Lolicon vs. Pedophilia: Do you know the difference?

Offline

Aug 2007

7550

MorningGlory said:
After reading a few comment,I came to a conclusion of
Paedophile are the next Level of Lolicon....

Your conclusion is made of ignorance.

Poplmon said:
I honestly think that an adult looking at doujinshi is the same as a child looking at hentai.

Sexual curiosity?

Jun 30, 2010 7:13 AM

#116

Offline

Sep 2009

308

A lolicon is somebody who like images of children in cartoon form animated or pictorial, they might even have seen real images of Child pornography but it remains a fantasy.

A paedophile is somebody who acts out their fantasy and recreates the fantasy with real children.

That is my understanding, basically even though the semantic arguments of it might be wrong that is the definition I have come to understand.

This came from finding 4chan a few years ago, I was exposed to so much pornography there. I was really turned on by the images of /l/ when it was still around and they were not always sexual, the of course the inescapable /b/ who opened my eyes to a form of child pornography that I didn't even knew existed. Suddenly these two world collided, these fantasy of lolis the cartoon character a kind fo perfect girl who loved my and I could do with whatever I wanted within the confines of my imagination became real. I soon realised that these cartoon strips of a girl being broken mentally and physically dominated or giving themselves freely in an expression of their own secret lust for me which didn't exist in real life, my machinations of a girl who would come to me when nobody else was around and say to me I want to have sex with you which I know stemmed from my inability to find a real girl in life to act out my desires sexually after years of isolation a social rejection. These were being acted out by people in real life and the images of /b/ forever changed my perception of what was real and just imagination.

So for my sanity I had to create a group where people who once found or still do find cartoon girls sexually appealing as well as spiritually and emotionally appealing but who had also seen the reality of what I can only call a master manipulator of sexual desires and peoples minds was, but who had absolutely no interest in making it real. Those were to become lolicons, I was a lolicon, I couldn't hide from the fact that I was sexually attracted to the cartoon images of children, not just sexually but physically they had perfect body's and curves like the best sports cars or computers, I wanted them to be real for me, of course seeing the reality shocked and despite knowing the ages of some of these glamour models I couldn't help but be sexually aroused by them.

But I wouldn't act out my desires in real life, SO people who did, the people who made those pictures reality of glamour models and who have actual sexual relationships with under-age girls are paedophiles.

I've been in a few fights and accidents, I know how much pain the body can endure while still awake, Family members who died of cancer and watching them in excruciating pain made me feel terrible. These people who capitulate to have sex with real people against their natural will and causing much pain and suffering is abhorrent to me.

I watched a program of victims of paedophilia shortly after, the stories were so vivid. One person described how they were taken into a room and striped naked, then being told that it was going to hurt a bit but then they would get used to it. They said the initial pain was so bad they almost passed out but didn't and it hurt like a knife going in and out repeatability, they said they wished the were dead but they weren't. They also said after years of brainwashing with drugs they began to really enjoy the sex and the attention, they got gifts for the things they did and they had so many people who wanted to see them. Years later when they were tossed aside like garbage and through painfully rebuilding their lives they realised what had been done to them. That was just one story, other stories of 11 year old becoming prostitutes to pay fro their family because their parents are drug abusers, Entire families who made it a way of life, and had zero connection with the outside world controlling the very reality of the children and raising and breeding new paedophiles from birth, and so much more.

I stopped looking at cartoon images of girls, even porn altogether after that. It took me a long time before I could watch a porn again and even then I thought to myself are they doing this because they want to or are they doing it because they have been trained like an animal. I'm not sure any more.

I suppose the initial feeling watching lolicon images was that it would be mutual and that it wouldn't hurt, in my fantasy of that kind, but the reality is far more than that. Just knowing of this stuff makes me feel unable to be happy, worse for me that the people doing it are very happy and even worse still that after that story there are people, children who play along because they are given everything in exchange for sexual favours and that after a while it becomes normal and they too are happy in their lives, especially when you are shown an image of some poor African girl picking up litter or dieing of starvation. When give a choice the less of tow evils seems rather palatable for a child.

I watched an anime called immortal sisters blossoming, which made me realise that when given the choice between the hard road of suffering and a easier rout of pleasure and money and revenge, most people would choose that. Of course it's an incestuous anime about a woman is is financially manipulated into having sex with people and eventually her children as well through emotional blackmail until the point where all three, mother teenager and lolis are in a love triangle with a man and they enjoy many exciting sexual fantasy together, the husband is of course a cockroach and an evil person who deserves this punishment, until it turns out he was manipulated as well by failing business deals and not being able to look after his wife and children and so fourth making him the real victim of the who affair.

it's usually the family's that suffer.

that is basically it.

lolicons= fantasy
paedophiles =realists

Jun 30, 2010 7:27 AM

#117

--ALEX--

Offline

Jun 2008

25970

^ HOLY CRAP, was an essay really necessary.

However I do agree with your fantasy vs. reality issue.

Jul 1, 2010 1:01 AM

#118

Offline

Aug 2007

7550

Disposable-Angel said:

A paedophile is somebody who acts out their fantasy and recreates the fantasy with real children.

the people who made those pictures reality of glamour models and who have actual sexual relationships with under-age girls are paedophiles.

1) Wrong. They would be child molesters. Not all pedophiles are child molesters.

2) Complete bullshit. A person who has a sexual relationship with a teenager is not a pedophile.

Jul 1, 2010 1:16 AM

#119

MelbShaw

Offline

Feb 2010

1890

Pedophiles ~ Likes little kids
Lolicons ~ Likes little anime kids

That is the difference.

Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines.

