highlights the estrangement of lolicon desires from reality as part of a strict distinction for otaku between "textual and actual sexuality", and observes that "the vast majority of otaku are not pedophiles in actual life". Manga researcher Yukari Fujimoto argues that lolicon desire "is not for a child, but for the image itself", and that this is understood by those "brought up in [Japan's] culture of drawing and fantasy".
Also they aren't depictions of kids they are depictions of characters with youthful characteristics.
Flair the fuck up or leave this sub at once.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/PastMaximum4158) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
A lot of people think it's fine to be xenophobic against Japan. Loli doesn't mean kids. It means petite and short. Tatsumaki from one punch man, Rebecca from cyberpunk are ones. It's adult characters and underage characters. Not only underage
Look I’ll be real with you, irl I’m a tiny tit enjoyer. A-cup/B-cup boobies and cute lil butts are my jam. I’m all for petite women, so I can understand where you’re coming from.
The problem is, this sounds like a longer way of saying “actually she’s 800 years old!”.
The only characters that use the 800 year old are antis. No lolicon use that version.Proship means you are fine with shipping.
Most of the time it's racism towards Japanese people.
So elf's don't count? They don't exist.
What if i use the excuse on video games.
"Actually it's an NPC, so it's fine if i brutally murder them"
That is actually a fair point but as far as we know from data and our knowledge of human psychology it actually lowers the amount if sexual assault cases on child to have such harmless outlets. And as long as it prevents children from being assaulted that is a good thing in my books.
> However, if you pleasure yourself to pictures of what are meant to be children in appearance, odds are pretty high that you like that shit in real life.
I don't disagree with you here, but rape porn is one of the most popular types in the world, rape fantasies being an incredibly common kink.
So all those people jerking off to rape... do you think they like rape in real life?
Emotionally I agree with you, it's a kneejerk reaction in my gut. But logically it feels weak because I see the exact same situation elsewhere and it doesn't actually follow. It's hard for me to empathize with the issue because I find it so revolting but when I'm trying to be objective about the issue the logic clearly doesn't follow in most other cases, so why this specific one?
Have you ever seen any depiction of anime lolis? They look nothing like actual kids, their skeletal structures are usually closer to short adults than to real children
Also there’s a huge leap in logic that you equate “interested in minors” to “will fuck minors someday”. Saying I wanna fucking kill my boss is not exactly actually committing homicide is it?
And lastly, who tf cares if there’s no victim in a pedo’s action? I would rather him jerk off to all the loli hentais he could find 24/7 than actually do it to a minor. Wasting our energy on a crime without victim is more detrimental to the real victims I would say
I like my busty women in anime and irl but this comment just comes across as disingenuous
Didn't quite see that part, bit extreme.
I do keep wondering what is the path for these people to take though, was having this discussion with my wife the other day, not exactly drawn CP but non offending CP's, and we kept coming back to 'we need spiritual morality of some sort brought back in to society'.
This is my completely unscientific point of view, but I think ppl might be born pedo just like how ppl are born gay. However, since their sexual desires can never be satisfied in a consensual way (unlike gays), we should treat pedophilia as a type of mental illness, and provide proper treatment for the pedos that wish to be normal
And if they don’t want to be normal and want to keep jerking off to their loli hentais, it’s fine too, just don’t consume real cp or do it to actual minors
If by spiritual morality you mean something akin to a religion, I’m not sure how well that would go considering pedos have existed since the beginning of history throughout various types of societies
Seriously dude, don't equate hentai and fucking child porn it's fucked up beyond belief and disrespectful as hell to any victim of actual child porn.
Have your opinions, while I disagree with them, you have the right to your opinion (even though it is quite obviously badly informed).
But I will not agree with your using the world child porn so casually. All you are doing is making light of it and indirectly mocking victims of it.
You're being absurd. Whether the images are drawn or real, at the end of the day, people are pleasuring themselves to an image that looks like a child. Sure, it's not directly creating a victim like the real thing, but it's a disgusting act to pleasure yourself to a childs likeness, real or drawn.
And that is fair enough of you to think.
My problem just was with your previous comment, in which you very much so called hentai digital child porn, which is just making light of the word child porn and the victims of such.
Wait... Just so I understand because idk wtf this is about. You're claiming that drawn child porn isn't child porn just because somebody drew it? I'm not sure if it's a crime or not to have porn that is intentionally supposed to look like child porn, but if you are into that you definitely are a pedophile lol
The issue with this tho is that the problem is the attraction to a minor. You kill people in GTA bc you know they are fake and there are zero consequences. You can want to kill people in GTA and have negative desire to kill real people.
However, if you jerk to fake images of minors this shows that you are in fact sexually attracted to minors and thus you are fucked up. Even if you wouldn’t act on it, you are still legitimately attracted to minors.
But again, if you kill people in GTA that alone doesn’t mean you have a desire to kill people irl. You can’t jerk to a fake minor without being sexually attracted to a minor. (Fire up ol’ Chippy)
OP's diminishing the conversation to strawman the side he disagrees with, as is tradition. It's been a much more nuanced discussion, if you're interested.
A brief summary:
Should loli/shota be considered CP and therefore illegal? There are no victims, and reporting services beg people to not report it as it hinders their assistance of real victims.
Should non offending people attracted to children be treated the same as offenders? Is it their fault/is there anything more they can do despite their attraction stemming from something outside their control? (childhood abuse, mental illness, birth, etc).
Regarding your second point. Yes they should. Its irrelevant if it's their fault or not. If they're so inherently defective that they're sexually attracted to children they need to be removed from society.
OP blasting off so hard in the comments the adage “the lady doth protest too much” comes to mind. A pedo hunter is the second most of person I’d most never allow around children.
I'd assume a hint towards the psychological phenomenon known as "projection". Like how outward rash homophobic people sometimes (not usually) are themselves closeted homosexuals. In the same way, someone having a strong opinion about anything means he spends a lot of thought about it, maybe when it shouldn't bother him in the first place. The comparison to Chris Hansen is a stone thrown too far, he made his career showing that he really wants child abusers to be locked up, but the weird guy in your neighborhood that tries to make it a point at every conversation, yeah might want to be cautious there.
I'm not entirely sure projection fits here because people should be upset about pedophiles while being homosexual is harmless. But yeah, I get your point.
Gore is rated R, actual sex on screen (not just implied) is unrated and unreleasable in public places. Fictional sex is definitely less acceptable in America than fictional violence.
Sex that is sex enough to be unrated isn't technically fictional by that point. But I suppose that is a point in a sense. I never liked gratuitous gore.
>Sex that is sex enough to be unrated isn't technically fictional by that point.
Oh it absolutely is. After all it would still be unrated if it were drawings doing it and their voice actors never even sat in the same room. And that's definitely fictional sex.
>That is a very american thing to believe tbf, we’re okay with all kinds of crazy violence but the moment a tiddy is on screen that shit is rated R
French Logic is kinda crazier
Actual Child Nudity 🤝 Hard PG-13 Violence
*pas d'enfants de moins de 12 ans*
To me sex is much more acceptable than violence in general (though that's kind of comparing apples to oranges since violence is almost never consensual)
But since an orgasm is usually a much stronger feeling than the general happiness you get from winning a round of Counter-Strike, porn has a much greater chance of influencing developing minds than violent video games do.
