I think there's already some good answers in this thread, but I've noticed that I haven't actually seen anyone try to defend it while openly admitting that they like lolicon. So I'll be the first to do it(well, that I've seen at least).
I like lolicon. Yeah, yeah, boo on me! If I gave a fuck I wouldn't be typing this. What I like about it, is pretty much the same thing I like about any other porn. It's hot. It arouses me, so I jack off to it. That's it. You can call it pedophilia all you want. In the end, I know that as long as I'm not hurting anyone, or contributing to the harm of anyone, I have nothing to be ashamed of.
It's like with people who jerk it to rape porn. Just because they're aroused by rape in a fictional porno, doesn't mean they'd be down to rape, or be raped in real life. And this is the important part; the two things are very different. So different, that in a persons mind(I assume), they are not even considered to be the same thing. Rape in a porn, is not the same as rape in real life, just as a drawing of a loli, is not the same as an actual child in real life. The real thing is not the same as the fictional thing, and therefore, it won't create the same feelings of arousal in the vast majority of people who enjoy the fictional thing. At least, I assume it won't, though there's bound to be a few sickos out there.
It should be easy to understand. With rape porn, the appeal comes from the fantasy of either taking control by force, or having control taken away from you, and therefore not having to worry about being in control. The second part I hear is an especially popular fantasy among women who watch porn. In real life, however, none of that comes into play. Real rape, is simply a miserable violation of human rights for the one on the receiving end, and, you know, really fucked up on the other end. So yeah, completely different.
With lolicon, honestly it's a bit more difficult for me to explain, because I consider myself to be a "visuals" guy when it comes to lolicon. What I mean is, I personally just happen to like slim, small characters in hentai. Often times, loli hentai fulfills that desire for me. However, I don't really get off to the "idea" of lolicon. Basically, I just like small boobs short girls, but not the idea that the character is actually a kid. For the sake of argument though, I'll go out on a limb and say that for people who do like the "idea" of lolicon, the appeal probably mostly comes from the feeling of "taboo", like you're indulging in something forbidden. I think much of loli hentai is based around that appeal, and is designed specifically to enhance those feelings in the readers. And of course, they do it in ways that are completely impossible in real life.
To bring it back to the rape comparison, loli hentai, like rape porn, is completely different from real life. Loli hentai is designed to portray the whole scenario as a forbidden indulgence, through things such as, the loli enjoying it, the loli somehow being experienced in sex acts, the loli having an unrealistic body figure, and the loli not being traumatized in the slightest when all is said and done. These things are all impossible in real life. In real life, such an experience would be traumatizing for the child, and it wouldn't be enjoyable for the adult unless they were actually a sick pedophile. This is why you'll hear from most lolicons, myself included, that we think real children are absolutely disgusting. They're nothing like hentai. They're unsanitary and annoying, so I prefer not to be around them given the choice.
And I know the response to that is gonna be "well of course you'd say you hate kids in real life, that's exactly what a pedo would say!". So I'll take it a step further. I feel the same way about real women in general. Now, don't get me wrong, I haven't written off real women, if I had a chance to fuck a supermodel I'd probably take it. But generally speaking, I think 3-D girls are far less appealing than 2-D. They can be ugly, smelly, and they'll force you to deal with bullshit just to keep them around. Hentai, however, can be whatever the hell you want it to be, and that's what I like about it.
See, lolicon is just the tip of the iceberg. Hentai has all sorts of crazy, ridiculous shit you'd never see in real life, and I like a lot of it! I like the fantasy shit, exhibitionist shit, orgy shit, bondage shit, the yuri shit, mind control shit, time stop shit, tentacle shit, the stuck-in-a-wall shit, hell, sometimes I even like the literal shit! Just about the only shit I don't fuck with, is the gay shit, and the beastiality shit. I like all that shit, mainly because the visuals, the drawings, just look arousing to me. That's it.
Is it weird? Yes, duh, of course it's fucking weird! I may be a degenerate, but I'm not such a fucking dumbass as to not know that it's weird for me to like this stuff. But still, I don't feel an ounce of shame regarding any of this, because in the end it's my fucking business, not anyone elses, and it's not harming anyone. Imo, if someone wants to insist that I have a mental problem because I like certain drawings of completely fictional characters, then that person is the one with the problem, not me.
So uh, yeah, that's it I guess. Thanks for coming to my ted talk. I probably wrote way more than I should have, but in my defense, it only took a couple hours for me to write this. Man, I only recently started commenting on this website, I sure didn't expect that after a few days I'd be explaining weird hentai to you guys. I wonder if I'll get famous for this.
I’ll chime in here as well. I think one thing to separate is producers and consoomers. I don’t enjoy loli, but as it’s drawn I’m not entirely disgusted by it, and as someone who is into femdom, I come across a bit of femdom loli or shota material. The thing is, I’m placing myself in the child’s place in the material, because there is height, size, position, and other power dynamics involved that trigger me, and I’m inserting myself mentally into the submissive position. Another example of loli I enjoy is some latex scenes. Now, latex material is rare, but it’s a visual stimulus as well as a tactile one if you’ve played with it. I enjoy smaller breasts, and I love the visuals of light across breasts and butts. I have a thing for gymnast style bodies as well as spandex or form fitting clothing and the clothing cuts involved, but am creeped out by the ages involved in the olympics and the blatant interest in that by the general population, should gymnastics events be banned because “think of the pedos”? Can you get ESPN cancelled for it?
But as others have pointed out here, where exactly is “the line”? Porn is degenerare, but I jerked it to sailor moon. How do you draw a smooth younger anime figure but pin the age in your drawing so that others won’t call it loli or pedo material? You can make it blatantly mature or milfy, but where do high school characters fit into that, and highschool is a good age for story characters.
I think you deserve at least a little more engagement than you've received, so I'll ask for some clarification.
