The Twitter Pedo Hunter / Loli Crusader Community

[Scissors 61]

In his own eloquent words:
View attachment 6252650

Tweets in question:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220321165011/https://twitter.com/phillamarr/status/1276203554802331650

https://web.archive.org/web/20200626214010/https://twitter.com/phillamarr/status/1276628807634448385

 

[Lone Star]

And while not technically loli, I noticed a lot of people shrugging off the sexualization of a 16 year-old Bulma with foreign age of consent laws. Only Toriyama seems to get this pass and no other manga creator.

 

[Corn Flakes]

And while not technically loli, I noticed a lot of people shrugging off the sexualization of a 16 year-old Bulma with foreign age of consent laws. Only Toriyama seems to get this pass and no other manga creator.

What are you talking about? Most shounen anime feature female characters who are both sexualized and underage and most non-spergs don't even bat an eyelash.

 

[Sekirodiealot]

So....I went back to that duncancantdie video on lolis. For some reason he still responds to the comments and somehow end up with likes.

 

[Male Idiot]

Lolicons are gross, but if they help me keep my fanservice and set off the sjws/terfs/juden/reincarnated fundies, they can be allies of convenience.

Let their autism fuel the fires of the culture war and save you ammo.

 

[RX-78]

So....I went back to that duncancantdie video on lolis. For some reason he still responds to the comments and somehow end up with likes.
View attachment 6255929View attachment 6255930View attachment 6255931View attachment 6255932

It's alt accounts, a faggot like him is too retarded to know how to use bots for updoots.

 

[Stoner Miko]

Lolicons are gross, but if they help me keep my fanservice and set off the sjws/terfs/juden/reincarnated fundies, they can be allies of convenience.

Let their autism fuel the fires of the culture war and save you ammo.

So you hate pedophiles, but you wouldn't have a problem to side with pedophiles/feminazis/pedophiles/pedophiles to keep them away from your tranime?

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

So you hate pedophiles, but you wouldn't have a problem to side with pedophiles/feminazis/pedophiles/pedophiles to keep them away from your tranime?

He's truly Hitler's top guy. Or more accurately Ernst Röhm's bottom guy

 

[Frenzy of Sharks]

So you hate pedophiles, but you wouldn't have a problem to side with pedophiles/feminazis/pedophiles/pedophiles to keep them away from your tranime?

I think what they're trying to say is that while the genres of lolicon and shotacon are controversial (because they deal with tough subjects), they are the canary in the coal mine to see if Japanese entertainment is being pozzed by lefty Western activists or not (the Anita Sarkeesian-types that want everything to be controlled by them, a common trait of autocrats or would be autocrats is to demonize and hate anything they have no control over).

Why are so many people (especially those on the Right) are flocking to anime and manga now? Because Japanese entertainment (for the most part) isn't being pozzed by lefty activists that want everything sanitized to fit their world view.

If the loli and shota stuff goes, guess what so will a lot of things that makes anime and manga appealing to begin with.

How often do you hear people talk about the latest Western stuff anymore? The answer is not much. I think the last Western cartoons I got into were Regular Show and Smiling Friends but that's only because they're an exception and everything else out there these days was written by a Tumblr blue hair creature with no talent. Now and days with Western entertainment, you really cannot make something like American Psycho or Batman: The Animated Series anymore because someone will complain about being offended. Meanwhile in the East, much of their entertainment resembles what Western entertainment used to look like prior to the Woke stuff we see now and the Japanese can get pretty defensive about their right to freedom of expression. Lolicon and shotacon are offensive but you're better off having content creators be irreverent (which means to being unorthodox or lack respect for any established norms) than to play it safe where you make sure never to offend anyone (like what we see with a lot of Western entertainment now). Anime fans these days are getting very defensive about the censorship of Japanese content and Eastern content in general for the same reasons why gamers were defensive about video games during the Gamergate drama back in the day.

I'd rather have the Japanese entertainment industry being filled to the brim with plenty of Stanley Kubricks than being filled with a bunch of J.J. Abrams' at this point.