Jul 1, 2010 5:24 AM

#120

People for the Ethical Treatment of Jellygooses

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Drunk_Samurai said:

Disposable-Angel said:

A paedophile is somebody who acts out their fantasy and recreates the fantasy with real children.

the people who made those pictures reality of glamour models and who have actual sexual relationships with under-age girls are paedophiles.

1) Wrong. They would be child molesters. Not all pedophiles are child molesters.

2) Complete bullshit. A person who has a sexual relationship with a teenager is not a pedophile.

Ok

1. I said that in my post I knew the semantics of the point I was making were wrong, it was a classification I made between people who have seen or been exposed to child pornography both animated and real, but has no desire to ever have a sexual relationship with a child.

2. Under-age does not mean teenage it means under-age, as in the age of consent and some of the glamour models are as young as 6 or 7 which is not even remotely close to teen age.

I think you're itching for a fight but you wont find one here.

MelbShaw said:
Pedophiles ~ Likes little kids
Lolicons ~ Likes little anime kids

That is the difference.

I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

Jul 1, 2010 7:39 AM

#121

LobsterRyoma

Offline

Sep 2009

415

Pedophiles = Lusts after real underage children.

Lolicon = Lusts after fictional & anime characters that look underage, but may or may not actually be underage.

ex. Izumi Konata(18), Ousawa Mimina(19)

That's about it.

Jul 1, 2010 10:38 AM

#122

Jellygoose

Offline

Feb 2008

260

kitkatbar said:

And there is a correlation, like I just stated, as did the studies which you can look for yourself alex. And I am aware that doesn't mean watching violent porn will make someone a rapist, however someone who watches violent porn is more likely to rape someone.

since you don't seem to grasp the concept of causality i will lay it down for you in simple terms.

What part of this study (for which I have yet to see a link to) rules out the more natural explanation which is that someone who is a rapist is more likely to watch violent porn ?

from the information I've been given about this unbacked study I'd say that that causality is far more likely.

or did the study actually follow people from a young age, introduce violent porn to one group and not to the other and then look at how many became rapists? because unless they did that the causality you have decided to draw seem to be at best nothing but speculation but more likely just another study paid for by an arbitrary group of moral fags.

correlation != causality

you can't just discover a correlation, deduce the cause based on speculation and call that assumption "results of a scientific study".

there are so-far nothing that shows that watching violent porn, or playing violent video games actually makes people criminals/rapists. This is just your assumption and it's not based on anything that would actually hold any ground in a real scientific arena.

now show me these so-called studies.

JellygooseJul 1, 2010 10:51 AM

Jul 1, 2010 11:00 AM

#123

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Jellygoose said:

kitkatbar said:

And there is a correlation, like I just stated, as did the studies which you can look for yourself alex. And I am aware that doesn't mean watching violent porn will make someone a rapist, however someone who watches violent porn is more likely to rape someone.

What part of this study (for which I have yet to see a link to) rules out the more natural explanation which is that someone who is a rapist is more likely to watch violent porn ?

from the information I've been given about this unbacked study I'd say that that correlation is far more likely.

or did the study actually follow people from a young age, introduce violent porn to one group and not to the other and then look at how many became rapists? because unless they did that the correlation you have decided to draw seem to be at best nothing but speculation but more likely just another study paid for by an arbitrary group of moral fags.

More like a correlation of rapists that have been caught as well as other sexual offenders and the kinds of porn they watched linked to studies based on psychoanalysis with them.

I read a Report about a rapist who had a perfect home, but started becoming obsessed with violent acts of sexual aggression. He couldn't act them out with his wife so he acted them out in real life.

There is also evidence no matter the argument that violence and sexual abuse in films doesn't affect children, but that is actually does. Gangster films like scar face become idolised heros for youth, the perfect man of power and violence wrapped up with respect from the people around him. Making him an idol and something to aspire to for people in some situations.

There is always going to be evidence to the contrary, every time you prove a rapist raped someone because they saw a violent porn, you will find a rapist who will rape because of some other need. Usually with rapists it power. They seek to control that which they cannot by force, the best way to enforce power is from a young age, or else we would not have schools.

Training a child to be a sex slave from birth is a lot easier than an adult. Not to mention you can set yourself up as GOD if you do it systematic training like any animal , Use of drugs and training they will revere and totally obey you like any animal.

personally I would stop getting bogged down with meta data about the subject and try to research it first hand, which is hard. But 4chan and /b/ is but a few clicks away try not to blind yourself to the obvious truths in favour of a more rose tinted perceptive that there is another reason. People can always be manipulated.

Watching a film like saw will give you nothing but ideas of how to kill someone, the entire film is a bible of torture of the human body and mind, it still takes a psychopath to take that step across the line though.

Years of abuse can be a trigger for that, not everyone has a strong ethical code, which can be broken down given enough motivation. The human psyche is a fragile thing when it breaks terrible things happen, are you suggesting that if such an occurrence took place in an individual and that that individual had been exposed to all sorts of violent ans sexual fantasy that they couldn't;t then act them out?

Jul 1, 2010 11:31 AM

#124

zharnotczar

Offline

Apr 2010

1403

Disposable-Angel said:

Jellygoose said:

kitkatbar said:

And there is a correlation, like I just stated, as did the studies which you can look for yourself alex. And I am aware that doesn't mean watching violent porn will make someone a rapist, however someone who watches violent porn is more likely to rape someone.

What part of this study (for which I have yet to see a link to) rules out the more natural explanation which is that someone who is a rapist is more likely to watch violent porn ?

from the information I've been given about this unbacked study I'd say that that correlation is far more likely.

or did the study actually follow people from a young age, introduce violent porn to one group and not to the other and then look at how many became rapists? because unless they did that the correlation you have decided to draw seem to be at best nothing but speculation but more likely just another study paid for by an arbitrary group of moral fags.

