Are lolicons pedophiles?
Yes
49.3%
104
No; and I also happen to be a lolicon
30.3%
64
No; and I'm not a lolicon, I swear
20.4%
43
211 votes
Miki-Miki-Fanboy said: Is that so? (nsfw)Objurgo said: Renge's purity is everlasting ^ |
  |
Not looking further into that... She's like 7 |
 |
Woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah, woah. Better do something about that link before the mods and the cops come. |
| "After I finish fucking you. I am going to kill you." |
| Quoting the link defeats the purpose of telling HaX to rid it. There are 3 links now. |
 |
| indeed lol anyways if it's nsfw tagged it's at your own risk also I'm sure you knew roughly what it'd contain given the dialogue at hand |
| |
Supercolin said: I'm a lolicon is that so bad!? Its not directly or indirectly harming anyone or anything, so no. |
|
| Wow, so many people here are wrong. Like that's abnormal. No, you're not a pedophile if you like lolis. /thread, Immahnoob is here. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: You're wrong.Wow, so many people here are wrong. Like that's abnormal. No, you're not a pedophile if you like lolis. /thread, Immahnoob is here. |
| I'M GONE NOW |
Immahnoob said:  [/spoiler]. This is tempting.......You are a pedophile if you like loli in a sexual way. |
| "After I finish fucking you. I am going to kill you." |
AnarchicSloth said: Immahnoob said: You're wrong.Wow, so many people here are wrong. Like that's abnormal. No, you're not a pedophile if you like lolis. /thread, Immahnoob is here. Nope. JackFisher said: Immahnoob said: [/spoiler]. This is tempting.......You are a pedophile if you like loli in a sexual way. Nope. TheCancerMan said: Lolis are shit. Everyone who loves them are pedophiles. Nope. That's enough for me to deny your assertions, bring some more to the table and maybe I'll consider your so called "arguments". |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
TheCancerMan said: TheCancerMan said: Lolis are shit. Everyone who loves them are pedophiles. Immahnoob said: Nope. That's enough for me to deny your assertions, bring some more to the table and maybe I'll consider your so called "arguments". It was a joke which you obviously didn't understand. Well well, I'm incredibly sorry if that simplistic show of sarcasm didn't adhere to my sense of humor. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: Nope. Yeah. |
| "After I finish fucking you. I am going to kill you." |
| yes all pedophiles like every fucking one. |
Supercolin said: I'm no pedophile.. Dont you lust over your ten year old sister though? |
Supercolin said: I'm no pedophile.. Shhh shh Who cares what people think little Colin. |
 |
Ange892 said: he already have desumaidenSupercolin said: I'm no pedophile.. Dont you lust over your ten year old sister though? |
 |
Supercolin said: Ange892 said: Dont you lust over your ten year old sister though? I said I have had feelings. I mostly like girls my own age. Well, having feelings is pretty damn close. As long as you're not watching real life child porn or trying to hit up kids for lewd reasons, you're fine. If you like lolis, like them. You're still fine by my book. |
|
JackFisher said: Immahnoob said: Nope. Yeah. You still have no argument, you're still wrong. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Can't like every lolicon just be allowed to speak for themselves since you can't generalize this question for the entire demographic? I mean what's the point really, the only one who really knows is yourself |
| |
| Well, I see your point guys (i.e. that lolis aren't real). But here's my problem: whenever I see a loli, I recognize a human child, not something else. Hell, Bakemonogatari, which is a good show, was really hard to watch because of the lolis and I really tried liking the loli character but I couldn't because I just couldn't accept sexualized children. My point is, even when I tried consciously to alter my view, I couldn't. So, lolicons, did you really never see lolis as children? |
| your waifu is shit |
IktIkn said: not really because the concept of age is basically irrelevant when it comes to hentai and eroge etc, it's nothing but an arbitrary number the author/artist can make up on the spotSo, lolicons, did you really never see lolis as children? you can say that any character regardless of appearance is of any age whatsoever and noone would be able to argue against it, and as a result the entire argument just fumbles upon itself thus for me at least I only see anime girls by their personality and appearance, however whether they're children or adults is all the same to me because it doesn't really matter; it's just a concept used for some people to feel better about themselves for being or not being attracted to a certain fictional character but in reality it doesn't really make any difference so no, I never see lolis as children, they're just some divine cutesy little being that has no equivalent in reality and should therefore never be compared to anything like that they make me feel good in a way nothing else really does, and that's all there is to it, no complicated side effects or deeper meanings, it's really nothing but a physical attraction to a certain type of cuteness and innocence that you can't find in real life |
