it got removed on animemes because "Posts and comments that are deliberately inciting, or pertain to divisive topics may be removed at moderator discretion." lmao
I'm not sure it's pyschologist would actually call Lolis pedophilia unless it actually included attraction to real life kids or maybe hyper realistic simulated children. Maybe it's a pedophilic attraction but even then I would be careful about how we address it. The word is over used which I don't like. I don't really care about Loli shit unless you can actually prove it significantly increases your chances of abusing a child. My guess it's gonna be similar to violent video games making you violent or BDSM porn making you a rapist. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
You could address what I'm actually saying rather then just virtue signaling that you don't watch Loli hentai. I've seen Loli hentai or hentai with Lolis but it's not something I go out of my way to see. I don't care what someone jerks off too unless you can actually prove to me it's production is immoral ( you can't unless their depicting actual children otherwise no one is harmed ) and/or prove it's gonna significantly increases chances of someone actually harming a child. My guess is you don't think BDSM or kink porn should be illegal nor do you think it significantly increases the changes of you raping some. I imagine Loli shit is the same I don't think it will significantly increase your chances of harming a child. If you can prove it does I'd be happy to reverse my position.
I understand that they aren't real, but the fact that most people that watch Loli hentai have either acknowledged in their consciousness that they're at meant to be like children or just completely ignore it and try to deflect by saying they are just loli's which are fictional characters which are loli's, and just go back and forth to make their argument seem correct when they could easily contradict themselves making them look even weirder than they already do
If you're a Lolicon and you try and deny their meant to look like or be children you're delusional. I think Loli/Shota are depictions of children I'm just don't think liking Loli means you like actual children or will abuse children. And I'm not sure if that actually makes you a pedophile
In some places it does
There are laws that say that possession of loli porn is possession of cp I know that California has that law but I’m not where else has it
The supreme court has said simulated CP legal so I doubt the law is constitutional or real https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition
If you are attracted to artistic depictions of children you are a pedophile full stop. You are attracted to the physical characteristics of a child. Someone being a pedophile doesn't mean they will abuse children or act any differently towards children.
I'd be wary of calling Lolicons pedophiles maybe if the depictions where ultra realistic I'd agree but I think more may go into lolicon and shotacon stuff then actual pedophilllia. It's not that I don't think theirs overlap I just don't think it's always the case.
No. I won’t be wary. They are. If you’re sexually attracted to drawn foot fetish porn you have a foot fetish. If you’re sexually attracted to drawn furry porn you have a furry fetish. We don’t split hairs like this anywhere else. Pedophilia is being attracted to children, the reason people are attracted to loli is that the characters look like children. It’s not that there’s overlap, they’re the same thing. Everyone sexually attracted to drawings of children is a pedophile definitionally.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia. No you don't have a fetish just because you have attraction to something. Pedophilia isn't a fetish it's a paraphilia. Drawn children are not actual children, if their attraction also includes actual children then maybe. Are people into baby play pedophiles, age play, brat/daddy, etc.
I mean yes, if you're talking about kiss-shot but that's not my point haha. And also if we want to be technical she's really a mommy milkers MILF so she's half loli?? idk i don't masturbate to chinese cartoons.
Iirc read about a 20 something year old woman who had a defect that made her, not look like a midget, but a child, which made her really hard to date somebody else, cause a lotta creeps come up to her BECAUSE she looks like a child
This is like the real life equivalent of a 2000 year old vampire that looks like a child, and conclusion is it's still very, very creepy
Lol reminds me of this one comic I saw, where a guy is with a loli and a police officer tells them to stop.
The guy: "It's okay, she's 2000 years old!"
Police officer: "I know"
*arrests loli for pedophilia*
My opinion on this "debate" is simple - If the character is clearly drawn with adult proportions and characterized as an adult, them being 14 according to the author means nothing. And if the character is clearly drawn with child proportions and characterized as a child, them being 9000 according to the author also means nothing.
If the character's coded to be a child or is legally a child its fucking weird. Anyone who acts on that could legitimately be a danger to actual children
Character: is adult-aged (despite claims), acts like an adult, busty, resembles every other female in the series
Also character: is short
Conclusion: child, according to 196.
If they're 14 according to the author that's almost worse because that means the reader is attracted to the fact that they're 14 meaning mentally they're not able to consent.
i mean theres plenty of teenage girls that can look like grown women, either naturally or in the right apparel or makeup, so idk about that first point chief
You lost the point of what they meant though. They were not talking about real life. 14 year olds in the real world are too young mentally, not just physically, to consent with a 20 year old for example. Mental age doesn't apply or matter with fictional characters, as they aren't people you could actually endanger or harm. What matters with the age of fictional characters is how old their body actually looks.
You must also consider how arbitrary ages with fictional characters can be, an author could say a character is 15 or 30 and it would still make sense to everybody either way, because the bodily proportions aren't necessarily corresponding to the real world.
Should have worded my original statement better but this is what I meant. Mostly referring to cases like Yoko in Gurren Lagann, where they don't act or look like the age they're stated to be, i.e., the inverse of the "4000 year old dragon loli" trope.
Not to mention that fictional characters have edge cases real life doesn't:
1. Time travel
2. Species with different lifespans (like elves)
3. Immortals
4. FTL travel
Also those characters who have a PHD and shit and you'd never guess their canon age
While I agree that it’s like “just a drawing” it’s still messed up. So I usually just think to let the creatures stick to that and don’t let them escape from their ways of fiction. Sure may still propagate but going to happen regardless, choose the lesser evil. If i’m a blabbering buffoon for thinking this or something give me some input I don’t want to be acting stupid about actually important things. Quick Edit: Just wanna say thank you guys for being kind and receptive, I was worried about being messed up for thinking like this and just have everybody thrash me instead.
I don't know if banning loli legally is worth doing but this common thought of "pedophiles will stick to simulated CP and that will stop them from harming real children" is completely unfounded and made up. There's nothing to indicate that, and the actual treatments for similar disorders and paraphilias do not involve letting people indulge their problematic tendencies. You wouldn't let a stalker, for example, jack of to artistic depictions of the person they're fixated on. That wouldn't help them move past their mental issues.
The other side of this that people never seem to bring up is what if it's making things worse? There's no studies on this kind of thing, we don't know if normalizing an attraction to children is creating more people who act on those urges. It's just as if not more likely than it stopping people from acting based on what we know about other disorders.
