Yukiteru said: Furthermore, what makes the fact that these characters are young so appealing? To be honest this is a bad question and you'll never get a real straight answer.. It's almost impossible to explain a fetish completely down to the bone but I'll try to answer. I'd be considered a lolicon I suppose because I find characters like this: Extremely sexually stimulative.. but I could never really tell you why because I don't really know for myself.. As far as I know its just that I'm turned on by small features (body, hands, feet all that jazz). |
Kinoholic said: Yukiteru said: Furthermore, what makes the fact that these characters are young so appealing? To be honest this is a bad question and you'll never get a real straight answer.. It's almost impossible to explain a fetish completely down to the bone but I'll try to answer. I'd be considered a lolicon I suppose because I find characters like this: Extremely sexually stimulative.. but I could never really tell you why because I don't really know for myself.. As far as I know its just that I'm turned on by small features (body, hands, feet all that jazz). ............What did I just get done saying............. |
ZippyserNov 19, 2010 2:03 AM
| I didn't really read your post. |
| I can even tell you a major reason that picture works the way it does............... Look at it she is shy and reserved but obviously is in the "mood". Its a matter of liking the innocence of the picture I am sure people can obviously find examples in something else. Plus yes she is smaller thats the other reason............... |
| I think innocence is a whole other ball game.. when I look at that picture thats not what I'm 'seeing' and you use way too many periods. |
Kinoholic said: I think innocence is a whole other ball game.. when I look at that picture thats not what I'm 'seeing' and you use way too many periods. Yes on both accounts I used innocence lightly I don't know another word to describe the particular thing I am talking about and its not anything like degrading. |
Lightyear8684 said: Arguing over fictional loli characters is really pathetic, who cares if someone likes fictional lolis, as long as they don't rape real life children I don't see anything bad in it, but some people just have to "show" what that is really "bad" ..Anyways people who argues over that doesn't have anything better to do for sure... Yeah, there is nothing inherently bad about it unless the person turns into something bad (such as going after real life little children). Also, and I am speaking for myself, I like lolis because they look cute. That's all there is to it. I also like anime characters who look older (I also like women in their 20's irl). I wouldn't say that I only have one preference. |
The thing is not so much a difference of hair colour, but that most lolis look more like this girl than the girl in that picture. And she's an adult now. One of those idols I was talking about. I've never seen a "loli" in the anime form picture, that looked quite like that pink haired little girl. I have however, seen a lot of lolis, who look exactly like Momo, minus the breasts. Momoko Tsugunaga is an 18 year old, in reality and in this picture. It gets even crazier when you get into people who might be considered lolis who are older than I am. Such as Hirano Tomomi. 26 years of age. Now of course, may idols are hired way younger than that. And this topic is about the subject of Junior Idols. But we've veered off into the differences of "2d and 3d loli". And this topic is about "sickening Japanese porn", so we can pretty well discuss anything from idols to hardcore pornography here. Since we've veered into the discussion of 2d versus 3d, or "what's a loli?". And people are on and on the path to the common predictable destination of, "you say loli isn't kids, but it means kids. Just because they're 2d doesn't mean anything. They're supposed to represent kids and you're a paedophile either way". And "but they don't look like real kids, and they're really over 9000 years old!". & "What?!? Nine Thousand?!? There's no way that can be right! Yeah, right. Like they're really supposed to be that old, that's just an excuse, they're a kid". And usually getting stuck there at 2d versus 3d and "they're kids(supposed to represent kids", and "no, they're not!", and the occasional "but they don't look like kids". There are people in real life who are kids. And there are anime characters who are supposed to represent kids. Anime kids are a little more idealized and defined by characterization than by reality. And then there are real life adults who are youthful. And anime characters who are youthful put stated to be older and have a characterization of an older person. All are considered lolis. Whatever the morality of Junior Idols. I don't think that being into loli, even when it dips over into "real life" "3d" examples, necessarily makes you a paedophile. Because the analogous comparison isn't that picture of a real little kid. It's pictures like these above that I've presented. This is a 3D "adult loli", as I've presented above. Now compare that to this "2d loli".  Now compare them all to that pink haired Halloween girl. I think it's pretty clear that Hinaro Tomomi, Momoko Tsugunaga, and Len, all resemble each other more than that costumed child. |
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
skankfish said: Drunk_Samurai said: skankfish said: That's such a poor agument, really. They clearly represent children. No-one is arguing that anime children are alive. Because real children obviously have blue or purple hair. [url=http://family.go.com/images/upload/contest/halloween-costume/MIKKI44DD1039821954862.jpg]http://family.go.com/images/upload/contest/halloween-costume/MIKKI44DD1039821954862.jpg Lol at you using a Halloween costume as "proof" No child looks like that. |