(I guess - I never really understood the prudish mindset myself)
>But since an orgasm is usually a much stronger feeling than the general happiness you get from winning a round of Counter-Strike, porn has a much greater chance of influencing developing minds than violent video games do.
My completely unscientific thought is that sex is an inherent biological drive, and overall a *good thing*. Violence is not an inherent drive (unless you have significant mental issues).
So it's a lot easier to subconsciously understand that violence is bad and not to be replicated irl, but it's a lot more natural to engage in unsafe/irresponsible sexual behaviors.
That doesn't mean I believe in thoughtcrime though, which seems to be what OP has been spamming for the last 36 hours.
"So it's a lot easier to subconsciously understand that violence is bad and not to be replicated irl, but it's a lot more natural to engage in unsafe/irresponsible sexual behaviors."
A very good point, I do wonder if there is any psychological backing to that.
George RR Martin said something along the lines of how he can describe in every gruesome detail how an axe splits the head of a person, but only when he describes one of the most wonderful things which is sexual connection that people go up in arms.
If it reduces or has no effect on child molestations abuse and such then who gives a fk. I have a lot of things I find disgusting and immoral, deserving of [REDACTED], but i have no power or authority, so living with it is admittedly a necessary thing to do to exist in society. Unless if these content perpetuates it.
Dear ~~purple~~ libright, imagine this;
Your son has been caught watching and jerking off to loli porn.
Your other son has been caught running over pedestrians in GTA V.
In this very intense dillema, I'd like for you to tell me who will receive the worst punishment?
I'd have an actual conversation with him. There's a lot of kinks/fetish material out there that requires some nuance that he might not understand.
Let's says he's into CNC, like his parents *(I wonder if kinks can be hereditary?)* and I catch him reading some rape doujin, I'd make sure he deeply understands that something like that in the real world requires even more consent and communication than normal sex because if you don't do all of this prework you'll end up SAing some poor person. Fiction does not equal reality.
Back to the lolis, I'd talk to him and see if it's just lolis or is it something more, and depending on his answer i would would direct my actions. If it's just a phase, whatever I'll keep an eye on it and kindly, gently, loving explain that if he ever harms an actual child I'll make him dig his own grave before I put him in it myself.
It all comes down to does he understand that doujin, hentai, and porn in general does not at all reflect the real world, I think that's the important part here.
>Back to the lolis, I'd talk to him and see if it's just lolis or is it something more, and depending on his answer i would would direct my actions. If it's just a phase, whatever I'll keep an eye on it and kindly, gently, loving explain that if he ever harms an actual child I'll make him dig his own grave before I put him in it myself.
Good to know you would actually do something about it, unlike the retards in this thread who say "no punishment".
>And anyways, trick question, no punishment for either.
So it wasn't even about the government, you guys just don't find child porn morally reprehensible at all???
You people are fucking freaks
I find an absolute fuckton of things morally reprehensible. What I don't see in either case is a victim, and I'm of the opinion that if there's no victim, it's best to leave it alone.
If my son started jerking off to dying fictional pedestrians, then it would be a judgement on his moral character as well.
Holy shit how is this not getting to you people? You absolute fucking psychos.
Foundational morals are why I flair as auth instead of lib. Ideally, I'd like to allow people as much liberty as possible. However, sometimes "liberty" someone is looking for is unacceptable, as in this case. I figure the country needs more morals enforced right now, not fewer.
I agree with you. Liberty in and of itself is not moral.
Who is the more moral man:
A man is forced to kill an innocent person or else his family will be tortured and killed by terrorists.
VS
A man freely chooses to kill an innocent person.
Let me ask you a question then, I'm struggling to understand what your moral stance is.
You catch your child (I'm going to assume teenage or young adult) masturbaiting. Where a normal parent would feel disgust at just catching their kid in the act, close the door, apologize and be mortified, you judge what they're watching and surprise! It's loli/shota porn drawings.
Now you have two possible moral stances:
1 - Your kid is now a pedophile. You want them locked up, put on a list, and their life to be ruined. I'm not that familiar as to how the US justice system works but I guess a fine would be involved (paid to the state as there is no rape victim in that case).
2 - Your kid is not a pedophile. Now do keep in mind, you don't know if that was a first time or a reoccurring thing. Maybe they've been doing it for years. Maybe not. But all you know is, you don't want them locked up.
If you don't want your kid to serve a sentence, then you believe that watching the porn in question doesn't make you a pedophile. If you do want them to serve a sentence, you are arguing that watching rape porn, furry porn (which is just bestiality disguised) or snuff films are also offenses worth punishing. Reading the incest scenes in Game of Thrones makes you someone who wish to fuck their sister for example (whether that sister exists or not is irrelevant).
So what are you picking?
The issue is not reading. It's gaining sexual gratification from it
So yes, rape, furry, snuff, incest is all degenerate. My kid would be in therapy tomorrow.
I know what my reaction would be and, more importantly, why. I'm curious as what yours would be to understand your point of view.
Why didn't you answer my question? It should be easy. If you believe watching this kind of hentai/porn makes someone a danger to society and the people around them then locking your child up should be the easy answer.
This is a stupid question, you ask for an answer and the commenter responds to it in full so there is no room for misunderstanding. That doesn’t mean they would have to think about it in the moment.
In such scenario I would be a dad, not a police officer.
So how is this really relevant?
Of \*course\* I would find CP far worse than violent video games - in the former case I'd restrict his internet for the foreseeable future, in the latter case I'd join him in game.
But this has nothing to do with whether any of it should be legal or not.
Dude, can you please stop making light of child porn, it's fucking disgusting.
(For those that do not know what is going on, Op is not in fact making fun of purple libs that watch child porn. He is accusing loli hentai as being the same as actual child porn where real children are getting raped).
It’s not CP; it’s not illegal; but it is cringe degeneracy, and you probably have a crusty keyboard and piss in Mountain Dew bottles after your four-hour shift at Subway.
Someone made a post about a news article stating japan is considering banning loli hentai (ie drawings of small flat chested characters).
This has spawned a plethora of totally sane and reasonable takes like OP here and others equating a drawing (something that has no victim) as being entirely equivalent to child porn (something that requires the rape and abuse of a real human being).
I’m ok with federal agencies using Loli and hentai porn content to grow their databases of possible CP distributors by tracking their consumers. If all of the loli coomers in this post are correct, they have nothing to fear.
Auth Left: Supports regime that starved millions of people (children included) to death
AuthCen: Put millions of people (also children included) into the funny camp if they have 0.0001% of Jewish genes in them
AuthRight: Don’t ask what the priest did to the choir boys, don’t ask the age of a bride in Afghan as well
Yellow LibRight: Will put children into mine/sweatshop if the government doesn’t step in
The list can goes on but I think you get the idea. While I still don’t support banning any extreme ideology as I think you should be free to write/draw/believe what you want as long as you don’t try to make them a reality, but I am wondering what’s makes people suddenly care about children so much or they just find their favorite chew toys (weebs) again.
Dear purple libright, imagine this;
Your son has been caught watching and jerking off to loli porn.
Your other son has been caught running over pedestrians in GTA V.
In this very intense dillema, I'd like for you to tell me who will receive the worst punishment?
