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

[Kyangyenki]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/3557620/discussions/

Sir, the second loli game has hit the steam discussions,

 

[T-21]

Snippets

Nigger, learn how to archive things and format your post properly because it looks unorganized. Avoid doubleposting unless this is your first time posting which edit or delete feature isn't available for a while. Go here to learn about archival tools and here how to upload images with thumbnails.

Example of archived articles based on your posts:
Archive of first article
Archive of second article

 

[twinArmageddons]

Sir, the second loli game has hit the steam discussions,

damn they got it but to be frank all the black souls fans i know of prefer the 2nd game more than the first

Spoiler: 2nd game

cuz the 2nd game has node and dodo so thats probably why. i wonder if the steam version of bs2 will patch out the rape and the children then it would probably be a good game cause i used the get rid of the crimes patch but knowing these people they'd p[robably patch it back in for le dev intended experience fuck that hes japanese i love ur art style toro but like

 

[SnakeEye]

View attachment 7492149
damn they got it but to be frank all the black souls fans i know of prefer the 2nd game more than the first

Black souls as a franchise is extremely overrated, it’s almost seen as the messiah of porn games by gooners for its passable gameplay and story "depth" (Toro's writing is mediocre, it only seems better due to aping Dark Souls' storytelling style) while having, and I'm quoting this from a friend who's obsessed with porn games, "really good, hilarious sex scenes". Both games are 6~7/10s at best.
Not-so-fun fact: this series has multiple discord servers filled with children, manchildren, and drama in-between. It’s also a darling of 4chan's /v/ board, so you know the fanbase is filled with trannies.
Speaking of the second game, it has both NTR and three instances of lolishit characters (regular, twins, and incest flavors. Incredible, isn’t it?).
Having to hear faggots sucking this game's cock so often made me hate it with a passion before I even started hating gooners.

 

[Berrakh]

Black souls as a franchise is extremely overrated, it’s almost seen as the messiah of porn games by gooners for its passable gameplay and story "depth" (Toro's writing is mediocre, it only seems better due to aping Dark Souls' storytelling style) while having, and I'm quoting this from a friend who's obsessed with porn games, "really good, hilarious sex scenes". Both games are 6~7/10s at best.
Not-so-fun fact: this series has multiple discord servers filled with children, manchildren, and drama in-between. It’s also a darling of 4chan's /v/ board, so you know the fanbase is filled with trannies.
Speaking of the second game, it has both NTR and three instances of lolishit characters (regular, twins, and incest flavors. Incredible, isn’t it?).
Having to hear faggots sucking this game's cock so often made me hate it with a passion before I even started hating gooners.

A lot of this issue is about how credible people are, because if they’re not you can’t just take their word and live/let live with them. So it comes down to what they’re willing to say to “win the argument” and who we really find when we peel back the curtain. Surprise surprise it’s other degenerates and there’s no “Based” substance to this.

 

[SnakeEye]

I just remembered something. Before Toro made BS, he drew a Touhou fanfiction series called Touhou Igyoukyou, I think. It was in the same vein as Koishi's Heartthrobbing Adventure if you know of it, basically just a bunch of gore and senseless violence connected by a nonexistent plot.
The synopsys is that a bunch of evil and fucked-up versions of the Touhou characters appeared and are killing the regular versions.
It’s mostly okay, but the most recent installment in my memory involves Alice's made-up backstory, which involves her getting raped for no real reason. I guess his fascination with Alice in Dreamland and rape were always there.

 

[The Koral Hunter]

Black souls as a franchise is extremely overrated, it’s almost seen as the messiah of porn games by gooners for its passable gameplay and story "depth" (Toro's writing is mediocre, it only seems better due to aping Dark Souls' storytelling style) while having, and I'm quoting this from a friend who's obsessed with porn games, "really good, hilarious sex scenes". Both games are 6~7/10s at best.
Not-so-fun fact: this series has multiple discord servers filled with children, manchildren, and drama in-between. It’s also a darling of 4chan's /v/ board, so you know the fanbase is filled with trannies.
Speaking of the second game, it has both NTR and three instances of lolishit characters (regular, twins, and incest flavors. Incredible, isn’t it?).
Having to hear faggots sucking this game's cock so often made me hate it with a passion before I even started hating gooners.