More like a correlation of rapists that have been caught as well as other sexual offenders and the kinds of porn they watched linked to studies based on psychoanalysis with them.

I read a Report about a rapist who had a perfect home, but started becoming obsessed with violent acts of sexual aggression. He couldn't act them out with his wife so he acted them out in real life.

There is also evidence no matter the argument that violence and sexual abuse in films doesn't affect children, but that is actually does. Gangster films like scar face become idolised heros for youth, the perfect man of power and violence wrapped up with respect from the people around him. Making him an idol and something to aspire to for people in some situations.

There is always going to be evidence to the contrary, every time you prove a rapist raped someone because they saw a violent porn, you will find a rapist who will rape because of some other need. Usually with rapists it power. They seek to control that which they cannot by force, the best way to enforce power is from a young age, or else we would not have schools.

Training a child to be a sex slave from birth is a lot easier than an adult. Not to mention you can set yourself up as GOD if you do it systematic training like any animal , Use of drugs and training they will revere and totally obey you like any animal.

personally I would stop getting bogged down with meta data about the subject and try to research it first hand, which is hard. But 4chan and /b/ is but a few clicks away try not to blind yourself to the obvious truths in favour of a more rose tinted perceptive that there is another reason. People can always be manipulated.

Watching a film like saw will give you nothing but ideas of how to kill someone, the entire film is a bible of torture of the human body and mind, it still takes a psychopath to take that step across the line though.

Years of abuse can be a trigger for that, not everyone has a strong ethical code, which can be broken down given enough motivation. The human psyche is a fragile thing when it breaks terrible things happen, are you suggesting that if such an occurrence took place in an individual and that that individual had been exposed to all sorts of violent ans sexual fantasy that they couldn't;t then act them out?

Your last paragraph is completely logical, but as Jellygoose says, it's still just assumption.

Jul 1, 2010 12:21 PM

#125

Offline

Aug 2007

7550

Disposable-Angel said:

Ok

1. I said that in my post I knew the semantics of the point I was making were wrong, it was a classification I made between people who have seen or been exposed to child pornography both animated and real, but has no desire to ever have a sexual relationship with a child.

2. Under-age does not mean teenage it means under-age, as in the age of consent and some of the glamour models are as young as 6 or 7 which is not even remotely close to teen age.

I think you're itching for a fight but you wont find one here.

1) Nobody has ever been exposed to animated child porn because it doesn't exist. It's not real therefore there are no children involved therefor it is not child porn.

2) Underage means under the age of consent. Which by your logic you directly stated a person who has a sexual relationship with a teenager is a pedophile

Disposable-Angel said:
I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

There is no similarity since one is real and the other isn't.

Jul 1, 2010 12:37 PM

#126

EfiChan

Offline

Apr 2010

3747

Let me see if I understand:

Pedophilia=Under 13
Lolicon=Above 13 (Maybe untill 18?)

Never heard about this word before. It doesn't exist in my language.

Jul 1, 2010 12:39 PM

#127

Offline

Oct 2009

2995

EfiChan said:
Let me see if I understand:

Pedophilia=Under 13
Lolicon=Above 13 (Maybe untill 18?)

Never heard about this word before. It doesn't exist in my language.

No no no...

Jul 1, 2010 12:40 PM

#128

EfiChan

Offline

Apr 2010

3747

Let me see if I understand:

Pedophilia=Under 13
Lolicon=Above 13 (Maybe untill 18?)

Never heard about this word before. It doesn't exist in my language.

Jul 1, 2010 12:45 PM

#129

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Drunk_Samurai said:

Disposable-Angel said:

Ok

1. I said that in my post I knew the semantics of the point I was making were wrong, it was a classification I made between people who have seen or been exposed to child pornography both animated and real, but has no desire to ever have a sexual relationship with a child.

2. Under-age does not mean teenage it means under-age, as in the age of consent and some of the glamour models are as young as 6 or 7 which is not even remotely close to teen age.

I think you're itching for a fight but you wont find one here.

1) Nobody has ever been exposed to animated child porn because it doesn't exist. It's not real therefore there are no children involved therefor it is not child porn.

2) Underage means under the age of consent. Which by your logic you directly stated a person who has a sexual relationship with a teenager is a pedophile

Disposable-Angel said:
I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

There is no similarity since one is real and the other isn't.

the real superman

The cartoon superman.

Both are fake, nether has superpowers except in the mind, but one is human and the other is purely fictional imagination. Notice the resemblance and how it is a human desire to want to imitate that which in the imagination and make it as real as possible.

Stop trying to put words in my mouth I never said people who have sex with teenagers are paedophiles except when grouping under-age groupings. As far as the law states you are wrong. Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

there is so much wrong with your post but mainly you're trying to bate me into a logical argument and progression of which suits your needs rather than discussing the actual intracity of the situation.

I suspect you are trolling me, because nobody on this site has not been to 4chan and /b/ and so I can only infer that you want an argument not a discussion. Read my post again, understand it before you try to dissect it. It's tiresome watching someone to try and run circles around me based on a semantic debate that in my first line i admitted was wrong.

I have seen cartoonist images of the exact scenes in CP pictures, which puts me off the whole cartoonist images of girls in general. Furthermore the stories read less like a fantasy of a superhuman man and an actually domination of a little girl which happens every single day in real life.

Stop trying to make it out like this is some obscure thing that never happens in real life and isn't based at all not even in the slightest on real events.

Unlike superman, or GOKU who powers up and flys through the air these things happen and glamour models are groomed from early ages and the animated porn of lolis is based almost exactly on real event whether you like it or not. I'm guess you like it but for sexual reasons and dislike people telling you your masturbating to the story of the rape of a little girl.