This sort of attraction you've expressed here, would you say that it demands your personal acknowledgement of non-physical attributes for the character(s) involved? To be direct, I wish to confirm that you are primarily attracted to the physical attributes that you've described and -not- any other attribute like personality or mental/emotional immaturity (you already stated that legality/age are of no interest).
IF you were to confirm the above, do you think your preferred body type would have an impact on your potential real life mate selection? Ignoring the difficulty of finding such an adult woman who lacks (or has diminished) secondary sexual characteristics.
I would sum up the physical aspect of most loli as 'lacking secondary sexual characteristics'. The labelling is murky, of course, but I get the feeling we have the same functional definitions for it. However, if you were only attracted to that aspect, it sort of leads one to wonder if traps appealed to you similarly.
Okay, I'll try to clarify. First off, no, my enjoyment of lolis does not demand acknowledgement of non-physical attributes. As I said in my first comment, it's not the "idea" of lolis that appeals to me, it's the "visuals", the body type, which is often "short girl with small boobs".
Now, I'd like to add an important note; I don't actually agree with your definition of lolis being "lacking secondary sexual characteristics". I disagree because there is a large spectrum of lolis, and not every type of loli will fit that description. Some are as you define them, and some are, as I've said, short girls with small boobs. I feel that this is an important distinction.
Personally, the closer a loli is to how you define them, the less I will like it. In fact, I consider the drawings of lolis with more "realistic" body types to be a huge turn off. I like small boobs, not flat to the point that they haven't even started to develop yet. Not that there's anything morally wrong with enjoying that style of loli hentai. It's still just as fictional, and therefore harmless, as the loli hentai with clearly exaggerated, "unrealistic" body types. Though I could understand if someone thinks it's extra creepy compared to the exaggerated kind.
Regarding traps, no, traps do not appeal to me. You may have thought it would be logical to assume I like traps, since you seem to have made the assumption that traps and lolis have the same body type, but that isn't the case. I don't consider them to have the same body type, and "trap" itself is not a body type that I like. I don't like cock, and I don't like literally flat chests, so traps are a no-go for me.
However, I'm not entirely averse to the presence of traps in hentai either. Before anyone tries to call me gay for admitting that, I'd like to point out that trap hentai, like loli hentai, exists on a spectrum. Just because a trap exists in a hentai, that doesn't mean the focus of the hentai is on something gay, like yaoi, or pegging. It could be that a hentai with a trap in it is about a trap fucking a girl, which is something I might be down to read depending on the quality of the art and story.
As for whether my body type preference would affect my choice of mate in real life, I'm not sure why you'd ask this, but I would say yes. Not to the point of overriding all other characteristics though. I would definitely prefer a slim, small-breasted gf, but real life isn't hentai. You can't have it exactly the way you want it, and I think there's more important things then appearance when it comes to a mate. So, I think i'd be willing to compromise a little on appearance. If she had the right personality and interests, I'd probably be happy with a thick girl(not too thick though, I don't want a fatty) with humongous D-cups.
I'd rather not have to bring up a body type chart and argue the fine details of which stages of physical maturity should fall under loli; my proposal was already generous by including diminished secondary sexual characteristics. Maybe I should have said "secondary sexual characteristics that have not reached 100% maturity", but I suppose even that could be confused by genetics.
I could probably also say androgyny, but somehow that implies to me that there's some physical maturity, which would exclude the younger range of loli. Personally, I've started using "toddler" for the very young range, but that's loaded in itself since it seems to be the label for realistic (and often western sourced) loli, which I think most fans of common loli would rather not see.
I wish we had more specific terms for these things; spectrum terms cause problems in communicating clearly.
Anyway, your clarification did make it clear that 0% secondary sexual maturity is a no-go, so it'd make sense to exclude a wide range of traps even before you get to the genitals.
I brought up the real life mate selection mostly for curiousity, but I'll also be the guy to bring up stereotype of asians having childlike physiques. "Short, with small breasts" sounds like a relatively simple hurdle to clear in the real world, so I'd count you lucky. Imagine being into furry or goblins, or some other such fantasy niche - those people have got 0 chances of finding something like that in real life. But yes, you are right, looks don't count for everything. I didn't mean to imply that you're shallow, we're just engaged in a, um, superficial topic.
I think there's a theory to build in the mate selection realm with regards to fetishes/kinks/etc, but I'll have to get more data samples before I can really go there. The other questions I asked relate to other theories I'm working on, such as how the taboo factor is not the primary force that leads a person to pursue new/adjacent fetishes/kinks, despite contradictory claims.
Nope. Unless you can prove they want to go after actual kids you cannot call someone pedophile. Lest you want to downplay the word to the point people don't know whether you are talking about people hurting actual kids or people who like anime..
A fascinating question, and I JUST posted in another thread that I wanted an arbitrary debate on any topic whatsoever with a proper discourse!
Assumption from your post: Let it be assumed that some people like loli who are not pedopheliac in nature. This is basically your entire premise.
Arising query: What traits attract such a person to such a thing? If they exist, they must have a reason. We do not assume perfectly rational actors, but we do assume sentient and sapient ones at the least: They seek pleasure, and/or flee from pain.
Obvious logical answer: They are attracted to the same traits they would be attracted to in an adult portrayal. If they are not pedopheliac in nature, then the traits they are attracted to would not be, logically speaking, those corely associated with pedopheliac aims.
Assumption from obvious answer: We can know what a pedopheliac "aims" at. This is a big assumption, but we have a lot of psychology data on these, so to define my terms as I will be using them...
Definitions: I would assign two types of pedopheliacs:
Pedo1 has an attraction to the mental traits inherent in children, but not adults. To a Pedo1, The Terminator from the movies of the same name is a legitimate target of attraction, as it has no knowledge of sin or sinner, sexuality, sociality, or moral behavior. The Terminator is "innocent" mentally, and that attracts them. But an actually-9000-year-old-vampire-who-was-turned-at-8-years-old would hold no attraction if their mental behavior was reflective of their age. I do not believe Pedo1 is a common thing, but it is included for completeness.