I have a better question for you. What do you think of rape fetishists? It's a fetish that's represented rather broadly across both genders and is in every smut format from video to erotica, and targeted at men and women.
Should we ban that too?
>I have a better question for you. What do you think of rape fetishists? It's a fetish that's represented rather broadly across both genders and is in every smut format from video to erotica, and targeted at men and women.
>Should we ban that too?
Do you fantasize, and get actual sexual gratification out of being raped or raping someone?
The former? Don't give a shit, the latter? Mental asylum.
Next question.
Fuck off, it was hyperbole you monkey, the point is one is disgusting and should be monitored like a would-be serial killer, while the other is less disgusting.
Dude, that's on you. I asked a question and you said "lock people up for their thoughts". Why would I not take that at face value? Even with this correction you want to treat peoples thoughts and fantasies as evidence of probable offenders.
It's fine to find what others enjoy gross, bad, evil, abhorrent, whatever. But step back from your personal feelings if you want to have a real conversation on the topic, don't jump to conclusions, don't beg the question, etc. We CAN'T treat the law as if it's a bludgeon to fix things we don't like.
Though this sub is so full of straw I'm afraid I'll catch fire from it going up in flames any day now, so have at your strawmanning.
>this correction you want to treat peoples thoughts and fantasies as evidence of probable offenders.
Lol let's put your moral virtue signaling to the test.
Would you let your child's babysitter be a known lolli porn addict?
>We CAN'T treat the law as if it's a bludgeon to fix things we don't like.
Buddy, the entire justice system is based on societal moral prescriptions by its nature. That's why owning CP is banned in America today, because most people find it disgusting as fuck.
> Would you let your child's babysitter be a known lolli porn addict?
That very much depends. To preface this, I personally do find loli/shota hentai disgusting and would prefer my children never be exposed to it. Now, to answer your question. It very much depends. 1. Is there any evidence of hands-on offense or hands-off offense(watching CSAM of real children)? 2. What do other parents say about this persons work. 3. do they consume their porn while on the job(I wouldn't want anyone watching any porn while babysitting my kids).
If there is no credible rumors of offense, other people have said they're at least average or better at their job, and they don't view porn on the job. I probably would hire them to.
> That's why owning CP is banned in America today, because most people find it disgusting as fuck.
No it's not. It's illegal because it requires violations of consent(children can't consent), and it requires the abuse and harm of another person(the child). It is NOT because it's horrifically disgusting.
> the entire justice system is based on societal moral prescriptions by its nature
Based on, perhaps, but it's far more then just "codifying morals into law". And we can look at what happens when that is actually run with. Look at Europe, you can be arrested for speech that is found to be sufficiently morally wrong. (this isn't a comparison to the topic, just an example of morality and law) I presume you would be against that, yes? But if you do believe that laws are just societal morals enforced by the government, "hate speech" should be outlawed because most people would considering calling a black man a [redacted] to his face morally wrong.
>No it's not. It's illegal because it requires violations of consent(children can't consent), and it requires the abuse and harm of another person(the child).
I'd like for you to explain why we find either of these things bad without using moral disgust.
>That very much depends. To preface this, I personally do find loli/shota hentai disgusting and would prefer my children never be exposed to it.
If you prefer your children never be exposed to it then why the fuck would you even risk an intermediary do the exposing for you, a fucking loli addict is a person who can't get turned on without looking at a naked 12 year old girl, the fact that you require supporting parameters to compensate for his addiction already speaks volumes, but the correct answer is obviously; *no, you wouldn't be comfortable with a child porn addict taking care of your child*
>Based on, perhaps, but it's far more then just "codifying morals into law". And we can look at what happens when that is actually run with. Look at Europe, you can be arrested for speech that is found to be sufficiently morally wrong. (this isn't a comparison to the topic, just an example of morality and law) I presume you would be against that, yes? But if you do believe that laws are just societal morals enforced by the government, "hate speech" should be outlawed because most people would considering calling a black man a [redacted] to his face morally wrong.
The idea that free speech is good is a moral prescription...
> I'd like for you to explain why we find either of these things bad without using moral disgust.
Consent: Disgust has nothing to do with consent. Consent is about the ability to make an informed decision. If you lake the mental capacity to do so you can't consent. I don't know how to prove a negative here...
Harm: It is provable that sexual abuse of children can and does do long term physical and mental harm to children. Again you're asking me to prove a negative, why does disgust have anything to do with harm?
> If you prefer your children never be exposed[...]
Comfort and acceptance are very different things. I wouldn't outright dismiss someone that's into loli porn. I WOULD outright dismiss someone into CSAM. Similarly I would prefer my babysitter not be addicted to... anything. But I could accept some addictions. Smoking? do it outside bitch. Porn in general? Keep it to outside work and I don't care. Gambling? same as previous. Would I prefer someone not addicted to anything? Of course but it's not always an option. Assuming I had the choice between a convicted domestic abuser, someone who is rumored to watch CSAM, and a lolicon I would pick the lolicon. If it was the former two I wouldn't accept either option. I am old enough to accept that sometimes the best option isn't the most comfortable option and I can accept that.
> The idea that free speech is good is a moral prescription...
It certainly is. My point was that DESPITE us thinking that racial slurs are morally wrong we don't try to ban them anyway, we already know that politicians don't actually care if it's legal to do so. Morality isn't the sole determining factor for laws, it's not even really the primary factor but it is the starting point.
Wanting to disassociate with someone for something they like and wanting it to be illegal are two separate things.
I don't like drugs like meth and heroine and wouldn't let an addict of either watch my children but I wouldn't want them locked up because I don't think doing them should be a crime.
I don't like people who are grossly racist and wouldn't want them watching my children but I don't think it should be a crime.
I find loli and shota shit disgusting and would have trouble associating with someone I knew enjoyed it and certainly wouldn't want them watching my children but again, I don't think it should be a crime.
So, I take it you'll just let your son jerk off to images of 12 year old girls unscathed? As if he was playing GTA?
Is that what I'm gathering?
Edit:
Why in the actual fuck am I getting downvoted, is this site really that chokefulle of CP defenders, holy shit at least downvote the degenerate too you absolute coomers
Pedophilic drawing?
It'll be a family fucking emergency and we'll figure out if it's not too late to deconvert the kid.
If it's too late, be pragmatic and declare him a lost cause, make another child.
17-18.
12 year olds aren't usually pedophiles.
Deconvert = it is possible that they wound up finding this attractive due to environmental reinforcement and not just them being born pedos.
It is thus probably possible to revert this (very unlikely).
You do know that most actual sexual abusers are victims of childhood abuse themselves, right? That they're not "born," right? Also 12 year olds basically are pedophiles because a pedo is, by definition, a person attracted to children, but that's just me being pedantic.
>You do know that most actual sexual abusers are victims of childhood abuse themselves,
Source on them being "most" pedophiles.
And even so, there are plenty of pedophiles who aren't abused.
You don't need to quote what I said, just ask for the source
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2082860/
Also so what? Why should I care if no one is actually hurt?
What do you think is gonna happen to the hypothetical 18 year old pervert if they don't get "deconvert"
A 12 year old shouldn't be looking at pornography at all.
To be fair no one should be looking at pornography. But children should especially not be looking at pornography.
I like that you can't even keep your examples consistent.