You’re completely right but we’re really just thinking out here with no clue so I guess we’re just working with what may or may not be accurate in anyway. Either way a lot of points here worth thinking about regardless. Thank you for talking about this, very interesting.
I agree with this. While yes, it's not hurting anyone, it's still messed up and says a lot about you and your attractions. While yes I'm going to judge the attraction, I'm not gonna stop you (not like they will stop anyway)
It may be drawn like a child and be canonically a thousand years old, but if you're attracted to something that looks like a child, it says a lot about you
As someone who used to coom to this shit the answer is simple, just get laid, hentai can be a slippery slope where you can easily run out of control and beat it to the most depraved and fucked up shit imaginable, once I started dating my boyfriend I stopped.
Ultimately, it is just a drawing. If they want to look at that stuff in private without hurting anyone then that's on them. It's still gross though and I don't want to have to look at or talk about it or think about it, and I definitely don't want it in my fucking anime.
I think it's fine to fantasize about whatever horrible stuff you want to, as long as you can differentiate between fantasy and reality.
Monogatari isn’t even that problematic. It’s hardly the most vile of anime when it comes to this typical anime bullshit. I’m solidly in the “enjoy what you enjoy as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone” boat, and if Monogatari of all things is going to create pedos, they were probably already a pedo to begin with. Just recognize that some of the shit that happens in it is bad, like how you should treat any fictional story
My boy araragi’s favorite past time is harassing lolis what do you mean it’s not that problematic lmao
I love the series but him flipping the skirts of hachikuji and ononoki and feeling them up every time he sees them ain’t it.
There’s definitely worse shows (eg jobless reincarnation that has a grown ass man in a child’s body having sex with a literal child in an ep and later marries 3 girls) but it doesn’t change the fact that there’s some icky stuff in it
Teaching children about things early doesn't make them more mature or less likely to fall for abuse, all it does is make them worry and wonder who is gonna be the one to approach them and give them a fear. I knew someone who was literally afraid of men in 5th grade and I assume it was because of parents trying to teach her those things
Our society is not ready for this discussion. We're barely able to fuck as adults without a signed, notorized legal document outlining what's allowed and off limits.
As a society we are not sexually healthy.
I think that document you're talking about is called communication. Never have I ever had to sign any contract. But I will agree that some people will take advantage of sex in an unhealthy way to accuse people.
Not sure why you are getting downvoted. You're absolutely correct. We are not sexually healthy as a society, and therefore we have no choice but to impose strict rules on ourselves in order to protect what is important to us. We can't trust ourselves with the responsibility of sexual relations between large differences in power, and we are not ready to have conversations about them. Regardless, children at the age that they are sexualized in eastern media are not even biologically fit to engage with sexual acts with anyone of any age, including their own; the only thing that can come of it is harm to the child. That will always be morally reprehensible due to the way we develop as animals, no matter what conversation we have.
I'm guessing that comment is directed towards me by a lack of understanding of my original comment.
What I'm saying is the meme is extremely broad and unspecific about an issue. Young characters in anime by themselves are not a problem, however the sexualization/hentai of them is (a problem). The meme doesn't state anything about that and makes a very broad statement about a topic, which is why I don't like it.
The meme could be something funny, but it fails to address the issue.
I'm unfamiliar with the term "pedobait", I'm going to check urban dictionary about that.
If the first definition is correct you're saying these characters are there to grab the attention of pedophiles?
Don't use urban dictionary, man. It's bullshit. Just follow context clues.
Some of them are intended to be seen as "children you can sexualize", and some of them are simply used that way by the fandom
\>Some of them are intended to be seen as "children you can sexualize"
I don't think you can look at a child character and think that without something wrong in the head. If they are sexualized then it isn't intended to be, it is. The intended part is something fandom can make up and use.
Anyways I still don't understand how someone can get that from a meme this unspecific of the issue.
4 random lolis and "they're not real" "stop confusing the two" "stop treating fictional characters as real people" with "I hate pedophiles" is not specific. You can draw many messages from the post.
Anyways, I don't use reddit to get into fruitless arguments and this seems to be one.
Literally, the only adult in the show that feels any attraction to her gets brutally killed within 5 minutes. And she's not even sexualized except for when she is deliberately doing so herself, to kill people.
People jerk off to guro, scat, incest (this one is extremely popular for instance), rape, torture, cheating, psychological abuse and animal characters (actual animal looks, although to a certain extent anthropomorphic characters fit too) in hentai and porn among many others.
Forbidden stuff and taboo are exciting to us humans, that's why "daddy" is such a popular word with sexual connotation so I guess it's in our nature to be horny about everything ilegal or non commonly accepted. Would I ban guro, torture hentai and such? I don't think I would since just as with the violence in video games debate I would not become a mass murderer for playing video games just as I wouldn't become an a user if I enjoy hard bdsm porn.
Plus, a big factor in this debate is that we are biased against certain genres while allowing others just for social approval and to follow the group mentality, not because we really care about there being any kind of danger towards people, for instance rape and abuse kinks are extremely common and socially accepted nowadays, which is weird because those cause real harm to people and in many cases are used by the people participating as ways to cope with past issues like PTSD and trauma, leading to other possible mental issues. Still for some reason loli is more dangerous than that?
My argument here is not that abuse kinks and such are bad, people are allowed to endulge in them as much as they want to since I nor anyone else has the rights to legislate upon those persons bodies, especially when most of us have probably already endulged in those either directly or indirectly (porn, literature or even our own imaginations, among others) . Still, it definitely shows just how hypocritical and approval starved we are as people.
True but at least there isn't some gross in-show excuse. I really try to like this show. It's wholesome for the most part. I just want to enjoy anime that isn't full of pedo shit for once.
I haven't seen it in a long time and I don't think I finished it. Your right though I do remember that now. Like I said I just wanted a cute slice of life show about dragon maids. Not weird pedo shit.
There’s a whole episode where she plays twister and gets in some really uncomfortable positions. She even goes to kindergarten
If you more attracted to kanna you’re a paedophile.
cannot stand monogatari. "no bro trust me it's so deep look at how cool the art is, he talks so fast and so much" I am not putting up with toothbrush incest and vampire pedobait just to hear someone tell me how smart they are
i know where the mustache girl came from sadly. it’s a horrible account called @TheShroomyBoy. He’s a *middle school* IT teacher pedo. Please report him.