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

Meanwhile in the East, much of their entertainment resembles what Western entertainment used to look like prior to the Woke stuff we see now and the Japanese can get pretty defensive about their right to freedom of expression. Lolicon and shotacon are offensive but you're better off having content creators be irreverent (which means to be unorthodox or lack respect for any established norms) than to play it safe where you make sure never to offend anyone (like what we see with a lot of Western entertainment now). Anime fans these days are getting very defensive about the censorship of Japanese content and Eastern content in general for the same reasons why gamers were defensive about video games during the Gamergate drama back in the day.

I'm sorry, but no, pornography of underage characters isn't the thing that makes Japan "unpozzed", and if it is, then I wonder why semi-pornographic western shows with underage characters such as Big Mouth are also so pozzed at same the time. That also being besides the fact that plenty of japs are also supporting things like gay marriage now.

If the difference between the SJWs and the japs is just the brand of degeneracy, then those two better burn, because they are morally no different

 

[Frenzy of Sharks]

I'm sorry, but no, pornography of underage characters isn't the thing that makes Japan "unpozzed", and if it is, then I wonder why semi-pornographic western shows with underage characters such as Big Mouth are also so pozzed at the time. That also being besides the fact that plenty of japs are also supporting things like gay marriage now.

If the difference between the SJWs and the japs is just the brand of degeneracy, then those two better burn, because they are morally no different

Buddy, the Woke left (for the most part) do not like anime and manga the way it is now. I've clearly been around many online political circles for a lot longer than you have and let me explain how the Far-Left views Japanese entertainment.

Why does the Far-Left like something praise Big Mouth while they demonize something like Boku no Pico? Simple, they don't control Japanese entertainment the same way they control Hollywood or (to an extent) video games and since many on the Far-Left are optics cucks (cherry picking morality) mostly because of double standards (Big Mouth = good while Boku no Pico = bad).

I've seen my share of Woketards complain about shows like Re: Zero or Goblin Slayer because 'muh-Japanese are misogyny' because there is a loli character in suggestive or sexual situations or there is an adult female character with big tits.

Yeah, I do see my share of Rightoids complain about this about Japanese entertainment but nowhere to the same extent as a Leftoid does.

The main difference I see with the Japanese and the Woke Left is that the Far-Left wants collectivism while the Japanese just want to be left alone and produce content they want. Can we argue that many lefties and the Japanese can get pretty degenerate? Sure. But to be objective here, the hardline left doesn't really like Japanese entertainment because they think anyone that likes anime and manga is some crypto-Nazi pedo or something.

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

Buddy, the Woke left (for the most part) do not like anime and manga the way it is now. I've clearly been around many political circles for a lot longer than you have and let me explain how the Far-Left views Japanese entertainment.

Why does the Far-Left like something praise Big Mouth while they demonize something like Boku no Pico? Simple, they don't control Japanese entertainment the same way they control Hollywood or (to an extent) video games and since many on the Far-Left are optics cucks (cherry picking morality) mostly because of double standards (Big Mouth = good while Boku no Pico = bad).

I've seen my share of Woketards complain about shows like Re: Zero or Goblin Slayer because 'muh-Japanese are misogyny' because there is a loli character in suggestive or sexual situations or there is an adult female character with big tits.

Yeah, I do see my share of Rightoids complain about this about Japanese entertainment but nowhere to the same extent as a Leftoid does.

The main difference I see with the Japanese and the Woke Left is that the Left wants collectivism while the Japanese just want to be left alone and produce content they want. Can we argue that lefties and the Japanese can get pretty degenerate? Sure. But to be objective here, the hardline left doesn't really like Japanese entertainment because they think anyone that likes anime and manga is some crypto-Nazi pedo or something.

So in the end they are two equally degenerate forces that want to create, directly or indirectly, a society that views even further degeneracy as something normal. Why should I support one of them and oppose the other once again?

