I consider illustrations of naked little anime girls (also known as "loli") to be equivalent to child porn. If you masturbate to it, I consider you to be a pedophile. I advocate for banning loli artwork, but telling artists what they can and cannot draw makes me feel like I'm fighting against freedom of speech.
I think it boils down to whether or not loli artwork is the same thing as child porn. Is it? If not, then why not? None of the counter-arguments I've heard have been persuasive.
>"They're not real!" A sexual depiction of a child is child porn. The definition for "child porn" doesn't mention anything about the child being real.
>"It's not hurting anybody!" I never said it hurt anyone. I'm saying that it's a sexual depiction of a child, and thus it should be classified as child porn.
>"I'm only attracted to anime drawings, I'm not attracted to real kids!" If you enjoy masturbating to sexual depictions of little girls, it means that you're a pedophile.
If artwork is created for people to masturbate to, it's porn. If it features a child, then it's child porn. If you masturbate to it, you're a pedophile. All of these things seem like common sense to me, but when I say "loli is child porn" I always encounter resistance.
Can I advocate for banning loli artwork and still consider myself to be a free speech advocate?
Okay, so like, nice thread and all, bruv. But I hope you're aware you definitely just outed yourself as a pedophile or at least someone comfortable enough around CP to save it.
>makes me feel like I'm fighting against freedom of speech. Because you are. >Can I advocate for banning loli artwork and still consider myself to be a free speech advocate? Can someone eat a steak and still call themselves a vegan?
Zachary Morgan
>The definition for "child porn" doesn't mention anything about the child being real. Actually, in US law at least, it does. It specifies that, of artist depictions in any medium only a pornographic image "indistinguishable from an actual minor" or depicting a specific identifiable minor is considered child porn.
Thomas King
your argument boils down to >if it happens to fall under the law then it should be covered by the law basically ignoring any nuance that there might be. child porn laws have good reason to exist, BECAUSE child porn harms children. if child porn wasn't harmful to children, then theres no reason for it to be illegal. now, whether or not you consider loli to be "child porn" is just semantics. the fact of the matter is that no child is being harmed in the making or consumption of the media. the only people involved are the artist and the consumer. this implies that nobodies rights are being violated, and thus it shouldn't be illegal. child porn laws should include this important bit of nuance and if they don't then they are either in disagreement with what i said or lazily written.
Logan Martin
Well... It doesn't really matter what you think because it's not child pornography. In the US, child pornography is any visual depiction that is of an actual, real child engaged in sexually explicit or suggestive conduct. Child pornography is illegal because it's considered a form of child exploitation, in that it requires the sexual enticement or abuse of children and is illegal in all circumstances.
Drawings or depictions of fictional characters that are described as or merely appear to be minors are not entitled to any rights, and to assume so would be both redundant and harmful to free speech.
>I'm only attracted to anime lolis not real kids Whatever gets you off, guy. I've beat my dick to incest porn or hentai and I have no intention to fuck my sister, mother, or cousins and I even find irl incest to be both disgusting and morally abhorrent.
You don't have to agree with that second point, but you have to, at the very least, understand the difference between reality and fiction. It's not a matter of semantics. If it's not a REAL child, then it's not CP.
No ink or computer colors where harmed in their making
Asher Ward
>Can I advocate for banning loli artwork and still consider myself to be a free speech advocate? loli is in viololation of no ones rights, so no.
Caleb Jackson
why the fuck do you have the image saved if youre not a lolicon yourself?
Juan Bennett
I'm comfortable enough to save a few media files just to either convey a message or prove my point. Doesn't mean I'm a pedophile nor aroused by these images. You should stop projecting.
>because you are But I'm not against freedom of speech. I'm against child abuse and rape. >can someone eat a steak and still call themselves a vegan? False equivalence. There are many forms of speeches, and I'm an advocate for most except loli/child porn. Vegans have a strict diet, so of course their decisions would be much narrower.
That makes a lot of sense to me. Loli porn are sexual depictions of children, therefore it should be classified as child porn.
