After an incident where anti-loli false flaggots got an account wrongfully banned for cp, ottman decided to ban loli by making false arguments similar to what 8chan owner jim watkins and gab owner andrew torba made.
Minds userbase is having none of it, and are actively calling ottman out for lying while demanding this decision be reversed.
new edit: ottman is having a meltdown, calling people bots and deleting posts.
edit: the mods need to consider banning the anti-loli spergs on this site for pointless infighting.
the guy is calling people who like pornographic artwork pedophiles.
What kind indeed. I noticed no one responded to you
Artwork that may or may not depict characters of a certain age of which sexual depiction is frowned upon in just about every country on earth. Loli is female, shota is male.
Whether you believe it's moral or not is up to you.
Evil is not evil is not evil. Looking at KOS-MOS, at one year old because it's an android but drawn as a fully developed woman who has all the knowledge of the most war-torn adult, and looking at Mieu, a one year old android but drawn as a fully developed woman but who is entirely innocent and clueless of the world and sexuality, and looking at Chachazero, a one year old android (lots of them exist, apparently) who is drawn as an underdeveloped woman but who is knowledgable about the roles of sexuality and maturity in society, and... Hmm... I'm drawing a blank for a one-year-old android that is both ignorant and underdeveloped to round out the quadrant, but you get the point I'm sure one exists.
Each one of the four quadrants starts with "one-year-old android". But KOS-MOS, with a form of an adult and the mind of an adult (if a PTSD-filled psychotic one), clearly isn't "loli" by most definitions except the broadest technical sense. The Terminator isn't a shota, but by strict definition, Arnold Schwartzenegger is, indeed, a shota actor, because that sentient humanoid isn't over 18 years, and he appears naked in some scenes. The scandal!
So your definition of "certain age" doesn't work.
The other three quadrants are trickier. The one I couldn't think of an example of, yeah, obviously shota/loli. Child-like in mentality and appearance (and age, as all four are 1-year-old robots). That's bad. But what of Mieu, physically adult-scale, but mind of a child? Obviously, that's bad, right? The whole point of the laws is to protect child innocence and minds. But if I showed you a picture of Mieu, you would not know she had that tabula-rasa mind. And does that mean innocent idiots are never legally adults? And in quadrant three, does someone with, say, puberty blockers so they don't grow like standard kids never qualify as an adult no matter their age or wisdom? Now, Chachazero, being a SMART one-year-old android, commissioned an adult body to be made for herself. At what point in the data transfer process does it go from Loli to not? If they copy-paste instead of cut-paste, is she simultaneously both despite being the same entity?
There's a reason the official definition for these things is "I'll know it when I see it", because simply defining something as you did, leaves much to be desired. Too many loopholes to close.
So TL;DR: Your definition is bad. The proper definition is "it is 100% subjective, but ideally subjective based upon a communal agreed-upon case-by-case assessment."
[EDIT: And before you say "but true-AI androids don't exist!", they do in anime and video games and books. And we're talking about books, not things that exist in real life. So you need a definition that includes magic, ageless entities, aliens with accelerated lifecycles, and robots.]
The physical age of a non-human is not relevant to the question. A newly constructed Terminator does not look like a newborn, does not think like a newborn and does not act like a newborn, so it does not possess any of the attributes of a child that would appeal to a pedophile. On the other hand only a pedophile would want to sexualise Grogu from the Mandalorean, because despite being described as 50 years old he looks, thinks and acts like a child.
If a man likes pornographic art of women, he's straight. If a man likes pornographic art of men, he's gay. If a man likes pornographic art of children, he's a pedophile.
If someone likes killing people in games they like to shoot people irl . And most of the time when an actual pedo is outed it's a smash player, a furry or someone who was attacking anime or loli. Though even if you think it makes someone pedo, unrealistic cartoon art is still a better alternative to keep them away from irl wouldn't it?
I disagree though my second paragraph covers your point
Why stop there? Why not make children wear hats depicting child pornography? I mean if it could stop even one attack against a child, isn't it our duty to wear child porn hats?
Or maybe society shouldn't be built to appease freaks.
That's a stupid argument that makes no sense and you know it.
Not sure why you are calling for people to suicide over different opinions on fictional things. And I feel like you haven't been here long if you are surprised to be honest. Seems more anti loli which is different actually which makes me think there's new people.
Nope. This sub has always had a blind spot for cartoon child porn. If you didn't know this, then you're the one out of the loop.
I literally I said people being anti loli here makes me think there's new people here.
Just because your cp hasn’t involved any children being hurt in it’s making doesn’t make you any less of a deplorable degenerate. What’s it matter how long I’ve been here? I’ve seen this in almost every sub culture or community I’ve vaguely been a part of, just because you’re older than me, it doesn’t make you cooler, you millennial nonce.
I never said that though it kinda makes sense you are a zoomer getting so uptight about this. And I was just saying if you are surprised there are people who defend loli here it means you are new here. That is all
Oh and calling loli as cp shows you are not interested in having an honest discussion just an emotional one and it's also insulting to people who were actually hurt by real Cp.
Comment Removed - Rule 2