 

[Frenzy of Sharks]

So in the end they are two equally degenerate forces that want to create, directly or indirectly, a society that views even further degeneracy as something normal. Why should I support one of them and oppose the other once again?

If you have any real principles, defend those who you object to for their right to self-expression even if you don't agree with them.

I don't like Nazis or Communists but I'll still defend their right to say stupid shit like "14/88" or "Eat the Rich" on the Internet.

I don't like people like Destiny or Nick Fuentes but that doesn't mean I want both of them censored.

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

If you have any real principles, defend those who you object to for their right to self-expression even if you don't agree with them.

I don't like Nazis or Communists but I'll still defend their right to say stupid shit like "14/88" or "Eat the Rich" on the Internet.

I don't like people like Destiny or Nick Fuentes but that doesn't mean I want both of them censored.

Why did you automatically assume that I'm one of those old-school libertatians? And also, animated child pornography being self-expression, when it is illegal in multiple US states and european countries already.

And I also asked you why should someone oppose one and support the other, not whether or not they should be free to discuss that subject

 

[Frenzy of Sharks]

Why did you automatically assume that I'm one of those old-school libertatians? And also, animated child pornography being self-expression, when it is illegal in multiple US states and european countries already.

And I also asked you why should someone oppose one and support the other, not whether or not they should be free to discuss that

1. I never assumed what your politics was, do not put words in my mouth.

2. If you're referring to old school obscenity laws on a state level from 1960-something, rarely are they ever enforced anymore for the same reasons why some states have since stopped enforcing marijuana laws or even state laws against adultery (if that was the case, by now some state would force Amazon to take down the film 'Once Upon a Girl' from their listings which is basically Western shota animation, the American animation industry in the 1970's was really wild ).

Besides, if the American government or the states really cared about this, 4chan would've been shut down by now. I also wouldn't use Europe as some bastion of morality, considering that they tolerate a certain group of people that think 9/11 was a good thing.

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

If you have any real principles, defend those who you object to for their right to self-expression even if you don't agree with them.

1. I never assumed what your politics was, do not put words in my mouth.

Why would I follow the first quote if I weren't a libertarian? Why would my principles uphold the right of self-expression (when it comes to pornographic pictures) if I were not a libertarian?

If you're referring to old school obscenity laws on a state level from 1960-something, rarely are they ever enforced anymore for the same reasons why some states have since stopped enforcing marijuana laws or even state laws against adultery (if that was the case, by now some state would force Amazon to take down the film 'Once Upon a Girl' from their listings which is basically Western shota animation, the American animation industry in the 1970's was really wild ).

And no, I'm talking about things such as the PROTECT Act, and other similar laws that have been passed since.

Besides, if the American government or the states really cared about this, 4chan would've been shut down by now. I also wouldn't use Europe as some bastion of morality, considering that they tolerate a certain group of people that think 9/11 was a good thing.

The american goverment doesn't care about actual pedophilia and sex offenders for the most part, otherwise Hollywood wouldn't be the den of deviancy and sexual abuse that it is, or unionized teachers wouldn't get a slap on the wrist and a quick relocation after they are exposed for fucking one of their students. But that doesn't mean that it isn't illegal, nor that it will never land you in trouble, the law, even when not actively enforeced, doesn't stop being the law

 

[Frenzy of Sharks]

Muh-Protect Act of 2003.

Go read the law again, it literately states that it's a criminal offense if the visual description is virtually indistinguishable from a real life minor (keywords are "virtually indistinguishable'); in other words you have to pull a Shadbase to be formally charged under the Protect Act of 2003. Even the Wikipedia article you've cited acknowledges this. Holy shit, learn to read; the fact that you cited Wikipedia (muh-Wikipedia) as some own shows me you are a fucking midwit.