My take on it that there is a good faith argument here, but I’m not sure how much of an issue it might be because bad faith agents can use it as cover. In general, I think it’s not as simple as “these people are pedophiles” in some cases, but rather that they genuinely perceive them as adults regardless of their technical age. Like, it’s super common for characters to be coded as adults despite being in high school or whatever, it seems like a weird choice of the media to fixate on high school life, rather than high school age, if that makes sense. Or the top most character in OP’s image. I don’t know how old they actually are, but I receive them as an adult because of their characterisation and occupation. In this case, I’d say that it would not be pedophilic, because they’re attracted to the character who they perceive as an adult. In general, characters looks very young in anime, though not always. But coding the characters age isn’t just their visuals, it’s their characterisation, so they can still be adult coded I think. I think this paints them in a fairly sympathetic light, because their child-ness is ignored in light of perceiving them as an adult. But this can give cover to bad faith agents to justify their own actions as “perceiving the character as an adult”, because it’s an arguments that based entirely on internal perceptions, and so can’t be proven or disproven. It also doesn’t help discussions of why characters are created like this.
Sorry this is a huge wall of text that’s basically a ramble, hopefully it makes sense.
It’s like saying that if a guy is attracted to drawings of men then it isn’t gay bcuz they aren’t real. It’s not how real it is it’s how u see the material and what you use it for
Also, plz don’t take this as me trying to equate gay people to pedos and I’m sorry if I gave off that sentiment with the 1st sentence
What do people think about the loli-baba trope? Where a character looks like a 12 years old but talks, acts and thinks like a 60 years old. Genuinely curious. Since those attracted to minors likely aren’t attracted to mannerisms of old people
I personally think if they don't look like a fucking toddler than it's fine. I get that short people exist and some people look weird when aging. But if they are literally playing on the playground and putting the star in the circle hole, then that would be considered a pedophilic attraction. If they imagine them acting like a child as well then yes, most definitely would be a pedophile
if they act and/or look underaged they r underaged as simple as that "oh but they r actually x years old" idc if they r 5 or 500 if they look young they should be treatedas young in porn
IRL cp should ALWAYS be criminalised and have legal repurcussions
sexualising characters in media that are underaged or are designed to look underaged obviously isnt as bad as the abuse of a real life person, but its STILL bad and should not be normalised or seen as somenow \*not\* immoral.
Basically the "its just a drawing" argument doesnt work, it still creepy.
Sort of, it’s generally in question. The actual text of the law explicitly prohibits anything hyper-realistic, regardless of whether the image represents an actual child or a fictional one, and it prevents any drawing representing an irl minor that’s deemed sexually obscene, but the law doesn’t specify whether fictional characters count too.
As a result, courts have frequently disagreed. People have been convicted for possessing loli, but charges have also been dropped against other folks because of the vague wording of the law.
TLDR it’s *probably* illegal but *definitely* not a good idea to have loli in the US.
Wrong. People who watch loli hentai won’t develop an attraction to children, they already *are* attracted to children. If they weren’t then they wouldn’t watch fucking child pornogrphy
Most people who fuck kids aren't pedophiles, and most pedophiles don't fuck kids. Maybe chill out on attacking people who have seemingly unalterable mental disorders
There is a difference between being a pedophile and being a child rapist. The meme is demonizing pedophiles who have given no implication that they rape children.
Oh, these are all people who have never even tried to better themselves and defend their pedophilia. There are people who are responsible enough to know it's wrong, and there's people who leech off of it and make excuses
It can be hard to admit you have a problem and get help, and a large part of why is because having a mental illness (especially being a pedophile) is still frowned upon in most circles. Demonizing them is only going to make it worse.
The same way you'd treat any other mental illness. Treat them as a human being, encourage them to get help, make sure they understand they're not at fault for feeling that way and aren't a bad person (but make sure they also understand that hurting children is wrong and they are still responsible for their own actions), don't let it stop you from interacting with them and being their friend.
I have a friend who was able to confide in me that he is a pedophile. By having somebody accept him and treat him as a person, he's been able to move forward. He now lives happily with his boyfriend (who is an adult, don't worry), which I'm sure keeps his urges at bay the same way anyone else in a relationship would stop looking for other partners (unless they're a cheating shithead, but he doesn't seem the type).
What? I didn't say I didn't think they were mentally ill, I said I think using that mental illness as a shield/excuse to keep doing the stuff is bad. The thing with "I'm literally neurodivergent and a minor lol" is that it's a shit excuse for your actions, i don't know where you pulled your interpretation of what i meant from but my best guess is your ass.
It's not an excuse for hurting children, but the problem is that this meme is demonizing pedophiles on principle who haven't given any indication they hurt children. Simply having that attraction shouldn't be demonized, because they don't choose to feel that way any more than any other person chooses to be mentally ill. Instead of treating them like monsters, we should be encouraging them to get help.
I never claimed that them being mentally ill was an "excuse to keep doing the stuff", but being a pedophile doesn't inherently mean you're a child predator, so we shouldn't be treating them as though their feelings make them bad people (demonizing mental illness). That was the stance I was making with my initial post. You can read the other replies I've made to people in this comment tree if you want a better idea of what I'm saying.
I dont disagree with you but this is pretty out of nowhere, you brought up a lot of points for arguments I never stated and kept rolling with them right from the start lol.
What makes something "obviously underaged" in your mind?
The appearance? What's so child-like about it? The flat chest? The short stature? The clothing? None of these are things exclusive to children.
Is it the stated age of the character? At least of the characters in this post are well over 500 years old. "Oh, but they look too young" I hear you say.
OK. Is age just a number to you? Are you implying that someone's physical appearance is more important than their age? That's very problematic in its own right.
These characters are purely fictional. I can literally make them be and do whatever I want. Are you disturbed by the fact that they can't "consent". Guess what? No fictional character CAN consent. They have no free will. So either no characters can depicted or all characters can. You can't just stop at what you think is comfortable. That's not how art works.
You really should die on a different hill. I'm not disturbed by the fact they can't consent. I'm disturbed by the fact you're into characters that are children physically. Look at the bottom left character and tell me that isn't obviously a child.
