Should lolicon / shotacon be considered drawn child pornography?

Is OP a pedophile?

  • yes

    Votes: 967 74.3%
  • no

    Votes: 210 16.1%
  • it should be regulated, not outright banned

    Votes: 124 9.5%

  • Total voters
    1,301
I forgot kiwi farms has this brainrot that loli/shota is a 1:1 to pedophilia. It's stupid.
One thing i'm curious about is if it's even worth "going after" flam when that's exactly what Gunt wants. To divide the anti-gunt kekforce.
Would you trust someone you know is into loli/shota to be alone with children you're related to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xenomorph
Grown men masturbating to drawings of little boys and girls getting fucked is totally not weird and completely normal to do. Heck I believe any normal person wouldn't find it weird or suspicious.
Fifteen years old is above the age of consent in most of the world. The character in question is a teenage boy having sex with older women, something that is generally not looked down upon. The only part that would raise eyebrows is the anime art style, and that's it. Actually think about what you're saying instead of virtue signaling like a retard.
 
I don't know what shota is but that is the definition of CP, is a minor having sex with adults. At the very least is statutory rape porn, is there a japanese cartoon word for that?

This character is 17.
1654841470458.png


Should it be illegal to make porn of this character? Its an illustration under the age of eighteen, after all.
 
  • Autistic
Reactions: Toast Sandwich
No but it should be legal to gas weebs anyway.
This is unironically a more reasonable argument than this:
Yes, I don't know what the confusion is, he's a minor.
He doesn't have any of the sex characteristics of a child. He looks like an adult. No pedophile would ever be attracted to him. No child was hurt in his creation, nor is the abuse of children normalized by his sexualization. What if the author decided to make this character a minor?
1654841901431.png

I know "age is just a number" is a meme, but in this case its literally true. The character is an adult in every meaningful way except for a single scribble on a page.
 
Why is Jim the tard wrangler for all of these cows???
He isn't, he kind of ducks out whenever the responsibility emerges. Sort of like their real daddies ducked out to buy a pack of ciggies and never showed up again. But at least Jim never bought the responsibility by blowing a load in their mom. That we know of.
So this is what the thread has derailed into? Pedo art defense?
Somehow whenever this subject comes up a certain group of people show up. I'm sure they're just philosophically interested in the subject though.
 
Yes, I don't know what the confusion is, he's a minor.
So to you someone that looks like a kid but is actually a 9000 year old vampire witch is prefectly ok to sexualize? Because you're saying that it's the number on the page that matters not the physical traits. That's pretty fucked dude.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: GuntN7
Its a fucking drawing jesus h christ
If you jerk to it you are a weirdo and legally shouldn't be allowed near children
And if you get butthurt and feel the need to moralfag and protect the fucking cartoon, unironically go touch grass and then hang yourself
Same argument and same sperging every time this shit gets brought up
 
Back