>it doesn't hurt children Loli porn recruits more pedophiles/child molesters which results in more children being harmed.
>advocates to ban lolis and thinks lolis are cp >posts loli on his thread proving he thinks that he both saved and posted cp on Yea Forums Are you fucking retarded?
Levi Clark
loli hentai it's self is not CP, but, if it gets you off, you're a pedo.
Luke Bennett
You could abuse a law like that, for example in novels people are marrying girls that are 13 and then you would have to censor a lot of great works of literature like lolita
Sebastian Ramirez
Those drawing that make you feel icky are fucking lines on a paper that you think look like a kid, they aren't kids they're lines
Nicholas Nelson
The whole reason why child porn is illegal is because children getting hurt. If it's just a drawing nobody really should care.
Benjamin Hernandez
What you're doing is "word-thinking" ie you're trying to avoid logic by changing the definitions of words. Your brain is going "but isn't being against this mean we're against free speech? Wait a minute, its actually just child porn which obviously doesn't count. Phew, we were almost hypocrites for a second!"
Do you want "free speech?" Obviously not because you think child porn should be banned, so the initial statement is already flawed. You actually want some free speech with exceptions. So now ask yourself if you think loli also belongs on that list of exceptions alongside photos of kids getting diddled, saying "bomb" on an airplane, and whatever other things you think of.
Jaxon Watson
>s..s..stop projecting I didn't think you jacked off to loli until you said that and posted more then one loli pic
Aiden Ross
>Loli porn recruits more pedophiles/child molesters which results in more children being harmed. that line of reasoning is the same that says that we should ban violent video games because they recruit mass shooters. if you think that thats true then so be it, but its been proven wrong a millions times before, you dont have to go out of your way to find countevidence. i'm curious OP, why make this thread? do you wish to convince other people or be convinced yourself?
Henry Cooper
Projecting, huh? You clearly saved a good amount, besides that I'm pretty sure we'd all know what you're talking about with one photo, faggot. Nice cover in case the feds are watching though, "don't worry officers, totally only saved these to convey a message and in fact I'm so against this stuff that I've made this thread about it, see?"
Dominic Green
Made it for (yous)
Adam Diaz
understandable have a nice day
Charles Torres
im not projecting, i KNOW i like cunny.
Luke Sullivan
>Loli porn are sexual depictions of children They are not depictions of any child that actually exists. The law specifies "an actual identifiable minor". If you draw a made-up character off the top of your head, or a fictional toon or animu, that is not an identifiable actual minor. Regardless of your opinion, it is a fact that in order for a fictional image to be LEGALLY classified as child porn, it either has to look exactly like a photograph or you have to be able to identify an actual real child that it is supposed to be depicting. If it doesn't tick either of those boxes, it is not legally child porn.
Angel Fisher
I always thought that it was clear that it is child pornography. I think it's ok to spread "Loli" pictures because they are fictional and do not harm anyone. I always thought the target group for this are people who do not want to commit a real crime and therefore miss their lust on drawings.
Charles Campbell
Being a pedo isn't illegal user. What you're describing is considered thought crime
Aiden Jones
Are you a fucking brainlet? Obviously the solution is to let anyone draw whatever they want but not DISTRIBUTE it! Ironically you just did that, like a fucking hypocrite tosser.
For me there's a fine line, and the image you used is far on the no go side on that line. I describe what you posted as "toddler-con" its grotesquely young and blatantly a child in the photo. My views on Loli-con are that they have to show some form of pubescence, i.e breasts, pubic hair, or even just having proportions of a older teen.
I myself am only 18 so when I look at loli hentai I aim for what I described as being portrayed as being older and less child like, it keeps my fetish around my age range. I find the pictures drawn to very closely resemble toddlers gross and they immediately turn me off. I'll also get grossed out if I'm reading a doujin and they say the loli is in 3rd grade or some shit despite having tits.
When it comes to lolis I completely understand the argument that it is child porn.