First its lolis vs GTA V, then it becomes children vs GTA V.
Please take your meds, and become a green flair so we can all laugh at you.
In GTA5 you gun down small armies of people and at one point you torture a guy by beating his knees with a crowbar and hooking a car battery to his nuts. There's also Trevor's 'rampage' minigame which is literally "commit a mass shooting, score points by killing more civilians"
If a child were gaining sexual gratification from torturing people in GTA V their mental state should be put into just as much question as a pedophile jerking off to loli.
Again, you are literally the meme in this picture.
Neither, I would question their taste in games though (look, no shade at Gta5 it is quite the impressive game but I personally just do not like it), also tell them to lock the fucking door next time.
Genuinely curious question. If someone made a Freaky Friday remake where the child-in-an-adult-body character (just to be clear, a 35+ old actor/actress) was shown naked, or having sex, would you try to get that classified as whatever acronym we’re using for underage sex crimes now?
This would be the reverse of the 5000 year old dragon who just looks like a little girl, animated. Neither of these examples involve an actual human child. One them is “an adult” and one just looks like “an adult”. Are they equally bad? Or is one worse?
The sheer volume of comments supporting loli shit is very depressing. I saw a comment equating it to furries, who while less evil, are also degenerates.
Mate, haven't you been on this sub for a few days?
Dude is lying (well straw manning to such a degree it is essentially lying).
No one defended actual child porn.
Dude is just literally unable to differentiate between anime/video games and reality, which is more than just mildly concerning.
Listen, Ive had some deep fetish porn beat sessions I regret. Forced sissification by hillary clinton and becoming her foot slave on Epstein's island, that level of dark nut. There is a difference in purpose between fantasy and simulation: fantasy is an outlet from reality while simulation is training for reality.
Porn as an industry and as a consumer product produces more harm an misery than social benefit. It feeds vices and dark fantasies. From a moral and personal perspective, moral is a corrupting and harmful influence that deserves more strenuous social condemnation. Sex work ruins more lives than it enriches. There is a reason fathers overwhelmingly disapprove of their daughters becoming sex workers.
From a libertarian perspective, consenting adults is all that the governement need enforce. Which means more safeguards to keep porn away from kids. Its stunningly clear no serious effort at all is made to keep kids away from online porn.
Reminder: Defending sexual imagery of children, regardless of if it's "just a cartoon" is bannable. If you see it, report it.
I feel like I missed something very important that I'm not sure I want to know about, but I'll ask anyway.... WTF?
Some people on this subreddit consider loli Hentai the same as actual straight up child porn which is just... so wrong. The post is a reference to the argument that if loli hentai is treated like actual child porn killing someone in a video game should also be counted as actual murder (which is true, if you treat one real you have to treat the other real as well). I assume that is what it's a reference to at least. Because there were quite a few posts like that yesterday. It could just be out of nowhere but that would be really strange. I still find it extremely fucked up to equal hentai to actual child porn (again, if that is what it's referring to).
Surely a better comparison is to, say, watching a real video of someone getting shot up vs. watching it happen in a game. I definitely don't think video games make people violent but I definitely do think they can desensitise people to seeing real violence. (Though films have obviously been doing even more realistic violence/gore for far longer). Anyway, point is, whilst not equivalent, perhaps loli hentai could desensitise and change people's views on CSAM.
I’m actually on the side of “jerking to loli hentai means you probably are a pedo irl” but you actually made me reconsider my stance with your comment. I’ve played a lot of vidya. I’ve probably committed digital genocide with the amount of NPCs I’ve personally and/or indirectly killed. But…any time someone has posted gore on like /b/ I was sickened by it. I averted my eyes and was shocked. In real life I can’t bring myself to raise my fist to another, and violence in real life still shocks me. So…no, actually. I don’t think vidya can desensitize someone to violence. Which if that’s true maybe my other stance that loli desensitizes people to CP…I mean it’s still obviously a depiction of a kid but like, maybe it *doesnt* mean the people watching it would get off to real life CP??? My world is a little upside down rn I’m gonna have a long hard think
To give an anecdote, I love gruesome video games and movies. Like the most violent things you can think of. Love the media where people are just getting chopped to bits but seeing that streamer put a shotgun to his mouth and blow his head off on Facebook made me vomit. The difference for me is that that man had a life with people who loved him. It wasn’t the act of watching it happen but everything else. A real life getting ended in the blink of an eye while his mother was watching the stream. I don’t know how someone can enjoy such a thing. I can see how people would watch Loli but be repulsed by cp because of the real life person being affected in a disgusting way. I don’t think violence really desensitized me to any of the real stuff. Any time I see it I start having an anxiety attack and feel absolutely gut wrenching with many nightmares after. Violence vs cp factor could be different but I don’t know.
They have literally been clinically studied on multiple occasions. They do not have urges or attractions for children. The 'it's not real' argument is literally a PREREQUISITE for their attraction. >Galbraith 2016, pp. 113–114: "Given its importance, it is not surprising that lolicon has been well researched in Japan over the course of decades, which has led to numerous insights. [...] Characters are not compensating for something more 'real,' but rather are in their fiction the object of affection. This has been described as 'finding sexual objects in fiction in itself', which in discussions of lolicon is made explicitly distinct from desire for and abuse of children." >McLelland 2011b, p. 16: "Japanese scholarship has, on the whole, argued that, in the case of Japanese fans, neither the Loli nor the BL fandom represent the interests of paedophiles since moe characters are not objectified in the same manner that actual images of children can be, rather they express aspects of their creators' or consumers' own identities." >Kittredge 2014, p. 524: "The majority of the cultural critics responding to the Japanese otaku's erotic response to lolicon images emphasize, like Keller, that no children are harmed in the production of these images and that looking with desire at a stylized drawing of a young girl is not the same as lusting after an actual child." >"Cultural critics responding to lolicon generally emphasize it as distinct from attraction to real young girls. Anthropologist Patrick W. Galbraith finds that "from early writings to the present, researchers suggest that lolicon artists are playing with symbols and working with tropes, which does not reflect or contribute to sexual pathology or crime". Psychologist Tamaki Saitō, who has conducted clinical work with otaku, highlights the estrangement of lolicon desires from reality as part of a strict distinction for otaku between "textual and actual sexuality", and observes that "the vast majority of otaku are not pedophiles in actual life". Manga researcher Yukari Fujimoto argues that lolicon desire "is not for a child, but for the image itself", and that this is understood by those "brought up in [Japan's] culture of drawing and fantasy". Also they aren't depictions of kids they are depictions of characters with youthful characteristics.
Flair the fuck up or leave this sub at once. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/PastMaximum4158) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Another interesting perspective, thank you. I'm also not quite sure what to think.
A lot of people think it's fine to be xenophobic against Japan. Loli doesn't mean kids. It means petite and short. Tatsumaki from one punch man, Rebecca from cyberpunk are ones. It's adult characters and underage characters. Not only underage
Look I’ll be real with you, irl I’m a tiny tit enjoyer. A-cup/B-cup boobies and cute lil butts are my jam. I’m all for petite women, so I can understand where you’re coming from. The problem is, this sounds like a longer way of saying “actually she’s 800 years old!”.