Jul 1, 2010 2:27 PM

#130

Onitenshi

Offline

May 2008

238

Disposable-Angel said:
Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

fail

Jul 1, 2010 2:34 PM

#131

zharnotczar

Offline

Apr 2010

1403

EfiChan said:
Let me see if I understand:

Pedophilia=Under 13
Lolicon=Above 13 (Maybe untill 18?)

Never heard about this word before. It doesn't exist in my language.

Pedophilia=Prepubescent
Lolicon=Complex Subject with unstrict definition; I've always assumed it was just drawings of young-looking girls.

Drunk_Samurai said:

Disposable-Angel said:
I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

There is no similarity since one is real and the other isn't.

You best be trollin', brah.

Jul 1, 2010 2:40 PM

#132

testingthisyea

Offline

Jun 2010

19

The author of "How to Be an Anime Character".

Jul 1, 2010 3:34 PM

#133

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Onitenshi said:

Disposable-Angel said:
Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

fail

I agree the law is Fail, if you suggesting that because I quoted the law that I fail then your just being a troll.

zharnotczar said:

EfiChan said:
Let me see if I understand:

Pedophilia=Under 13
Lolicon=Above 13 (Maybe untill 18?)

Never heard about this word before. It doesn't exist in my language.

Pedophilia=Prepubescent
Lolicon=Complex Subject with unstrict definition; I've always assumed it was just drawings of young-looking girls.

Drunk_Samurai said:

Disposable-Angel said:
I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

There is no similarity since one is real and the other isn't.

You best be trollin', brah.

He is. Figured it out a bit too late though, could have saved myself some effort. At least I know for future sake.

Jul 1, 2010 3:43 PM

#134

Offline

Feb 2010

34616

@Disposable Angel:

Rofl, your arguments are as flawed as in the other thread, though the topic is totally different. Seems to me like you like moralizing without any connection to reality.

Notice the resemblance and how it is a human desire to want to imitate that which in the imagination and make it as real as possible.

Yeah, it IS the realization of o movie about a comic book we're talking right here. It is supposed to look alike. What that fuck does this have to do with Lolicons imitating what they read?

Stop trying to put words in my mouth I never said people who have sex with teenagers are paedophiles except when grouping under-age groupings. As far as the law states you are wrong. Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

Stop pretending they are not your words and then repeating them in the next sentence. By the way laws are made by discussion about morals, and morals are not based on the state of the Law, so if we're holding a moral discussion here don't argue with the law.

I suspect you are trolling me, because nobody on this site has not been to 4chan and /b/ and so I can only infer that you want an argument not a discussion. Read my post again, understand it before you try to dissect it. It's tiresome watching someone to try and run circles around me based on a semantic debate that in my first line i admitted was wrong.

I suspect you are trolling because I have yet to read a post by you that makes sense. Also I don't see the connection to 4chan (which I only heard of after joining MAL btw).

Unlike superman, or GOKU who powers up and flys through the air these things happen and glamour models are groomed from early ages and the animated porn of lolis is based almost exactly on real event whether you like it or not. I'm guess you like it but for sexual reasons and dislike people telling you your masturbating to the story of the rape of a little girl.

That statement undermines your possible trolling. "Loli porn is based almost exactly on real events". This made my day. Yeah, every piece of fiction is based on real events, that's why they call it fiction. Every mangaka who does work in this genre probably has a child or two in his cellar, or at least a Child Porn subscription. You sure are quick to judge people. Or is "loli porn" the only exception? Non-fictional-fiction? And please tell me where to find one of these tentacle rape monsters on whichsome of these hentai are based. I wanna cut off a tentacle and hang it on my wall.

I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

This is also a good one. You were a lolicon, couldn't handle your desires so you watched real Child Porn (what other reason is there?), and now you're so ashamed of yourself that you have to take it out on you former fellow lolicons. Otherwise please explain why you were into lolis and watched Child Porn in the first place. "Investigation"? Rofl.

Your response is probably gonna be something along the lines "You don't agree with me so you must be a moral devil, raping newborn babied everyday, there is so much wrong with your post" so I probably won't even respond. You may go on moralizing without any connection to reality, let aside arguments, I've said what I wanted to.

btw just because I'm furiously arguing agains above statement doesn't mean I'm totally supporting the opposite opinion. I just can't let such badly done arguments pass without trying to show what they actually state if you continue them logically.
If someone is moralizing that much and that serious while being the most judgemental person it is just bittersweet irony.

I probably regret this post by now.

Jul 1, 2010 4:40 PM

#135

Offline

Sep 2009

308

[

Higashi_no_Kaze said:
@Disposable Angel:

I hate people dissecting my posts with massive quote pyramids. but anyway lets trudge on.

Yeah, it IS the realization of o movie about a comic book we're talking right here. It is supposed to look alike. What that fuck does this have to do with Lolicons imitating what they read?

that fantasy relates to relatilty, that reality imitates fantasy as best it can.

Stop pretending they are not your words and then repeating them in the next sentence. By the way laws are made by discussion about morals, and morals are not based on the state of the Law, so if we're holding a moral discussion here don't argue with the law.

e don't argue with the law.

exactly my point.

That statement undermines your possible trolling. "Loli porn is based almost exactly on real events". This made my day. Yeah, every piece of fiction is based on real events, that's why they call it fiction. Every mangaka who does work in this genre probably has a child or two in his cellar, or at least a Child Porn subscription. You sure are quick to judge people. Or is "loli porn" the only exception? Non-fictional-fiction? And please tell me where to find one of these tentacle rape monsters on whichsome of these hentai are based. I wanna cut off a tentacle and hang it on my wall.

You're blowing things into proportions of the fact that not everyone is a pedophile. I know. not everyone is president but he does exist and he does have the power to do things that others can and does regularly.