Isaiah Jenkins
your main point seems to be that it is illegal. so would be the depiction of a murder. but no one seems to care. there is a whole billion dollar industrie making movies about it. the same goes for sodomie which is illegal by law. but do you make threads about banning furry threads? a few decades ago homosexuality was illegal. people did want to hang queers and co. ... you get my point?
Adrian Carter
This is retarded.
Jerking off to a drawn picture of an imaginary minor is equivalent to jerking off to your imagination. As stated, thought crime. Furthermore, who does it harm? Laws are (ideally) to protect the people.
Would you say playing a violent video game is tantamount to being a violent criminal? Surely this also extends to all fictional depictions of crime. We should lock all actors up for their horrific crimes against humanity.
This is retarded, and so are you.
Dylan Ortiz
I hope you never watch movies where people are killed or raped, cause with your fantastic logic you're even more fucked up than us.
Lincoln Anderson
I agree that loli shit is grotesque, but I disagree that it should be banned precisely because it is artwork. >they're not real They aren't. Period. This is an objective fact. You mention a legal ambiguity to support your position. That ambiguity is also what supports the position of pro-loli sickos. >its not hurting anybody See above. Your argument is based on legal ambiguity and is therefore no more and no less correct. >only attracted to anime drawings, not real children Once again, this is subjective. Do you consider "barely legal" and "teen" porn to be equally wrong? People jack off furiously to real women who really look like children, yet I don't see you arguing against it.
My point is this, your entire argument against loli shit is as acceptable as any argument for loli shit. It exists only in the realm of subjective morality. I personally find it immoral, and I think that people who enjoy it are pedophiles. But it is also art, depicting vaguely humanoid anime children. To ban it would be an affront to free speech.
Isaac Ramirez
Child porn insinuates that living breathing child was used in the production of the pornography.
Again as you have said a fucking drawing didn't harm anyone in the production of it.
>Can I advocate for banning loli artwork No
Luke Lee
Rawlin'
Jose Adams
Disclaimer: Not into this shit BUT there is a big difference between Someone just being perverted and not hurting anyone with it, and someone who supports the molestion of children. I rather have those freaks beat it to perverted drawings than to relieve this urge once a lifetime and hurt someone...
Owen Cooper
"Hey Timmy what do you like, a drawn picture of my fist up your bloody ass, or my actual fist up your bloody ass?" "Gee I dunno sir, my retarded mom thinks it's the exact same thing anyway so just shove your hand in me I guess."
>I consider illustrations of naked little anime girls (also known as "loli") to be equivalent to child porn And I consider you as unnecessary to this world and a prime candidate for euthanasia, but like the Stones sang, you can't always get what you want.
Luke Walker
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Are you saying one illegal image in an entire thread full of legal ones is supposed to make them suddenly all illegal?
John Price
Facial blends with children added are more attractive, that's science.
So.. Deep down we all like youth. 23 is the most attractive age for all males asked to rate faces.
But some will like her at 15 better than 25.
Some will like that on a certain day. So what. Living with things others like and you don't is part of actual freedom. You're coming at this from an angle that makes sense. Like your feelings matter.
Nobody cares what you think no victim no crime go police someone else's thoughts faggot or just kys lmao you ban loli people will just look at real cp or worse abuse a child
Gabriel Foster
So if cartoon kids are real kids, then we need to call child services on cartoon parents that abuse their cartoon children?
Jeremiah Watson
Ill start a petition to ban loli and give atleast 5 to 10 years for producing and distributing loli. It is porn and you know it. Free speech doesnt work this way when it is dangerous to society and loli is dangerous cause it normalizes rape and abuse as "not so bad" since its just a drawing but still porn. Do you know there is anime not suitable for minors?
Ryder Harris
>dangerous to society The actual science disagrees with you. See
Jason Sullivan
Loli art is offensive to some, like depictions of Muhammad, or even depictions of crimes like rape / incest. In western society we know that these depictions are just that, depictions - and thus they are protected as free speech. The second you restrict someone's right to make a depiction you are effectively silencing them. You are no different than the Muslims protecting their profit.