Drunk_Samurai said: skankfish said: Drunk_Samurai said: skankfish said: That's such a poor agument, really. They clearly represent children. No-one is arguing that anime children are alive. Because real children obviously have blue or purple hair. [url=http://family.go.com/images/upload/contest/halloween-costume/MIKKI44DD1039821954862.jpg]http://family.go.com/images/upload/contest/halloween-costume/MIKKI44DD1039821954862.jpg Lol at you using a Halloween costume as "proof" No child looks like that. So the difference between loli anime characters and real children is the color of their hair? |
Yukiteru said: So the difference between loli anime characters and real children is the color of their hair? No, this was poor reasoning on Drunk_Samurai's part. The difference between a loli and a real kid is that the loli is fictional, and the kid is not. The reason that this really matters lies in the fact that fiction is created to entertain us (besides the self proclaimed 'holy' books like the Bible or Quran of course, they serve different purposes). One of the freedoms of fiction necessary to keep viewers entertained is to be able to do anything that's not possible in real life. If you wish to banish that part of freedom our entertainment currently has, you'll end up only with real life stories, and most of those are as dull as it can get. There'd be videogames without violence (doesn't move you? Consider that we'd even lose games like Mario), movies with a plot nobody would even bother to finish reading in the TV guide, etc. Entertainment is free to picture what it wants, but the people behind it apply to the same laws you and I do (according to the country they live in of course), that's why actual child porn isn't allowed, because it would violate the age of consent. As for loving children in a 'special' way, I do ask you to remember what it was like to be homosexual. Not so long ago, homosexuals were looked at the same way pedophiles are being looked at right now. You will never know where we are in twenty years, because then it might just be legal to be in a relationship with a ten year old. Having that said, I do see a huge line between pedophiles and otaku with a loli fetish. They're simply not the same. You're lying to yourself if you've read my post and still say you don't know why they are not the same. |
ChavezNov 19, 2010 1:43 PM
Yukiteru said: Drunk_Samurai said: skankfish said: Drunk_Samurai said: skankfish said: That's such a poor agument, really. They clearly represent children. No-one is arguing that anime children are alive. Because real children obviously have blue or purple hair. [url=http://family.go.com/images/upload/contest/halloween-costume/MIKKI44DD1039821954862.jpg]http://family.go.com/images/upload/contest/halloween-costume/MIKKI44DD1039821954862.jpg Lol at you using a Halloween costume as "proof" No child looks like that. So the difference between loli anime characters and real children is the color of their hair? There are differences -Lolis can be classy and polite without being a brat or annoying (Ex: Aria from Sister Princess). I never seen any real child be as polite as Aria and definitely never seen any that have some class without being an annoying egotistical brat that I want to throw into traffic. -Can be seductive while understanding exactly what they are doing or better yet still seeming innocent and not looking like they are being forced to be a flirt. -Some tend to have a more experienced view of the world and/or are self actualized (most of these cases deal with lolis that technically are teenagers or adults but some that aren't have these traits). No child would have either one of these traits in real life. |
 |
Chavez said: No, this was poor reasoning on Drunk_Samurai's part. The difference between a loli and a real kid is that the loli is fictional, and the kid is not. http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=270402&show=140#msg9947194 http://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=270402&show=140#msg9947879 That is what led to the hair comment. The main argument is exactly what you said in this post. |
Chavez said: Yukiteru said: So the difference between loli anime characters and real children is the color of their hair? No, this was poor reasoning on Drunk_Samurai's part. The difference between a loli and a real kid is that the loli is fictional, and the kid is not. The reason that this really matters lies in the fact that fiction is created to entertain us (besides the self proclaimed 'holy' books like the Bible or Quran of course, they server different purposes). One of the freedoms of fiction necessary to keep viewers entertained is to be able to do anything that's not possible in real life. If you wish to banish that part of freedom our entertainment currently has, you'll end up only with real life stories, and most of those are as dull as it can get. There'd be videogames without violence (doesn't move you? Consider that we'd even lose games like Mario), movies with a plot nobody would even bother to finish reading in the TV guide, etc. Entertainment is free to picture what it wants, but the people behind it apply to the same laws you and I do (according to the country they live in of course), that's why actual child porn isn't allowed, because it would violate the age of consent. As for loving children in a 'special' way, I do ask you to remember what it was like to be homosexual. Not so long ago, homosexuals were looked at the same way pedophiles are being looked at right now. You will never know where we are in twenty years, because then it might just be legal to be in a relationship with a ten year old. Having that said, I do see a huge line between pedophiles and otaku with a loli fetish. They're simply not the same. You're lying to yourself