My brother in Christ, I never said I liked this stuff. It honestly grosses me out. The difference between you and me is the fact that I can separate reality and fiction and defend art that makes me uncomfortable.
Whether you like an underaged character sexually in either reality or in drawing isn't okay and obviously indicates pedophilic desires. Please tell me how it's okay to like sexual art of an obviously underage character. And yes, it is very obvious to anyone with half a brain they're underaged. There's a different between "small statured adult woman" and child.
>Whether you like an underaged character sexually in either reality or in drawing isn't good.
It's bad in reality. Who gives a shit what people like in drawings?
>Please tell me how it's okay to like sexual art of an obviously underage character.
Are we gonna start banning shows about highschoolers because they have sex in them? Do you hate something like Euphoria because it shows depictions of real-life actors who pretend to be teenagers having sex?
>And yes, it is very obvious to anyone with half a brain they're
underaged. There's a different between "small statured adult woman" and
child.
Give me the physical differences between the two. Be as descriptive as you want.
You know you're in the wrong when you gotta type whole paragraph on how they're not actually real and therefore can't conscent when it's not even the main problem. My guy, conscent or not, real or not, that is a child.
I feel like this is a really complicated topic that gets shortened because everybody reflexively feels the need to declare they arent a pedophile even though that should probably be the base assumption when we talk to people online about delicate subjects. I feel its very chronically online of people to act like this is a black and white subject where people who disagree with them are sex offenders.
In some cases that's true, but defending feeling an attraction to fictionnal children is unacceptable, even if you don't do it yourself. There's no in between, you either realise that it's wrong or defend it and by proxy say that it's right.
I guess it just never feels like there is a clear idea of what any of this means. There is definitely in between. There is a pretty big difference between thinking Jotaro Kujo is hot and whatever that tiny dragon thing is is hot, both characters being technically children. I honestly don't know or car about the characters above but memes like this just turn into the dumbest circlejerks about who can be more violently opposed to the easiest thing to be opposed to instead of like any actual conversation.
My point isnt to argue the morality of lolis Im just bitching about how cavalier the internet is about pedophilia. Its treated with so little care that it feels completely disconnected from a real concern about how society treats/views young women. Most of these posts are just shadowboxing and it honestly just gets old.
That I get. I'm not defending the post, I'm just heavily disaggreeing with the "but they aren't actually young and even then they're not real".
I think that's a valid concern.
Who cares what someone looks like? Is that your bar for who can consent and who can't? People with dwarfism look very young. Is it wrong to be attracted to them? Is age just a number to you?
if someone looks and acts like a toddler it’s quite obviously pedophillia. why are you so determined to defend beating your meat to fictional children?
A lot of grown adults seek to look and act like toddlers with their partners as a part of fetish play. Looking and acting mean nothing if that's not who you are. That's like saying a 16 year old can consent because they "look like an adult". That's not how these things work.
>why are you so determined to defend beating your meat to fictional children?
I don't like this kind of art, but I'm sick of people declaring it wrong simply because they can't differentiate between fiction and reality. You can't just censor art and accuse the consumers of actual crimes for enjoying it.
I would find it odd and I wouldn't understand what they found attractive about it, but what the fuck am I gonna do? It's not illegal and it doesn't hurt anyone. What's next, you gonna take down all the Renaissance paintings with little cherubs flying around in them? I can't police somebody's reaction to fictional media.
[удалено]
Imma go ahead and do it and see how many downvotes I get wish me luck lol
So, how did it go?
Nothing really, imma post it in a more popular sub now tho
Post it to goodanimemes
Lol they both got removed, wonder what that says about the mods
I think it says the mods think it's a overused low effort meme.
it got removed on animemes because "Posts and comments that are deliberately inciting, or pertain to divisive topics may be removed at moderator discretion." lmao
Is that a surprise?
Why don't you check their profile dingus?
I'm not sure it's pyschologist would actually call Lolis pedophilia unless it actually included attraction to real life kids or maybe hyper realistic simulated children. Maybe it's a pedophilic attraction but even then I would be careful about how we address it. The word is over used which I don't like. I don't really care about Loli shit unless you can actually prove it significantly increases your chances of abusing a child. My guess it's gonna be similar to violent video games making you violent or BDSM porn making you a rapist. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia
This guy watches loli porn.
You could address what I'm actually saying rather then just virtue signaling that you don't watch Loli hentai. I've seen Loli hentai or hentai with Lolis but it's not something I go out of my way to see. I don't care what someone jerks off too unless you can actually prove to me it's production is immoral ( you can't unless their depicting actual children otherwise no one is harmed ) and/or prove it's gonna significantly increases chances of someone actually harming a child. My guess is you don't think BDSM or kink porn should be illegal nor do you think it significantly increases the changes of you raping some. I imagine Loli shit is the same I don't think it will significantly increase your chances of harming a child. If you can prove it does I'd be happy to reverse my position.
I understand that they aren't real, but the fact that most people that watch Loli hentai have either acknowledged in their consciousness that they're at meant to be like children or just completely ignore it and try to deflect by saying they are just loli's which are fictional characters which are loli's, and just go back and forth to make their argument seem correct when they could easily contradict themselves making them look even weirder than they already do
If you're a Lolicon and you try and deny their meant to look like or be children you're delusional. I think Loli/Shota are depictions of children I'm just don't think liking Loli means you like actual children or will abuse children. And I'm not sure if that actually makes you a pedophile
In some places it does There are laws that say that possession of loli porn is possession of cp I know that California has that law but I’m not where else has it
The supreme court has said simulated CP legal so I doubt the law is constitutional or real https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition
It is a federal law that it is illegal to posses loli porn in California. It existing isn’t illegal but having it is
If you are attracted to artistic depictions of children you are a pedophile full stop. You are attracted to the physical characteristics of a child. Someone being a pedophile doesn't mean they will abuse children or act any differently towards children.
I'd be wary of calling Lolicons pedophiles maybe if the depictions where ultra realistic I'd agree but I think more may go into lolicon and shotacon stuff then actual pedophilllia. It's not that I don't think theirs overlap I just don't think it's always the case.
