Has the world "loli" always had pedo connotations? - Aw here it goes

[draggs]

I've never defended lolicon except for a few years ago when I used the typical "I don't like it but it's free speech" defense. I haven't believed that for a few years now, because I think that like all pornography, it is mind-altering and leads down very bad paths so should be banned. But I get how logic can be difficult to understand for you.

I'm not talking about you defending lolicon several years ago blah blah blah, I'm talking about idk a month or two ago in one of the threads here in mass debates about porn or whatever. And now you're doing it again. You say the exact same things pedos say when they decide to waste their time sperging on the internet about pedo shit

 

[Ass to Ass]

This is dodging the point entirely.

It's a recurring theme with a lot of Thunderdomers. Difference is, most of them haven't chosen lolicon as the hill to die on.

I'm not talking about you defending lolicon several years ago blah blah blah, I'm talking about idk a month or two ago in one of the threads here in mass debates about porn or whatever. And now you're doing it again. You say the exact same things pedos say when they decide to waste their time sperging on the internet about pedo shit

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Kiwi Farms isn't dedicated to lolicon in any way. You're asserting a false equivalency.

Where did I imply Kiwi Farms was dedicated to lolicon? You really need to work on your logic.

This is dodging the point entirely.

Your entire logic is that some perverted Japanese artist whose name I don't even know and whose works I have never encountered was a sicko, therefore anything even remotely descended from said works in style or tone is also perverted shit consumed by sickos.

Do you not see how retarded that logic of yours is?

I'm not talking about you defending lolicon several years ago blah blah blah, I'm talking about idk a month or two ago in one of the threads here in mass debates about porn or whatever. And now you're doing it again. You say the exact same things pedos say when they decide to waste their time sperging on the internet about pedo shit

I would think actual pedos would say "hell yeah I love loli" or at the very least "it's harmless and should be legal." If I really thought loli should be legal or that it was awesome, I'd tell you, just like I tell you all of my other beliefs and ideas that make me unpopular among the local neocon and libertarian population like when I mention Trump trade wars are bad for Americans and that China isn't as bad as those CIA-funded China Uncensored videos say.

 

[The Last Stand]

I don't see anything weird about it. Loli-type characters are meant to be cute like cats or dogs. That's why half the time they have animal ears and get headpats like a cat or dog.

Except the main purpose of loli is to arouse sexual satisfaction by depicting children in suggestive situations.

"Loli" just referred to a character type/body type, "lolicon" was the pedo stuff. Not my fault they've been increasingly conflated.

Yes it is, because you're adamant in playing semantics with "a difference."

 

[Grub]

Except I never said they were literal animals and just made a comparison to the cuteness factor in play. That's not "dehumanization" in the slightest. Why can't something just be cute with no sexualization involved? This smacks of projection on your part.

Dehumanization doesn't mean sexualization. It means:

Dehumanization is the process of depriving an individual or a group of human qualities

To reiterate what you said:

Loli-type characters are meant to be cute like cats or dogs. That's why half the time they have animal ears and get headpats like a cat or dog.

Do you not see how your statement deprives these child characters of humanlike qualities by likening them to pets? You view them as cute animallike objects and not depictions of people.

 

[keep em' comin]

Where did I imply Kiwi Farms was dedicated to lolicon? You really need to work on your logic.

Your entire logic is that some perverted Japanese artist whose name I don't even know and whose works I have never encountered was a sicko, therefore anything even remotely descended from said works in style or tone is also perverted shit consumed by sickos.

Do you not see how retarded that logic of yours is?

