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

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Kyangyenki said:
Introducing TAL's tranny vtuber gf , [source: microplastics in my brain :o]
Click to expand...
WelperHelper99 just sent me this:
20220830_173307.webp
He's not happy about this at all. Stay safe pedocons.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage, Scarface1, Wright and 6 others
I did this in my spare time. TAL stereotype (or just any loliniggers in general, and fuck 'em all).
muh loli.webp
Comic Sans because why the fuck not?
muh loli template.webp
Template if you want to use it. It depends whether you want to erase the watermark or not (credit is optional because I have an ego.).
 
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage, Scarface1, Nameless One and 36 others
NaggotFigger said:
I did this in my spare time. TAL stereotype (or just any loliniggers in general, and fuck 'em all).
View attachment 7630238
Comic Sans because why the fuck not?
View attachment 7630237
Template if you want to use it. It depends whether you want to erase the watermark or not (credit is optional because I have an ego.).
Click to expand...
Kek. The comic sans really adds just that bit of an extra bit of flair. Perfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Foxtrot, twinArmageddons and Toji Suzuhara
HodgePodgeRogerDodger said:
I commented this in A&N, but the loli censorship thing is a Motte and Bailey for censors. It’s an issue where people who want to censor expression have a very easy argument to use to shield their actual arguments from attack (the actual argument being we should be able to debank people who make expressions that we deem inappropriate or hurtful).

I agree, in a general sense that furries and lolicons deserve to be beaten with sticks and cast out of society, but one of my issues is that this is yet another form of curtailing speech/ expression in the guise of stopping something. Credit card companies and payment processors having the power to deem what is publicly acceptable is laughable. Those companies actively help human traffickers and cartels.

The other issue is that you have to defend furries and lolicons. People who should be in a gas chamber.
Click to expand...
I'm still willing to hear out reasons why it shouldn't be banned on the grounds of freedom of expression/speech etc since like I've mentioned I do still have lolbert leanings. But actual CSAM doesn't have the same artistic protections as lolicon dubiously has currently. I'm sure if you're a delusional and insane lolbert you could make the argument that CSAM is freedom of expression, but no one would take that seriously for obvious reasons. What I'd be open to is classifying loli essentially as one in the same as CSAM, as simulated child pornography. And you might say well that opens a can of worms of "is any piece of art that features children or depictions of minors in danger then?" Which I'd say no, as long as it follows 2 points of criteria:
1. Is it sexually explicit?
2. If not, does it pass the Dost test?
I think this is pretty reasonable, and obviously I'm just a fucking idiot online and not a lawyer so I'm sure there's plenty of holes to poke in what I'm presenting, but I think most people would find this agreeable. Now would legislation find a way to fuck this up? Probably, but in theory I'd be fine with loli being criminalized and no longer having artistic protections to it and still be a le freeze peach guy.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Waff and True Boss of this Gym
Ruben Sim said:
even i'll admit the lolicon people are worse than furries. i've never made a vid on this because it's kind of universally accepted by everyone (normal) that people who jack off to drawings of kids are pedophiles. there's no need to point it out
Click to expand...
There's a large overlap and if you've been in the internet long enough you'd probably not be considering one "better" than the other. ESPECIALLY given how discord had the furry pedo admin that jerked it to "cub" shit and was fucking with the TOS so anything vaguely anime styled (not porn) got marked by the system but THE FURRY BABY RAPING WAS ALLOWED.

Shit makes me want to KILL sometimes.
ATPH said:
The one thing that always used to rub me the wrong way about TAL during his streams is that occasionally someone would bring up his username and ask his thoughts on loli and he'd always give a boiler plate response along the lines that he doesn't condone it and if someone is posting it sexually "they need their hard drives checked" and that was it but he'd always follow that up by saying that the anti loli people were always ten times worse and projecting. Whenever some anti loli guy on twitter either got outed or implicated for kiddie stuff he's always make a point of bringing it up on stream and making the same mini rant. So while he's never publicly approved of loli he seems to have a major hate boner for people who are against loli and actively call it out.
Click to expand...
Since the time before current year eternal, people used that kind of username wording as a mildly edgy internet joke name. Issues of course arise when you decide to become some kind of "current thing coverer" type of personality instead of just shitposter/gamer like TAL decided to. If this guy is the guy I think he is there's an off chance his evolution to politisperg made him retroactively have to start defending the lolishit instead of making jokes about it. I've seen the pattern before, even if it is funny to just simplify it to "dude he's named loli that means he wants to fuck kids man!" The guy's become part of an insufferably boring retard slapfight where everyone's spinning shit from each other into more horrible things as they all sit in their fucking gaming chairs spewing whatever about whatever current thing. He made his fucking bed is what I'm saying.