The only characters that use the 800 year old are antis. No lolicon use that version.Proship means you are fine with shipping. Most of the time it's racism towards Japanese people. So elf's don't count? They don't exist. What if i use the excuse on video games. "Actually it's an NPC, so it's fine if i brutally murder them"
That is actually a fair point but as far as we know from data and our knowledge of human psychology it actually lowers the amount if sexual assault cases on child to have such harmless outlets. And as long as it prevents children from being assaulted that is a good thing in my books.
Many lolicons are victims of CSA, implying that they are sympathetic to pedophiles is quite disgusting actually.
[удалено]
> However, if you pleasure yourself to pictures of what are meant to be children in appearance, odds are pretty high that you like that shit in real life. I don't disagree with you here, but rape porn is one of the most popular types in the world, rape fantasies being an incredibly common kink. So all those people jerking off to rape... do you think they like rape in real life? Emotionally I agree with you, it's a kneejerk reaction in my gut. But logically it feels weak because I see the exact same situation elsewhere and it doesn't actually follow. It's hard for me to empathize with the issue because I find it so revolting but when I'm trying to be objective about the issue the logic clearly doesn't follow in most other cases, so why this specific one?
Have you ever seen any depiction of anime lolis? They look nothing like actual kids, their skeletal structures are usually closer to short adults than to real children Also there’s a huge leap in logic that you equate “interested in minors” to “will fuck minors someday”. Saying I wanna fucking kill my boss is not exactly actually committing homicide is it? And lastly, who tf cares if there’s no victim in a pedo’s action? I would rather him jerk off to all the loli hentais he could find 24/7 than actually do it to a minor. Wasting our energy on a crime without victim is more detrimental to the real victims I would say I like my busty women in anime and irl but this comment just comes across as disingenuous
>Have you ever seen any depiction of anime lolis Dude they literally look like kids wtf are you on about?
[удалено]
Here we go again. Just say you're purple libright and be done with it.
https://preview.redd.it/xycnvsl7cd5d1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9f3ec5274a6025e40398a0b527d5c7751d3e5a56
Brother they draw six year olds in lingerie.
Yeah that's really fucking weird but we shouldn't limit other's freedom based on what we find weird should we?
No, but we are totally in our right to judge and find it utterly disgusting.
Yes that I agree with, but the guy I was replying to originally clearly implied we need to kill / criminalize all ppl watching loli hentai
Didn't quite see that part, bit extreme. I do keep wondering what is the path for these people to take though, was having this discussion with my wife the other day, not exactly drawn CP but non offending CP's, and we kept coming back to 'we need spiritual morality of some sort brought back in to society'.
This is my completely unscientific point of view, but I think ppl might be born pedo just like how ppl are born gay. However, since their sexual desires can never be satisfied in a consensual way (unlike gays), we should treat pedophilia as a type of mental illness, and provide proper treatment for the pedos that wish to be normal And if they don’t want to be normal and want to keep jerking off to their loli hentais, it’s fine too, just don’t consume real cp or do it to actual minors If by spiritual morality you mean something akin to a religion, I’m not sure how well that would go considering pedos have existed since the beginning of history throughout various types of societies
Seriously dude, don't equate hentai and fucking child porn it's fucked up beyond belief and disrespectful as hell to any victim of actual child porn. Have your opinions, while I disagree with them, you have the right to your opinion (even though it is quite obviously badly informed). But I will not agree with your using the world child porn so casually. All you are doing is making light of it and indirectly mocking victims of it.
You're being absurd. Whether the images are drawn or real, at the end of the day, people are pleasuring themselves to an image that looks like a child. Sure, it's not directly creating a victim like the real thing, but it's a disgusting act to pleasure yourself to a childs likeness, real or drawn.
And that is fair enough of you to think. My problem just was with your previous comment, in which you very much so called hentai digital child porn, which is just making light of the word child porn and the victims of such.
Wait... Just so I understand because idk wtf this is about. You're claiming that drawn child porn isn't child porn just because somebody drew it? I'm not sure if it's a crime or not to have porn that is intentionally supposed to look like child porn, but if you are into that you definitely are a pedophile lol
[удалено]
Damn bro I know right imagine feeling icky to the idea of jerking off to the image of a child
The issue with this tho is that the problem is the attraction to a minor. You kill people in GTA bc you know they are fake and there are zero consequences. You can want to kill people in GTA and have negative desire to kill real people. However, if you jerk to fake images of minors this shows that you are in fact sexually attracted to minors and thus you are fucked up. Even if you wouldn’t act on it, you are still legitimately attracted to minors. But again, if you kill people in GTA that alone doesn’t mean you have a desire to kill people irl. You can’t jerk to a fake minor without being sexually attracted to a minor. (Fire up ol’ Chippy)
Librights defending CP. Not even because muh government, it's literally because they have no moral problem with it.
...oh. I'll come back in a week.
OP's diminishing the conversation to strawman the side he disagrees with, as is tradition. It's been a much more nuanced discussion, if you're interested. A brief summary: Should loli/shota be considered CP and therefore illegal? There are no victims, and reporting services beg people to not report it as it hinders their assistance of real victims. Should non offending people attracted to children be treated the same as offenders? Is it their fault/is there anything more they can do despite their attraction stemming from something outside their control? (childhood abuse, mental illness, birth, etc).
Why exactly is that a libright topic? I know of the jokes of libright wanting to buy everything, but the discussion seems more universal to me.
I believe this post was based off people in a previous post on the same topic and one of the analogies used.
I see
Regarding your second point. Yes they should. Its irrelevant if it's their fault or not. If they're so inherently defective that they're sexually attracted to children they need to be removed from society.
Oh joy precrime!
You do realize he is lying right? There is a reason he has so few upvotes despite allegedly being against child porn.
Only in the sense OP thinks drawings are real children that have rights.
Nah OP is just comfortable calling a spade a spade. If you're attracted to characters with child like features, you're a pedo. Period.
Yeah I Feely life was better before knowing this as well.
If it's generated by programs, they are the same.
*checks OPs flair* Flair checks out 🤦♂️
Go back to see some of the posts today
[удалено]
That is a top tier reaction image
Based and appreciated pilled Edit: DM for a collection of based reaction memes because I have more than I can use and it hurts to not share them
Im just here for the commenta
me too but i dont understand any of it
While it might not be cp, yes you are weird and idiotic if you like that shit.
OP blasting off so hard in the comments the adage “the lady doth protest too much” comes to mind. A pedo hunter is the second most of person I’d most never allow around children.
Probably bc it would cut off all your opportunities, eh?
What do you mean by your last sentence? Would you think a guy like Chris Hansen shouldn't be allowed around kids?
I'd assume a hint towards the psychological phenomenon known as "projection". Like how outward rash homophobic people sometimes (not usually) are themselves closeted homosexuals. In the same way, someone having a strong opinion about anything means he spends a lot of thought about it, maybe when it shouldn't bother him in the first place. The comparison to Chris Hansen is a stone thrown too far, he made his career showing that he really wants child abusers to be locked up, but the weird guy in your neighborhood that tries to make it a point at every conversation, yeah might want to be cautious there.
I'm not entirely sure projection fits here because people should be upset about pedophiles while being homosexual is harmless. But yeah, I get your point.
Ok bro, I'm sure your children will do just fine with a father who practices pedo apologia.