I would think actual pedos would say "hell yeah I love loli" or at the very least "it's harmless and should be legal." If I really thought loli should be legal or that it was awesome, I'd tell you, just like I tell you all of my other beliefs and ideas that make me unpopular among the local neocon and libertarian population like when I mention Trump trade wars are bad for Americans and that China isn't as bad as those CIA-funded China Uncensored videos say.

you can argue all you want man we all know you are into loli porn, stop "erm ackshully!'-ing around it

 

[The Last Stand]

I would think actual pedos would say "hell yeah I love loli" or at the very least "it's harmless and should be legal." If I really thought loli should be legal or that it was awesome, I'd tell you, just like I tell you all of my other beliefs and ideas that make me unpopular among the local neocon and libertarian population like when I mention Trump trade wars are bad for Americans and that China isn't as bad as those CIA-funded China Uncensored videos say.

I think you've psychologically convinced yourself that there's nothing wrong with loli that you feel the need to showcase it publicly. Congratulations, good luck convincing others.

 

[Hooked on phobics]

Do you not see how your statement deprives these child characters of humanlike qualities by likening them to pets? You view them as cute animallike objects and not depictions of people.

Logic here sounds....kinda stupid not gonna lie. Its dehumanizing a person to compare them to animals under any circumstances? Does a girlfriend dehumanize me by calling me tiger? Or a friend calling me big dog?
This is getting lost in the weeds tbh.

 

[Asterism]

sorry if someone's already said this
but yeah, it does
it comes from the book lolita
which is a warning tale about a neurotic pedophile obsessing over a little girl in a more gradually deranged and projective manner
interesting

 

[Anonymous Against Foodism]

how is a lollipop a pedo word

 

[NoBueno]

how is a lollipop a pedo word

According to the FBI and some other sources. Pedos use a code to communicate, with symbols or food items. I don't think theres a complete accurate list.

But I think you can guess what the Director/Producer was implying in this MV

 

[Grub]

Logic here sounds....kinda stupid not gonna lie. Its dehumanizing a person to compare them to animals under any circumstances? Does a girlfriend dehumanize me by calling me tiger? Or a friend calling me big dog?
This is getting lost in the weeds tbh.

The art of contex really seems lost on people these days. Let's think about these scenarios here. One is, what would assume, a loving relationship, where typically the two people treat eachother with love and respect on a regular basis and happen to have animal related nicknames for eachother.

The other scenario is a group of fat sweaty men posting pictures of cartoon children on the internet and referring to them as cute animals who's heads they would like to pet.

Do I really need to explain why one of those things is not like the other?

 

[Hey Johnny Bravo]

Your entire logic is that some perverted Japanese artist whose name I don't even know and whose works I have never encountered was a sicko, therefore anything even remotely descended from said works in style or tone is also perverted shit consumed by sickos.

Do you not see how retarded that logic of yours is?

Your username is "Save the Loli" and you said you don't see a problem with posting pictures of anime girls from lolicon franchises. There are no degrees of separation here. Also you said, and I quote:

Loli-type characters are meant to be cute like cats or dogs.

This is demonstrably false. Loli-type characters are sexualized and have been since the beginning of the genre.

What you're trying to argue here is that you're a special case that does not sexualize loli and just thinks it's "cute," which is an argument that others have made to cover for their blatant pedophilia.

 

[Lurker]

What you're trying to argue here is that you're a special case that does not sexualize loli and just thinks it's "cute,"

if only he knew 'moe' was a less gross term than 'loli'

 

[Fuck Bankers]

sorry if someone's already said this
but yeah, it does
it comes from the book lolita
which is a warning tale about a neurotic pedophile obsessing over a little girl in a more gradually deranged and projective manner
interesting

Is the book worth reading? I like Russian lit a lot (Tolstoy is better than Dosto) but I've always passed on it because it was about pedophiles.

 

[Hooked on phobics]

The art of contex really seems lost on people these days. Let's think about these scenarios here. One is, what would assume, a loving relationship, where typically the two people treat eachother with love and respect on a regular basis and happen to have animal related nicknames for eachother.

Sounds like an admission that dehumanization via animal comparison isn't the REAL issue here.

Your username is "Save the Loli" and you said you don't see a problem with posting pictures of anime girls from lolicon franchises. There are no degrees of separation here.