Preach! I was so sick of seeing a bunch of retards dick sucking this mediocre ass game just to seem different. No! You aren't cool for liking a game despite the child rape you fucking tard.

 

[popsoda]

Hi, pedos
I asked chatgpt why your perversion might be interpreted as bad. Here's the response I got. I think I agree with most/all of it.

From an ethical standpoint, the issue of drawing or imagining sexual situations involving children (whether real or fictional) is highly complex and disturbing, and there are strong moral arguments on both sides. Here's how I interpret what is generally considered "OK" vs. "NOT OK" in this context, based on ethical principles of harm, respect for others, and societal responsibility:

1.​

• Art That Promotes Awareness, Healing, or Critique:
  It can be ethically acceptable for artists to address issues like child abuse in their work if the intention is to critique or raise awareness. For example, creating art that highlights the harms of abuse, promotes healing, or explores the psychological and societal consequences in a respectful and responsible way. These kinds of works aim to shine light on the issue, provoke reflection, and encourage positive social change. They do not seek to exploit or sexualize children.
  • Example: An artist may create abstract art or representations that convey the emotional damage caused by abuse or use metaphorical imagery to talk about child protection or resilience, without explicitly or realistically depicting child abuse in a sexual context.
• Non-Sexual Depictions of Childhood:
  Any artistic depiction of children that focuses on their innocence, emotional growth, or humanity is ethically acceptable, provided it does not sexualize or exploit them. This includes portrayals of children engaged in typical childhood activities (playing, learning, etc.), and these depictions should be focused on the positive aspects of childhood, such as curiosity, joy, and development.

2.​

• Sexualization of Children (Real or Imagined):
  Any form of sexualization of children, whether through photography, drawings, or other artistic means, is generally considered morally reprehensible. Even if no actual children are harmed, creating, sharing, or consuming imagery that depicts children in sexual situations—even fictional depictions—is viewed as deeply unethical. It undermines the innocence of childhood and may contribute to harmful societal attitudesthat normalize the sexualization of minors.
  • Example: Imagining, drawing, or sharing images of children in explicit sexual situations—even if no actual abuse occurs—goes against ethical principles of respecting human dignity and protecting vulnerable populations, including children.
• Exploiting Child Abuse for Artistic Shock Value or Profit:
  Art that seeks to exploit the suffering of children or sensationalize abuse for shock value, entertainment, or profit is also morally problematic. Art that is gratuitously violent or sexually explicit in a way that lacks meaningful social commentary or purpose is often seen as perpetuating harmrather than providing value.
  • Example: Creating or sharing detailed, explicit drawings of child abuse for the sake of evoking shock or catering to an audience that seeks harmful content is a serious ethical violation. This would contribute to the normalization of abuse and perpetuate the objectification and sexualization of children.
• Contributing to Harmful Fantasies or Desensitization:
  Drawing or imagining sexual situations involving children, even in a private or fictional context, can be ethically troubling because it may feed into dangerous fantasies and desensitize individuals to the real-life suffering of children. It may also contribute to the objectificationof children and indirectly encourage harmful behavior, even if the individual creating the material never acts on it.
  • Example: Even if someone only draws or imagines such situations in isolation and never shares it, they may still be engaging in morally questionable behavior that harms their own psychological development and encourages unhealthy attitudes toward minors.