if you've read my post and still say you don't know why they are not the same. I understand the difference between real children and animated characters, I never implied that they were the same thing. I'm just trying to understand what would make someone feel attraction to an animated child and not a 3D one they see on the street. Now, obviously not everyone who is attracted to children will attempt to act out their fantasies. To claim otherwise would be a disgustingly absurd generalization. What I'm curious to find out is what makes loli characters who look and act childish attractive, but real life children who look and act childish undesirable. Some say it's because despite acting childish and being of small stature, they essentially have the bodies of adults. Which makes sense, I suppose. What I'm curious about is the people who look into characters who are drawn and written in a way that clearly imitates the nature of a young child. I want to know why that interest only exists 2D characters. I am not implying that loli fans are pedophiles. I certainty don't think that's true. I also have no wish to remove loli from the world, I personally don't care whether or not people enjoy it. I suppose I'm just using this opportunity to feed my curiosity. |
YukiteruNov 19, 2010 12:35 PM
Seto_Akari said: Me too...!skankfish said: That's fine. I don't care at all about general shit eating or octopus sex, it's when children are sexualised and rape porn is mass produced that it gets nasty. I am with you. It's disgusting. |
 |
Yukiteru said: What I'm curious about is the people who look into characters who are drawn and written in a way that clearly imitates the nature of a young child. I want to know why that interest only exists 2D characters. You never know there could be a real child out there that a lolicon could actually get attracted to. But you gotta realise anime = perfection.. almost every single female has a perfect Everything and people can and will find a character to fit their exact specifications. While most humans out there are homely and unkempt (especially children) And the addition that even though lolis and little children may share some of the same characteristics In Theory.. they just don't look the same at all.. theres a large enough difference to understand why you'd like one and not the other. The logic that they share the same characteristics is like saying.. Why do you like baseball and not basketball? They share a lot of the same things.. they have team work.. men handling balls.. and other things. |
kinoholicNov 19, 2010 12:46 PM
Kinoholic said: Yukiteru said: What I'm curious about is the people who look into characters who are drawn and written in a way that clearly imitates the nature of a young child. I want to know why that interest only exists 2D characters. You never know there could be a real child out there that a lolicon could actually get attracted to. But you gotta realise anime = perfection.. almost every single female has a perfect Everything and people can and will find a character to fit their exact specifications. While most humans out there are homely and unkempt (especially children) And the addition that even though lolis and little children may share some of the same characteristics In Theory.. they just don't look the same at all.. theres a large enough difference to understand why you'd like one and not the other. The logic that they share the same characteristics is like saying.. Why do you like baseball and not basketball? They share a lot of the same things.. they have team work.. men handling balls.. and other things. All very valid and logical points. |
| I think one of the reasons a lot of people, myself included, view lolis and child porn completely differently is because of morals. It's obviously wrong to look at child porn, because the child can't consent to what they're doing. But lolis are specifically made to look as cute as possible and because they are made up there isn't the issue of doing anything seriously wrong by liking them and finding them attractive. Just my point of view |
blah98765234 said: I think one of the reasons a lot of people, myself included, view lolis and child porn completely differently is because of morals. It's obviously wrong to look at child porn, because the child can't consent to what they're doing. But lolis are specifically made to look as cute as possible and because they are made up there isn't the issue of doing anything seriously wrong by liking them and finding them attractive. Just my point of view The "its not real" argument never really impressed me. Even if the children depicted are fictional, its still getting off on images of underage girls. You can soothe your pesky conscience by telling yourself no children are being harmed it still makes me pretty sick to my stomach. Its the same concept when I hear of legal-age porn actresses having their images modified with computers to make them look like children to satisfy the pedos. Even if they aren't actually children it is still a moral cesspool I have no desire to approve of. And Chavez, keeping people "entertained" doesn't mean to me that you get carte blanche to do whatever you wish with images of children, no matter how fake. Freedom of expression and in creativity is all well and good but there should be a line for what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do and really that should be such a line. |
 |