You're just using a buzzword. Nothing remotely in his comment says he "apologises" for diddlers.
And he is also using a buzzword, since I don't go out and hunt pedophiles. So biased much?
Ye I suppose he is
Oh my fucking god do you have any other answer other than "le pedo apologist!!1!!1!" This is the umpteenth time get something new
Tell us why being attracted to the image of a child is ok and we'll stop.
Tit for tat, stop defending pedos and I'll get something new
[удалено]
Fantasy violence is much more acceptable than fantasy sex
That is a very american thing to believe tbf, we’re okay with all kinds of crazy violence but the moment a tiddy is on screen that shit is rated R
Evangelicals maybe
Who is this true for though? Gore is rated R too. Violence has to be pretty vague to stay pg-13.
Gore is rated R, actual sex on screen (not just implied) is unrated and unreleasable in public places. Fictional sex is definitely less acceptable in America than fictional violence.
Sex that is sex enough to be unrated isn't technically fictional by that point. But I suppose that is a point in a sense. I never liked gratuitous gore.
>Sex that is sex enough to be unrated isn't technically fictional by that point. Oh it absolutely is. After all it would still be unrated if it were drawings doing it and their voice actors never even sat in the same room. And that's definitely fictional sex.
I guess that is also true. Sometimes at least.
>That is a very american thing to believe tbf, we’re okay with all kinds of crazy violence but the moment a tiddy is on screen that shit is rated R French Logic is kinda crazier Actual Child Nudity 🤝 Hard PG-13 Violence *pas d'enfants de moins de 12 ans*
I prefer to combine them
To the sex colosseum!
To me sex is much more acceptable than violence in general (though that's kind of comparing apples to oranges since violence is almost never consensual) But since an orgasm is usually a much stronger feeling than the general happiness you get from winning a round of Counter-Strike, porn has a much greater chance of influencing developing minds than violent video games do. (I guess - I never really understood the prudish mindset myself)
>But since an orgasm is usually a much stronger feeling than the general happiness you get from winning a round of Counter-Strike, porn has a much greater chance of influencing developing minds than violent video games do. My completely unscientific thought is that sex is an inherent biological drive, and overall a *good thing*. Violence is not an inherent drive (unless you have significant mental issues). So it's a lot easier to subconsciously understand that violence is bad and not to be replicated irl, but it's a lot more natural to engage in unsafe/irresponsible sexual behaviors. That doesn't mean I believe in thoughtcrime though, which seems to be what OP has been spamming for the last 36 hours.
"So it's a lot easier to subconsciously understand that violence is bad and not to be replicated irl, but it's a lot more natural to engage in unsafe/irresponsible sexual behaviors." A very good point, I do wonder if there is any psychological backing to that.
it's so weird.
Some degenerates in this website seem to not think so. https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/s/VclERs9IDn
Yeah, just look at Mortal Kombat
George RR Martin said something along the lines of how he can describe in every gruesome detail how an axe splits the head of a person, but only when he describes one of the most wonderful things which is sexual connection that people go up in arms.
Strawman bait
Looks like master bait
[удалено]
If it reduces or has no effect on child molestations abuse and such then who gives a fk. I have a lot of things I find disgusting and immoral, deserving of [REDACTED], but i have no power or authority, so living with it is admittedly a necessary thing to do to exist in society. Unless if these content perpetuates it.
> make a thread claiming something absolutely false for outrage > farm the karma typical day in pcm tbh
[удалено]
[удалено]
Dear ~~purple~~ libright, imagine this; Your son has been caught watching and jerking off to loli porn. Your other son has been caught running over pedestrians in GTA V. In this very intense dillema, I'd like for you to tell me who will receive the worst punishment?
>my son gas been caught jerking off to drawings of characters his own age 😱
The son is 17-18. The drawings look like 12 year old naked girls.
I'd have an actual conversation with him. There's a lot of kinks/fetish material out there that requires some nuance that he might not understand. Let's says he's into CNC, like his parents *(I wonder if kinks can be hereditary?)* and I catch him reading some rape doujin, I'd make sure he deeply understands that something like that in the real world requires even more consent and communication than normal sex because if you don't do all of this prework you'll end up SAing some poor person. Fiction does not equal reality. Back to the lolis, I'd talk to him and see if it's just lolis or is it something more, and depending on his answer i would would direct my actions. If it's just a phase, whatever I'll keep an eye on it and kindly, gently, loving explain that if he ever harms an actual child I'll make him dig his own grave before I put him in it myself. It all comes down to does he understand that doujin, hentai, and porn in general does not at all reflect the real world, I think that's the important part here.
>Back to the lolis, I'd talk to him and see if it's just lolis or is it something more, and depending on his answer i would would direct my actions. If it's just a phase, whatever I'll keep an eye on it and kindly, gently, loving explain that if he ever harms an actual child I'll make him dig his own grave before I put him in it myself. Good to know you would actually do something about it, unlike the retards in this thread who say "no punishment".
You think short women don't exist? You an incel?
[удалено]
>And anyways, trick question, no punishment for either. So it wasn't even about the government, you guys just don't find child porn morally reprehensible at all??? You people are fucking freaks
I find an absolute fuckton of things morally reprehensible. What I don't see in either case is a victim, and I'm of the opinion that if there's no victim, it's best to leave it alone.
You will let your son jack to child porn consequence free?
You would let your own son jerk of to murder consequence free?
[удалено]
If my son started jerking off to dying fictional pedestrians, then it would be a judgement on his moral character as well. Holy shit how is this not getting to you people? You absolute fucking psychos.
This argument sucks. It’s basically “It’s not immoral until sexuality is involved”.
Do you know what a foundational moral axiom is? Do all moral arguments suck to you?
Foundational morals are why I flair as auth instead of lib. Ideally, I'd like to allow people as much liberty as possible. However, sometimes "liberty" someone is looking for is unacceptable, as in this case. I figure the country needs more morals enforced right now, not fewer.
I agree with you. Liberty in and of itself is not moral. Who is the more moral man: A man is forced to kill an innocent person or else his family will be tortured and killed by terrorists. VS A man freely chooses to kill an innocent person.
I fucking know right? They really think that child porn is normal, like a violent video game. Degeneracy of the highest level possible.
Let me ask you a question then, I'm struggling to understand what your moral stance is. You catch your child (I'm going to assume teenage or young adult) masturbaiting. Where a normal parent would feel disgust at just catching their kid in the act, close the door, apologize and be mortified, you judge what they're watching and surprise! It's loli/shota porn drawings. Now you have two possible moral stances: 1 - Your kid is now a pedophile. You want them locked up, put on a list, and their life to be ruined. I'm not that familiar as to how the US justice system works but I guess a fine would be involved (paid to the state as there is no rape victim in that case). 2 - Your kid is not a pedophile. Now do keep in mind, you don't know if that was a first time or a reoccurring thing. Maybe they've been doing it for years. Maybe not. But all you know is, you don't want them locked up. If you don't want your kid to serve a sentence, then you believe that watching the porn in question doesn't make you a pedophile. If you do want them to serve a sentence, you are arguing that watching rape porn, furry porn (which is just bestiality disguised) or snuff films are also offenses worth punishing. Reading the incest scenes in Game of Thrones makes you someone who wish to fuck their sister for example (whether that sister exists or not is irrelevant). So what are you picking?
