The legality of e.g. a video game hinging on whether the player is experiencing feelings of enjoyment that are in a category that is acceptable to you, is an insane basis for whether it should be illegal.
Do you think a hyperrealistic rape, torture, & murder VR simulator game would be insane to regulate because we don't like people feeling enjoyment of it?
I'd argue it'd be insane not to. You want to cultivate the good in people, not the bad.
Because porn is porn and not art. If it's meant to arouse the viewer or is obscene then it's not artistic, it's just gross smut with no value for society other than give men boners.
Hey now, there's plenty of women who are into porn. As pointed out by loli defenders, a lot of this stuff is allegedly drawn by women too.
No, you do not go from looking at lolicon to molesting children, that's not how it works.
Isn't it probable that they could graduate to cp,
then become molesters after that? Theoretically some people may not be interested in anything beyond cartoons, but exceptions don't make the rule, and it's unreasonable to assume there's not a potential pipeline.
No, I don't need to cite a study, I don't outsource my thinking to The Science (tm), nor do lawmakers.
Works can be arousing or obscene and still be art which is something we see all throughout history.
Something obscene shouldn't be considered art, and thus doesn't deserve the protected status thereof.
we don't line up people who are born with a mental illness and shoot them in the head, because we as a society believe in rehabilitation of the retarded and not euthanization.
We have mental hospitals for the mentally ill, and there's no rehabilitation for some people, so they should have a permanent stay.
I always thought the drawings of children being disemboweled or decapitated was worse. But I guess thats what happens when everyones playing videogame shooters all the time.
It depends. Depictions of kids killed in media can be justified with consideration to certain factors, such as realism and context.
For example, killing kids in video games isn't problematic
per se; if you could kill them in a game like Skyrim then it would make sense and isn't really any more concerning than killing other innocent characters and would just be a part of the larger, fairly cartoony game.
However, if it was a hyperrealistic game or solely about killing kids, that's infinitely worse than loli and should be banned all the more. But again, just showing kids die isn't an issue in and of itself, if you've ever lost in Zelda then you've watched a kid die, and it's not disturbing to anybody.
If you date an adult who looks like a child, are you a pedophile?
They don't exist, and no, the midgets and diseased people who age strangely don't actually look like children. It's an impossible question for reality, but if somehow such a person did exist, you'd need to be a pedophile to be aroused by such a strange adult.
You played video games with 11 year old perky tidded cat girls for memes so... pretty high and mighty words considering the source of them.
He claims to have played the censored version. If a game is bereft of nudity or sex scenes and otherwise good, you can just bypass/ignore any remaining suggestive elements and enjoy the rest of the game.
It's the Fate game that's the issue, as you've rather graphically explained several times.
Lots of millennials grew up with DBZ, Hellsing, Bebop etc and they are perfectly normal people.
I'll go a step further and say you're not normal if you don't like DBZ.