| right, I think that the reason there's an article on JAPANESE loli porn is because they're honest. And generally don't start CP threads on /b/ on 4chan at random times when the police aren't looking XP In any case, to each his/her own. I've always considered human beings only slightly above monkeys, since we really are just the next step in the chain. So back when were fighting to survive, natural mating age would be around what a loli counts as. And rape would have happened every day. So it's explainable, I guess. Explainable, but not acceptable; at least not in real life. I just don't think that anything should be made illegal if people actually enjoy it; the only thing that makes "other" porn more "honorable" is the fact that the majority of people enjoy it and that *real* children getting exploited is bad. |
| alter/blast/catch/die/energise/flick/grab/halt/intercept/joke/kill/lock/murder/nick/open/pull/quash/react/smash/track/undermine/vectorise/water/x-ray/yell/zap --- PRIORITY PETS :3 |
gswelcome said: And Chavez, keeping people "entertained" doesn't mean to me that you get carte blanche to do whatever you wish with images of children, no matter how fake. Freedom of expression and in creativity is all well and good but there should be a line for what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do and really that should be such a line. The problem is people can't decide on that line. That is why we are having this argument. People usually agree that it is wrong to show little children in the way they are depicted in these videos, but there are still people who don't. Then they will try to move the line back to somewhere the pleases some and disappoints some while others still say the line should be pushed back more. It's an endless cycle that will never be fixed. Also, if you say that we should go with the majority that is not always the best idea in every instance |
gswelcome said: blah98765234 said: I think one of the reasons a lot of people, myself included, view lolis and child porn completely differently is because of morals. It's obviously wrong to look at child porn, because the child can't consent to what they're doing. But lolis are specifically made to look as cute as possible and because they are made up there isn't the issue of doing anything seriously wrong by liking them and finding them attractive. Just my point of view The "its not real" argument never really impressed me. Even if the children depicted are fictional, its still getting off on images of underage girls. You can soothe your pesky conscience by telling yourself no children are being harmed it still makes me pretty sick to my stomach. Its the same concept when I hear of legal-age porn actresses having their images modified with computers to make them look like children to satisfy the pedos. Even if they aren't actually children it is still a moral cesspool I have no desire to approve of. And Chavez, keeping people "entertained" doesn't mean to me that you get carte blanche to do whatever you wish with images of children, no matter how fake. Freedom of expression and in creativity is all well and good but there should be a line for what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do and really that should be such a line. Once again since they are drawings which means they are not real therefore they ARE NOT ACTUAL CHILDREN. |
Drunk_SamuraiNov 24, 2010 9:54 AM
gswelcome said: And Chavez, keeping people "entertained" doesn't mean to me that you get carte blanche to do whatever you wish with images of children, no matter how fake. Freedom of expression and in creativity is all well and good but there should be a line for what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do and really that should be such a line. Have you read the post? If so, then here's why I think you haven't: I stated pedophilia is considered a disease, mental disorder, despicable, etc. Pretty much exactly the same as homosexuality back in the days. Instead of keeping in mind that these norms might change too, you blindly hammered on applying censorship because of the lolicon. As posted above here, rules aren't there to limit people to mainstream thoughts, instead, we make rules to create a framework that allows people to (somewhat) allow people to think and act as they wish, yet won't cause damage to others. |
| normally Child raper won't even announce himself unless he get caught or someone report it .... loli lover will spam their love all over the street(K-on) and Doujinshi will even draw hentai loli in Mangafest and be proud of his own masterpiece.....even girl will draws it the difference is visible. please don't mix both into one ....>.>" |
Jigero said: skankfish said: Jigero said: skankfish said: Jigero said: yep because Kiddy porn only shows up in Japan, yep never ever happens in America. clearly Japan is actually pretty tame compared to alot of other places. This is in a general porn shop. yea and? places like Cambodia where you can actually fuck a girl under 10 years old for less then 10 bucks and this is easier to do then picking up a hooker in America. and America has had it's fair share of Child pornography in normal porn shops. It's not uncommon at all. What do you mean "yeah, and"? The and is that it's legal. Besides, I'm sick of people talking shit about SE Asian countries with no clue of the reality. I've been to all of the ones mentioned and never saw "teens pimping teens" and know for a fact that you wouldn't be able to fuck a child for 10USD. For a start the regular whores were more than that, secondly that's massively illegal and could result in life in prison for both parties. I've lived in America for 23 years and I 've never seen children getting raped, but I know it happens, there was more cases I care to count just in the last year in my state. Heck I've never seen a prostitute, but I know they are there. I've never seen a drug deal either, but I know it happens all the time. Just because you don't see a criminal action doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Sounds like you're the one who has no clue of reality. And no Child Pornography is no legal in Japan you moron. Japan is actually very strict when it comes to pornography a hell of alot more strict then America. Just because one Pornography store happen to have child porn doesn't make it the poster child for an entire nation. Grow the fuck up. He's right. Do any of you read Japan Today, a English online newspaper on what's going on in Japan. Because I remember reading several article about Japan had several child pornography charge. You're right child porn is not allowed in Japan. 20 arrested in Japan for child pornography Illegal sites blocked in Japan to combat child porn So there you go folks, Japan has a no-no for child porn but it's OK for lolicon and 12 years old portray sexually in anime and hentai. Japan has odd double standard censorship. But I can confirm Japan is very strict about child pornography. |
