Why do we put so much stock into loli/underaged characters as a direct link to being a pedo?

[WelperHelper99]

God I love how this post turned into every other discussion post on this website. "Fuck troons and libtards, fuck xyz" nah man im sorry FUCK PEDOPHILES WHO LOOK AT LOLLI. That's the discussion here. People keep trying to bring all their other moral faggory into this when it has nothing to do with the discussion. You can have whatever opinion you want but all it does is derail the dog pile we should be having here against weirdos who look at drawings of kids being raped.

Morals has everything to do with it. Something legal can also be wrong. How hard is that to understand?

 

[ticktacktoe]

Morals has everything to do with it. Something legal can also be wrong. How hard is that to understand?

The morals of fucking kids vs someone who's existence you don't believe is real is pretty different? Like you can hate troons all you want but to bring them into this feels like people trying to make this discussion about trannies being the bain of this website and moving away from the discussion at hand about "people who look at this stuff are bad" cuz i guarantee more than just troons are looking at this stuff.

 

[WelperHelper99]

The morals of fucking kids vs someone who's existence you don't believe is real is pretty different? Like you can hate troons all you want but to bring them into this feels like people trying to make this discussion about trannies being the bain of this website and moving away from the discussion at hand about "people who look at this stuff are bad" cuz i guarantee more than just troons are looking at this stuff.

What? I think we've been pretty on point in saying "fuck all pedophiles that watch this shit". Even if we did bring them up, why are you mad?

 

[ticktacktoe]

What? I think we've been pretty on point in saying "fuck all pedophiles that watch this shit". Even if we did bring them up, why are you mad?

Im not necessarily mad, i just find it annoying that everything on this website eventually comes back to troons and liberals. Just feels over saturated and over done i guess. You've been good in discussion, I'm not saying otherwise, I just find most discussions actually going forward here eventually evolving into such and it's more annoying than anything.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Im not necessarily mad, i just find it annoying that everything on this website eventually comes back to troons and liberals. Just feels over saturated and over done i guess. You've been good in discussion, I'm not saying otherwise, I just find most discussions actually going forward here eventually evolving into such and it's more annoying than anything.

Well they are the source of a lot of this shit. It's called not being blind. But we've mostly been on point because this is about lolicon, which is a Japanese thing that migrated westward, and that's main audience is pedophiles and horse cock enthusiasts

 

[Lacto]

fuck all pedophiles that watch this shit

I'd rather not ;_;

 

[potato in mah painus]

Im not necessarily mad, i just find it annoying that everything on this website eventually comes back to troons and liberals. Just feels over saturated and over done i guess. You've been good in discussion, I'm not saying otherwise, I just find most discussions actually going forward here eventually evolving into such and it's more annoying than anything.

Troons almost always have severe mental illness that leads to shit like pedophilia, and liberals have the gall to enable and put them on a podium of moral standard the west needs to aspire to.

Spare me if there isn't a deep seated disdain when we say this shit is not ok and get labeled bigots for it.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

Defending adults wanting to mutilate children is just as bad, if not worse, than loli.

Yeah, it's the equivalent of jaywalking vs rape, there's hardly even a comparison to be made. The grooming, drugging, and mutilation of children is the worst thing you can do just short of killing them, which they may end up doing themselves anyway.

And if you want to jerk to it and you're certain you'll never ever harm a child then just go and do that! don't shit up the internet by trying to make it accepted because it shouldn't be accepted as a normal or okay thing.

Everyone wants to be a victim group and complain about not being accepted. I miss the days when people just kept their strange proclivities to themselves.

I hated fags less before they were omnipresent, worshipped, and politically pandered to. Most people probably wouldn't even think about lolifags if they shut the fuck.

I mention nuance because from what I've seen of what loli is since making the thread it is literally nothing like what I havent seen (but can imagine from stories I had to listen to in college) in real life.

Is English your third language? I don't even know what the hell you're saying.

You're a major retard if you think killing someone who is a danger enough to society, to literally mentally destroy a child (and god forbid, multiple children) for their life, is "a bridge too far." lol.

I'd settle for life in prison. As Michael Knowles pointed out, even just from a position of prudence, killing offenders gives them no incentive to not kill their victim in order to better cover up their crime since the punishment is death either way. It may cost taxpayers a bit more than the cost of a bullet but it's the better yet less cathartic option.

Mostly saying this because it's interesting how this is debated as "should this be illegal" when several authorities make no distinction between it and cheese pizza.

Quite rightly, I should add.

To say it's right or logical to make no distinction between cartoons and actual abuse victims is asinine at best, detrimental to abuse victims at worst. Loli is bad because it's obscene, cp is wrong because it's creating victims. They're both immoral but to staggeringly different degrees.