Pedo2 has an attraction to the physical traits inherent in children, but not adults. To a Pedo2, The Terminator, as portrayed by a clearly post-pubescent male, has no attractiveness, but the aforementioned vampire would, due to elements such as small stature, non-developed secondary sexual characteristics, and/or non-developed primary sexual characteristics.
The two make a quadrant matrix, they can exist in OR/NOR/AND/NAND/XOR states with each-other.
Clarification: So someone attracted to loli who is not pedopheliac in nature would need to avoid those traits, that is, a NOR situation, while still somehow being drawn to that medium.
Deduction: There exists traits highly common in "youthful portrayal", that are not exclusive to it, leading to an attraction to the medium.
Rationale: People will seek out their desire, and a place where that desire is common, they will congregate, even if their desire is tangential to the place's purpose. One who wants a quiet place to think may seek out a library, even if they have no intent on reading while there, in example, even if a music studio's soundproofed room may conceptually exist within accessible range to them and better suit their exact needs, because "close enough" is close enough for non-perfectly-logical actors.
Therefore we must find traits more common in loli/shota, that are not as common in adult oriented activity, but not exclusive to it. To do this, traits tangential to Pedo1 and Pedo2's assumed desires should be examined.
Pedo1 seeks those with no knowledge of sexuality or morality. "Innocence". Virginity porn and innocent-porn is common in many places in the world, that idiotic meme of "but that's where I poop from" exists because the scene it quotes exists. They could be seeking that aspect, and it is probably more plentiful in the loli/shota medium. But then again, if they're seeking innocence, they're probably a Pedo1... So to go one-level-removed.. Let's say "stupidity", instead, then: They seek an idiot, someone undereducated who they can dominate mentally, or teach, some level of superiority/inferiority situation.
Pedo2 seeks the underdeveloped. Someone seeking sporty types or more muscular frames perhaps would find overlap? I am reminded of Australia's meme-worthy legal ruling that women with A-sized cups are considered legally children, because their small chest size reminded that particular judge of children. So perhaps one who desires not children, but still flatter chests, would admire such works.
Pedo2 also seeks out small stature (assumption, but "Oppai Loli" exists as a seemingly self-contradicting category, so this is more likely a logical error spot). Small stature is often associated with large stature, size discrepancy. Giant black dicks and tiny white chicks, to reference a very popular pornography genre. Size disparity is also associated with domination and submission. While these are not rare fetishes (you can find hundreds of elf-on-orc size discrepancy doujins, and uncounted BDSM ones) perhaps they are more common, or better written, or better drawn in some way, of higher quality, in that sphere? Or it could simply be sheer quantity: You go where the supply exists for your demand.
Within the constraints you put forward, that's the best I got off the top of my head. Please check for logical inconsistencies, and reply back with your rebuttal.
EDIT: I just realized I forgot a VERY important point, a giant logic hole: "NOR" isn't necessary in the core assumption's characteristics. "Null" is also applicable. That is, there possibly exists an entity-set who would not care in either direction about Pedo1 or Pedo2's traits, that is agnostic to those traits entirely. But to get into that would take longer than I feel like typing, so feel free to remind me in the rebuttal, I'll get to it later. There could also be narrative and/or associative elements at play that I neglected to bring up, so tossing that as well as a touchstone. But these are just additional Deductions, they don't change the Obvious Logical Conclusion that this subject entity enjoys traits that exist common to and in both loli/shota and non-loli/shota settings.
The same thing that attracts people to regular porn.
I presume the reason everyone is scared is because they think the feminist cult who managed to take down 90% of PH by conflating everything with rape and using financial blackmail to force compliance will do the same trick with pedophilia.
So if someone is having that reaction to loli porn, that is animated porn of underage subjects, it ain't the medium (animation vs. real life) that's the crux of the issue. It's the age.
I tend to stay out of this part of the discussion because it's ultimately pointless, however;
You're making a very obviously bad deduction.
You assume that the draw of loli in terms of usage is age.
That's literally what being horny is. Your brain gearing you up to mate.
And up here you came to an incorrect idea of human psychosexual interactions.
Being horny or aroused doesn't strictly have to have anything to do with mating itself. It's a reaction to external or internal stimuli.
When a person gets aroused at seeing an image often the reason why has little to do with the image itself. It becomes a mental refinement process whereby the mind manifests a scenario of an ideal partner or situation.
This is the reason why long-term porn use is incredibly dangerous and habit forming. It evokes a sort of self-propagandization. You are quite literally training your mind in a Pavlovian style into more and more specific and more and more debased interests.
With loli, the age often may have little to do with it. More often you'll find that it's the presumption of innocence either mental or physical. The content will evoke a scenario of protection, corruption, or destruction.
Once it reaches the stage of destruction, that does not mean the individual is predisposed to a realization of their thoughts, nor a tendency towards them. Meaning, a person who comes to get off on porn about raping or torturing kids doesn't necessarily desire to rape or torture kids. It's the same as in regards to video game violence. There's a separation in thought and consciousness between the real and the imaginary.
The real issue comes for those that are unable to distinguish between reality and their thoughts, and for those who may be biologically predisposed towards certain attractions.
If ya really are worried about the cause and effect you should look not into loli but into furry and stuff like abdl. It's literally a cult recruitment scheme set up in a way to warp the mind into acceptance of a group value system. Trannies do the same thing through text and were partially bred through that self-replicating mind virus.