mdo7 said: Jigero said: skankfish said: Jigero said: skankfish said: Jigero said: yep because Kiddy porn only shows up in Japan, yep never ever happens in America. clearly Japan is actually pretty tame compared to alot of other places. This is in a general porn shop. yea and? places like Cambodia where you can actually fuck a girl under 10 years old for less then 10 bucks and this is easier to do then picking up a hooker in America. and America has had it's fair share of Child pornography in normal porn shops. It's not uncommon at all. What do you mean "yeah, and"? The and is that it's legal. Besides, I'm sick of people talking shit about SE Asian countries with no clue of the reality. I've been to all of the ones mentioned and never saw "teens pimping teens" and know for a fact that you wouldn't be able to fuck a child for 10USD. For a start the regular whores were more than that, secondly that's massively illegal and could result in life in prison for both parties. I've lived in America for 23 years and I 've never seen children getting raped, but I know it happens, there was more cases I care to count just in the last year in my state. Heck I've never seen a prostitute, but I know they are there. I've never seen a drug deal either, but I know it happens all the time. Just because you don't see a criminal action doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Sounds like you're the one who has no clue of reality. And no Child Pornography is no legal in Japan you moron. Japan is actually very strict when it comes to pornography a hell of alot more strict then America. Just because one Pornography store happen to have child porn doesn't make it the poster child for an entire nation. Grow the fuck up. He's right. Do any of you read Japan Today, a English online newspaper on what's going on in Japan. Because I remember reading several article about Japan had several child pornography charge. You're right child porn is not allowed in Japan. 20 arrested in Japan for child pornography Illegal sites blocked in Japan to combat child porn So there you go folks, Japan has a no-no for child porn but it's OK for lolicon and 12 years old portray sexually in anime and hentai. Japan has odd double standard censorship. But I can confirm Japan is very strict about child pornography. Its not a double standard for the lolicon part considering they're not real. |
prismheart said: The problem is people can't decide on that line. That is why we are having this argument. People usually agree that it is wrong to show little children in the way they are depicted in these videos, but there are still people who don't. Then they will try to move the line back to somewhere the pleases some and disappoints some while others still say the line should be pushed back more. It's an endless cycle that will never be fixed. Also, if you say that we should go with the majority that is not always the best idea in every instance I've never cared for most arguments on the "slippery slope" line. I understand that some people are quite strict when it comes to sexuality but I'm not trying to placate their conservative beliefs, I simply don't care for the exploitation of children, and real or not that is what I see lolicon as. I honestly don't think saying that we shouldn't be depicting images of children this way means that we will start rolling back the freedom of more mainstream porn. Given it is hard enough simply to convince people not to watch or make what we are talking about now, I don't see it occuring. Now just in case there are any misunderstandings, I don't even advocate outlawing this, I simply believe people should make the choice not to produce this crap. Of course where money involved, I doubt this will ever happen but hey, I can dream right? Drunk_Samurai said: gswelcome said: blah98765234 said: I think one of the reasons a lot of people, myself included, view lolis and child porn completely differently is because of morals. It's obviously wrong to look at child porn, because the child can't consent to what they're doing. But lolis are specifically made to look as cute as possible and because they are made up there isn't the issue of doing anything seriously wrong by liking them and finding them attractive. Just my point of view The "its not real" argument never really impressed me. Even if the children depicted are fictional, its still getting off on images of underage girls. You can soothe your pesky conscience by telling yourself no children are being harmed it still makes me pretty sick to my stomach. Its the same concept when I hear of legal-age porn actresses having their images modified with computers to make them look like children to satisfy the pedos. Even if they aren't actually children it is still a moral cesspool I have no desire to approve of. And Chavez, keeping people "entertained" doesn't mean to me that you get carte blanche to do whatever you wish with images of children, no matter how fake. Freedom of expression and in creativity is all well and good but there should be a line for