Moreover, I believe your intentions are good but your conclusions are misguided. Banning loli artwork would only serve to make the world and its children less safe. The reason why pedos are adamant on the points "they're not real", "it's not hurting anything", and "I'm only attracted to drawings" is because they demonstrate that the problems associated with child porn are being intentionally mitigated for the sake of children.
Nolan Long
Who. The. Fuck. Cares.
if you care about this shit you don't belong on Yea Forums
Michael Parker
>Can I advocate for banning [...] artwork and still consider myself to be a free speech advocate?
nope
Josiah Ortiz
yep
Carson Anderson
By definition, this is 100% true, but you're missing one thing:
> A pedophile does not a sex offender make
The consumption of harmless consensual media, whether or not said media contains children, in which the consent is placed between the artist and the viewer, not the subject inside the art, should not be construed as being offensive to anyone besides the likes of which would be conservative idealists who would rather not want any form of sexual deviancy.
Jace Richardson
The production of CP is a severely punished crime because of the effect it has on children. The production of loli artwork does not deserve to be in the same category.
David Hernandez
It doesn't matter if you're a pedophile or not. It doesn't matter if you're looking at child porn or not (assuming we go with your definition that includes loli). All that matters is if you can objectively identify harm being caused
Because loli creates absolutely NO HARM to anyone, it is NOT a problem. And NO it does not make one harm real kids. If someone who looks at loli did something to a real kid, they would have done it with or without loli.
Xavier Evans
>Loli porn recruits more pedophiles/child molesters which results in more children being harmed.
That is not how it works at all in the slightest. Not even a tiny bit.
Christopher Moore
I honestly don't give a shit as long as real children aren't hurt.
it is not illegal to be a pedophile. There is no law concerning what a person may or may not be attracted to sexually.
Lucas Ross
roll
Thomas Martinez
I'm going to make another response. I don't like loli. I'm simply not into it. But this ludicrous argument you make where you say "loli breeds child molesters and rapists" is as wrong and ludicrous as the idea that video games cause violent people. No children are being hurt. Picking fights with people online because you don't like their preferred hentai is incredibly stupid. Get your 1984 dystopian thought crime ideas and fuck off.
Levi Hill
NEEDS MOAR CP
Logan Brooks
>I think it boils down to whether or not loli artwork is the same thing as child porn. Is it? If not, then why not? None of the counter-arguments I've heard have been persuasive.
the only reason child porn was banned in the first place was because lawmakers were convinced that it victimizes the children involved even after the ordeal was over
the same laws do not apply towards people getting murdered on video though for some reason, they and their families are no longer considered victims after it is over
child porn would be legal if it were not believed that victims were still being victimized by the videos and images
drawn pornography has no victims and that is basically the only legal standpoint you should be arguing from in the united states, it is illegal in other countries like canada though because they have different laws obviously
The definition might not, but the compelling state interest in banning it (preventing child abuse) simply doesn't exist for drawn images.
Joshua Green
Anyone have that screenshot of the green text written by the guy who worked at a swim camp over the summer? You know the one.
Juan Perry
>If you like this shit, you're a pedophile. Are you illiterate? Dude said in the second and third sentence he does not, in fact, like this shit. That said, even if he did he'd still be right in that "I don't like this" is not a reason to make something illegal.
Jonathan Wright
stop reading shitty stories and just use your brain to fantasize
Josiah Murphy
No. You genuinely cannot consider yourself an advocate of free expression if you want to control what people can and cannot draw. Murder is also illegal, as is rape, and both of those are drawn all the time. Do those drawings not offend you?
Not that I think you actually believe anything you've said, I think you're just a shit-stirrer.
John Bennett
have you considered the possibility that some people just like small bodies? they dont have to be kids
Easton Gutierrez
Playing the devil's advocate... Possession crimes do exist, and they are what you compare having CP to, not murder. If having CP is at all like murder, then producing CP would be what - kidnapping people and forcing them to fight to the death? Instead of doing that though, say someone can make virtual games where people fight to the death. Should those virtual games be illegal like CP is? Oh, wait, I guess that doesn't help the argument at all does it.