This is also a good one. You were a lolicon, couldn't handle your desires so you watched real Child Porn (what other reason is there?), and now you're so ashamed of yourself that you have to take it out on you former fellow lolicons. Otherwise please explain why you were into lolis and watched Child Porn in the first place. "Investigation"? Rofl.

You've heard of 4chan, have you been? have you seen /b/? There a CP thread there almost everyday, or at least there was when I first found out about it 3 odd years ago. I hadn't even heard of lolicon until I found 4chan and those threads were more common but still around. A week on 4chan and the cumulative mind of the anon consciousness really breaks through. Laugh all you want, if it pleases you, I am not disgusted with myself that I have seen these things any more than I am when I see a dead cat in the road. It wasn't by my hand these things were done. In fact I do have morals on it.

You don't find morals hold much ground in your life obviously. So holding a moral conversation with you about the ethic of such things and the intracity of it is pointless. You pre-empt my response in the hopes of quashing any argument I have. You're just creating a bubble of ignorance for yourself.

The main reason I used the photos of superman was because they are classic images of man imitating art or wanting to be what he cannot be. The marvel cartoonists made him to be the epitome of justice like the Mangaka artist made GOKU to be the champion of champions for all time with no argument. Despite there always being someone who disagrees the outcome is this superman, GOKU always wins when it comes to good triumphing over evil, sadly it doesn't work that way in real life.

Not every Mangaka drawn is based on a child locked in the basement for modelling purposes, but don't think for a second that these things are not more based in reality that fiction. Belive me you wouldn't see me at all if there was no basis for this in reality, but I have never seen a man fly without aid, or shoot lasers out of his eye, or power up so the world shakes with his energy. I have unfortunatly seen the cartoonist images of a lolicon and a real child these are not fiction, the rape Mangaka that are Doujins of AH My Goddess are not based on the actual rape of some fictional person, they are the guise of a fiction character. Bell dandy doesnt exist, the GODESS exist as a fictional character, but even though the raping of Bell dandy might be fiction the fact that the kinds of implements used, the kind of tortures she is put through, not only happen to real people but do happen to real people.

I get that you don't agree, and I get that it's because of a moralist view you don;t agree with, I get that its a good and bad that you don;t agree with. I get that. I think you even undertsnad me but are just being smarter than me and trying to nit-pick details of such failing laws like the teenage age of consent, the fact that a cartoon is so far removed from reality because it's drawn. It's all in the imaginations.

If it were just imaginations, then tell me why 150,000 people are raped each year, that 100,00 children disappear and that's just the ones we find out about and broadly in one country, the figure world wide staggers into millions.

The only difference so far is that GOKU and SUPERMAN don;t come to save the day. because unlike the raping of a 5 years old girl they don;t exist except in cartoon form.

Tell me, what you are trying to prove with this argument?

Jul 1, 2010 5:14 PM

#136

Offline

Feb 2010

34616

Surprisingly interesting posting for the most part.

Of course you didn't really answer the first 3 comments, just picking out what you can argue against, but the important part of the post in my opinion is this:

You don't find morals hold much ground in your life obviously. So holding a moral conversation with you about the ethic of such things and the intracity of it is pointless. You pre-empt my response in the hopes of quashing any argument I have. You're just creating a bubble of ignorance for yourself.

You kinda got me, and kinda totally misunderstood me.
I do take morals very highly, but I do not believe they are equal for everyone.
First of all who are you to say what is moral and what is not? Why is your opinion on this matter better than anyone else's? Again, leave out the law here and let's just discuss moral at the level of human beings. Humans will have different opinions because of different reasons and no human can say that his opinion is better than the others. So an objective, global moral that includes everyone cannot come from humans. Does it come from god? No way to prove it, that line of arguing is just gonna be dogmatic in the end. So there is no objective moral.
Moral is something everyone has to decide for him or herself, of course taking into consideration the common standards and laws, but to what degree is up to the human individual. Of course there is a need for laws based on the most commonly accepted moral standards of a society or the human race, but that is not the point I want to argue about.
What disturbs me is that you seem full of yourself thinking that you have grasped some kind of general moral which is factual and on which everyone has to agree. At least that is the general impression I got of you. Don't force people to accept your moral standards and don't judge them if they don't.

On another not (finally completely merging in the discussion from the other thread) we just clash because my views are based on observation and I just try to see things as they are, while you tend to see things from a perspective focused on what may be the best possible way, what COULD be. Correct me if my observation is wrong. But as said, that's more about the other thread ^^.

I get that you don't agree, and I get that it's because of a moralist view you don;t agree with, I get that its a good and bad that you don;t agree with. I get that. I think you even undertsnad me but are just being smarter than me and trying to nit-pick details of such failing laws like the teenage age of consent, the fact that a cartoon is so far removed from reality because it's drawn. It's all in the imaginations.

If it were just imaginations, then tell me why 150,000 people are raped each year, that 100,00 children disappear and that's just the ones we find out about and broadly in one country, the figure world wide staggers into millions.[/quite]

Here you are just mixing things up again. Just because one thing exists in reality and there are fictional depictions of it doesn't mean one is based on the other. And even if it is, if Lolicon artists try to copy real Child Porn, isn't it still better than them trying to copy it in Real Life? I do not believe that porn creates urges (at best it may awaken them in some cases) but that urges create porn. So if you take away the porn, what's left are the urges, which will get bigger and bigger and will finally search for some way to be released. What is your proposal?

Tell me, what you are trying to prove with this argument?

I do not want to prove anything, besides what i wrote at the beginning of this post. If anything, I wanted to prove you're not right (which doesn't mean you're wrong, those are different things).

But the question back to you: What are you trying to prove with this argument? So far my guess would be that Lolicons and paedophiles are equal and morally on the same (low) level. But please correct me, I have the feeling the point got lost somewhere along the lines.