Im not necessarily mad, i just find it annoying that everything on this website eventually comes back to troons and liberals. Just feels over saturated and over done i guess. You've been good in discussion, I'm not saying otherwise, I just find most discussions actually going forward here eventually evolving into such and it's more annoying than anything.

Cope and seethe, tranny shill

Troons almost always have severe mental illness that leads to shit like pedophilia, and liberals have the gall to enable and put them on a podium of moral standard the west needs to aspire to.

Spare me if there isn't a deep seated disdain when we say this shit is not ok and get labeled bigots for it.

He's got a point that it is off-topic, but conversations naturally touch on related subjects. As long as it doesn't dominate the thread, which it hasn't, it's not a problem.

 

[Lowlife Adventures]

Spoiler: Long

I hate the "le video game is like jerking off!" argument. It's a complete false equivalency. In a game, you are engaging in skill-based mechanics, a story, and visual spectacle. When you shoot the bad guy in the face, you get a dopamine hit because your skill is being tangibly rewarded and you further the plot along. Finishing a monster in God of War looks badass and it's enjoyable, but nobody gets off to it. Even when you're not playing as the "good guy", like in GTA or Dead by Daylight, or even fucking amogus, you're working toward a skill-based goal and/or following a developing story, and you understand it's firmly in the realm of fiction. You're not jerking off to the corpses, and if you are you have issues. Jerking off to loli is jerking off to loli. There is no other incentive there than to jerk off to what is ostensibly a child

Does he not see the irony here?

Yeah, I agree. OP (who is a faggit) says:
"Violent media does not make you violent.
Watching porn of adult characters does not make you a rapist
Watching crude humor does not make you sexist" and that
"people who play violent video games or watch action movies enjoy it because it triggers the pleasure centers of the brain associated with violence in a manner that hurts nobody. If you get a dopamine rush from playing Call of Duty, you must want to go do a mass shooting"

But these are false equivalences because in all of his examples, the source of the pleasure does not come from the media's negative qualities. They're just incidental and not essential. Violent media entertains me not because I take pleasure in violence in itself but because of catharsis seeing some pieces of shit get destroyed. In most forms of violent media, it isn't innocents who get victimized. In the case of video games, there's also the thing you mentioned about the pleasure coming from game mechanics, stories, and visual spectacles. We find them fun because they're games. It's fun because of the interactivity and challenge and not because of the senseless violence, and if the senseless violence is what draws you in, then you're also a sick weirdo.

Re: crude humor, it's the same thing. We find crude humor funny because it's funny, the crude subject matter is just a medium or vehicle for funny incongruous ideas to be delivered. It's not the main attraction.

Re: porn of adult characters. This one is weird because it's not like all adult porn involves rape, and if rape porn is what gets you off then you're also worthy of scorn.

Meanwhile, the qualities that loli consumers are attracted to are the childlike qualities of the characters. The arguments about whether someone is 10 or 17 or whatever are a just a smokescreen that obscures the fact that these people are drawn in by what they consider small, weak, innocent, and easily manipulated, and that's why they're no different from pedophiles. Childlike qualities are inseparable from loli characters because that's literally how "loli" is defined.

 

[r9k-speaks]

Meanwhile, the qualities that loli consumers are attracted to are the childlike qualities of the characters. The arguments about whether someone is 10 or 17 or whatever are a just a smokescreen that obscures the fact that these people are drawn in by what they consider small, weak, innocent, and easily manipulated, and that's why they're no different from pedophiles. Childlike qualities are inseparable from loli characters because that's literally how "loli" is defined.

I think this whole discussion drops into murky areas where everyone has their own opinion "I know it when I see it". Should midgets be banned from porn? Petite Asians? Dwarfism? Ban schoolgirl outfits from sex shops?

Is there a proven loli to pedophile pipeline? I think it's just like the school shooters, if you are already interested in killing people, of course you are going to play an online shooter.

Everytime I read these sorts of discussions it eventually turns into "nuke Japan again", even though Epstein and the Vatican exists.

 

[grump]

people who consume loli probably are more likely to be pedos. But I don't really give a shit about some guy spanking it to a cartoon. I mean would you rather have them doing it to real people?

 

[r9k-speaks]

people who consume loli probably are more likely to be pedos. But I don't really give a shit about some guy spanking it to a cartoon. I mean would you rather have them doing it to real people?

Since the development of AI art though. I think now this is also a murky area. At what point is something a drawing vs an AI generated photograph? No one was abused, so is it still CP? Or is it just a very sophisticated drawing? Would it stop pedos from offending? Or encourage them? Have such studies even been done? I don't know.

