Should the world censor Lolicon?

[Slap47]

If you think drawings of anything should be censored, you don't believe in freedom of speech.

I think there's a key thing everyone often misses with this which is the degree of separation and the aspects of radicalization that occur when groups organize.

Banning lolicon is often not an all or nothing state. ULMF. F95. Various hosting sites all have caveats that ban loli, ban loli posters, but will happily host things that are clearly loli in disguise. Often with weak, but still existent caveats. But those caveats drive an important aspect.

You will be hard pressed to find a video game where murdering people is A. The purpose. B. Portrayed as a good thing. And C. Having a serious tone. People don't go to the store to buy the newest murder simulator. Or in other words, people buying GTA are not doing it to steal cars. It's the wacky fucking sandbox. So it's not really a proper comparison.

The degree of separation is the most important part. You can have childish looking artwork and write that off as style. You can claim the person is (enter minimum age of consent). Regardless, so long as people who say "I like that it's a child" aren't allowed to congregate, it's fine.

The solution therefor, is not banning an artstyle. It's banning lolicons. It's banning people who identify and organize around the personality, and if you doubt this exists keep an eye out for the next time someone on a discord shittalks loli and someone yells for their merry men to start posting graphs about fertility or some shit.

Because when those people get together is when you get shit. Thats how you get MAPS and diddlers. And INB4 study its called in-group radicalization, and it's literally basic bitch sociology 101. And if you want something specific, you've never worked in academia, because good god if you tried to get a double blind study approved you would get fucking shot by the IRB.

And if you doubt, go to /HGG. Go play their mod for Corruption of Champions. Go take a look at the sims 4 modding community thread. The moment you allow lolicons to congregate they go from "I just like the art style" to "I just like the touhou characters" to "text based British Loli Survivor Horror" to "The LonaRPG".

So yeah. We shouldn't be removing anything that isn't dead eyed SFM porn. But when someone looks you head on and says "I want to have sex with this virtual child" it's time to set some fires and watch them burn.

I shouldn't be surprised that many KF users support thought crimes.

 

[A Thick Piece of Meat]

does lolicon help or hurt children by existing?

 

[Wowcoolusername]

does lolicon help or hurt children by existing?

What's your take on the subject?
Who the fuck would say lolicon helps children? I think most of the discussion thus far has been on the censoring aspect of the original question; absolutely no one has argued that lolicon is a good thing. I would not like to further participate in this thought exercise if you're looking for people to offer you reasons why you're not a fucking degenerate.

Edit: I forgot to call you a nigger faggot. You're a nigger faggot.

 

[HOMO FOR LIFE]

I do not judge a man by the stack of goods he collects, but by the the quality of the stack.

 

[A Thick Piece of Meat]

What's your take on the subject?
Who the fuck would say lolicon helps children? I think most of the discussion thus far has been on the censoring aspect of the original question; absolutely no one has argued that lolicon is a good thing. I would not like to further participate in this thought exercise if you're looking for people to offer you reasons why you're not a fucking degenerate.

Edit: I forgot to call you a nigger faggot. You're a nigger faggot.

it's good to look at both sides

 

[Carlito]

Lolicon is despicable yet also causes no real life harm. The government censoring it would be a violation of free speech rights especially due to nothing about it being a call to violence or molestation. From a moral standpoint taking into account all people, lolicon should be left uncensored; governmental censorship will only lead to the slippery slope in my eyes. I can understand where those saying that, paraphrasing, "lolicon staying legal will lead to more molestation", are coming from, though it is fallacious. If exposure = desire, then violent video games and movies would have ushered in total anarchy.

Lolicon's existence also serves as a safe and consensual method for pedophiles to keep their urges in check. Most pedophiles know what they want is illegal, and I doubt they want jail time over it, so keeping lolicon uncensored may also lead to decreased rates of child molestation. And it lets normal people know not to affiliate with its consumers.

I do support sites' rights to keep lolicon (and by extension shotacon) off of their servers. That is the only form of censorship I could support. This way, it leads to lolicon consumers congregating in spots which could be easier avoided.