I probably regret this post by now.

Jul 1, 2010 5:44 PM

#137

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Im not saying that lolicons are on the same moral lows as paedophiles, not even in the slightest. I think I am starting to understand why there is so much back lash from my post.

I only picked out the things that I thought were clashing to try to resolve them, not pick points that I could win against. That's just silly, like a bully picking on a weaker opponent he knows he can crush.

Im seeking clarity. Most of all I want to stress that before I saw any real CP I loved lolicons, I loved hentai and pornography. After seeing them I changed my view, not based on morals but just because I couldn't really stomach the sexuality any more.

is it better to copy real CP, in my opinion and it is just that, nothing even removal CP should exist, it gives people ideas, it does and that's it. it' doesn't make people act on them, but having no idea is a better position to be in than having an idea and losing your head and committing some atrocious real world crime. That's always been my stance. Even if it is an attackable one.

my proposal is that the energy is released, either constructive or destructive, of course making a cartoon of your fantasy is constructive, not everyone is an artist of fantastic skill. So it's really up you how it comes out, I have so many suggestions, all of them good and all of them are just that suggestion nothing more I can't make anyone do anything they don't want to do.

My main and only dislike is that the cartoonist images, are the imagining of a deranged mind, that's hard enough to deal with for the individual without making it a global sickness. The fact that these images are taken and made real, or that real girls are used as models for cartoons makes it even worse.

Of course if they were JUST imaginations, but they are not, if they were I guess you'd just say, well that's pretty sick and twisted but wow the art is AMAZING!!

unfortunately, it's more like and this is just for me, but not just me, as other feel the same way. WOW this man is sick, and I've seen that picture which looks like ''gilr B'' from ''file A'' and the similarity of what happened to her is almost identical.

NOW IM TYPING IN CAPS BECAUSE IM EXCITED!!! im excited because I get to talk about H.P.LOVECRAFT, he is a prolific writer and one that describes psychic connections that exist of ethereal plains.

This particular thing intrigues me because he states in a story and nothing more, that a man who lived a life far from anyone else, had a psychic connection to a serial killer. Overcome by these nightmares and visions he drew them out in the hopes of finding the answer. He never did, until the killing of a group of people that matched exactly his drawn books. He was arrested in connection to the crime but he could not have committed it he was on the other side of the planet.

What I am saying here is a quantum leap of thinking that even I find hard to make. That a man draws the images of a girl being raped but has never seen them, he is haunted by them and then the images of a girl being raped are found that are almost identical to the drawings, it's the most evidence for a psych connection ever made, and even then it fail under scrutiny. Never the less I would hate to see these images in my head, I would hate even more to experience them, either way, the fact remains that images are created all time and they dipicting crimes against. Whats worse is the crimes are real.

And the really insanely and stupid thing is I am a bit of mulder because I am the one who thinks that the artist is making them happen in real life, like some supernatural being who has the power to create anything his mind desires happen in real life. I know I am nuts, and I know it stupid. But I have seen the evidence.

Anyway that's it.

As long as the lust never hurts anyone it's just a mental sickness. As long as it stays there there's no problem.

Jul 1, 2010 6:25 PM

#138

Offline

Feb 2010

34616

Well, I don't know about that psychic connection stuff. If CP pics and loli porn pics are similar this can be because of:
a) There is probably a LOT of material on both sides limited to a rather small area so similarities are bound to appear sooner or later.
b) The people who make those pics/drawings are both human and interested in the same scenario, so their imaginations will have the same "inspirations" at some point.

And for the record: Are you referring only to loli porn or to lolis in regular anime too (including some fanservice, but no hentai)?

Anyway I have the impression your last post mostly missed what I wanted to say/discuss in the post before. Dunno if it's me, but I also find it hard to connect your paragraphs and to figure out what part of my posting you are referring to. In any case we're kinda talking at cross-purposes here and although I could clarify some things about the "mental sickness", as you call it, I'll just leave it at that.

I probably regret this post by now.

Jul 1, 2010 8:10 PM

#139

Offline

Aug 2007

7550

Disposable-Angel said:

Drunk_Samurai said:

Disposable-Angel said:

Ok

1. I said that in my post I knew the semantics of the point I was making were wrong, it was a classification I made between people who have seen or been exposed to child pornography both animated and real, but has no desire to ever have a sexual relationship with a child.

2. Under-age does not mean teenage it means under-age, as in the age of consent and some of the glamour models are as young as 6 or 7 which is not even remotely close to teen age.

I think you're itching for a fight but you wont find one here.

1) Nobody has ever been exposed to animated child porn because it doesn't exist. It's not real therefore there are no children involved therefor it is not child porn.

2) Underage means under the age of consent. Which by your logic you directly stated a person who has a sexual relationship with a teenager is a pedophile

Disposable-Angel said:
I agree with you, except after seeing real CP i don't like either any more, but before I really liked lolicons, that was until I saw the reality and the similarity.

There is no similarity since one is real and the other isn't.

the real superman

The cartoon superman.

Both are fake, nether has superpowers except in the mind, but one is human and the other is purely fictional imagination. Notice the resemblance and how it is a human desire to want to imitate that which in the imagination and make it as real as possible.

Stop trying to put words in my mouth I never said people who have sex with teenagers are paedophiles except when grouping under-age groupings. As far as the law states you are wrong. Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

there is so much wrong with your post but mainly you're trying to bate me into a logical argument and progression of which suits your needs rather than discussing the actual intracity of the situation.

I suspect you are trolling me, because nobody on this site has not been to 4chan and /b/ and so I can only infer that you want an argument not a discussion. Read my post again, understand it before you try to dissect it. It's tiresome watching someone to try and run circles around me based on a semantic debate that in my first line i admitted was wrong.