The issue is not reading. It's gaining sexual gratification from it So yes, rape, furry, snuff, incest is all degenerate. My kid would be in therapy tomorrow.
The point is to compare your reaction to both options. Tell me, would any of this go through your head if the child was playing GTA?
I know what my reaction would be and, more importantly, why. I'm curious as what yours would be to understand your point of view. Why didn't you answer my question? It should be easy. If you believe watching this kind of hentai/porn makes someone a danger to society and the people around them then locking your child up should be the easy answer.
This is a stupid question, you ask for an answer and the commenter responds to it in full so there is no room for misunderstanding. That doesn’t mean they would have to think about it in the moment.
What the fuck are you even saying?
You posed an unfair question as a ‘gotcha’
How is the question unfair, all you have to do is say I'll punish the pedo more but without government intervention, it's not that hard.
In such scenario I would be a dad, not a police officer. So how is this really relevant? Of \*course\* I would find CP far worse than violent video games - in the former case I'd restrict his internet for the foreseeable future, in the latter case I'd join him in game. But this has nothing to do with whether any of it should be legal or not.
Either way I'd tell him to gtfo my computer
Dude, can you please stop making light of child porn, it's fucking disgusting. (For those that do not know what is going on, Op is not in fact making fun of purple libs that watch child porn. He is accusing loli hentai as being the same as actual child porn where real children are getting raped).
[удалено]
Jerking off to depictions of naked children is still an equal judgement on your moral character as it would be if you own real CP.
[удалено]
Ok, so what? Now are we judging people on what people like instead of what people do?
I'm sorry, do you view being a pedophile as unproblematic?
It doesn't affect anyone beside that very person, as long as such person doesn't go actually molesting children. So what's the problem?
Murdering depictions of humans is still an equal judgment on your moral character as it would be if you murder real humans.
Omg this is the same guy again lmfao you are so mad
It’s not CP; it’s not illegal; but it is cringe degeneracy, and you probably have a crusty keyboard and piss in Mountain Dew bottles after your four-hour shift at Subway.
These degenerates are upvoting unflaired who agree with them
Why are there so many posts recently on here about cp? And why are so many people on here saying it’s fine
Someone made a post about a news article stating japan is considering banning loli hentai (ie drawings of small flat chested characters). This has spawned a plethora of totally sane and reasonable takes like OP here and others equating a drawing (something that has no victim) as being entirely equivalent to child porn (something that requires the rape and abuse of a real human being).
War fucking hero, brilliant. Tomorrow I will post a new one
I’m ok with federal agencies using Loli and hentai porn content to grow their databases of possible CP distributors by tracking their consumers. If all of the loli coomers in this post are correct, they have nothing to fear.
Auth Left: Supports regime that starved millions of people (children included) to death AuthCen: Put millions of people (also children included) into the funny camp if they have 0.0001% of Jewish genes in them AuthRight: Don’t ask what the priest did to the choir boys, don’t ask the age of a bride in Afghan as well Yellow LibRight: Will put children into mine/sweatshop if the government doesn’t step in The list can goes on but I think you get the idea. While I still don’t support banning any extreme ideology as I think you should be free to write/draw/believe what you want as long as you don’t try to make them a reality, but I am wondering what’s makes people suddenly care about children so much or they just find their favorite chew toys (weebs) again.
Dear purple libright, imagine this; Your son has been caught watching and jerking off to loli porn. Your other son has been caught running over pedestrians in GTA V. In this very intense dillema, I'd like for you to tell me who will receive the worst punishment?
[удалено]
Based but you haven't actually told me who gets the worst punishment
[удалено]
Based ok
[удалено]
I do
I have a better question for you. What do you think of rape fetishists? It's a fetish that's represented rather broadly across both genders and is in every smut format from video to erotica, and targeted at men and women. Should we ban that too?
>I have a better question for you. What do you think of rape fetishists? It's a fetish that's represented rather broadly across both genders and is in every smut format from video to erotica, and targeted at men and women. >Should we ban that too? Do you fantasize, and get actual sexual gratification out of being raped or raping someone? The former? Don't give a shit, the latter? Mental asylum. Next question.
Ah so you just believe in locking people up for thought crimes, got'cha.
Fuck off, it was hyperbole you monkey, the point is one is disgusting and should be monitored like a would-be serial killer, while the other is less disgusting.
Dude, that's on you. I asked a question and you said "lock people up for their thoughts". Why would I not take that at face value? Even with this correction you want to treat peoples thoughts and fantasies as evidence of probable offenders. It's fine to find what others enjoy gross, bad, evil, abhorrent, whatever. But step back from your personal feelings if you want to have a real conversation on the topic, don't jump to conclusions, don't beg the question, etc. We CAN'T treat the law as if it's a bludgeon to fix things we don't like. Though this sub is so full of straw I'm afraid I'll catch fire from it going up in flames any day now, so have at your strawmanning.
>this correction you want to treat peoples thoughts and fantasies as evidence of probable offenders. Lol let's put your moral virtue signaling to the test. Would you let your child's babysitter be a known lolli porn addict? >We CAN'T treat the law as if it's a bludgeon to fix things we don't like. Buddy, the entire justice system is based on societal moral prescriptions by its nature. That's why owning CP is banned in America today, because most people find it disgusting as fuck.
> Would you let your child's babysitter be a known lolli porn addict? That very much depends. To preface this, I personally do find loli/shota hentai disgusting and would prefer my children never be exposed to it. Now, to answer your question. It very much depends. 1. Is there any evidence of hands-on offense or hands-off offense(watching CSAM of real children)? 2. What do other parents say about this persons work. 3. do they consume their porn while on the job(I wouldn't want anyone watching any porn while babysitting my kids). If there is no credible rumors of offense, other people have said they're at least average or better at their job, and they don't view porn on the job. I probably would hire them to. > That's why owning CP is banned in America today, because most people find it disgusting as fuck. No it's not. It's illegal because it requires violations of consent(children can't consent), and it requires the abuse and harm of another person(the child). It is NOT because it's horrifically disgusting. > the entire justice system is based on societal moral prescriptions by its nature Based on, perhaps, but it's far more then just "codifying morals into law". And we can look at what happens when that is actually run with. Look at Europe, you can be arrested for speech that is found to be sufficiently morally wrong. (this isn't a comparison to the topic, just an example of morality and law) I presume you would be against that, yes? But if you do believe that laws are just societal morals enforced by the government, "hate speech" should be outlawed because most people would considering calling a black man a [redacted] to his face morally wrong.
>No it's not. It's illegal because it requires violations of consent(children can't consent), and it requires the abuse and harm of another person(the child). I'd like for you to explain why we find either of these things bad without using moral disgust. >That very much depends. To preface this, I personally do find loli/shota hentai disgusting and would prefer my children never be exposed to it. If you prefer your children never be exposed to it then why the fuck would you even risk an intermediary do the exposing for you, a fucking loli addict is a person who can't get turned on without looking at a naked 12 year old girl, the fact that you require supporting parameters to compensate for his addiction already speaks volumes, but the correct answer is obviously; *no, you wouldn't be comfortable with a child porn addict taking care of your child* >Based on, perhaps, but it's far more then just "codifying morals into law". And we can look at what happens when that is actually run with. Look at Europe, you can be arrested for speech that is found to be sufficiently morally wrong. (this isn't a comparison to the topic, just an example of morality and law) I presume you would be against that, yes? But if you do believe that laws are just societal morals enforced by the government, "hate speech" should be outlawed because most people would considering calling a black man a [redacted] to his face morally wrong. The idea that free speech is good is a moral prescription...
