Plagued Lolicon/Shotacon Defense Force - The people who jerk off to cartoon children and won't ever shut up about it

There is a lolicon magazine...
View attachment 6380879
Oh you don’t know the half in of it buddy….Its fuckin worse than you think….

Reminder that the term lolicon refers to actual young girls back in the day AND drawings. And this was allowed to be printed and published.

1725478570628.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's more important now than ever to put these people on a watchlist. If not a government watchlist, a kiwi watchlist. Xitter is giving these subhumans a platform to normalize raping children and allowing them to find communities in plain sight through the guise of MAPs. I'm personally suspicious of any person who has an interest in an anime character who has a young/cutesy look to them.

Also, I vaguely remember a rage bait youtuber called Hero Hei saying something that sounded like he was defending this shit. I will see if I can find the video.
 
A while ago I posted about this burner Facebook account, where a Lolicon straight up admits to being attracted to minors:
IMG_3561.jpeg
IMG_3560.jpeg
IMG_3559.jpegIMG_3558.jpegIMG_3562.jpegIMG_3563.jpegIMG_3564.jpegIMG_3565.jpeg
Some may say that Punished Theo is just “shitposting”. However, I'm not buying that. If someone says point blank that they are a pedophile and love CP, its safe to assume that they likely do have CP on their hard drives at minimum.
 
A while ago I posted about this burner Facebook account, where a Lolicon straight up admits to being attracted to minors:
View attachment 6381587
View attachment 6381588
View attachment 6381589View attachment 6381590View attachment 6381595View attachment 6381597View attachment 6381598View attachment 6381599
Some may say that Punished Theo is just “shitposting”. However, I'm not buying that. If someone says point blank that they are a pedophile and love CP, its safe to assume that they likely do have CP on their hard drives at minimum.
"Puberty is literally when women are in their prime"- a pedophile.

We are at if she bleeds she breeds territory. Oh I can smell this creature. I can smell the cum jars. This nigga has shilled out for a 20tb hard drive. And its full. Oh lord. You have to go back. Back to the woodchipper.
 
A while ago I posted about this burner Facebook account, where a Lolicon straight up admits to being attracted to minors:
Why can't more admit it like this and make it easy for us...

"Puberty is literally when women are in their prime"- a pedophile.

We are at if she bleeds she breeds territory. Oh I can smell this creature. I can smell the cum jars. This nigga has shilled out for a 20tb hard drive. And its full. Oh lord. You have to go back. Back to the woodchipper.
The wood chipper is far too generous.
 
Reminder that the term lolicon refers to actual young girls back in the day AND drawings. And this was allowed to be printed and published.
I think someone brought this up before, but Japan was (before 1999) one of the worst countries in the world in terms of CSAM distribution. The only reason CSAM was banned is because other governments basically forced them to outlaw it:
1725489248611.pngSource
1725489381280.pngSource

Even after that, pedos just skirted the law by not showing full nudity:
1725489558184.pngSource
 
My advice: probably don't use Jack Thompson style arguments against lolicon. Because using the same logic as the "violent video makes people violent" to argue that loli turns people into pedos is how people against lolicon end up losing the argument, unless if you are a Jack Thompson type yourself.

You'd be far better off, arguing that loli is bad because it's immoral and degenerate or citing studies and/or data that proves there's a link between pedophilia and lolicon, and one that's stronger than correlation since I've seen lolicons pull the "correlation =/= causation" defense. If you don't want to be associated with the anti-violent game people, then you should avoid using the same logic/style as the "violent games leads to violence" argument, when arguing against the loli defenders.

Other than that, you could add the violent video game analogy to the cope section, but I'd still warn against using the same type of moralfag argument. Also I do think Jack Thompson may have actually been right about Japanese media in America being another Pearl Harbor.
Of course I'm not making that sort of argument. My post was responding to defenders of lolicon who prove too much by arguing that an "anti" (anti-pedophile) should also think that GTA players are murderers (or that violent video games cause violence). When I originally wrote it, I was responding to the pedophile known as @dzonatan who said this:
dzonatan said:
[GTA and lolicon] are fictional crimes.
dzonatan said:
Do you call GTA players murderers too?
I'm the opposite of Jack Thompson precisely because pedos bring up Jack Thompson as a strawman and argue that people disgusted with drawn CP are just being a Jack Thompson.