| |
IktIkn said: Shinobu is not a child, that is just her powerless form, and Hachicuji (or however you spell her name) is in fact older than Ararararagi. You gotta remember that there are women in real life who are really short too, for anime it's a body type partnered with character traits be it acting really mature or acting really childishWell, I see your point guys (i.e. that lolis aren't real). But here's my problem: whenever I see a loli, I recognize a human child, not something else. Hell, Bakemonogatari, which is a good show, was really hard to watch because of the lolis and I really tried liking the loli character but I couldn't because I just couldn't accept sexualized children. My point is, even when I tried consciously to alter my view, I couldn't. So, lolicons, did you really never see lolis as children? |
ObjurgoAug 25, 2014 3:37 AM
|
 for similar reasons, RL kids don't look like lolis and if they tried to cosplay as one they might end up looking something along those lines :> |
| |
| I'm a pedophile yet I still don't see lolis as "human children". "Resembling" is not the same thing as "being". Your points of view do not fall behind here though, they fall behind exactly from the beginning. Because a pedophile is an individual with an attraction towards prepubescent individuals, lolis aren't real, so they can't be any of those. The mere idea that it's still at the "resemble" part and it can't go further just makes all your arguments fall apart, I can actually quote myself and make fun of you while I'm at it, as I was being a bit more complete then. Immahnoob said: And why is the realization of pedo fantasies a problem? And why do you believe what you noticed as important details matters? Or if you think there was a lot of effort put in? All of you are ignoring the obvious facts. They are not actual children, that means it's not child pornography, that also means it's not for pedophile pandering because if they are not children and because they actually have no real age (as they are not children or real, they are drawings) that means a pedophile does not necessarily have to be attracted to it. There are also other facts that you are ignoring, like pedophile pandering is not actually inherently wrong, because pedophiles are only attracted to children, there's nothing that says they will or have acted on it. Oh, there's also the thing that art is subjective, but I shouldn't mention that many things, I hate making it too hard for you guys to make an argument. This is like, an impossible to win against argument though. Why? Simple, because the only arguments you can make are either illogical and mostly retarded (like "It's ethically wrong.", "It's religiously wrong."), or/and they are wrong, like for example, "Masturbating to this is going to make you act in reality.", you have no proof of it (and video games can be paragoned to this, and we know for a fact that video games do not mind control people to do what they do in video games). Or "You'll become a pedophile.", which is an impossibility, unless you can prove it or prove to me that heterosexuals can become full fledged homosexuals because of some type of force of will or being forced to do so (and will remain at that stage). So, what will you do guys? What argument will it be? Come on now, throw all you have at me, I think you guys know by now how it'll end. (Actually, now that I think of it, I wasn't more "complete" here, I just used a finishing argument, well damn) |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| Stop mixing reality with fiction already... Also, people that think that Lolicon is delivered from Japan, stop. Also again, as HaXXspetten said, stop generalizing. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| I just want to clear something up. There's no such thing as "legal lolis", those are technically midgets. Having a midget fetish is okay in my book. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| This is a simple question with a simple answer; are people who like violence in fiction likely to cause or like violence in reality? Answer the question to that and you'll have the answer to the this question as well. As far as I'm concerned, liking something fictional doesn't mean I like that in reality, therefore like a fictional loli does not, in fact, make you a pedophile. |
 |
| i pedophobic |
 |