 

[Nobue]

Watch out if they say their 900 years old then that means their a fed.




View attachment 1917056

Sakaki, nooooo!

 

[Cyclonus]

According to Jason Schrier, this is lolicon:

I don't see what the big deal is.

 

[naught]

 

[Pimpleking55]

Isn't the latest trend that people who want loli banned are diddling kids themselves? Like that dude on twitter who got arrested for trying to seduce a little boy....cant remember his name.
If people can have the freedom to make axe wounds and pretend to be woman while being a drain on the healthcare system, i want to to have the freedom to buy drawings of fictional beings and be a degenerate on my own...in peace.

My opinion is that as long it is fictional(and easy to recognize as such) and no one is hurt in the process of creating it, go nuts.

 

[Trombonista]

Isn't the porn already censored?

 

[A Thick Piece of Meat]

well this changed my entire view on lolicon

i support lolicon to remain legal it seems to protect children

 

[Calandrino]

Isn't the porn already censored?

I say it's ok as long as they have those little black bars on the genitals. That's what keeps it from warping people's minds permanently.

 

[Fields Of Rye]

I shouldn't be surprised that many KF users support thought crimes.

How is it thought crime if the only thing being targeted are people organizing around the sole interest of viewing virtual child pornography, under the assumption that in-group radicalization will occur, which is a well accepted sociological concept.

Like by definition if more than one person has to be part of it to qualify, you can't really call it a "thought" now can you? Unless lolicons are somehow psychic or something.

 

[Slimy Time]

No, but if you watch/read and are turned on by that shit, then fuck you.

 

[Thidwick]

Disclaimer: I don't believe media, playing games, etc., makes people do bad things. Also, long post, feel free to skip.

That said, media can have some influences. Those with proclivities towards acts of sadism can be attracted to certain themes in media. Similar to how a priest doesn't make one a child molester, it just so happens that it's an attractive position because it brings them closer to potential victims.

IMO there's also a difference between watching regular violence and media with a sexual basis. Media that prompts a strong physical response, like orgasms, can work like (psych 101) pavlovs dog: Dog salvates in presence of food. Person rings bell. Eventually bell prompts response without food present. Human is aroused by imagery, masterbates until orgasm. This is repeated. Now there's an association between that type of imagery, arousal, and getting off.

Fetishes are made all the time. Another example: Chinese foot binding. Started as a foolish fashion trend from a story, continued because it became a widespread fetish. So much so, that it became a necessity for finding a husband. There was nothing about it that could've been argued as being naturally embedded into human sexuality. Rotten, distorted flesh by natural instinct, would in fact be a turn off. Point being; The men weren't "born that way".

There's good influences too. Theories on human empathy increasing (to where we can see brain structure changes from past humans, from growth in that part of the brain), attribute some of it to literature. When literacy became widespread, empathy for others did too. You can see direct correlations between the overnight rise in human rights activism and popular literature depicting sympathetic, relatable characters being read by the greater public. Shawshank redemption was responsible for raised awareness about treatment of prisoners by humanizing them. So media can influence by being inspiring, as an emotional outlet, and put a mirror on our values.

So no, I don't support the idea that lolicon is good for preventing sexual abuse. If anything, it can be attractive to those that already have proclivities towards seeing children as sexual, and worse, if they're getting off to that, training themselves to find the characteristics arousing. While making it illegal is a too complex, society should find ways to shout distasteful depictions down, platforms should be mindful of content, and in no way should people become complacent about the sexualization of children, no matter the form it's presented in.

 

[Strayserval]

YES.

 

[Lemmingwise]

lolicon is drawings of children that are girls.

I don't think this explantion fully captures everything about lolicon.

Its like saying...

Porn is videos of adults that are women.

 

[Daddy's Little Kitten]

This topic comes up too much on this site...

 

[Weed Eater]

does lolicon help or hurt children by existing?

Does pornography help or hurt children by existing?