Yes, I'm aware some people were charged and arrested for having lolicon and shotacon content on their person under this law but that is only because law enforcement in America is super corrupt and like to abuse laws that are broad enough for them to screw over even innocent people because are are under the assumption the accused in question will not exercise their Miranda rights (it's why they always tell you to lawyer up and don't talk to cops even if you are innocent). It would be like advocating for the death penalty and then not acknowledge that innocent people have been given the death plenty before and still refuse to see the flaws in this.

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

Yes, I'm aware some people were charged and arrested for having lolicon and shotacon content on their person under this law but that is only because law enforcement in America is super corrupt and like to abuse laws that are broad enough for them to screw over even innocent people because are are under the assumption the accused in question will not exercise their Miranda rights (it's why they always tell you to lawyer up and don't talk to cops even if you are innocent).

They tell you to do that under all circumstances because that's simply the smart thing to do, no matter if you did or didn't do it.

It would be like advocating for the death penalty and then not acknowledge that innocent people have been given the death plenty before and still refuse to see the flaws in this.

How the hell is citing the law an appeal to authority? And also, how the hell do you think that just spamming one of those "you did an X fallacy" pics still works as a counter-argument? This is not 2008, and you are not a teenager, get a grip. And the worst part is that is that you are even using the pic wrong, peak late 2000s level of "debate".

Also, someone that has been charged of a crime is, by definition, guilty, not innocent, and that's also the reason as to why courts work in a "guilty/not guilty" basis. When justice was done poorly, and the courts have charged someone that they couldn't reasonably prove to be guilty, that is something that falls on the specific court for not applying the law properly, not at the law itself.

You can argue that the current laws are being applied in a way that's too harsh, or broad, or vague, or that they didn't follow the due process in some cases, but that only affects the way they are handled in a case by case basis, and thus, once again, not in a way so general as to say that the laws itself are wrong.

You are aware that people have been charged for animated child pornography, and yet you still you still deny that this is something that can be illegal, how? How can somebody say that something is patently not illegal while at the same time seeing multiple examples of legal punishment arising due to it?

 

[Frenzy of Sharks]

You can argue that the current laws are being applied in a way that's too harsh, or broad, or vague, or that they didn't follow the due process in some cases, but that only affects the way they are handled in a case by case basis, and thus, once again, not in a way so general as to say that the laws itself are wrong.

This is an appeal to authority, "muh-state says it's wrong therefore it is wrong".

Homosexuality is also illegal in various Middle Eastern countries but just because the Middle East made being gay illegal doesn't mean the Western world going to follow that example anytime soon. I mean shit, you can go to prison in some European countries for raising up the Nazi flag or displaying other far-right related material (some people in Europe do risk prison time for just browsing Kiwi Farms because hate speech laws are fucked up there).

You're not good at this, your argument skills is on the same levels of midwittery as Xanderhal. You can bring up as many 'muhs' as you want but the only thing you will accomplish here is making yourself look more retarded than you do now.

 

[Toji Suzuhara]

This is an appeal to authority, "muh-state says it's wrong therefore it is wrong".

I'm not arguing that it is wrong because the state says that it is wrong. I'm arguing that it is illegal because the state says that it is illegal, and unless you have found a way to make the unlawful legal, while at the same time not changing any laws, tell me, that could be useful for me.

Homosexuality is also illegal in various Middle Eastern countries but just because the Middle East made being gay illegal doesn't mean the Western world going to follow that example anytime soon. I mean shit, you can go to prison in some European countries for raising up the Nazi flag or displaying other far-right related material (some people in Europe do risk prison time for just browsing Kiwi Farms because hate speech laws are fucked up there).

Good that we are not talking about the middle east, but rather about relevant areas like Europe and the US, where it is already illegal in some cases, and thus we don't have to make use of useless comparisions and irrelevant hypotheticals. Also, the problem with KF is the bad reputation that the site has, and the (clearly illegal) attempts that have been made by various groups to take it off the internet, nobody has gone to prison due browsing, hosting, or otherwise been involved with KF, unlike with your precious animated child pornography.

Also, reply to me directly, faggot. You clearly know how to do it, and also clearly know why you are now trying to avoid it