AnarchicSloth said: yhunata said: Could you set a scenario because it's quite possible that they do like violence in reality.This is a simple question with a simple answer; are people who like violence in fiction likely to cause or like violence in reality? Answer the question to that and you'll have the answer to the this question as well. As far as I'm concerned, liking something fictional doesn't mean I like that in reality, therefore like a fictional loli does not, in fact, make you a pedophile. That's the thing, ain't it? It's different for everybody. I hate violence in reality, I love it in fiction and that's what I'm saying. For people who find fiction and reality to be "one and the same", then yeah, you could call them pedophiles. But then there are others, who differentiate between fiction and reality. To call those pedophiles, it would be harsh and unfair. As for a scenario, think murder or rape. |
|
| No, shota/lolicons don't watch actual child porn. And even if, for whatever reason, you do consider them as pedophiles, they're not even as slightly dangerous as the guy who molests his neighbor's kid. |
 |
AnarchicSloth said: Hahahaha, can you stop being wrong for a second? I think we've been repeating ourselves so many times, lolis are not human nor children, nor do they have any age, that "body type" is not even realistic, fantasies do not equal reality.Lolis on the other hand are fictional but still represent the bodies of a child. By being sexually attracted to this body type, it is the same as being a pedophile. AnarchicSloth said: yhunata said: Could you please set a scenario because it's quite possible that they do like violence in reality.This is a simple question with a simple answer; are people who like violence in fiction likely to cause or like violence in reality? Answer the question to that and you'll have the answer to the this question as well. As far as I'm concerned, liking something fictional doesn't mean I like that in reality, therefore like a fictional loli does not, in fact, make you a pedophile. So they're murderers, right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_controversies#Theories_of_negative_effects_of_video_games I guess about 10 or so years of "No, games do not influence the average human being." is still not enough with so many studies claiming the same thing. Inb4s... |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
AnarchicSloth said: I think you're right, we should arrest everyone who's ever watched a hentai with rape in it.yhunata said: Could you please set a scenario because it's quite possible that they do like violence in reality.This is a simple question with a simple answer; are people who like violence in fiction likely to cause or like violence in reality? Answer the question to that and you'll have the answer to the this question as well. As far as I'm concerned, liking something fictional doesn't mean I like that in reality, therefore like a fictional loli does not, in fact, make you a pedophile. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
HaXXspetten said: not really because the concept of age is basically irrelevant when it comes to hentai and eroge etc, it's nothing but an arbitrary number the author/artist can make up on the spot you can say that any character regardless of appearance is of any age whatsoever and noone would be able to argue against it, and as a result the entire argument just fumbles upon itself As for the age of characters: your brain understands visual information (i.e. the child-like appearance of lolis) a lot quicker than semantic information (i.e. the real age of loli). Source: http://www.simplypsychology.org/levelsofprocessing.html My point with this, is that I don't think that you're right when you say that you never saw them as children. Why do I say that? Because your brain should have told you when seeing your first loli that it's a child. Why? Because, simply put, your brain would have recognized a human child* and only after that would it have been able to say that it's something else, in this case fictional, non-existent characters. Therefore, even if only briefly, your brain should have seen them as a child - and that'd have been your first impression. Now, you could have forgotten this, of course, so I'll give you the benefit of doubt, but remember that first impressions are usually lasting! *you might say that, yes, your brain did recognize them as humans, but not as children my reply would be that the human brain takes on average 3-5 seconds to determine the age, the sex and the attractiveness of another human. Compare that to the time needed to explain that it's not really a child/human, that'd be about 15 seconds minimum |
SzJAug 25, 2014 3:59 AM
| your waifu is shit |
AnarchicSloth said: it's a bit plain to have every character with the same body type don't you think? And then you'd have personality traits that don't match that body types.Objurgo said: Sure there are women in real life who look a lot younger than they actually are, and I think it's okay because, although it's still off-putting, it's still a fact that they are older. However, it's not like they can help it and should be able to live their lives how they want. Lolis on the other hand are fictional but still represent the bodies of a child. By being sexually attracted to this body type, it is the same as being a pedophile.Shinobu is not a child, that is just her powerless form, and Hachicuji (or however you spell her name) is in fact older than Ararararagi. You gotta remember that there are women in real life who are really short too, for anime it's a body type partnered with character traits be it acting really mature or acting really childish |