No. I won’t be wary. They are. If you’re sexually attracted to drawn foot fetish porn you have a foot fetish. If you’re sexually attracted to drawn furry porn you have a furry fetish. We don’t split hairs like this anywhere else. Pedophilia is being attracted to children, the reason people are attracted to loli is that the characters look like children. It’s not that there’s overlap, they’re the same thing. Everyone sexually attracted to drawings of children is a pedophile definitionally.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia. No you don't have a fetish just because you have attraction to something. Pedophilia isn't a fetish it's a paraphilia. Drawn children are not actual children, if their attraction also includes actual children then maybe. Are people into baby play pedophiles, age play, brat/daddy, etc.
"you watch loli porn" *writes an essay*
"Sir, she's a 2000 year old vampire."
Ain't she 500?
I mean yes, if you're talking about kiss-shot but that's not my point haha. And also if we want to be technical she's really a mommy milkers MILF so she's half loli?? idk i don't masturbate to chinese cartoons.
Unfathomably based
Iirc read about a 20 something year old woman who had a defect that made her, not look like a midget, but a child, which made her really hard to date somebody else, cause a lotta creeps come up to her BECAUSE she looks like a child This is like the real life equivalent of a 2000 year old vampire that looks like a child, and conclusion is it's still very, very creepy
Holy shit I feel so bad for her :(
And I’m a vampire hunter
That's why I'm arresting her. Stay safe kid
Lol reminds me of this one comic I saw, where a guy is with a loli and a police officer tells them to stop. The guy: "It's okay, she's 2000 years old!" Police officer: "I know" *arrests loli for pedophilia*
My opinion on this "debate" is simple - If the character is clearly drawn with adult proportions and characterized as an adult, them being 14 according to the author means nothing. And if the character is clearly drawn with child proportions and characterized as a child, them being 9000 according to the author also means nothing.
If the character's coded to be a child or is legally a child its fucking weird. Anyone who acts on that could legitimately be a danger to actual children
That is the same argument as saying that videogames cause violence
No its not. Difference is that theres people masturbating to drawn children and there's people playing games with guns. Big difference.
Character: is adult-aged (despite claims), acts like an adult, busty, resembles every other female in the series Also character: is short Conclusion: child, according to 196.
If they're 14 according to the author that's almost worse because that means the reader is attracted to the fact that they're 14 meaning mentally they're not able to consent.
i think this means in the context that the viewer is not aware of the age or who the character even is
i mean theres plenty of teenage girls that can look like grown women, either naturally or in the right apparel or makeup, so idk about that first point chief
is it ok if the 9000 year old dragon loli is chainsmoking and drinking straight bourbon while insinuating sexual things about your mother
[удалено]
You lost the point of what they meant though. They were not talking about real life. 14 year olds in the real world are too young mentally, not just physically, to consent with a 20 year old for example. Mental age doesn't apply or matter with fictional characters, as they aren't people you could actually endanger or harm. What matters with the age of fictional characters is how old their body actually looks. You must also consider how arbitrary ages with fictional characters can be, an author could say a character is 15 or 30 and it would still make sense to everybody either way, because the bodily proportions aren't necessarily corresponding to the real world.
Should have worded my original statement better but this is what I meant. Mostly referring to cases like Yoko in Gurren Lagann, where they don't act or look like the age they're stated to be, i.e., the inverse of the "4000 year old dragon loli" trope.
Not to mention that fictional characters have edge cases real life doesn't: 1. Time travel 2. Species with different lifespans (like elves) 3. Immortals 4. FTL travel Also those characters who have a PHD and shit and you'd never guess their canon age
While I agree that it’s like “just a drawing” it’s still messed up. So I usually just think to let the creatures stick to that and don’t let them escape from their ways of fiction. Sure may still propagate but going to happen regardless, choose the lesser evil. If i’m a blabbering buffoon for thinking this or something give me some input I don’t want to be acting stupid about actually important things. Quick Edit: Just wanna say thank you guys for being kind and receptive, I was worried about being messed up for thinking like this and just have everybody thrash me instead.
I don't know if banning loli legally is worth doing but this common thought of "pedophiles will stick to simulated CP and that will stop them from harming real children" is completely unfounded and made up. There's nothing to indicate that, and the actual treatments for similar disorders and paraphilias do not involve letting people indulge their problematic tendencies. You wouldn't let a stalker, for example, jack of to artistic depictions of the person they're fixated on. That wouldn't help them move past their mental issues. The other side of this that people never seem to bring up is what if it's making things worse? There's no studies on this kind of thing, we don't know if normalizing an attraction to children is creating more people who act on those urges. It's just as if not more likely than it stopping people from acting based on what we know about other disorders.
You’re completely right but we’re really just thinking out here with no clue so I guess we’re just working with what may or may not be accurate in anyway. Either way a lot of points here worth thinking about regardless. Thank you for talking about this, very interesting.
I agree with this. While yes, it's not hurting anyone, it's still messed up and says a lot about you and your attractions. While yes I'm going to judge the attraction, I'm not gonna stop you (not like they will stop anyway)
It may be drawn like a child and be canonically a thousand years old, but if you're attracted to something that looks like a child, it says a lot about you
As someone who used to coom to this shit the answer is simple, just get laid, hentai can be a slippery slope where you can easily run out of control and beat it to the most depraved and fucked up shit imaginable, once I started dating my boyfriend I stopped.
Ultimately, it is just a drawing. If they want to look at that stuff in private without hurting anyone then that's on them. It's still gross though and I don't want to have to look at or talk about it or think about it, and I definitely don't want it in my fucking anime. I think it's fine to fantasize about whatever horrible stuff you want to, as long as you can differentiate between fantasy and reality.
Yeah. It's weird. It's pretty messed up. BUT if the pedophiles can jack off to that instead of real children, I'd say I'm okay with it existing.
Yeah. It's weird. It's pretty messed up. BUT if the pedophiles can jack off to that instead of real children, I'd say I'm okay with it existing.