Jerking off to lolicon doesn't cause you to be a pedophile, being a pedophile in the first place is what causes you to jerk off to lolicon. There's a strong correlation between enjoyment of lolicon and pedophilia. Anybody who has even a modicum of pattern recognition will see this too. You can argue correlation =/= causation but it's extremely unlikely that anybody could be jerking off to lolicon for non-pedophilic reasons.
 
Jerking off to lolicon doesn't cause you to be a pedophile, being a pedophile in the first place is what causes you to jerk off to lolicon. There's a strong correlation between enjoyment of lolicon and pedophilia. Anybody who has even a modicum of pattern recognition will see this too. You can argue correlation =/= causation but it's extremely unlikely that anybody could be jerking off to lolicon for non-pedophilic reasons.
The theoretical end point of porn addiction where you'll jack off to anything is about the only point i can see someone jerk off to lolicon and not be a pedophile, but at that point, it's likely they are a pedophile because nothing but the most depraved vile shit like CSAM will get them off any more. That's the only correlation =/= causation argument i can think of.
 
The theoretical end point of porn addiction where you'll jack off to anything is about the only point i can see someone jerk off to lolicon and not be a pedophile, but at that point, it's likely they are a pedophile because nothing but the most depraved vile shit like CSAM will get them off any more. That's the only correlation =/= causation argument i can think of.
iirc porn addiction rarely ends in pedophilia. More commonly they have a higher threshold for disgust regarding sex to begin with, so they don't find the thought of being aroused to children so unappealing as normal people do.
 
More commonly they have a higher threshold for disgust regarding sex to begin with, so they don't find the thought of being aroused to children so unappealing as normal people do.
When you say "higher threshold" do you mean to say more stringent or more loose?
 
Crazy this hasn't been posted yet
View attachment 6381446

And how deepl translates it (inb4 muh google)
View attachment 6381455
Both platforms take user feedback into consideration for translations. Anyone can submit translations with no background in languages and DeepL picks the most popular.
1725542228416.png
1725542284389.png
I remember in the past the translation being just from katakana to romaji like how is currently with shota but without the alternatives section
1725546912014.png
Here is Hikikomori as example and its picking the wrong translation for the first result
1725545480743.png

1725545700823.png
1725545747053.png
Bonus: VICE hit piece on Japan and Manga industry that is blocked in Japan. It wasnt censorship from the government or backlash, VICE themselves decided to block
1725547923655.png1725548140856.png
Kinda funny how they are trying to blame the Manga Industry for the rising of child abuse and they drop "dude trust me" as argument.

1725548401474.png
 
Last edited:
1725570999049.png

What they mean to say is that there are no studies that investigate whether looking at drawn child porn leads to real rape. Not that there are some that disprove that it leads to real rape. There aren't. However, studies have already shown that watching violent porn can lead one to act more violent. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6751001/ That's a RECENT study, newer than the Big-Porn industry-paid studies. That show yes, it does increase violence.

One might hypothesize that those who do rape and are in possession of drawn child porn are more likely to have raped than those who have raped without drawn child porn based on accounting for the population size of those who have drawn child porn which is going to be much smaller than those who don't own drawn cp since the smaller the demographic size, the greater the representation... sort of like how trannies represent less than 1% of the population but you're in more danger of being raped around a tranny than a normal guy.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 6385113
What they mean to say is that there are no studies that investigate whether looking at drawn child porn leads to real rape. Not that there are any.
I guess they haven't asked rapists if they have watched lolicon with a multiple choice worksheet. Its not like there's FBI statistics or anything out there from all their stings.
 
One common argument I see from Lolicons that I find mildly amusing is how often they’ll deflect to pointing out that Cuties exist, so therefore we shouldn’t make fun of their fetish for drawn children.

They think they made a point, but all they end up showing is that they’re being willfully obtuse about the subject matter. Ignoring the obvious deflection tactic, just about 90% of Netizens were calling for the movie to be boycott because of how it sexually exploited the young actresses. The only people defending it were either doing it to “own the conservatives” or straight up pedophiles (or both).

Funny enough, it’s an argument that says more about the Lolicon than it does about the “Antis” they’re arguing with.

It’s an argument whose foundation is built upon the assumption that “Antis” ever supported Cuties in the first place. If a person loathes the sexualization of children, they’re more likely to loathe it regardless if it’s real or fictional.
 
Back