|
bash108 said: kickmesign said: I think you're right, we should arrest everyone who's ever watched a hentai with rape in it. i agree You bastards will never catch me. |
|
IktIkn said: HaXXspetten said: not really because the concept of age is basically irrelevant when it comes to hentai and eroge etc, it's nothing but an arbitrary number the author/artist can make up on the spot you can say that any character regardless of appearance is of any age whatsoever and noone would be able to argue against it, and as a result the entire argument just fumbles upon itself As for the age of characters: your brain understands visual information (i.e. the child-like appearance of lolis) a lot quicker than semantic information (i.e. the real age of loli). Source: http://www.simplypsychology.org/levelsofprocessing.html My point with this, is that I don't think that you're right when you say that you never saw them as children. Why do I say that? Because your brain should have told you when seeing your first loli that it's a child. Why? Because, simply put, your brain would have recognized a human child* and only after that would it have been able to say that it's something else. Therefore, even if really briefly, your brain should have seen them as a child. Now, you could have forgotten this, of course, so I'll give you the benefit of doubt. *you might say that, yes, your brain did recognize them as humans, but not as children my reply would be that the human brain takes on average 3-5 seconds to determine the age, the sex and the attractiveness of another human. Compare that to the time needed to explain that it's not really a child/human, that'd be about 15 seconds minimum Immahnoob said: "Resembling" is not the same thing as "being". Your points of view do not fall behind here though, they fall behind exactly from the beginning. Because a pedophile is an individual with an attraction towards prepubescent individuals, lolis aren't real, so they can't be any of those. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
| well japan has a lot of loli material and they have population problems |
|
IktIkn said: For normal people in that case, their maternal instinct would be to want to care for and protect said child. Unless I am mistaken in any wayHaXXspetten said: not really because the concept of age is basically irrelevant when it comes to hentai and eroge etc, it's nothing but an arbitrary number the author/artist can make up on the spot you can say that any character regardless of appearance is of any age whatsoever and noone would be able to argue against it, and as a result the entire argument just fumbles upon itself As for the age of characters: your brain understands visual information (i.e. the child-like appearance of lolis) a lot quicker than semantic information (i.e. the real age of loli). Source: http://www.simplypsychology.org/levelsofprocessing.html My point with this, is that I don't think that you're right when you say that you never saw them as children. Why do I say that? Because your brain should have told you when seeing your first loli that it's a child. Why? Because, simply put, your brain would have recognized a human child* and only after that would it have been able to say that it's something else, in this case fictional, non-existent characters. Therefore, even if only briefly, your brain should have seen them as a child - and that'd have been your first impression. Now, you could have forgotten this, of course, so I'll give you the benefit of doubt, but remember that first impressions are usually lasting! *you might say that, yes, your brain did recognize them as humans, but not as children my reply would be that the human brain takes on average 3-5 seconds to determine the age, the sex and the attractiveness of another human. Compare that to the time needed to explain that it's not really a child/human, that'd be about 15 seconds minimum |
|
Immahnoob said: [/quote]"Resembling" is not the same thing as "being". Your points of view do not fall behind here though, they fall behind exactly from the beginning. Because a pedophile is an individual with an attraction towards prepubescent individuals, lolis aren't real, so they can't be any of those. What is your point exactly? My point was that, whether you like it, or not, your brain did recognize them for a moment as a child, but HaXX claimed that his didn't. In that post (although somewhere else I might have) I do not claim that lolicons are pedophiles. Also, I like fictional incest but am not attracted to any family members but nevertheless there is a reason behind this taste of mine, which is the lack of intimacy. So I think that liking lolis doesn't make you a pedophile, there is a reason behind this taste and I think this reason (whatever it is) is pretty similar to the cause of pedophilia. |