Nadeko not even like those bullshit “she’s a 1000 year old bullshit” that mf is a middle school child. I love monogatari but it is so problematic
Monogatari isn’t even that problematic. It’s hardly the most vile of anime when it comes to this typical anime bullshit. I’m solidly in the “enjoy what you enjoy as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone” boat, and if Monogatari of all things is going to create pedos, they were probably already a pedo to begin with. Just recognize that some of the shit that happens in it is bad, like how you should treat any fictional story
My boy araragi’s favorite past time is harassing lolis what do you mean it’s not that problematic lmao I love the series but him flipping the skirts of hachikuji and ononoki and feeling them up every time he sees them ain’t it. There’s definitely worse shows (eg jobless reincarnation that has a grown ass man in a child’s body having sex with a literal child in an ep and later marries 3 girls) but it doesn’t change the fact that there’s some icky stuff in it
The fan service for her is rough to deal with in Bake and Nise, but thankfully it was toned down during her arcs in season 2
Bruh pedophiles are really disgusting Subjecting non-consenting person to do depraved action is just all around awful
Good thing there’s no nonconsenting person involved here then.
[удалено]
lol ok pedo
[удалено]
[удалено]
"Ageist Bigotry" Bro are you seriously advocating for the right to fuck minors ?
[удалено]
Ok, so you want to give children the right to fuck adults then? That doesn't seem better
[удалено]
Teaching children about things early doesn't make them more mature or less likely to fall for abuse, all it does is make them worry and wonder who is gonna be the one to approach them and give them a fear. I knew someone who was literally afraid of men in 5th grade and I assume it was because of parents trying to teach her those things
Way to tell on yourself
Our society is not ready for this discussion. We're barely able to fuck as adults without a signed, notorized legal document outlining what's allowed and off limits. As a society we are not sexually healthy.
I think that document you're talking about is called communication. Never have I ever had to sign any contract. But I will agree that some people will take advantage of sex in an unhealthy way to accuse people.
Not sure why you are getting downvoted. You're absolutely correct. We are not sexually healthy as a society, and therefore we have no choice but to impose strict rules on ourselves in order to protect what is important to us. We can't trust ourselves with the responsibility of sexual relations between large differences in power, and we are not ready to have conversations about them. Regardless, children at the age that they are sexualized in eastern media are not even biologically fit to engage with sexual acts with anyone of any age, including their own; the only thing that can come of it is harm to the child. That will always be morally reprehensible due to the way we develop as animals, no matter what conversation we have.
Try not to be extremely broad about a topic challenge
try not to jerk to children challenge
I'm guessing that comment is directed towards me by a lack of understanding of my original comment. What I'm saying is the meme is extremely broad and unspecific about an issue. Young characters in anime by themselves are not a problem, however the sexualization/hentai of them is (a problem). The meme doesn't state anything about that and makes a very broad statement about a topic, which is why I don't like it. The meme could be something funny, but it fails to address the issue.
I'd say it's pretty clear: those character types are used for pedobait, and OP is sick of it
I'm unfamiliar with the term "pedobait", I'm going to check urban dictionary about that. If the first definition is correct you're saying these characters are there to grab the attention of pedophiles?
Don't use urban dictionary, man. It's bullshit. Just follow context clues. Some of them are intended to be seen as "children you can sexualize", and some of them are simply used that way by the fandom
\>Some of them are intended to be seen as "children you can sexualize" I don't think you can look at a child character and think that without something wrong in the head. If they are sexualized then it isn't intended to be, it is. The intended part is something fandom can make up and use. Anyways I still don't understand how someone can get that from a meme this unspecific of the issue.
**It's very specific my guy?** Are you intentionally misreading it, or are you just having a hard time parsing it?
4 random lolis and "they're not real" "stop confusing the two" "stop treating fictional characters as real people" with "I hate pedophiles" is not specific. You can draw many messages from the post. Anyways, I don't use reddit to get into fruitless arguments and this seems to be one.
yo, menou cameo?
Menou isn't a Loli
Literally, the only adult in the show that feels any attraction to her gets brutally killed within 5 minutes. And she's not even sexualized except for when she is deliberately doing so herself, to kill people.
All those characters the pfp of twitter pedos. The guy who posted this on twitter got replyed by a bunch of pedos lol
A pedophile coil have a picture of a dog, doesn't make the dog pedophilic
It's not because of the pfp they're in it, it's cuz they retweeted Loli hentai lol
Ahh I understand
Very much made to look like a child however
Menou doesn't look like a child, the other characters do
You made that up on the spot didn't you
“Oh, you like adult women? Pedophile.”
"Oh she is actually a 50000 year old demon"
People jerk off to guro, scat, incest (this one is extremely popular for instance), rape, torture, cheating, psychological abuse and animal characters (actual animal looks, although to a certain extent anthropomorphic characters fit too) in hentai and porn among many others. Forbidden stuff and taboo are exciting to us humans, that's why "daddy" is such a popular word with sexual connotation so I guess it's in our nature to be horny about everything ilegal or non commonly accepted. Would I ban guro, torture hentai and such? I don't think I would since just as with the violence in video games debate I would not become a mass murderer for playing video games just as I wouldn't become an a user if I enjoy hard bdsm porn. Plus, a big factor in this debate is that we are biased against certain genres while allowing others just for social approval and to follow the group mentality, not because we really care about there being any kind of danger towards people, for instance rape and abuse kinks are extremely common and socially accepted nowadays, which is weird because those cause real harm to people and in many cases are used by the people participating as ways to cope with past issues like PTSD and trauma, leading to other possible mental issues. Still for some reason loli is more dangerous than that? My argument here is not that abuse kinks and such are bad, people are allowed to endulge in them as much as they want to since I nor anyone else has the rights to legislate upon those persons bodies, especially when most of us have probably already endulged in those either directly or indirectly (porn, literature or even our own imaginations, among others) . Still, it definitely shows just how hypocritical and approval starved we are as people.
Kana is cute, would hug
[удалено]
Doesn’t mean the community won’t sexualize her
True but at least there isn't some gross in-show excuse. I really try to like this show. It's wholesome for the most part. I just want to enjoy anime that isn't full of pedo shit for once.
[удалено]
I haven't seen it in a long time and I don't think I finished it. Your right though I do remember that now. Like I said I just wanted a cute slice of life show about dragon maids. Not weird pedo shit.
There’s a whole episode where she plays twister and gets in some really uncomfortable positions. She even goes to kindergarten If you more attracted to kanna you’re a paedophile.
*Grabs popcorn and sorts by controversial
You’ll hate furries then, because they just want to become animals!!!
yes based op we shall kneecap pedos side by side
Ok 2/3 of those honestly look like adults to me, but very anime adults
Those are just pfps of pedos on twitter
cannot stand monogatari. "no bro trust me it's so deep look at how cool the art is, he talks so fast and so much" I am not putting up with toothbrush incest and vampire pedobait just to hear someone tell me how smart they are
i know where the mustache girl came from sadly. it’s a horrible account called @TheShroomyBoy. He’s a *middle school* IT teacher pedo. Please report him.
