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.
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.