HodgePodgeRogerDodger said:
I commented this in A&N, but the loli censorship thing is a Motte and Bailey for censors. It’s an issue where people who want to censor expression have a very easy argument to use to shield their actual arguments from attack (the actual argument being we should be able to debank people who make expressions that we deem inappropriate or hurtful).

I agree, in a general sense that furries and lolicons deserve to be beaten with sticks and cast out of society, but one of my issues is that this is yet another form of curtailing speech/ expression in the guise of stopping something. Credit card companies and payment processors having the power to deem what is publicly acceptable is laughable. Those companies actively help human traffickers and cartels.

The other issue is that you have to defend furries and lolicons. People who should be in a gas chamber.
Click to expand...
There's also the sneaky jewwy thing where companies and payment processors will slather a weirdly wide amount of shit with their censors as if it's the same as these things, or allow actual child porn if it's furry or marked under "educational imagery" if I'm remembering prior cases that caused outrage correctly.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Wright, twinArmageddons and 1 other person
The Lawgiver said:
even if it is funny to just simplify it to "dude he's named loli that means he wants to fuck kids man!"
Click to expand...
It's not "his name's a bit sus innit", but "wow I wonder why the guy who calls himself loli is so offended at pedophiles being named and shamed"
 
  • Agree
Reactions: dustnight
@Dan of Steel

I’d rather have a government step in because you can protest that action, if you think it goes too far or damages expression. The Lolberts empower payment processors to censor. The type of censorship currently going on right now, in regards to someone like Null, is third parties censoring because they dislike the person, dislike the politics, or on behalf of a government entity who is aware they are trampling on rights should they actually do it. I do think individuals and companies do have a right to say “we aren’t allowing this here”, but to the degree payment processors do it is worrying largely because they won’t give you a reason if they demand it. They tap a TOS and ban you.

The Lolberts issue is that they never self-police and let bad actors infest them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: The Foxtrot, DerangedBehavior, twinArmageddons and 3 others
volatile puar said:
It's not "his name's a bit sus innit", but "wow I wonder why the guy who calls himself loli is so offended at pedophiles being named and shamed"
Click to expand...
From what I've seen chain of event wise it seems the further he goes into the politisperg sphere the more things shift from clarifying he doesn't support pedo shit to trying to psuedo-intellectualize about it.
 
The Lawgiver said:
From what I've seen chain of event wise it seems the further he goes into the politisperg sphere the more things shift from clarifying he doesn't support pedo shit to trying to psuedo-intellectualize about it.
Click to expand...
I think it's fairly well known that "it's irony bro" is not a sustainable mental state, and you will begin to unironically like the thing that you joke about. Not to powerlevel too much, but as a personal anecdote, a friend of mine who was fond of nazbol jokes told me way back that he was becoming an actual nazbol, so he had to quit making those jokes to become normal again. If you think lolicon is funny, and you are an anime addict (read: you like hentai), you are going to attract lolicons to yourself, and whatever barriers against lolicon that you had will go away and you will start to like it yourself.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Political Sperging
Reactions: The Foxtrot and Waff
volatile puar said:
a friend of mine who was fond of nazbol jokes told me way back that he was becoming an actual nazbol, so he had to quit making those jokes to become normal again.
Click to expand...
This is literally a youtube video essayist BS "alt right pipeline" story take. :story:
Mel brooks literally pretends to be hitler at every chance he's gotten and he LIVED when hitler was an actual guy!
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Foxtrot, DerangedBehavior, Wright and 5 others
HodgePodgeRogerDodger said:
I commented this in A&N, but the loli censorship thing is a Motte and Bailey for censors. It’s an issue where people who want to censor expression have a very easy argument to use to shield their actual arguments from attack (the actual argument being we should be able to debank people who make expressions that we deem inappropriate or hurtful).

I agree, in a general sense that furries and lolicons deserve to be beaten with sticks and cast out of society, but one of my issues is that this is yet another form of curtailing speech/ expression in the guise of stopping something. Credit card companies and payment processors having the power to deem what is publicly acceptable is laughable. Those companies actively help human traffickers and cartels.

The other issue is that you have to defend furries and lolicons. People who should be in a gas chamber.
Click to expand...
In 15~ countries, fictional CSAM is banned. This includes NSFW of lolis. Most notable are Canada, new Zealand, and almost all Scandinavian countries. Least important are some African countries, china, and North/South Korea

A while ago I checked the freedom of speech index of these countries. USAs current freedom of speech index is 61 points if I'm not wrong(this is important since a lot of lolicons are typically American and speak from an American POV). In the top 10 countries with most freedom of speech points(meaning 80+), the Scandinavian countries who have fictional CSAM banned were there. Canada and new Zealand also were in front of USA in the index. The "freedom of speech will disappear if we ban loli" is horseshit to manipulate you.