Do you think furries are zoophiles ? Or can a 1980's Karen ask why do you want to play violent video games? Or how adult women like to ship BakuDeku? It's asking the same sort of questions. And demanding people explain themselves over fiction or they are pedophiles is gross. The burden goes to you on why you want to keep acting as a Karen over loli and try to force insults on others and vilify others over it. And I do not like loli but I do not agree with the way people witchhunt it and I believe that it's just a way to distract from real issues and gives ground to the sjw left who use loli as a scapegoat to attack anime and call everything in anime as pedo.and just a gateway to increased censorship
Are the people who jack off to zoo porn, who go to convention, dress like animals, and fuck each other while shitting in diapers, and who routinely get caught actual animals, zoophiles? Hmmmm. I must mediate on this subject.
Like I said the only thing anti lolis have is "YOU ARE A PEDOPHILE" and "ITS LITERALLY ACTUAL CHILDREN" and you still don't want to answer why you want to waste time and resources going after loli instead of dealing with real issues. We know why cause you want to distract from your own actual problems
It's not for other people to explain fiction it's for you to explain why you treat it like a Karen treats violent video games in the 1980s . And you still haven't answered why you want to waste people's time and resources on going after loli instead of actual issues. We know why.
Cool the first thing I said answered you. But you are too stupid to understand or don't want to accept any other answer except one. And when are you going to answer my question to you? We know why you won't.
Cool just admit you only want one answer which is to call others pedophile and won't accept any other answer why bother pretending you are open to any debate.
It's not evasion I answered you and you just don't want to accept any other answer except "pedophile" so why pretend to be open to debate? And the burden was on you to explain to begin with. Since when was it others burden to explain about fiction?
And you have evaded why you want to waste time and resources on going after Loli instead of actual issues. We know why.
How exactly.? First comment you didn't read or you dont understand or can't accept any other answer but "pedophile" and also can't understand burden is on you to begin with. .. And when are you gonna answer my question?
I mean there's a very easy and obvious answer here. It's a paraphilia of its own. It's like asking why some weirdos are attracted to dragons fucking cars or other weird shit like that. We don't really know why people develop paraphilias, but most research seems to indicate childhood or adolescent experiences play a roll. That's not to say that the people who like that stuff aren't pedos, I really have no idea. But the concept is well established.
I have personally never been aroused by a drawing of any type though. Whether it's weird pseudo-children/teenagers in anime, or adult cartoon stuff. It just does absolutely nothing for me for whatever reason.
I'm not a "loli" fan, but I can conceive that one thing that might make it appealing to people would be that it pisses off uptight prudish authoritarians on both the left and the right.
Good question. I assume most defenders of this trash are afraid that if you ban it, then that is a slippery slope for banning other forms of supposed art or speech. That I can still respect.
Not actually liking it though, because it's creepy as hell.
I think the "extra special" boundary is called reality. You can film as much rape/murder porn as you want, but if you film an actual rape or kill one of the actors(snuff film), then that's illegal- obviously. I can play Murder Sim 2021 all day, every day and not feel the inclination to take someone's life for real- I assume it's the same for other fictional depictions of otherwise horrible acts.
I tried answering you in the other thread and got no response, but okay, I'll try one more time. Minus the assumption of good faith this time.
First is definition. If you wanted a serious discussion, you wouldn't ignore requests for it. Honestly really incriminating, considering the language games most of us are familiar with from sjws. But that's okay, I'll use the broadest definition I can think of: illustrations of females.
Next, since we're engaged in a discussion of the broadest generalities, I'll remove a large chunk with broad generalities befitting the refusal to define terms: any singular image without narrative context can be enjoyed for craftsmanship or illustrative style.
The little interest possible now falls to images that bear narrative context. Broadly: metaphorical value, asthetic value, crude tonal display, and expression of incentive from another character's point of view.
Anime is a gateway to pedophilia, they feel atracted to neotenic characteristics like large eyes and head, flat face, short arms, etc. lolicon is what anime leads to. Anime is like porn and just as coomers, weaboos are addicted and search for a "stronger" version of what they are consuming
Moral grandstanders don't seem to grasp the fact that we currently live in a world dominated entirely by the LEFT.
You guys going after this loli shit only increases the power of the left.
They will just use the precedent set by your crusade over loli to ban things that we all value by saying that too is offensive and needs to be banned. You really think that the left won't weaponize this crusade and use it against you? The left never lets any situation go to waste.
Your moral grandstanding will just result in giving the left wing authoritarians more power.
You don't seem to get that I am not just talking about alt tech banning loli being a boon for the left.
I am talking about the religious right's constant moral grandstanding crusade against trivial shit like loli.
Instead of trying to build as large of a coalition of anti leftists as possible they would rather alienate people who otherwise fully agree with them just because these people cannot resist seething over coomers fapping to lolis.
I think this attitude is beyond counter-productive and only strengthens the power of the left.
Stop trying to divide the anti-leftist coalition.
How does a fucking coomer fapping to loli harm you? It doesn't harm anyone.
If that isn’t a real answer, then what would consider a “real answer?”
I think there's already some good answers in this thread, but I've noticed that I haven't actually seen anyone try to defend it while openly admitting that they like lolicon. So I'll be the first to do it(well, that I've seen at least).
I like lolicon. Yeah, yeah, boo on me! If I gave a fuck I wouldn't be typing this. What I like about it, is pretty much the same thing I like about any other porn. It's hot. It arouses me, so I jack off to it. That's it. You can call it pedophilia all you want. In the end, I know that as long as I'm not hurting anyone, or contributing to the harm of anyone, I have nothing to be ashamed of.
It's like with people who jerk it to rape porn. Just because they're aroused by rape in a fictional porno, doesn't mean they'd be down to rape, or be raped in real life. And this is the important part; the two things are very different. So different, that in a persons mind(I assume), they are not even considered to be the same thing. Rape in a porn, is not the same as rape in real life, just as a drawing of a loli, is not the same as an actual child in real life. The real thing is not the same as the fictional thing, and therefore, it won't create the same feelings of arousal in the vast majority of people who enjoy the fictional thing. At least, I assume it won't, though there's bound to be a few sickos out there.