what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do and really that should be such a line. Once again since they are drawings which means they are not real therefore they ARE NOT ACTUAL CHILDREN. Which is irrelevant. It is still getting off on the images of children. Being fake does not make it acceptable behavior. If you would be outraged at the real thing, than I don't see how anyone can simply shrug on the fictional ones. Honestly, you'd think flat chested girls would be enough, Shana, Taiga, etc instead of Primula but no, people got to have the real thing instead of the faux loli... bah. Chavez said: gswelcome said: And Chavez, keeping people "entertained" doesn't mean to me that you get carte blanche to do whatever you wish with images of children, no matter how fake. Freedom of expression and in creativity is all well and good but there should be a line for what you CAN do and what you SHOULD do and really that should be such a line. Have you read the post? If so, then here's why I think you haven't: I stated pedophilia is considered a disease, mental disorder, despicable, etc. Pretty much exactly the same as homosexuality back in the days. Instead of keeping in mind that these norms might change too, you blindly hammered on applying censorship because of the lolicon. As posted above here, rules aren't there to limit people to mainstream thoughts, instead, we make rules to create a framework that allows people to (somewhat) allow people to think and act as they wish, yet won't cause damage to others. Are you suggesting that one day pedophilia will become an acceptable practice because of the example of homosexuality once being considered a mental disorder as well? I'd find that to be a scary proposition. Homosexuality after all is the relationship between two consenting people, something you most certainly not get with pedophiles. Perhaps I haven't kept in touch with the status of pedophilia but I didn't think it was considered a mental disorder except by some leftist moral relativists. Not that it matters either way, I'm not going to try and excuse their behavior. I don't want to censor the stuff, as long as no children are actually involved I'd allow it. That doesn't mean it should be made though, going after the desires of such people makes my skin crawl even if I would allow it to happen. People should make those lines I talked about on their own. I understand rules shouldn't limit us to the mainstream but simply to ensure the safety of people involved. I do reject though, that I should be indifferent to this whole issue because the norms of society may one day open its arms to the darling pedos. Should that day ever come then I think it will be a dark day for us all. |
| |
Drunk_Samurai said: Its not a double standard for the lolicon part considering they're not real. Japan do have double standard law. Most of video game that have blood and gore gets tone down. Resident Evil 4, Ninja Gaiden, No More Heroes got censored because of the gore. Other game like Call of Duty: Black Ops got censored in Japan because of gore. Yet Japan produced some of the goriest movie made like Tokyo Gore Police, Machine Girl, and films by Takashi Miike and they don't get censored at all. Why censor gore in game but not in movie?? |
mdo7 said: No one is saying they don't have double standard laws....Drunk_Samurai said: Its not a double standard for the lolicon part considering they're not real. Japan do have double standard law. Most of video game that have blood and gore gets tone down. Resident Evil 4, Ninja Gaiden, No More Heroes got censored because of the gore. Other game like Call of Duty: Black Ops got censored in Japan because of gore. Yet Japan produced some of the goriest movie made like Tokyo Gore Police, Machine Girl, and films by Takashi Miike and they don't get censored at all. Why censor gore in game but not in movie?? |
  |
gswelcome said: Which is irrelevant. It is still getting off on the images of children. Being fake does not make it acceptable behavior. If you would be outraged at the real thing, than I don't see how anyone can simply shrug on the fictional ones. Honestly, you'd think flat chested girls would be enough, Shana, Taiga, etc instead of Primula but no, people got to have the real thing instead of the faux loli... bah. No they're not. They're getting off of images of drawings. Also it does because if somebody looks at it then they have a lower chance of actually going after real children. Because its quite simple. Since they are just drawings there is nothing morally wrong about it. They are not real therefore nobody is hurt. |
| All arguments that say that fapping to 2D is the same as fappin' to 3D are invalid. If you were to arrest every 2D thing that allowed the viewer/player to do illegal things, we'd all be under arrest. Who hasn't shot some people in Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto or even watched some lolis with lust in our eyes. If you're going to arrest me for watching lolis, then arrest every person who's stolen a car in GTA, shot others in CoD and assassinated innocent people in Assassin's Creed. 2D and 3D don't mix. End of story. |
 |
Sake said: All arguments that say that fapping to 2D is the same as fappin' to 3D are invalid. If you were to arrest every 2D thing that allowed the viewer/player to do illegal things, we'd all be under arrest. Who hasn't shot some people in Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto or even watched some lolis with lust in our eyes. If you're going to arrest me for watching lolis, then arrest every person who's stolen a car in GTA, shot others in CoD and assassinated innocent people in Assassin's Creed. 2D and 3D don't mix. End of story. So true. Peple comparing 2D and 3D sickens me more than loli-porn does. Just like that Rapelay game, when the player can go around raping young Japanese girls. It sounds horrible, but know what, it's just a game! Where I live, people overreacted and some even stated that anyone who played that game are sick, violent male bastards. Oh, so murdering people from GTA aren't as sick as raping someone from a game? It's the same damn thing and it's from someone's imagination - not real life. |