Why Certain Depictions Are "Not OK" from an Ethical Standpoint:​

• Impact on Vulnerable Populations (Children): Children are vulnerable and deserve protection from harm, both physical and psychological. The creation or consumption of content that sexualizes or exploits them can undermine their safety, making it harder to protect children from real-world abuse. Children are not capable of giving informed consent to be depicted in such ways, and thus, their exploitation—whether real or imagined—disrespects their inherent human dignity.
• Psychological and Societal Harm: Even though a drawing or imagined situation doesn’t involve real harm, it may promote unhealthy attitudes and distort the public’s perception of what is acceptable behavior. Creating or consuming child sexualization imagery can contribute to the normalization of harmful behaviors, especially if it falls into the hands of individuals who may be influenced by these depictions.
• Ethical Responsibility of the Artist: As an artist, there's an ethical responsibility to consider the impact of your work on both the individual creator and society at large. Art can shape social norms and attitudes, so creating work that sexualizes children or depicts harm in a way that exploits rather than critiques can reinforce harmful ideas about minors and perpetuate a cycle of exploitation.

---

Conclusion:​

• "OK": Art that is respectful, that aims to raise awareness of child abuse or its consequences, and that does not involve the sexualization or exploitation of children.
• "NOT OK": Depictions that sexualize children, even if imagined or drawn, and work that encourages harmful fantasies or normalizes abuse.

Ethically speaking, any form of artistic expression that sexualizes children or implies the acceptability of child abuse—whether real or imagined—is not only morally unacceptable but can also contribute to harmful societal attitudes that damage children’s safety and well-being.

I know this is AI and I know there are a lot of you out there who dislikes AI. But personally I think this is a good summation.

Edit: I asked follow-up questions:


Me:

I think I agree with almost all what you said.The argument I see most often from people who enjoy this sort of content, who want to defend themselves and say "I'm not a pedo!". The argument they use "it's just a drawing", and "no real child got hurt by this".Is that a valid response, do you think?

Chatgpt:

I understand why people might try to defend themselves with that argument. On the surface, it seems like a logical response: “It’s just a drawing. No real child is involved. No real harm is done.” But ethically speaking, that argument doesn’t hold up when you consider the deeper societal, psychological, and moral implications of creating or consuming sexually explicit depictions of children, even if they are fictional or drawn.


Let’s break this down:

1.​

While no real child is harmed in the process of creating or consuming such content, the intention behind the creation and the impact on society still matter. Art doesn't exist in a vacuum—it’s part of the larger social conversation and can have both direct and indirect effects. Here’s why:

• Normalization: Even fictional depictions can normalize the sexualization of children. The more these images exist and are consumed, the more they can shape or distort people’s views on what is acceptable. This can gradually desensitize individuals to the seriousness of child abuse or foster a dangerous acceptance of such fantasies.
• Cultural Impact: In many ways, society is shaped by the collective consumption of art, media, and ideas. If content that sexualizes children is made widely available or culturally tolerated, it could indirectly reinforce harmful beliefs and attitudes about children or sexual conduct, leading to potential harm in the future—whether or not actual abuse is directly depicted or occurs.

Even if the individual isn't actively acting out these fantasies, the mere fact that they consume or create such content can feed into harmful ideologies that perpetuate the sexualization of minors.

2.​

Art—whether it’s visual, literary, or musical—can have a significant impact on the psyche and on how people perceive the world. Fictional depictions of violence or abuse can influence an individual’s thoughts and attitudes, especially if they already have predisposed thoughts or tendencies. While someone may believe their consumption of such content is harmless, it may inadvertently encourage the normalization of harmful fantasies or reinforce unhealthy mental states.


For example, someone who consumes content that sexualizes children could start to view them as less innocent or more sexualized than they actually are, which might distort their understanding of appropriate relationships and boundaries. This is a particularly concerning issue if such content serves to reinforce a distorted perception of children and sexualization in general.

3.​

• Morally, the question isn’t just about whether harm is done to an individual child in the moment. It’s about whether it’s ethically right to engage in or support the creation of material that involves the sexualization of children in any way. Even if a drawing doesn’t harm a specific child in that instant, it’s still contributing to a broader issue of child exploitation by potentially reinforcing the idea that it is acceptable to depict or consume such material.
• Responsibility to Protect: In a healthy society, we have a moral responsibility to protect the innocence and dignity of children. The line between acceptable artistic expression and exploitative, harmful material can sometimes feel blurry, but when the content involves children in a sexual context, it generally crosses that line into what’s ethically unacceptable. The fact that it’s a drawing or a fantasy doesn’t remove the responsibility to be conscious of the harmful effects it may have on society or on the viewer's mental state.