It should be easy to understand. With rape porn, the appeal comes from the fantasy of either taking control by force, or having control taken away from you, and therefore not having to worry about being in control. The second part I hear is an especially popular fantasy among women who watch porn. In real life, however, none of that comes into play. Real rape, is simply a miserable violation of human rights for the one on the receiving end, and, you know, really fucked up on the other end. So yeah, completely different.
With lolicon, honestly it's a bit more difficult for me to explain, because I consider myself to be a "visuals" guy when it comes to lolicon. What I mean is, I personally just happen to like slim, small characters in hentai. Often times, loli hentai fulfills that desire for me. However, I don't really get off to the "idea" of lolicon. Basically, I just like small boobs short girls, but not the idea that the character is actually a kid. For the sake of argument though, I'll go out on a limb and say that for people who do like the "idea" of lolicon, the appeal probably mostly comes from the feeling of "taboo", like you're indulging in something forbidden. I think much of loli hentai is based around that appeal, and is designed specifically to enhance those feelings in the readers. And of course, they do it in ways that are completely impossible in real life.
To bring it back to the rape comparison, loli hentai, like rape porn, is completely different from real life. Loli hentai is designed to portray the whole scenario as a forbidden indulgence, through things such as, the loli enjoying it, the loli somehow being experienced in sex acts, the loli having an unrealistic body figure, and the loli not being traumatized in the slightest when all is said and done. These things are all impossible in real life. In real life, such an experience would be traumatizing for the child, and it wouldn't be enjoyable for the adult unless they were actually a sick pedophile. This is why you'll hear from most lolicons, myself included, that we think real children are absolutely disgusting. They're nothing like hentai. They're unsanitary and annoying, so I prefer not to be around them given the choice.
And I know the response to that is gonna be "well of course you'd say you hate kids in real life, that's exactly what a pedo would say!". So I'll take it a step further. I feel the same way about real women in general. Now, don't get me wrong, I haven't written off real women, if I had a chance to fuck a supermodel I'd probably take it. But generally speaking, I think 3-D girls are far less appealing than 2-D. They can be ugly, smelly, and they'll force you to deal with bullshit just to keep them around. Hentai, however, can be whatever the hell you want it to be, and that's what I like about it.
See, lolicon is just the tip of the iceberg. Hentai has all sorts of crazy, ridiculous shit you'd never see in real life, and I like a lot of it! I like the fantasy shit, exhibitionist shit, orgy shit, bondage shit, the yuri shit, mind control shit, time stop shit, tentacle shit, the stuck-in-a-wall shit, hell, sometimes I even like the literal shit! Just about the only shit I don't fuck with, is the gay shit, and the beastiality shit. I like all that shit, mainly because the visuals, the drawings, just look arousing to me. That's it.
Is it weird? Yes, duh, of course it's fucking weird! I may be a degenerate, but I'm not such a fucking dumbass as to not know that it's weird for me to like this stuff. But still, I don't feel an ounce of shame regarding any of this, because in the end it's my fucking business, not anyone elses, and it's not harming anyone. Imo, if someone wants to insist that I have a mental problem because I like certain drawings of completely fictional characters, then that person is the one with the problem, not me.
So uh, yeah, that's it I guess. Thanks for coming to my ted talk. I probably wrote way more than I should have, but in my defense, it only took a couple hours for me to write this. Man, I only recently started commenting on this website, I sure didn't expect that after a few days I'd be explaining weird hentai to you guys. I wonder if I'll get famous for this.
I’ll chime in here as well. I think one thing to separate is producers and consoomers. I don’t enjoy loli, but as it’s drawn I’m not entirely disgusted by it, and as someone who is into femdom, I come across a bit of femdom loli or shota material. The thing is, I’m placing myself in the child’s place in the material, because there is height, size, position, and other power dynamics involved that trigger me, and I’m inserting myself mentally into the submissive position. Another example of loli I enjoy is some latex scenes. Now, latex material is rare, but it’s a visual stimulus as well as a tactile one if you’ve played with it. I enjoy smaller breasts, and I love the visuals of light across breasts and butts. I have a thing for gymnast style bodies as well as spandex or form fitting clothing and the clothing cuts involved, but am creeped out by the ages involved in the olympics and the blatant interest in that by the general population, should gymnastics events be banned because “think of the pedos”? Can you get ESPN cancelled for it?
But as others have pointed out here, where exactly is “the line”? Porn is degenerare, but I jerked it to sailor moon. How do you draw a smooth younger anime figure but pin the age in your drawing so that others won’t call it loli or pedo material? You can make it blatantly mature or milfy, but where do high school characters fit into that, and highschool is a good age for story characters.
I think you deserve at least a little more engagement than you've received, so I'll ask for some clarification.
This sort of attraction you've expressed here, would you say that it demands your personal acknowledgement of non-physical attributes for the character(s) involved? To be direct, I wish to confirm that you are primarily attracted to the physical attributes that you've described and -not- any other attribute like personality or mental/emotional immaturity (you already stated that legality/age are of no interest).
IF you were to confirm the above, do you think your preferred body type would have an impact on your potential real life mate selection? Ignoring the difficulty of finding such an adult woman who lacks (or has diminished) secondary sexual characteristics.
I would sum up the physical aspect of most loli as 'lacking secondary sexual characteristics'. The labelling is murky, of course, but I get the feeling we have the same functional definitions for it. However, if you were only attracted to that aspect, it sort of leads one to wonder if traps appealed to you similarly.
Okay, I'll try to clarify. First off, no, my enjoyment of lolis does not demand acknowledgement of non-physical attributes. As I said in my first comment, it's not the "idea" of lolis that appeals to me, it's the "visuals", the body type, which is often "short girl with small boobs".