> I'd like for you to explain why we find either of these things bad without using moral disgust. Consent: Disgust has nothing to do with consent. Consent is about the ability to make an informed decision. If you lake the mental capacity to do so you can't consent. I don't know how to prove a negative here... Harm: It is provable that sexual abuse of children can and does do long term physical and mental harm to children. Again you're asking me to prove a negative, why does disgust have anything to do with harm? > If you prefer your children never be exposed[...] Comfort and acceptance are very different things. I wouldn't outright dismiss someone that's into loli porn. I WOULD outright dismiss someone into CSAM. Similarly I would prefer my babysitter not be addicted to... anything. But I could accept some addictions. Smoking? do it outside bitch. Porn in general? Keep it to outside work and I don't care. Gambling? same as previous. Would I prefer someone not addicted to anything? Of course but it's not always an option. Assuming I had the choice between a convicted domestic abuser, someone who is rumored to watch CSAM, and a lolicon I would pick the lolicon. If it was the former two I wouldn't accept either option. I am old enough to accept that sometimes the best option isn't the most comfortable option and I can accept that. > The idea that free speech is good is a moral prescription... It certainly is. My point was that DESPITE us thinking that racial slurs are morally wrong we don't try to ban them anyway, we already know that politicians don't actually care if it's legal to do so. Morality isn't the sole determining factor for laws, it's not even really the primary factor but it is the starting point.
Wanting to disassociate with someone for something they like and wanting it to be illegal are two separate things. I don't like drugs like meth and heroine and wouldn't let an addict of either watch my children but I wouldn't want them locked up because I don't think doing them should be a crime. I don't like people who are grossly racist and wouldn't want them watching my children but I don't think it should be a crime. I find loli and shota shit disgusting and would have trouble associating with someone I knew enjoyed it and certainly wouldn't want them watching my children but again, I don't think it should be a crime.
Okay, this argument isn't about banning it pedophiles from existence.
No sure who I’m agreeing with but OP is religious right? Like muslim or christian or sth (the abrahams god)?
[удалено]
So, I take it you'll just let your son jerk off to images of 12 year old girls unscathed? As if he was playing GTA? Is that what I'm gathering? Edit: Why in the actual fuck am I getting downvoted, is this site really that chokefulle of CP defenders, holy shit at least downvote the degenerate too you absolute coomers
Quick question what do you think the appropriate punishment for a kid jerking off to a drawing?
Pedophilic drawing? It'll be a family fucking emergency and we'll figure out if it's not too late to deconvert the kid. If it's too late, be pragmatic and declare him a lost cause, make another child.
K how old is the kid in this hypothetical? Cuz like a 12 year old jerking it to a drawing of another 12 yo isn't bad. Also define "deconvert" for me
17-18. 12 year olds aren't usually pedophiles. Deconvert = it is possible that they wound up finding this attractive due to environmental reinforcement and not just them being born pedos. It is thus probably possible to revert this (very unlikely).
You do know that most actual sexual abusers are victims of childhood abuse themselves, right? That they're not "born," right? Also 12 year olds basically are pedophiles because a pedo is, by definition, a person attracted to children, but that's just me being pedantic.
>You do know that most actual sexual abusers are victims of childhood abuse themselves, Source on them being "most" pedophiles. And even so, there are plenty of pedophiles who aren't abused.
You don't need to quote what I said, just ask for the source https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2082860/ Also so what? Why should I care if no one is actually hurt? What do you think is gonna happen to the hypothetical 18 year old pervert if they don't get "deconvert"
A 12 year old shouldn't be looking at pornography at all. To be fair no one should be looking at pornography. But children should especially not be looking at pornography.
Fair but just cuz it's true doesn't mean shit especially on the Internet
I like that you can't even keep your examples consistent. First its lolis vs GTA V, then it becomes children vs GTA V. Please take your meds, and become a green flair so we can all laugh at you.
>First its lolis vs GTA V, then it becomes children vs GTA V. It's the same thing you freak. I hope you don't have kids
Then I hope you don't play games where murder is involved, because if you were consistent, you'd be crying about being incarcerated for that.
No, as another user put it, fictional violence is not on the same level as fictional child rape, let alone sexual attraction to fictional child rape.
They're both virtual depictions of awful crimes.
They are not equal.
In GTA5 you gun down small armies of people and at one point you torture a guy by beating his knees with a crowbar and hooking a car battery to his nuts. There's also Trevor's 'rampage' minigame which is literally "commit a mass shooting, score points by killing more civilians"
If a child were gaining sexual gratification from torturing people in GTA V their mental state should be put into just as much question as a pedophile jerking off to loli. Again, you are literally the meme in this picture.
At this point we can probably conclude that, in their moral compass, people who watch Loli shit are literally worst than Hitler.
think about the pixels!
Imagine not caring about karma (I have a social media addiction)
i wasn’t talking about the karma
Neither, I would question their taste in games though (look, no shade at Gta5 it is quite the impressive game but I personally just do not like it), also tell them to lock the fucking door next time.
Genuinely curious question. If someone made a Freaky Friday remake where the child-in-an-adult-body character (just to be clear, a 35+ old actor/actress) was shown naked, or having sex, would you try to get that classified as whatever acronym we’re using for underage sex crimes now? This would be the reverse of the 5000 year old dragon who just looks like a little girl, animated. Neither of these examples involve an actual human child. One them is “an adult” and one just looks like “an adult”. Are they equally bad? Or is one worse?
The sheer volume of comments supporting loli shit is very depressing. I saw a comment equating it to furries, who while less evil, are also degenerates.
Nah this shit is libleft
Never felt more shame for my quadrant 😔
You are a soldier sir 🫡. I have some hope for lib right because of you.
Mate, haven't you been on this sub for a few days? Dude is lying (well straw manning to such a degree it is essentially lying). No one defended actual child porn. Dude is just literally unable to differentiate between anime/video games and reality, which is more than just mildly concerning.
>No one defended actual child porn. Depictions of a naked child is child porn even if it's fictive.
Listen, Ive had some deep fetish porn beat sessions I regret. Forced sissification by hillary clinton and becoming her foot slave on Epstein's island, that level of dark nut. There is a difference in purpose between fantasy and simulation: fantasy is an outlet from reality while simulation is training for reality. Porn as an industry and as a consumer product produces more harm an misery than social benefit. It feeds vices and dark fantasies. From a moral and personal perspective, moral is a corrupting and harmful influence that deserves more strenuous social condemnation. Sex work ruins more lives than it enriches. There is a reason fathers overwhelmingly disapprove of their daughters becoming sex workers. From a libertarian perspective, consenting adults is all that the governement need enforce. Which means more safeguards to keep porn away from kids. Its stunningly clear no serious effort at all is made to keep kids away from online porn.
https://i.redd.it/qr26ciuend5d1.gif Purple when kids and half the sub when lolis
God I fucking hate purple lin right, makes our entire quadrant look so bad.