Now I don't know if the score index is accurate, but from the outside, these countries didn't turn into some Orwellian dystopian fascist regimes after banning fictional CSAM that lolicons keep fear mongering about.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Silence of the Troons, Vladislav and Aero the Alcoholic Bat
The question is going to be why do you support "free speech"? If you believe in the free marketplace of ideas, you should probably realize that it was a failed experiment, but you should realize that pornography is something which directly subverts the purpose of that "marketplace". If you think that no speech should be suppressed, it's clear that cp is speech, or at least it should be very clear that someone distributing cp as a political statement that it should be legal is political speech, and of course the guy who murdered Shinzo Abe was also making a political statement. If you believe the guy who murdered Shinzo Abe should be punished, there is no reason to oppose banning pornography. If you are afraid that advocating for good things will make the government do bad things in response, stop worrying about that. Our governments are already tyrannical, fighting for the bad thing isn't going to make them less tyrannical, and fighting for the good thing makes it more likely that the government will become better in the future.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Slaughtercel
Slaughterhouse said:
In 15~ countries, fictional CSAM is banned. This includes NSFW of lolis. Most notable are Canada, new Zealand, and almost all Scandinavian countries. Least important are some African countries, china, and North/South Korea

A while ago I checked the freedom of speech index of these countries. USAs current freedom of speech index is 61 points if I'm not wrong(this is important since a lot of lolicons are typically American and speak from an American POV). In the top 10 countries with most freedom of speech points(meaning 80+), the Scandinavian countries who have fictional CSAM banned were there. Canada and new Zealand also were in front of USA in the index. The "freedom of speech will disappear if we ban loli" is horseshit to manipulate you.

Now I don't know if the score index is accurate, but from the outside, these countries didn't turn into some Orwellian dystopian fascist regimes after banning fictional CSAM that lolicons keep fear mongering about.
Click to expand...
Those indexes are typically bullshit and I have no faith in them. Those are like happiness indexes where personal property and divorce rates are excluded. I think Germany ranks high on all of those, which is fucking hilarious.

New Zealand in general is the canary in the coal mine for it being bullshit. They are also relevant to this website and Christchurch. They readily weaponized laws against CP on anyone who shared footage of the shooting. Covid saw them do evil shit. Seriously look it up they repurposed laws to imprison people. They wanted @Null to censor it, it was before your time, but seriously that case is a highlight of where this shit can go.

Canada is worse for their debanking during the trucking protests. Also, that lolcow got away with tracing kids for cub porn.

The government action towards it I would prefer to see is something like the Florida Parental rights act rather than the current issue of Judicial maximalism. A very short, clear bill saying “Don’t draw CP”.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Feels
Reactions: Wright, Gatcha Gonna Getcha, Outer Space Traveller and 7 others
And meanwhile, there was (and still is) plenty of censorship of unpopular opinions on mainstream social media.

Essentially anarcho-tyranny in cyberspace.

Shitlibs and lolbertarians have this weird tendency to gauge how much freedom there is based on how much open degeneracy there is. The more yuckiness is going on, and the more the state turns a blind eye to it, the freer everything is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: The Foxtrot, Wright, Dyl505 and 4 others
HodgePodgeRogerDodger said:
A very short, clear bill saying “Don’t draw CP”.
Click to expand...
It’s nice in theory, but it’s difficult to trust a government body to appropriately define, let alone enforce, when it regularly fails to do so with the standards already in place. And I think those standards, when properly upheld, are very good: employing the DAWs (DAHS? DAAS? I’ve only ever heard it and search is fucking useless) DOST (as per Dan of Steel’s post above) standard and prosecuting when fictional sexualized depictions are derived from real depictions of children, which if it doesn’t extend from production if such material to ownership it should. The issue, as was with Cuties not being and with Christchurch viewers being prosecuted, is governments will clearly only ever employ it when politically expedient. But the solution to a poorly enforced standard is not to increase the scope of said standard.

I also do not trust government to create a more effective standard. CSAM standards are as effective as they are because they are first and foremost based on a real-world objective fact, that being the age of the child being victimized. The problem with fictional characters is their age is arbitrary, like their birthday or blood type. The unfortunate reality is that lolis are a body type, but that body type happens to be based on pre-pubescent girls. The issue here is the thresholds needed to determine this fact are interpretive at best (“I can’t define it but I’ll know it when I see it”) which are always poor foundations for legal action. So the government will take the easiest course of action and base the issue on the stated age of the character, a trap users on this site are already falling into. This is the very reasoning lolicons use to justify a character really being a 5000 year old vampire. While a case may be made for characters whose status as a minor are integral to the overall context in which they exist in the story, it is neither universal nor objective.

As was outlined by Null himself:
Well, ephebophile, which users may claim is splitting hairs but I do think it’s a spectrum of bad.
IMG_0288.webp
However you are homosexual.
IMG_0289.webp

These two characters are ostensibly the same age.

I have had so much fucking trouble making this post phone posting is hell.
 
Last edited:
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: YWNBAM, CeleryBread, Wright and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back