Now, I'd like to add an important note; I don't actually agree with your definition of lolis being "lacking secondary sexual characteristics". I disagree because there is a large spectrum of lolis, and not every type of loli will fit that description. Some are as you define them, and some are, as I've said, short girls with small boobs. I feel that this is an important distinction.
Personally, the closer a loli is to how you define them, the less I will like it. In fact, I consider the drawings of lolis with more "realistic" body types to be a huge turn off. I like small boobs, not flat to the point that they haven't even started to develop yet. Not that there's anything morally wrong with enjoying that style of loli hentai. It's still just as fictional, and therefore harmless, as the loli hentai with clearly exaggerated, "unrealistic" body types. Though I could understand if someone thinks it's extra creepy compared to the exaggerated kind.
Regarding traps, no, traps do not appeal to me. You may have thought it would be logical to assume I like traps, since you seem to have made the assumption that traps and lolis have the same body type, but that isn't the case. I don't consider them to have the same body type, and "trap" itself is not a body type that I like. I don't like cock, and I don't like literally flat chests, so traps are a no-go for me.
However, I'm not entirely averse to the presence of traps in hentai either. Before anyone tries to call me gay for admitting that, I'd like to point out that trap hentai, like loli hentai, exists on a spectrum. Just because a trap exists in a hentai, that doesn't mean the focus of the hentai is on something gay, like yaoi, or pegging. It could be that a hentai with a trap in it is about a trap fucking a girl, which is something I might be down to read depending on the quality of the art and story.
As for whether my body type preference would affect my choice of mate in real life, I'm not sure why you'd ask this, but I would say yes. Not to the point of overriding all other characteristics though. I would definitely prefer a slim, small-breasted gf, but real life isn't hentai. You can't have it exactly the way you want it, and I think there's more important things then appearance when it comes to a mate. So, I think i'd be willing to compromise a little on appearance. If she had the right personality and interests, I'd probably be happy with a thick girl(not too thick though, I don't want a fatty) with humongous D-cups.
I'd rather not have to bring up a body type chart and argue the fine details of which stages of physical maturity should fall under loli; my proposal was already generous by including diminished secondary sexual characteristics. Maybe I should have said "secondary sexual characteristics that have not reached 100% maturity", but I suppose even that could be confused by genetics.
I could probably also say androgyny, but somehow that implies to me that there's some physical maturity, which would exclude the younger range of loli. Personally, I've started using "toddler" for the very young range, but that's loaded in itself since it seems to be the label for realistic (and often western sourced) loli, which I think most fans of common loli would rather not see.
I wish we had more specific terms for these things; spectrum terms cause problems in communicating clearly.
Anyway, your clarification did make it clear that 0% secondary sexual maturity is a no-go, so it'd make sense to exclude a wide range of traps even before you get to the genitals.
I brought up the real life mate selection mostly for curiousity, but I'll also be the guy to bring up stereotype of asians having childlike physiques. "Short, with small breasts" sounds like a relatively simple hurdle to clear in the real world, so I'd count you lucky. Imagine being into furry or goblins, or some other such fantasy niche - those people have got 0 chances of finding something like that in real life. But yes, you are right, looks don't count for everything. I didn't mean to imply that you're shallow, we're just engaged in a, um, superficial topic.
I think there's a theory to build in the mate selection realm with regards to fetishes/kinks/etc, but I'll have to get more data samples before I can really go there. The other questions I asked relate to other theories I'm working on, such as how the taboo factor is not the primary force that leads a person to pursue new/adjacent fetishes/kinks, despite contradictory claims.
And you strike me as a Bible thumping tard with some dark shit hidden in your closet.
Here's the problem:
The terms have been conflated to correspond to statute limitations instead of biology.
From a biology perspective, Sailor Moon is ephebophilia / hebephilia, and K-On is pedophilia.
To an SJW, Revolutionary Girl Utena is pedophilia.
No, you're ignoring my answer because it isn't playing to your preconceived notions.
The terminology has been bent and the words are being misused.
The SJWs call Asuka and Rei loli.
If you were to press most anime fans for a line, I think the consensus would be that Sakura Kinomoto is not okay, but Rei Ayanami is kosher.
His question itself is loaded.
I'm saying that most of what THEY are calling loli, isn't.
Pedophilia.
By definition.
Nope. Unless you can prove they want to go after actual kids you cannot call someone pedophile. Lest you want to downplay the word to the point people don't know whether you are talking about people hurting actual kids or people who like anime..
I don't think you're going to find a person on this forum who's going to say it is.
The question is where is the line and why the SJWs are pushing the line higher than the community is.
A fascinating question, and I JUST posted in another thread that I wanted an arbitrary debate on any topic whatsoever with a proper discourse!
Assumption from your post: Let it be assumed that some people like loli who are not pedopheliac in nature. This is basically your entire premise.
Arising query: What traits attract such a person to such a thing? If they exist, they must have a reason. We do not assume perfectly rational actors, but we do assume sentient and sapient ones at the least: They seek pleasure, and/or flee from pain.
Obvious logical answer: They are attracted to the same traits they would be attracted to in an adult portrayal. If they are not pedopheliac in nature, then the traits they are attracted to would not be, logically speaking, those corely associated with pedopheliac aims.
Assumption from obvious answer: We can know what a pedopheliac "aims" at. This is a big assumption, but we have a lot of psychology data on these, so to define my terms as I will be using them...
Definitions: I would assign two types of pedopheliacs:
Pedo1 has an attraction to the mental traits inherent in children, but not adults. To a Pedo1, The Terminator from the movies of the same name is a legitimate target of attraction, as it has no knowledge of sin or sinner, sexuality, sociality, or moral behavior. The Terminator is "innocent" mentally, and that attracts them. But an actually-9000-year-old-vampire-who-was-turned-at-8-years-old would hold no attraction if their mental behavior was reflective of their age. I do not believe Pedo1 is a common thing, but it is included for completeness.