| your waifu is shit |
Objurgo said: For normal people in that case, their maternal instinct would be to want to care for and protect said child. Unless I am mistaken in any way My exact thoughts when I saw Shiro's panty shot (her first appearance) in NGNL. |
| your waifu is shit |
| That's exactly the reason: "the cause of pedophilia" You're trying to claim it's something acquired. And by the way, any individual that has hit puberty is no longer a child. |
Play League of Legends here! Autocrat said: Hitler was good, objectively. |
Immahnoob said: That's exactly the reason: "the cause of pedophilia" You're trying to claim it's something acquired. And by the way, any individual that has hit puberty is no longer a child. I don't get your first point, could you rephrase? |
| your waifu is shit |
Heredity said: Immahnoob said: ah ha, that's not what you said last thread. guys guy, noob has actually reneged - lolis now resemble human children.I'm a pedophile yet I still don't see lolis as "human children". "Resembling" is not the same thing as "being" true progress. We're doing God's work, son. |
| your waifu is shit |
IktIkn said: I think you're waaaayy overanalyzing this. Like even assuming that's true it doesn't change the fact that you can still think for yourself. Even if your brain would innately identify a loli as a child doesn't mean you'd accept that for yourself or ever act on something like that.HaXXspetten said: not really because the concept of age is basically irrelevant when it comes to hentai and eroge etc, it's nothing but an arbitrary number the author/artist can make up on the spot you can say that any character regardless of appearance is of any age whatsoever and noone would be able to argue against it, and as a result the entire argument just fumbles upon itself As for the age of characters: your brain understands visual information (i.e. the child-like appearance of lolis) a lot quicker than semantic information (i.e. the real age of loli). Source: http://www.simplypsychology.org/levelsofprocessing.html My point with this, is that I don't think that you're right when you say that you never saw them as children. Why do I say that? Because your brain should have told you when seeing your first loli that it's a child. Why? Because, simply put, your brain would have recognized a human child* and only after that would it have been able to say that it's something else, in this case fictional, non-existent characters. Therefore, even if only briefly, your brain should have seen them as a child - and that'd have been your first impression. Now, you could have forgotten this, of course, so I'll give you the benefit of doubt, but remember that first impressions are usually lasting! *you might say that, yes, your brain did recognize them as humans, but not as children my reply would be that the human brain takes on average 3-5 seconds to determine the age, the sex and the attractiveness of another human. Compare that to the time needed to explain that it's not really a child/human, that'd be about 15 seconds minimum In the end what it really comes down to is that everyone who is a lolicon that feels absolutely zero attraction of any sort towards real life children are literally living evidence that there is no necessary connection between the two. Noone can argue against that. The entire issue is entirely an individual question and no matter what arguments you might bring up against it, all it takes is for the lolicon in question to say "no" and that'd suddenly be the end of it. You can't try to say you know how someone else thinks or feels unless you've run tons of psychology tests and brain scans or something on that very person, noone else's "results" mean shit for something like that. It's like if you say you don't like a certain type of food but dislike another, noone else can just say that statement is incorrect because the only one who could ever know that is you yourself. And as it is, there is still absolutely no scientific evidence that there is any connection between lolicon and pedophlia despite numerous studies, and until that happens there is really no point in arguing about this. The only person you can ask this is yourself. Noone else. |
| |
More topics from this board
» MLB fans, share information with each other!-YUMMY- - 2 hours ago |
2 |
by -YUMMY-
»»
20 minutes ago |
|
» Do you like Hyperdimension Neptunia? I do...DesuMaiden - Apr 30 |
20 |
by rohan121
»»
25 minutes ago |
|
» Any American Football fans?Neterosan - Oct 8, 2023 |
13 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
30 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » do you believe that scientific theory are just a theory and scientific consensus are just opinions?deg - May 3 |
30 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
32 minutes ago |
|
» What is the weather like in your regionST63LTH - May 1 |
28 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
33 minutes ago |