I have seen cartoonist images of the exact scenes in CP pictures, which puts me off the whole cartoonist images of girls in general. Furthermore the stories read less like a fantasy of a superhuman man and an actually domination of a little girl which happens every single day in real life.

Stop trying to make it out like this is some obscure thing that never happens in real life and isn't based at all not even in the slightest on real events.

Unlike superman, or GOKU who powers up and flys through the air these things happen and glamour models are groomed from early ages and the animated porn of lolis is based almost exactly on real event whether you like it or not. I'm guess you like it but for sexual reasons and dislike people telling you your masturbating to the story of the rape of a little girl.

Lol. If anybody is trolling you are. Especially with the Superman pics. Shit neither are real since they are still both fictional. One is live action fiction and the other is cartoon fiction. Also no. State law does not call them pedophiles. They get arrested for statutory rape. Just because people call them pedophiles doesn't mean they are.

Also lol at your mental sickness line. Now I know you are trolling.

Jul 2, 2010 3:30 AM

#140

Offline

Sep 2009

308

So apparently I am now trolling because two people have agreed that it's not a mental sickness, which in my opinion it is. If I am upsetting you are you are getting angry or frustrated at what I am saying that doesn't mean I am trolling, trolls tend to saying things to purposely upset you, since neither one of you seems to be in any way upset at this topic or what I am saying except to disagree with it, how does this calculate to me trolling you? If I am then don't respond. I know I won't be responding to any more of Drunk samurai posts again.

There is no point trying to argue with two people at the same time who obviously agree, but offer nothing in the way of it not being so.

neither one of you seems to be able to even grasp what I am saying. I'm not going to continue with this it's pointless.

I would actually like to continue the discussion with Higashi though. But you obviously striving for a retraction of my statement that it's a mental sickness, which is not going to happen. If it makes you sick it's a sickness, the fact it exists in the mind is moot. It is accepted though not by you, that rapists and sexual offenders are metal sick, the fantasy of these rapists and sexual offenders make me sick personally, and just because it makes me sick does not mean I am the only one either.

If you would like to talk a bit more about the psychic phenomenon I would be interested in doing that.

To answer the last question, Just the loli porn, the rape fantasy is the sickness not the fan service like like lucky star type anime or Hirugash, those were just really rubbish anime with loli character, Hirugashi was a little more violent and bloody but I didn't like either really, but millions do, just not me, and not because of the loli characters, but because they were just really dull imo.

Even though I can logically like you, say it's because of so much material being around that an artist can create these fictions. The main arguments for my psychic phenomenon are based purely on irrational logic. The very idea a person can somehow see into another persons mind is a scary prospect at best, worse still, having a flood of someone else's life and torments come to you in the form of pictures you make in to cartoons is just really stressing if nothing else, especially when you have no idea where these things come from. I suppose it's like a two way street, both people are walking down it one an artist and one a paedophile, as they pass the street there is an exchange of information, like giving the time, perhaps the artist asks the paedophile the time and he gives it to him, neither one is aware that the time is not just the only thing being exchanged. either way the point of some kind of psychic connection or frequency being involved is something that is been the stuff of discussion for years. Most research into brainwaves being linked to psychic connection has been debunked.

Let's say just like with any disease or sickness that there is a rate of infection and way of infection. With AIDS for example the disease attacks the body ability to create white blood cells which fight off infection, the healthy cells, which protect from invading illness stop working and allow a disease of any kind to come in a ravish the body until death. Healthy cells get attacked all the time, the white blood cells destroy the infection. At one point the cell being attacked is consider healthy, it functions normally and has no problems, until it's attacked. the idea of a metal sickness is that the a mind can be infected by the ideas and thoughts of other beings. Mostly people have said for years that violent games and films pollute the mind, at to a degree you are right, just with anything in life our mind assimilates information of all kind, and acts on that information. The idea of a person never having seen a violent film and not acting violently is wrong though since we are still animals and human.

But violent media isnt the sickness, and i'm not suggesting lolicons are the sickness, you just have to open a paper to world events or go to 4chan for a day and see the many cancerous thread about gore and CP to see there is a lot of suffering in the world. The human race is sick. Paedophilia is just another sickness if it affect your mind you can overcome it, with help. But there are hundreds of thousand who cross the line from fantasy to reality everyday and hurt people violently. When you find a porn stash of some paedophile ring, see how they live the reality and convert the reality into cartoons and then use legitimate artists as a cover for there depravity, you would not be arguing with me about semantic points and details, you'd be fighting with me, but you're not.Actually, I have argued that lolicons are part of the cure, I failed that arguments as well because the fact that the lolicons porn is so detailed in its coverages and depiction of real life rapes of young girls.

That is why lolicons are now banned worldwide, why /l/ was shut down and so much more.

Anime like lucky star and hiugashi will always be made. loli porn of hirguashi and luckstar will not be made and if it is made and found it will get you arrested. That is the bottom line like it or not.

Anyway. This is really off topic.

Jul 2, 2010 4:58 AM

#141

Onitenshi

Offline

May 2008

238

Disposable-Angel said:

Onitenshi said:

Disposable-Angel said:
Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

fail

I agree the law is Fail, if you suggesting that because I quoted the law that I fail then your just being a troll.

The only one who is obviously trolling seems to be you.

Pedophile: Someone who is sexually interested in prepubescent children.
Someone who has sex with them: Child abuser

Child abuser != Pedophile
Not everyone who is interested in them wants to rape them (or actually tries it, even if he/she wants to).
Not everyone who abuses children is sexually interested in them...there are many sick fucks out there who go for anything helpless to demonstrate their "might"...

I won't blame you for not knowing, because that's not written in any of your superman comics...but please do everone here a favour and just stay away from topics like these...