Pedo2 has an attraction to the physical traits inherent in children, but not adults. To a Pedo2, The Terminator, as portrayed by a clearly post-pubescent male, has no attractiveness, but the aforementioned vampire would, due to elements such as small stature, non-developed secondary sexual characteristics, and/or non-developed primary sexual characteristics.
The two make a quadrant matrix, they can exist in OR/NOR/AND/NAND/XOR states with each-other.
Clarification: So someone attracted to loli who is not pedopheliac in nature would need to avoid those traits, that is, a NOR situation, while still somehow being drawn to that medium.
Deduction: There exists traits highly common in "youthful portrayal", that are not exclusive to it, leading to an attraction to the medium.
Rationale: People will seek out their desire, and a place where that desire is common, they will congregate, even if their desire is tangential to the place's purpose. One who wants a quiet place to think may seek out a library, even if they have no intent on reading while there, in example, even if a music studio's soundproofed room may conceptually exist within accessible range to them and better suit their exact needs, because "close enough" is close enough for non-perfectly-logical actors.
Therefore we must find traits more common in loli/shota, that are not as common in adult oriented activity, but not exclusive to it. To do this, traits tangential to Pedo1 and Pedo2's assumed desires should be examined.
Pedo1 seeks those with no knowledge of sexuality or morality. "Innocence". Virginity porn and innocent-porn is common in many places in the world, that idiotic meme of "but that's where I poop from" exists because the scene it quotes exists. They could be seeking that aspect, and it is probably more plentiful in the loli/shota medium. But then again, if they're seeking innocence, they're probably a Pedo1... So to go one-level-removed.. Let's say "stupidity", instead, then: They seek an idiot, someone undereducated who they can dominate mentally, or teach, some level of superiority/inferiority situation.
Pedo2 seeks the underdeveloped. Someone seeking sporty types or more muscular frames perhaps would find overlap? I am reminded of Australia's meme-worthy legal ruling that women with A-sized cups are considered legally children, because their small chest size reminded that particular judge of children. So perhaps one who desires not children, but still flatter chests, would admire such works.
Pedo2 also seeks out small stature (assumption, but "Oppai Loli" exists as a seemingly self-contradicting category, so this is more likely a logical error spot). Small stature is often associated with large stature, size discrepancy. Giant black dicks and tiny white chicks, to reference a very popular pornography genre. Size disparity is also associated with domination and submission. While these are not rare fetishes (you can find hundreds of elf-on-orc size discrepancy doujins, and uncounted BDSM ones) perhaps they are more common, or better written, or better drawn in some way, of higher quality, in that sphere? Or it could simply be sheer quantity: You go where the supply exists for your demand.
Within the constraints you put forward, that's the best I got off the top of my head. Please check for logical inconsistencies, and reply back with your rebuttal.
EDIT: I just realized I forgot a VERY important point, a giant logic hole: "NOR" isn't necessary in the core assumption's characteristics. "Null" is also applicable. That is, there possibly exists an entity-set who would not care in either direction about Pedo1 or Pedo2's traits, that is agnostic to those traits entirely. But to get into that would take longer than I feel like typing, so feel free to remind me in the rebuttal, I'll get to it later. There could also be narrative and/or associative elements at play that I neglected to bring up, so tossing that as well as a touchstone. But these are just additional Deductions, they don't change the Obvious Logical Conclusion that this subject entity enjoys traits that exist common to and in both loli/shota and non-loli/shota settings.
The same thing that attracts people to regular porn.
I presume the reason everyone is scared is because they think the feminist cult who managed to take down 90% of PH by conflating everything with rape and using financial blackmail to force compliance will do the same trick with pedophilia.
I tend to stay out of this part of the discussion because it's ultimately pointless, however;
You're making a very obviously bad deduction.
You assume that the draw of loli in terms of usage is age.
And up here you came to an incorrect idea of human psychosexual interactions.
Being horny or aroused doesn't strictly have to have anything to do with mating itself. It's a reaction to external or internal stimuli.
When a person gets aroused at seeing an image often the reason why has little to do with the image itself. It becomes a mental refinement process whereby the mind manifests a scenario of an ideal partner or situation.
This is the reason why long-term porn use is incredibly dangerous and habit forming. It evokes a sort of self-propagandization. You are quite literally training your mind in a Pavlovian style into more and more specific and more and more debased interests.
With loli, the age often may have little to do with it. More often you'll find that it's the presumption of innocence either mental or physical. The content will evoke a scenario of protection, corruption, or destruction.
Once it reaches the stage of destruction, that does not mean the individual is predisposed to a realization of their thoughts, nor a tendency towards them. Meaning, a person who comes to get off on porn about raping or torturing kids doesn't necessarily desire to rape or torture kids. It's the same as in regards to video game violence. There's a separation in thought and consciousness between the real and the imaginary.
The real issue comes for those that are unable to distinguish between reality and their thoughts, and for those who may be biologically predisposed towards certain attractions.
If ya really are worried about the cause and effect you should look not into loli but into furry and stuff like abdl. It's literally a cult recruitment scheme set up in a way to warp the mind into acceptance of a group value system. Trannies do the same thing through text and were partially bred through that self-replicating mind virus.
We've been repeatedly told a lot of things, like that Biden won the election, wuflu isn't from china, and there's no border crisis.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm not sure why you wrote so much.
Do you think furries are zoophiles ? Or can a 1980's Karen ask why do you want to play violent video games? Or how adult women like to ship BakuDeku? It's asking the same sort of questions. And demanding people explain themselves over fiction or they are pedophiles is gross. The burden goes to you on why you want to keep acting as a Karen over loli and try to force insults on others and vilify others over it. And I do not like loli but I do not agree with the way people witchhunt it and I believe that it's just a way to distract from real issues and gives ground to the sjw left who use loli as a scapegoat to attack anime and call everything in anime as pedo.and just a gateway to increased censorship
Are the people who jack off to zoo porn, who go to convention, dress like animals, and fuck each other while shitting in diapers, and who routinely get caught actual animals, zoophiles? Hmmmm. I must mediate on this subject.