4.​

People who argue that it’s “just a fantasy” or “just a drawing” may not fully recognize the connection between fantasy and behavior. While fantasy is indeed a part of human psychology, it’s important to distinguish between harmless daydreams and fantasies that involve the exploitation or objectification of others, particularly vulnerable groups like children. In the case of something like child sexualization, it's not just a benign fantasy—it reflects deeply ingrained harmful ideas about minors, and it can lead to serious consequences if normalized.


A fantasy or drawing involving children in sexual situations is not a neutral act. It can still reinforce dangerous beliefs, and people might not always be able to separate fantasy from reality, particularly if these fantasies are fed over time by repeated exposure to similar content.

5.​

Even if no real child is involved and it’s just a drawing, society often considers it a moral and ethical boundary to prohibit the creation or consumption of content that sexualizes children—because it’s viewed as harmful to society’s collective moral fabric and the well-being of minors. While you might argue that “it’s just a drawing” or “no one’s harmed,” the legal system and societal ethics have set certain standards to protect the most vulnerable (children) from potential exploitation or harm, even through fictional means.

Conclusion:​

While the argument “it’s just a drawing” may seem like a logical defense, it doesn’t adequately address the deeper ethical implications at play. The core issue is that creating or consuming content that sexualizes children, even if it's fictional or artistic, can contribute to harmful cultural narratives and distorted views on childhood and sexuality. It's about more than just the immediacy of harm—it’s about respecting the innocence of childhood and ensuring that society does not normalize harmful behavior, even in fantasy.


If someone says, “I’m not a pedo, it’s just a drawing,” it's important to understand that ethically, the act of creating or consuming that drawing still carries significant moral responsibility because it contributes to a culture that may normalize the sexualization of children. The question isn't whether an individual is acting on these fantasies, but whether they’re engaging in behaviors that undermine the innocence of children and could have long-term negative consequences on society's values as a whole.


So, from an ethical standpoint, no, that argument doesn’t hold up. Creating or consuming such content is still ethically problematic because it reflects and reinforces harmful attitudes toward children, even if no real harm is done in the moment.

Edit2: (I don't want to double-post)

A though experiment occurred to me these past days.
Say I'm in a room, watching a person rape a child. Say I have a camera and I take a photograph of this, or maybe even a video.
Say I don't have a camera, say I have a pen and paper, and I draw what I see,

What is the difference there? I had a tool, I saw something, I replicated it on a medium.
Sure the camera is probably better than me at representing reality, but assume I'm a really skilled artist. Is my drawing really any different?

I'm a guy using a tool (camera/pen) to recreate what I'm seeing (a child being abused), in my view in both the situations the creations are child porn.

Sure an artist could create a drawing from fantasy, where no real child was involved, but the result is still child porn, in my view. All you lolicons should explain to me/us why the artist who draws from imagination is different from the first guy. And, following onto that - why you enjoying that sort of content is different from "real" child porn.

 

[Kyangyenki]

-ai sperging-

 

[scatterbrain]

"I asked chatgpt-"

How about you ask if your dad ever truly loved you.

 

[Brap God]

I know this is AI and I know there are a lot of you out there who dislikes AI. But personally I think this is a good summation.

This is one of the most pro-AI forums from what I've seen. The issue at hand is that no one gives a fuck about you prompting chatGPT to summarize or argue on some topic. Any troglodyte can generate such vomit and it offers nothing of value.

 

[dick tha master]

Haven't watched it yet, but i have a bad feeling about this one.