I mean I posted a none lewd "loli" gamergate girl in this thread and nobody got on my case.

Correct me if I'm wrong please, but I don't know of any weird behavior from save the loli outside the name / avatar which I really don't see as an issue, they have been here from 2017 and not been banned or forcibly name changed / pink triangled AFAIK, which speaks for itself. As for the avatar, its not porn, its not scantily clad, or cropped porn AFAIK. And save the loli on a surface level interpretation gives me ANTI pedo vibes frankly, since "save the loli" was a term thrown around on 4chan an the like to counter pedobear shit. And if this is correct to interpret, are you guys really suggesting someone saying to NOT molest "lolis" is a pedo BECAUSE they said the word loli?

Like I've said already, linguistically "loli" is 2 concepts, and I don't believe its always sexual. And if its 2 concepts, why do you think they are the perverted kind? Weeb? ABSOFUCKINLUTELY, dead to rights, @Save the Loli is a fucking weeb. But the logic in this thread is kinda retarded, like people who say you are a faggot if you are aware the detailed harms of faggotry and troonery , like your average kiwi might be "because you sure know a lot about gays for a straight guy, so you must be gay". I found such logic annoying then, and I find it annoying now.

Sure, the term definitely originated as porn backings, But the word itself isn't "the devil" or something, I also don't buy this purity spiral BS that having a clean name and avatar is "100% dead to rights" making them a pedo or something. I'd need more evidence to buy that.

This said, save the loli is DEFINITELY a weeb.

Is the book worth reading? I like Russian lit a lot (Tolstoy is better than Dosto) but I've always passed on it because it was about pedophiles.

You are asking for someone to review a book on kiwi farms where even if people did read it, I doubt they would admit it. What do you think you are going to get from that exactly?

 

[Grub]

Sounds like an admission that dehumanization via animal comparison isn't the REAL issue here.

No it really is and i'm not really sure what your point is. But let me try to break this down for you.

A person using a nickname for a person they actively treat like a human is not dehumanization.

Treating depictions of humans as animals and attributing animal qualities to them as a group as an excuse to objectivity the characters depicted those pictures is dehumanization.

To put it another way. If you call your significant other a nickname like tiger in public, nobody will look twice.

If you were to go to a playground and start patting children on the head and calling them cute, at best, you'd be asked to leave, at worst, you'd be knocked the fuck out and arrested.

Doing the second thing online with pictures instead in real life is not really any less fucked up. Just like how you would look at any dude going up to children and patting them on the head calling them cute like a puppy dog in real life with extreme suspicion, likewise, it's extremely suspicious when men do the same thing online with cartoon children.

 

[Fuck Bankers]

What do you think you are going to get from that exactly?

Something interesting, or something funny.

 

[Hooked on phobics]

A person using a nickname for a person they actively treat like a human is not dehumanization.

attributing animal qualities to them as a group as an excuse to objectivity the characters depicted those pictures is dehumanization.

You know nicknames like tiger and big dog DO attribute animal qualities right?

Also are you really suggesting someone being seen as cute is "objectifying?" I know the trope of discord kitten has kinda ruined it, but women comparing men to dogs, and men comparing women to cats is as old as time.

Just be honest, all this is is grasping at straws BECAUSE you don't like loli in their name, the REST of it is trying to build an argument to reinforce it.

 

[Asterism]

Is the book worth reading? I like Russian lit a lot (Tolstoy is better than Dosto) but I've always passed on it because it was about pedophiles.

I think it can be beneficial to read if you look at it with the right lens.
It's honestly a well-made work and accurately paints the dynamics and psychology that occur in these situations. It can help someone understand the complexities of the specific type of abuse.
It isn't an easy read in my opinion. It's probably not a book you'll be able to read once and go "Oh I get it!" right off the bat. It's a book that gives your mind a series of questions to ponder, with those questions depending on the individual reading.
It's not supposed to be a romantic book.