Like I said the only thing anti lolis have is "YOU ARE A PEDOPHILE" and "ITS LITERALLY ACTUAL CHILDREN" and you still don't want to answer why you want to waste time and resources going after loli instead of dealing with real issues. We know why cause you want to distract from your own actual problems
It's not for other people to explain fiction it's for you to explain why you treat it like a Karen treats violent video games in the 1980s . And you still haven't answered why you want to waste people's time and resources on going after loli instead of actual issues. We know why.
Cool the first thing I said answered you. But you are too stupid to understand or don't want to accept any other answer except one. And when are you going to answer my question to you? We know why you won't.
Cool just admit you only want one answer which is to call others pedophile and won't accept any other answer why bother pretending you are open to any debate.
It's not evasion I answered you and you just don't want to accept any other answer except "pedophile" so why pretend to be open to debate? And the burden was on you to explain to begin with. Since when was it others burden to explain about fiction?
And you have evaded why you want to waste time and resources on going after Loli instead of actual issues. We know why.
How exactly.? First comment you didn't read or you dont understand or can't accept any other answer but "pedophile" and also can't understand burden is on you to begin with. .. And when are you gonna answer my question?
Comment Removed: Rule 16
I mean there's a very easy and obvious answer here. It's a paraphilia of its own. It's like asking why some weirdos are attracted to dragons fucking cars or other weird shit like that. We don't really know why people develop paraphilias, but most research seems to indicate childhood or adolescent experiences play a roll. That's not to say that the people who like that stuff aren't pedos, I really have no idea. But the concept is well established.
I have personally never been aroused by a drawing of any type though. Whether it's weird pseudo-children/teenagers in anime, or adult cartoon stuff. It just does absolutely nothing for me for whatever reason.
Because Asian wombyn never get married. Only Western babushkas do.
I'm not a "loli" fan, but I can conceive that one thing that might make it appealing to people would be that it pisses off uptight prudish authoritarians on both the left and the right.
What I really like about being me is that I have absolutely no idea what any of you are talking about...and I'm keeping it that way.
What a thing for adults to be concerned about, on both sides of the argument...seriously.
Good question. I assume most defenders of this trash are afraid that if you ban it, then that is a slippery slope for banning other forms of supposed art or speech. That I can still respect.
Not actually liking it though, because it's creepy as hell.
We seem to have no problem creating boundaries for regular porn. I guess cartoon porn is just extra special.
I think the "extra special" boundary is called reality. You can film as much rape/murder porn as you want, but if you film an actual rape or kill one of the actors(snuff film), then that's illegal- obviously. I can play Murder Sim 2021 all day, every day and not feel the inclination to take someone's life for real- I assume it's the same for other fictional depictions of otherwise horrible acts.
While breaking it down exactly would require a massive study you could never get enough participants for best guess is the taboo.
I tried answering you in the other thread and got no response, but okay, I'll try one more time. Minus the assumption of good faith this time.
First is definition. If you wanted a serious discussion, you wouldn't ignore requests for it. Honestly really incriminating, considering the language games most of us are familiar with from sjws. But that's okay, I'll use the broadest definition I can think of: illustrations of females.
Next, since we're engaged in a discussion of the broadest generalities, I'll remove a large chunk with broad generalities befitting the refusal to define terms: any singular image without narrative context can be enjoyed for craftsmanship or illustrative style.
The little interest possible now falls to images that bear narrative context. Broadly: metaphorical value, asthetic value, crude tonal display, and expression of incentive from another character's point of view.
They can't answer because they are pedos.
Anime is a gateway to pedophilia, they feel atracted to neotenic characteristics like large eyes and head, flat face, short arms, etc. lolicon is what anime leads to. Anime is like porn and just as coomers, weaboos are addicted and search for a "stronger" version of what they are consuming
New account that literally has only posted this message and another message saying that white girls fuck dogs?
If you don't like anime then don't watch it.
To paint all of anime with a false brush like this is why I completely despise moral authoritarians like you.
Moral authoritarians often are found to be closet sex predators.
You are also a new account who didn't post at all until in the Minds thread.
I feel pity for you foolish moral authoritarians who are nothing but useful idiots for the left's censorship.
"Authoritatians"(plural)
sock accounts: Am I a joke to you?
Moral grandstanders don't seem to grasp the fact that we currently live in a world dominated entirely by the LEFT.
You guys going after this loli shit only increases the power of the left.
They will just use the precedent set by your crusade over loli to ban things that we all value by saying that too is offensive and needs to be banned. You really think that the left won't weaponize this crusade and use it against you? The left never lets any situation go to waste.
Your moral grandstanding will just result in giving the left wing authoritarians more power.
You don't seem to get that I am not just talking about alt tech banning loli being a boon for the left.
I am talking about the religious right's constant moral grandstanding crusade against trivial shit like loli.
Instead of trying to build as large of a coalition of anti leftists as possible they would rather alienate people who otherwise fully agree with them just because these people cannot resist seething over coomers fapping to lolis.
I think this attitude is beyond counter-productive and only strengthens the power of the left.
Stop trying to divide the anti-leftist coalition.
How does a fucking coomer fapping to loli harm you? It doesn't harm anyone.
Focus on the bigger picture.
New account!!! You are deboonked!
I didn't know I was still in Reddit.
If you don't like Desmond is amazing don't watch it, don't be a bigot!
You clearly are not engaging in any good faith discussion when you stated all of anime is a gateway to pedophillia.
This is one of the most smoothbrained takes I ever have seen.
Congratulations, you have demonstrated a new level of retardness.