gswelcome said: Are you suggesting that one day pedophilia will become an acceptable practice because of the example of homosexuality once being considered a mental disorder as well? I'd find that to be a scary proposition. Homosexuality after all is the relationship between two consenting people, something you most certainly not get with pedophiles. Perhaps I haven't kept in touch with the status of pedophilia but I didn't think it was considered a mental disorder except by some leftist moral relativists. Not that it matters either way, I'm not going to try and excuse their behavior. Way to pull things out of context. I'm not suggesting it, I'm stating it's not unlikely. And not because homosexuality used to be treated the same way, but because the whole situation with homosexuality has shown that people, as in the civilization, change over the years. gswelcome said: I don't want to censor the stuff, as long as no children are actually involved I'd allow it. That doesn't mean it should be made though, going after the desires of such people makes my skin crawl even if I would allow it to happen. People should make those lines I talked about on their own. I understand rules shouldn't limit us to the mainstream but simply to ensure the safety of people involved. I do reject though, that I should be indifferent to this whole issue because the norms of society may one day open its arms to the darling pedos. Should that day ever come then I think it will be a dark day for us all. You still haven't elaborated why. Currently, all you have reasoned with is the fact that real life sexual interaction with individuals below the age of consent is not allowed as we speak. As I mentioned, it could be subject to change. So if you really oppose the idea of this, and lolicon, you should come with valid arguments that support your ideas of censorship (because even though you posted you don't want to censor stuff, the line after the comma nullifies that statement). |
gswelcome said: Homosexuality after all is the relationship between two consenting people, something you most certainly not get with pedophiles. Why not? I have seriously never seen any good reason children can't consent. It's simply defined impossible. Informed consent in children is a far wider issue than sex; importantly in medicine and the like, where it comes up far more often and where knowing whether a child can or can't give consent to procedures can be life-deciding. Some countries have very rough, imprecise guidelines for this. Most do not. There is no reason a child cannot know what the issues are, and then consent. That depends on individual cases; some develop very fast, some develop very slowly. Some may be too immature at thirty to give informed consent; so why not mature before fifteen (as is AoC here)? The factors which make us capable are obviously correlated with age, but not strictly or uniformly; it is not age itself which makes us capable. There's really no large amount of research being done because it's such a sensitive matter, with more social stigma than freaking murder, so we can't really say anything sound about it. And for it children suffer. Chavez said: You still haven't elaborated why. Currently, all you have reasoned with is the fact that real life sexual interaction with individuals below the age of consent is not allowed as we speak. As I mentioned, it could be subject to change. So if you really oppose the idea of this, and lolicon, you should come with valid arguments that support your ideas of censorship (because even though you posted you don't want to censor stuff, the line after the comma nullifies that statement). It doesn't really nullify the statement. You can be against the censorship of something yet still hope it isn't made because it disgusts you; I really hope people stop writing lies about evolution and climate change, but that doesn't mean I want any kind of action to be taken to stop people from doing it. Supporting freedom of expression doesn't mean we have to like everything; it means that especially what we do not like, we should allow to be said. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
Chavez said: Way to pull things out of context. I'm not suggesting it, I'm stating it's not unlikely. And not because homosexuality used to be treated the same way, but because the whole situation with homosexuality has shown that people, as in the civilization, change over the years. Sort of like how 14-15 year old girls married older men in their 30-40s then society changed? |
| ok, that Loli crap is unforgivable |
 |
| Ahh! what a blunder! |
I can't say that I am surprised considering the fact Japan is a country that makes incest and loli hentai,at one time sold used school girl underwear out of vending machines, sells bukkakke porn and many other things. |
Gogetters said: mdo7 said: No one is saying they don't have double standard laws....Drunk_Samurai said: Its not a double standard for the lolicon part considering they're not real. Japan do have double standard law. Most of video game that have blood and gore gets tone down. Resident Evil 4, Ninja Gaiden, No More Heroes got censored because of the gore. Other game like Call of Duty: Black Ops got censored in Japan because of gore. Yet Japan produced some of the goriest movie made like Tokyo Gore Police, Machine Girl, and films by Takashi Miike and they don't get censored at all. Why censor gore in game but not in movie?? It's double standard. Why censor gore in video game, not movie. In order it for not to be double standard: -The movie with gore has to be censor just like video game with gore get censor. -Allow video game with gore intact. |
