The Great Lolicon Debate of ANN

[Fuchikoma]

Originally Posted by Dewgy

does that say 'nicorrect'

Ask Arkturus.

[Revolver Koala]

Vistah wins argument, saying that event A (lolicon) will inevitably lead to or increase the probability of B (child molestation) is a blatant logical fallacy unless you have evidence to back it up which you don't as it is different only in degree of exaggeration from the arguments of people who say that if we let gay people marry then everyone will start fucking dogs, I have never molested a child nor has my theoretical desire to molest a child caused me much "distress" which I am fairly sure applies to almost all lolicon people, I don't even want to molest a child though I'm rather attracted to teenage non-prepubescents, which if it were a serious problem would be called something different entirely, and the picture Mint posted is the best motivational image ever and I want a full-size framed print of it.

[Mint Mania IIDX]

Originally Posted by Revolver Koala

Vistah wins argument, saying that event A (lolicon) will inevitably lead to or increase the probability of B (child molestation) is a blatant logical fallacy unless you have evidence to back it up which you don't as it is different only in degree of exaggeration from the arguments of people who say that if we let gay people marry then everyone will start fucking dogs, I have never molested a child nor has my theoretical desire to molest a child caused me much "distress" which I am fairly sure applies to almost all lolicon people, I don't even want to molest a child though I'm rather attracted to teenage non-prepubescents, which if it were a serious problem would be called something different entirely, and the picture Mint posted is the best motivational image ever and I want a full-size framed print of it.

Fuck it. I'll head to the closest office supply store TODAY.

[Axem Rangers]

Xybur, I have a long rant coming for you (after I finish masturbating).

[xybur]

Originally Posted by Revolver Koala

Vistah wins argument, saying that event A (lolicon) will inevitably lead to or increase the probability of B (child molestation) is a blatant logical fallacy unless you have evidence to back it up which you don't as it is different only in degree of exaggeration from the arguments of people who say that if we let gay people marry then everyone will start fucking dogs, I have never molested a child nor has my theoretical desire to molest a child caused me much "distress" which I am fairly sure applies to almost all lolicon people, I don't even want to molest a child though I'm rather attracted to teenage non-prepubescents, which if it were a serious problem would be called something different entirely, and the picture Mint posted is the best motivational image ever and I want a full-size framed print of it.

That was the longest run-on sentence I have ever read.

In any case, I never stated that that the ACT of assault or whatever was going to be the end-all result of looking loli-con. It could happen, I'm not ruling out the fact, but that doesn't mean it will.

In fact, going by that copy pasta that Vistah posted, it only strengthens what I said earlier.

"Note that pedophilia can be diagnosed solely in the presence of fantasies or sexual urges on the subject's part — it need not involve sexual acts with children, and indeed "Pedophilia" is not a legal term, it describes no act."

The urge is there, regardless of whether or not the image is drawn or real.

I thought of this example last night: You look at a photo of a nude woman engaged in a sexual act. She is in her lower-20's, and rather attractive. You become aroused by this photo.

Now, take that same woman, and animate her. Chances are, if the drawing is anywhere near as accurate a depicition of the actual photo, you will probably become aroused in the same manner.

Now, following this logic in can work in a reverse manner. You become aroused by a drawing, and you can become equally aroused by the same drawing when you find out it was originally a photo.

Assuming you become aroused by well drawn pictures (which many have, don't lie), who is to say that you wouldn't have the same pension over an equally arousing photo. Hence, a lolikon picture, as "FAR OUT THERE" as it may seem, it can still cause arousal, as a drawing. The only logic I can follow then, is that a person would be capable of being aroused by the real thing, and if someone has a pension to reallly want the animated stuff (for whatever reason), further down the line, the desire for more graphic stuff is going to be in demand.

So then, I realllly highly doubt that sole reason for anyone to be looking at a lolikon picture is simply because you express a slight interest in the art, or because it's cute. That effing bull.

Also, just because it's accepted in another country, doesn't make it correct or right in any sense of the word.

My point is, you can convince yourself it isn't a problem, but frankly, if you have to convince yourself that it isn't a problem, it already has become one.

[raven_tker]

k anyway threads pretty much over unless you guys can bring up new points

[xybur]

Originally Posted by raven_tker

i'm a loli lover and don't want to talk about it

oh, ok

[raven_tker]

oh no i could talk about how much i like loli all day. It just gets boring after listening to xybur talk about it for a while =P

[xybur]

How old are you anyway soji? You said your gf was like 14 or something, but I thought you said you were 17 before.

That's not really loli, in fact I think that's ok.

[raven_tker]

i am 17, and i do realize that an age gap of 2.5 years is like nothing at all, which is why i get pissed sometimes when people say to me GOD SHES WAY TOO YOUNG! being a pedo to me is more about age difference than numbers. Im not a pedo, though.

[Nomi]

Look, I don't have a problem with it when the girls are 14 and stuff. Yeah, I would not want to hear about any real girl screwing at 14, but it happens. Loli that doesn't feature rape or anything like that doesn't really bother me if the people in it are of an age (including age differences) that would be reasonable in the real world. There's nothing pedophile-y about a 16 year old kid liking lolicon that shows 14 year old girls.

It's not my thing at all, as I even think hentai/not real people porn is kind of weird, but I don't see why everyone shits a brick when young guys like lolicon with similarly aged fake minors. I do think it's weird if they don't age into something with women older, but whatever, to each their own. Nobody gets hurt so eh. Better for people to get off to fake minors than real ones.

[fweezel]

Originally Posted by xybur

Assuming you become aroused by well drawn pictures (which many have, don't lie), who is to say that you wouldn't have the same pension over an equally arousing photo. Hence, a lolikon picture, as "FAR OUT THERE" as it may seem, it can still cause arousal, as a drawing. The only logic I can follow then, is that a person would be capable of being aroused by the real thing, and if someone has a pension to reallly want the animated stuff (for whatever reason), further down the line, the desire for more graphic stuff is going to be in demand.

Find a girl who looks IDENTICAL to Chiyo and I'll believe this.

[xybur]

Find a girl with genetalia, and I've proven my point.

[Mint Mania IIDX]

Originally Posted by raven_tker

i am 17, and i do realize that an age gap of 2.5 years is like nothing at all, which is why i get pissed sometimes when people say to me GOD SHES WAY TOO YOUNG! being a pedo to me is more about age difference than numbers. Im not a pedo, though.

I feel ya, man.

PS - The poster has been made, it is BEAUTIFUL.

[Hortence:The Muleface Mod]

Originally Posted by xybur

My point is, you can convince yourself it isn't a problem, but frankly, if you have to convince yourself that it isn't a problem, it already has become one.

If I had to convince myself that it wasn't a problem I wouldn't be arguing now would I. I have to convince you. Hell personally I've never had a problem with it because I know reality and art are two different things. Simply calling that aspect of it "bull" and dismissing it really shows that this argument can't go anywhere because you're simply refusing to accept what I'm telling you and calling me a liar.

Which in the end to me says I've no reason to believe that I'm wrong, and you can't be convinced of my standpoint because you simply choose not to be, thereby defeating any productive aspect of having an argument in the first place.