 

[WTBOnlineFather]

Since the development of AI art though. I think now this is also a murky area. At what point is something a drawing vs an AI generated photograph? No one was abused, so is it still CP? Or is it just a very sophisticated drawing? Would it stop pedos from offending? Or encourage them? Have such studies even been done? I don't know.

Does it matter? Loli is not CSAM in US law (it is in some other countries) because no real children are harmed in the making of it, but still only pedos will jack off to it because normal people find that shit disgusting. I'd say it's completely irrelevant whether someone drew it by hand or programmed a computer to draw it for him.
Does playing Counter-Strike encourage people to commit mass shootings? I don't think so. Would any mass shooters have decided against committing the shooting if they had simply played CS instead? I don't think so either.

The legality of lolishit is a complex moral question that can be answered neither by "it's totally normal and she's 700 years old" nor by "it must be banned everywhere to protect the kids". I find it vile personally but maybe it's supposed to fall under free speech.

 

[Gremperor]

I think the amount of hate towards loli could be far better spent after actual pedophiles.

Loli fags are actual pedophiles.
This "argument" doesn't even make any sense, everyone that hates lolicons would treat CP owners and child molesters even worse, the reason you SEE more hate for loli is because it's far more common and freaks keep trying to "normalize" it.

Im not necessarily mad, i just find it annoying that everything on this website eventually comes back to troons and liberals.

I wonder why you would find that annoying?

I understand having an aspect of your identity attacked doesn't feel good but you should look at the faggot that chimped out when I said pedophiles should be killed and realize posting comments when you are personally offended is only going to make you look bad.

 

[grump]

Since the development of AI art though. I think now this is also a murky area. At what point is something a drawing vs an AI generated photograph? No one was abused, so is it still CP? Or is it just a very sophisticated drawing? Would it stop pedos from offending? Or encourage them? Have such studies even been done? I don't know.

Well nobody actually gets molested through a computer calculating an AI picture. Whether its CP or not is semantics.

 

[SenutiSolidus]

Well nobody actually gets molested through a computer calculating an AI picture. Whether its CP or not is semantics.

it probably is considering the law states that if it's indistinguishable from the real thing, it's CP.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

if the senseless violence is what draws you in, then you're also a sick weirdo.

I love going on rampages, killing innocents in games (I almost always save and reload afterwards though, because I like playing as a good/neutral character, not bad). It's just a video game. Now I do think certain games could appeal to sickos theoretically, but senseless violence in the average video game can be fun, like Skyrim. If there was a hyperrealistic torture simulator then sure, I'd agree.

Sex and violence are inherently different though, indulging in violent media is typically much less a red flag than sexual media.

I think this whole discussion drops into murky areas where everyone has their own opinion "I know it when I see it". Should midgets be banned from porn? Petite Asians? Dwarfism? Ban schoolgirl outfits from sex shops?

Well, for starters, ban what's obvious. You can work on the outliers later.

I find it vile personally but maybe it's supposed to fall under free speech.

Obscenity laws exist precisely for vile things.

Well nobody actually gets molested through a computer calculating an AI picture. Whether its CP or not is semantics.

If the AI is good enough it could create confusion and more workload for investigators, wasting their time, effort, and resources on determining if something is real or not, unlike with hentai. At the very least such AI art should be banned for practical reasons.

 

[Catler]

Obviously "lolis" aren't real and loli material isn't the same as actual CSAM

Depends entirely upon country, some rightfully consider loli porn CP and the same laws apply to it. Are you likely to go to jail for just loli porn? No, but as they say where there's smoke there's fire.

At the very least such AI art should be banned for practical reasons.

The other big problem is how can you prove a model didn't use existing CP as part of its dataset to generate said content?

Sex and violence are inherently different though, indulging in violent media is typically much less a red flag than sexual media.

I'm glad someone understands this. Sane people don't get sexual enjoyment from violent media and if they did that would be the reddest of red flags and major cause for concern.

 

[Mr.Miyagi]

If the AI is good enough it could create confusion and more workload for investigators, wasting their time, effort, and resources on determining if something is real or not, unlike with hentai. At the very least such AI art should be banned for practical reasons.

By banning, do you mean outlawing under existing definitions of explicit material or preventing its generation in the first place? The former is possible but likewise increases the workload on CP investigators greatly due to volume, but the latter may be next to impossible in the long run. Online services already attempt to do so by virtue of secondary checks for certain content and keywords, but locally run models don't.

 

[Lidl Drip]

how can you prove a model didn't use existing CP as part of its dataset to generate said content?

Isn't it basically guaranteed that an AI that can generate realistic CP has been trained on such material? Anyone who is developing and distributing such a thing should be in jail.