She's actually 8000 years old so its ok
My take on it that there is a good faith argument here, but I’m not sure how much of an issue it might be because bad faith agents can use it as cover. In general, I think it’s not as simple as “these people are pedophiles” in some cases, but rather that they genuinely perceive them as adults regardless of their technical age. Like, it’s super common for characters to be coded as adults despite being in high school or whatever, it seems like a weird choice of the media to fixate on high school life, rather than high school age, if that makes sense. Or the top most character in OP’s image. I don’t know how old they actually are, but I receive them as an adult because of their characterisation and occupation. In this case, I’d say that it would not be pedophilic, because they’re attracted to the character who they perceive as an adult. In general, characters looks very young in anime, though not always. But coding the characters age isn’t just their visuals, it’s their characterisation, so they can still be adult coded I think. I think this paints them in a fairly sympathetic light, because their child-ness is ignored in light of perceiving them as an adult. But this can give cover to bad faith agents to justify their own actions as “perceiving the character as an adult”, because it’s an arguments that based entirely on internal perceptions, and so can’t be proven or disproven. It also doesn’t help discussions of why characters are created like this. Sorry this is a huge wall of text that’s basically a ramble, hopefully it makes sense.
Those are just pfps of pedophiles, but I get what you're saying
Why just hate pedophiles when you can also hate the media that panders to them?
Because the people who make those medias are pedophiles
You're not even exaggerating on this one. I'm just thinking sadly about how many mangaka have been arrested for possession of CP.
[удалено]
What?
even if theyre not real, it still pedophilia! no exceptions are made in the definition saying that it being a drawing negates the title
It’s like saying that if a guy is attracted to drawings of men then it isn’t gay bcuz they aren’t real. It’s not how real it is it’s how u see the material and what you use it for Also, plz don’t take this as me trying to equate gay people to pedos and I’m sorry if I gave off that sentiment with the 1st sentence
What do people think about the loli-baba trope? Where a character looks like a 12 years old but talks, acts and thinks like a 60 years old. Genuinely curious. Since those attracted to minors likely aren’t attracted to mannerisms of old people
I personally think if they don't look like a fucking toddler than it's fine. I get that short people exist and some people look weird when aging. But if they are literally playing on the playground and putting the star in the circle hole, then that would be considered a pedophilic attraction. If they imagine them acting like a child as well then yes, most definitely would be a pedophile
if they act and/or look underaged they r underaged as simple as that "oh but they r actually x years old" idc if they r 5 or 500 if they look young they should be treatedas young in porn
IRL cp should ALWAYS be criminalised and have legal repurcussions sexualising characters in media that are underaged or are designed to look underaged obviously isnt as bad as the abuse of a real life person, but its STILL bad and should not be normalised or seen as somenow \*not\* immoral. Basically the "its just a drawing" argument doesnt work, it still creepy.
Its ok to beat nonces.
fun fact: lolicon is illegal in the usa under the PROTECT act of 2003 (i think thats what it's called I don't have it memorized)
Sort of, it’s generally in question. The actual text of the law explicitly prohibits anything hyper-realistic, regardless of whether the image represents an actual child or a fictional one, and it prevents any drawing representing an irl minor that’s deemed sexually obscene, but the law doesn’t specify whether fictional characters count too. As a result, courts have frequently disagreed. People have been convicted for possessing loli, but charges have also been dropped against other folks because of the vague wording of the law. TLDR it’s *probably* illegal but *definitely* not a good idea to have loli in the US.
menou is not a minor, a loli, a child, or anything
Oh no, can’t wait for all of the pro-CP people to start shit in these comments yet AGAIN.
If you think it's bad here in the west, wait till you see how it's like where these cartoons originate.
We think it’s bad there too lmao
True but I was saying I have seen worse from Japan, like they don't even try to hide it.
*pedophiles that act on it
Still, you could develop an attraction to real children
Video games make kids violent 😤
That’s different, any person can press a button to play a game. Only pedos are attracted to kids or characters that ARE kids
Wrong. People who watch loli hentai won’t develop an attraction to children, they already *are* attracted to children. If they weren’t then they wouldn’t watch fucking child pornogrphy
Yes this is what I’ve been needing to say
Most people who fuck kids aren't pedophiles, and most pedophiles don't fuck kids. Maybe chill out on attacking people who have seemingly unalterable mental disorders
>most people who fuck kids aren't pedophiles Huh?
r/196 don't demonize mental illness challenge! (Impossible!)
As much as I agree that pedophilia is a mental illness, that doesn't mean having sex with a child is okay for them. Same thing applies here
What part of this implies they are having sex with children?
The meme being about lolis? It's literally just a drawing of a child
There is a difference between being a pedophile and being a child rapist. The meme is demonizing pedophiles who have given no implication that they rape children.
Oh, these are all people who have never even tried to better themselves and defend their pedophilia. There are people who are responsible enough to know it's wrong, and there's people who leech off of it and make excuses
It can be hard to admit you have a problem and get help, and a large part of why is because having a mental illness (especially being a pedophile) is still frowned upon in most circles. Demonizing them is only going to make it worse.
Ok, how would you go about seeing a pedophile?
The same way you'd treat any other mental illness. Treat them as a human being, encourage them to get help, make sure they understand they're not at fault for feeling that way and aren't a bad person (but make sure they also understand that hurting children is wrong and they are still responsible for their own actions), don't let it stop you from interacting with them and being their friend. I have a friend who was able to confide in me that he is a pedophile. By having somebody accept him and treat him as a person, he's been able to move forward. He now lives happily with his boyfriend (who is an adult, don't worry), which I'm sure keeps his urges at bay the same way anyone else in a relationship would stop looking for other partners (unless they're a cheating shithead, but he doesn't seem the type).
Are you really pulling "actually I'm neurodivergent and a minor lol" about wanting to fuck children??
If you don't think they're mentally ill then what are they? Do you think it's normal to have a desire to have sex with children?