mdo7 said: We aren't talking about video games, we are talking about porn. It's double standard. Why censor gore in video game, not movie. In order it for not to be double standard: -The movie with gore has to be censor just like video game with gore get censor. -Allow video game with gore intact. As said before no one is saying they don't have double standard laws... |
desolatoNov 30, 2010 8:20 AM
|
ezikialrage said: I can't say that I am surprised considering the fact Japan is a country that makes incest and loli hentai,at one time sold used school girl underwear out of vending machines, sells bukkakke porn and many other things. Incest and loli hentai have nothing to do with it. |
Drunk_Samurai said: ezikialrage said: I can't say that I am surprised considering the fact Japan is a country that makes incest and loli hentai,at one time sold used school girl underwear out of vending machines, sells bukkakke porn and many other things. Incest and loli hentai have nothing to do with it. I forgot that you think there is nothing wrong with virutal child porn or incest as long as it is just depictions of children and siblings instead of actual pictures of children and siblings. I guess you would be in this thread trying to defend your tastes. |
Gogetters said: We aren't talking about video games, we are talking about porn. As said before no one is saying they don't have double standard laws... Video game, porn. I don't care. If you censored one piece of media and not censor another then it's double standard by my definition. Why do you think people wanted to ban sales of violent video game in US but not violent movies. Also Japan ban child pornography but OK with Loli hentai. See that's double standard, if you don't know what double standard, then I think you need to look it up. |
desolatoNov 30, 2010 8:20 AM
mdo7 said: Also Japan ban child pornography but OK with Loli hentai. See that's double standard, if you don't know what double standard, then I think you need to look it up. If you had bothered to read the last few pages you would have realised that lolis and child porn are completely different. I think you'll find in most countries lolis are ok, but child porn isn't. It's hardly just japan doing that... |
Lucifer-Sama said: Japs...full of sick pedophile people. Your post made me think of this picture:  This is not really a good thing tbh. |
mdo7 said: Video game, porn. I don't care. If you censored one piece of media and not censor another then it's double standard by my definition. Why do you think people wanted to ban sales of violent video game in US but not violent movies. Also Japan ban child pornography but OK with Loli hentai. See that's double standard, if you don't know what double standard, then I think you need to look it up. They wanted to ban (and still do) violent video games because they think "violent media cause more violence" and because these said people just plain out hate it. As Drunk_Samurai said before.... "Its not a double standard for the lolicon part considering they're not real." Child porn and lolicon are two totally different things which is why lolicon is legal and child porn is not in both Japan and the US (The US can only get you on "obscenity" which it total bullshit) The "obscenity law" is crap and the state should not be able to tell you what you can and cannot have if it doesn't violate other peoples rights. Mod edit: Please don't let the quoting go out of hand next time. |
desolatoNov 30, 2010 8:21 AM
|
ezikialrage said: Except there is no such thing as virtual child porn because they are not real. We already established in the old threads how stupid you are about it though.I forgot that you think there is nothing wrong with virutal child porn or incest as long as it is just depictions of children and siblings instead of actual pictures of children and siblings. I guess you would be in this thread trying to defend your tastes. |
desolatoNov 30, 2010 8:21 AM
Drunk_Samurai said: Except there is no such thing as virtual child porn because they are not real. We already established in the old threads how stupid you are about it though. All your justification for looking at virtual child porn does not change the fact you are a closet pedophile. If you like to look at depictions of prepubescent children or pubescent children in a sexual manner then you are a pedophile it does not manner if those children are real or if those are drawings of children. Seek out help from a shrink before you molest your little sister or the neighbor's kid down the street.. You can sit there all day until your face turns blue and say its not and call other people stupid, it does not make you right. It does not change the fact a loli is a drawing of a little girl. |
ezikialrageNov 26, 2010 8:05 PM
More topics from this board
» First Thing That Comes To Mind v21 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Kunii - Mar 27 |
7823 |
by Animeistaken
»»
9 seconds ago |
|
» Do you recognize the user above by just looking at their username? ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )UncreatedSong - Jun 21, 2022 |
2696 |
by iftsistrnn
»»
15 seconds ago |
|
» Rate the avatar of the user above you v.4 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Kunii - May 1, 2021 |
956 |
by iftsistrnn
»»
1 minute ago |
|
» Oh no! The user above you died! But how!? ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Sweetcats - Oct 17, 2016 |
2623 |
by OniMage
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» Deny or Comply v.4 ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )anime-prime - Dec 5, 2021 |
7160 |
by effy_
»»
3 minutes ago |