Edit: made an archive just in case and not to ruin your algo for the next few weeks.
Preservetube

Spoiler: Local Archive

 

[Fat and Balding]

Haven't watched it yet

Basically,
"It's just an edgy joke song"
"Western cartoons like the Simpsons have pedo characters"
"You're racist"
Most of the video seems to be about the creator, a Vtuber who has an alternate child model that she uses sometimes for telling stories about her childhood (or as a forfeit where her fans make her act like a child). Her default model is supposed to be 16 (aka, a HAG). She didn't mean for the song to get so popular.
There's a """funny""" screenshot from Asmongold's subreddit:

 

[True Boss of this Gym]

I fucking hate the Shigure Ui "meme" and whoever still likes this fucking thing. The song is subtly pro-pedo, the lyrics are written from the perspective of a little girl making fun of some greasy old men attracted to her, and the song outright ends with something among the lines of "Lolicons will inherit the world." It legitimately has to be some fucking psyop that this thing not just gained traction, but blew up in both the west and east.

 

[SSj_Ness (Yiffed)]

“My lolis are just lines and pixels. Your lolis are representations of children though”

Lolifaggots are struggling to cope with the intense cognitive dissonance.

It's all bad, but the more realistic the art the worse it is, that much is true. It doesn't justify fapping to any of it, but it is a spectrum of problematicness.

Yeah. Especially since 5000 year old Dragon is such a meme.

Right, it's a thinly veiled technicality lolifags try to use, so validating canon ages plays into their logic.

I want to give him the benefit of the doubt as a fellow anime/magical girl fan who understands why collectors get in the mindset they do, but I honestly got really weirded out by how much he focused on Winx Club and why it was I stopped visiting the site even though I liked following the fan fiction Angelfire links.

Is Winx Club especially degenerate or something? I guess it's fine to like magical girl stuff, the genre can be enjoyed innocently. It's nothing I'm really interested in though, aside from Cardcaptor since I have nostalgia from watching it as a kid. I'm sure you'll get weird stares watching it as a grown man.

Especially given in anime there usually isn't much difference in appearance between a character who is 16 vs 20. If the characters age isn't mentioned or implied in the series I can't blame someone for not knowing.

It depends on the anime, usually you can't tell between teenagers and adults in anime based on design, but one called Bokurano actually visually distinguishes them better from what I saw.

cuz the 2nd game has node and dodo so thats probably why. i wonder if the steam version of bs2 will patch out the rape and the children then it would probably be a good game cause i used the get rid of the crimes patch but knowing these people they'd p[robably patch it back in for le dev intended experience fuck that hes japanese i love ur art style toro but like

That's kind of a big caveat

 

[rapecel]

https://steamcommunity.com/app/3557620/discussions/
View attachment 7491903
Sir, the second loli game has hit the steam discussions,

moralgods in control; so no, that wont be happening.

 

[Throng of Titans]

moralgods in control; so no, that wont be happening.
View attachment 7497586

Different game, but any victory is a good one.

 

[Outer Space Traveller]

moralgods in control; so no, that wont be happening.
View attachment 7497586

Are sankakoids irate over said decision? If they were honest, they would agree.

 

[John Shedletsky]

moralgods in control; so no, that wont be happening.
View attachment 7497586

Nupedocacas keep losing

 

[GI Robot]

Basically,
"It's just an edgy joke song"
"Western cartoons like the Simpsons have pedo characters"
"You're racist"
Most of the video seems to be about the creator, a Vtuber who has an alternate child model that she uses sometimes for telling stories about her childhood (or as a forfeit where her fans make her act like a child). Her default model is supposed to be 16 (aka, a HAG). She didn't mean for the song to get so popular.
There's a """funny""" screenshot from Asmongold's subreddit:
View attachment 7496495

Total Asmongold cuck death when? Considering the dude has no personal hygine or work ethics than shitting out slop/ragebait, im willing to bet we got a Pyrocycnical level of hidden degeneracy here. wonder how long till Asmongold gets his own thread

also things that scares Japs/Redditor Weebs
Proper Workers rights (not working your employees 18 hours a day)
a functioning multiparty state (not a one party facade)
An age of consent above 12
any social skills at all