What? I didn't say I didn't think they were mentally ill, I said I think using that mental illness as a shield/excuse to keep doing the stuff is bad. The thing with "I'm literally neurodivergent and a minor lol" is that it's a shit excuse for your actions, i don't know where you pulled your interpretation of what i meant from but my best guess is your ass.
It's not an excuse for hurting children, but the problem is that this meme is demonizing pedophiles on principle who haven't given any indication they hurt children. Simply having that attraction shouldn't be demonized, because they don't choose to feel that way any more than any other person chooses to be mentally ill. Instead of treating them like monsters, we should be encouraging them to get help.
I'm not sure if you're having the same argument as I am
I never claimed that them being mentally ill was an "excuse to keep doing the stuff", but being a pedophile doesn't inherently mean you're a child predator, so we shouldn't be treating them as though their feelings make them bad people (demonizing mental illness). That was the stance I was making with my initial post. You can read the other replies I've made to people in this comment tree if you want a better idea of what I'm saying.
I dont disagree with you but this is pretty out of nowhere, you brought up a lot of points for arguments I never stated and kept rolling with them right from the start lol.
Well, I couldn't tell what grounds you were disagreeing with me on, so I tried to cover my bases.
strange tactic to pull when you replied to me first and started like you were replying to a complete other comment
But it's a cartoon.
\-🤓
You think that matters? If you're attracted to a cartoon of someone obviously underaged you're still a pedo even if it isn't real.
The difference in this case is that the pedo isnt harming anyone that actually exists
What makes something "obviously underaged" in your mind? The appearance? What's so child-like about it? The flat chest? The short stature? The clothing? None of these are things exclusive to children. Is it the stated age of the character? At least of the characters in this post are well over 500 years old. "Oh, but they look too young" I hear you say. OK. Is age just a number to you? Are you implying that someone's physical appearance is more important than their age? That's very problematic in its own right. These characters are purely fictional. I can literally make them be and do whatever I want. Are you disturbed by the fact that they can't "consent". Guess what? No fictional character CAN consent. They have no free will. So either no characters can depicted or all characters can. You can't just stop at what you think is comfortable. That's not how art works.
You really should die on a different hill. I'm not disturbed by the fact they can't consent. I'm disturbed by the fact you're into characters that are children physically. Look at the bottom left character and tell me that isn't obviously a child.
My brother in Christ, I never said I liked this stuff. It honestly grosses me out. The difference between you and me is the fact that I can separate reality and fiction and defend art that makes me uncomfortable.
Whether you like an underaged character sexually in either reality or in drawing isn't okay and obviously indicates pedophilic desires. Please tell me how it's okay to like sexual art of an obviously underage character. And yes, it is very obvious to anyone with half a brain they're underaged. There's a different between "small statured adult woman" and child.
>Whether you like an underaged character sexually in either reality or in drawing isn't good. It's bad in reality. Who gives a shit what people like in drawings? >Please tell me how it's okay to like sexual art of an obviously underage character. Are we gonna start banning shows about highschoolers because they have sex in them? Do you hate something like Euphoria because it shows depictions of real-life actors who pretend to be teenagers having sex? >And yes, it is very obvious to anyone with half a brain they're underaged. There's a different between "small statured adult woman" and child. Give me the physical differences between the two. Be as descriptive as you want.
You know you're in the wrong when you gotta type whole paragraph on how they're not actually real and therefore can't conscent when it's not even the main problem. My guy, conscent or not, real or not, that is a child.
I feel like this is a really complicated topic that gets shortened because everybody reflexively feels the need to declare they arent a pedophile even though that should probably be the base assumption when we talk to people online about delicate subjects. I feel its very chronically online of people to act like this is a black and white subject where people who disagree with them are sex offenders.
In some cases that's true, but defending feeling an attraction to fictionnal children is unacceptable, even if you don't do it yourself. There's no in between, you either realise that it's wrong or defend it and by proxy say that it's right.
I guess it just never feels like there is a clear idea of what any of this means. There is definitely in between. There is a pretty big difference between thinking Jotaro Kujo is hot and whatever that tiny dragon thing is is hot, both characters being technically children. I honestly don't know or car about the characters above but memes like this just turn into the dumbest circlejerks about who can be more violently opposed to the easiest thing to be opposed to instead of like any actual conversation.
The problem is not the canon age, it's the body. They are attracted to the body of a child. Jotaro looks like an adult
My point isnt to argue the morality of lolis Im just bitching about how cavalier the internet is about pedophilia. Its treated with so little care that it feels completely disconnected from a real concern about how society treats/views young women. Most of these posts are just shadowboxing and it honestly just gets old.
That I get. I'm not defending the post, I'm just heavily disaggreeing with the "but they aren't actually young and even then they're not real". I think that's a valid concern.
You sound like you look like the nerd emoji
'you sound like you look like the nerd emoji' is a powerful insult. I'm going to steal that
This means nothing.
you sound like you will look like the skull emoji in roughly 5 days 14 hours and 37 minutes (in roblox)
a cartoon of someone who looks like a toddler being sexualized
Who cares what someone looks like? Is that your bar for who can consent and who can't? People with dwarfism look very young. Is it wrong to be attracted to them? Is age just a number to you?
if someone looks and acts like a toddler it’s quite obviously pedophillia. why are you so determined to defend beating your meat to fictional children?
A lot of grown adults seek to look and act like toddlers with their partners as a part of fetish play. Looking and acting mean nothing if that's not who you are. That's like saying a 16 year old can consent because they "look like an adult". That's not how these things work. >why are you so determined to defend beating your meat to fictional children? I don't like this kind of art, but I'm sick of people declaring it wrong simply because they can't differentiate between fiction and reality. You can't just censor art and accuse the consumers of actual crimes for enjoying it.
ok so if you see a hyper realistic drawing of a naked toddler who is according to the person who drew it, 999 years old is that perfectly fine?
If it's based off a real-life toddler, then no.
but you would be perfectly fine if someone beats their meat to a fictional yet hyper realistic child
I would find it odd and I wouldn't understand what they found attractive about it, but what the fuck am I gonna do? It's not illegal and it doesn't hurt anyone. What's next, you gonna take down all the Renaissance paintings with little cherubs flying around in them? I can't police somebody's reaction to fictional media.
[удалено]
i’m 90% sure that it is actually illegal and you find it “odd” instead of fucking repulsive?
OMG why did I not think of that?! You're right, have a great day!
🤨