Jul 2, 2010 5:05 AM

#142

no-thanks

Offline

Nov 2008

18019

Statutory rape, it's real.

Doesn't make you a paedophile though.

Jul 2, 2010 5:36 AM

#143

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Onitenshi said:

Disposable-Angel said:

Onitenshi said:

Disposable-Angel said:
Any person who has sex with someone under the age of consent is a paedophile and that's it with no more debate.

fail

I agree the law is Fail, if you suggesting that because I quoted the law that I fail then your just being a troll.

The only one who is obviously trolling seems to be you.

Pedophile: Someone who is sexually interested in prepubescent children.
Someone who has sex with them: Child abuser

Child abuser != Pedophile
Not everyone who is interested in them wants to rape them (or actually tries it, even if he/she wants to).
Not everyone who abuses children is sexually interested in them...there are many sick fucks out there who go for anything helpless to demonstrate their "might"...

I won't blame you for not knowing, because that's not written in any of your superman comics...but please do everone here a favour and just stay away from topics like these...

I said exactly that earlier, your actually regurgitating my posts back to me now. How you missed it is beyond me. Now I know why ESSWHY stop talking to you, i'm going to be doing the same from now on.

Jul 2, 2010 6:00 AM

#144

Offline

Oct 2009

2995

Disposable-Angel said:

That is why lolicons are now banned worldwide, why /l/ was shut down and so much more.

Anime like lucky star and hiugashi will always be made. loli porn of hirguashi and luckstar will not be made and if it is made and found it will get you arrested. That is the bottom line like it or not.

Anyway. This is really off topic.

I'm surprised no one has said anything about this...

Lolicon is not banned worldwide.... Japan allows it and is the main source of it. In the US it's more like a grey area.
As for /l/ I'm not a 4chan idiot so i don't know what it is or care about it.

I like my Satoko and Rika porn collection and will never delete it <3

Also exactly how are you connecting kids suffering and dying to loli porn?...

Ah before i forget...
Paedophilia is not a sickness it's a sexual preference.

GogettersJul 2, 2010 6:10 AM

Jul 2, 2010 6:08 AM

#145

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Gogetters said:

Disposable-Angel said:

That is why lolicons are now banned worldwide, why /l/ was shut down and so much more.

Anime like lucky star and hiugashi will always be made. loli porn of hirguashi and luckstar will not be made and if it is made and found it will get you arrested. That is the bottom line like it or not.

Anyway. This is really off topic.

I'm surprised no one has said anything about this...

Lolicon is not banned worldwide.... Japan allows it and is the main source of it. In the US it's more like a grey area.
As for /l/ I'm not a 4chan idiot so i don't know what it is or care about it.

I like my Satoko and Rika porn collection and will never delete it <3

Also exactly how are you connecting kids suffering and dying to loli porn?...

4chan and /l/ was the reason that grey areas even exist in you society, it was shut down because of certain states making it illegal.

I thought it was banned in japan, my mistake. But it is banned in a lot of countries. Maybe worldwide was being a bit over the top, but it's basically frowned upon.

Also exactly how are you connecting kids suffering and dying to loli porn?...

Because it just is and I am sick of repeating myself on the subject.

Jul 2, 2010 6:11 AM

#146

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Gogetters said:

Disposable-Angel said:

That is why lolicons are now banned worldwide, why /l/ was shut down and so much more.

Anime like lucky star and hiugashi will always be made. loli porn of hirguashi and luckstar will not be made and if it is made and found it will get you arrested. That is the bottom line like it or not.

Anyway. This is really off topic.

I'm surprised no one has said anything about this...

Lolicon is not banned worldwide.... Japan allows it and is the main source of it. In the US it's more like a grey area.
As for /l/ I'm not a 4chan idiot so i don't know what it is or care about it.

I like my Satoko and Rika porn collection and will never delete it <3

Also exactly how are you connecting kids suffering and dying to loli porn?...

4chan and /l/ was the reason that grey areas even exist in you society, it was shut down because of certain states making it illegal.

I thought it was banned in japan, my mistake. But it is banned in a lot of countries. Maybe worldwide was being a bit over the top, but it's basically frowned upon.

Also exactly how are you connecting kids suffering and dying to loli porn?...

Because it just is and I am sick of repeating myself on the subject read my posts i've said it about 50 times now..

Jul 2, 2010 6:12 AM

#147

Offline

Oct 2009

2995

Disposable-Angel said:

4chan and /l/ was the reason that grey areas even exist in you society, it was shut down because of certain states making it illegal.

Somehow i really doubt that...

I thought it was banned in japan, my mistake.

People keep trying but it's never happened and doubt it will anytime soon.

GogettersJul 2, 2010 6:16 AM

Jul 2, 2010 6:17 AM

#148

Offline

Sep 2009

308

Gogetters said:

Disposable-Angel said:

4chan and /l/ was the reason that grey areas even exist in you society, it was shut down because of certain states making it illegal.

Somehow i really doubt that...

You doubting it is irrelevant. Since you don't know anything about 4chan it's hardly a conversational point. The site was actually shut down and /l/ was removed due to legal reasons. The site barley made it back because of the actual CP that was being posted, but since you can't stop anon from posting in an anonymous site it was put back up with increased moderations if you post a lolicon thread it will be deleted just like any real CP thread made. So grey area of not the moderators don't see it your way.

Jul 2, 2010 6:32 AM

#149

Offline

Oct 2009

2995

I don't know /l/ i never said i didn't know 4chan. I know /b/ from what people say and also been there once or twice a few months ago. I know very little about it other then that.

What i'm saying is that i doubt 4chan /l/ has anything to do with the grey area about loli porn in law.

Jul 2, 2010 9:12 AM

#150