Robert Rodriguez
>OP wants to make fortnite illegal
Ethan Sanchez
>. In the US, child pornography is any visual depiction that is of an actual, real child engaged in sexually explicit or suggestive conduct. This is not accurate. Even drawn loli stuff is cp in the US.
Eli Lopez
>then producing CP would be what - kidnapping people and forcing them to fight to the death? And possession of the resultant video from that fight to the death would not be illegal.
Brody Cooper
d9Zuu3h
Gavin Walker
is a victimless crime still a crime?
I think that's what it mostly comes down to
Gavin Lee
>playing the devil's advocate stopped reading right there.
no you are fucking retarded, it literally states in the law it has to be undistinguishable from real stuff, all drawn and cg generated are easily distinguishable from real thing
Jose Reed
It's funny because he didn't actually play the devil's advocate
Chase Price
gg/XSJthW
Eli Cruz
which?
Colton Martin
You said it yourself. It's a sexual depiction.
Jeremiah Carter
T7CVRC
Oliver Lee
>loli hentai it's self is not CP, but, if it gets you off, you're a pedo.
How did you come to this conclusion??
Angel Butler
thats bullshit. of course he can someone can be a free speech advocate, but still believe there are some situations where free speech needs to be limited for the good of society as a whole and thats coming from someone who disagrees with OP
Sebastian Torres
that's...factually incorrect. Look up the holding of Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition. It is defined as such even by the DoJ.
True, there is obscenity law, but that's too vague and varies on a state-by-state, case-by-case basis and in many states (like Oregon or California) you can't be convicted for obscenity, even at the federal level (because states decide what can be obscene, not the feds) unless you go out of your way to expose it to a non-consenting adult or minor or allow it to be exposed in such a manner, bascially like any other kind of porn. I should know, because I know people who have ordered explicit lolicon hentai, dakimakuras, and figurines from Mandarake, Fakku, Ebay, and Amazon (US and JP) and they all seem to be okay. One of whom is a good friend of mine and former colleague and he has a manga library in his closet with a good bit of it being Comic LO imported from Japan, and I actually own an explicit lolicon body pillow.
wait wait wait first you say >If you enjoy masturbating to sexual depictions of little girls, it means that you're a pedophile.
then you say >Loli porn recruits more pedophiles/child molesters which results in more children being harmed.
which is it? does loli porn create more pedophiles, or were loli viewers already pedophiles before they found loli?
Bentley James
>Art Advocate Mental Gymnastics: >Pictures depicting Lolis are a form of art. >Art is protected under Free Speech, even if it's obscene to some. >Therefore art depicting lolis is acceptable. (T-poses)
Michael Martin
Not him, but I came to the same conclusion a couple years ago. Whatever format of porn you're looking for, be it 3d models, animated, audio, written literature, etc, the topic of the porn is indicative of your sexual interests. If you look at foot porn very often, in any format, I'll bet you've got a foot fetish. It's in the same vein that if you look at porn of children very often then you're sexually interested in children.
Now, I will say this doesn't actually necessitate that you're a pedo. If for instance you are under the age of 18, then you cannot be diagnosed with pedophilia. This is similarly true if you're more interested in women of legal age. However, the term pedophilia does not only denote a medical condition, it is also a term used colloquially to simply mean "anyone who is sexually attracted to children." It;s with this colloquial definition of pedo that I argue anyone who gets off to lolis is a pedo.
>still believe there are some situations where free speech needs to be limited
nope
Ryan Barnes
This isn't one of those situations, however. Availability of pornography is directly correlated with a lower occurrence of rape, there is no data that indicates porn is actually harmful to society. OP even states "I never said it hurt anyone." I'm curious to know, do you have an example of a drawing that harmed society?
bruh, they aren't mutually exclusive statements. Sure I disagree with the second one in particular, but I have no logical problem with someone saying: >Because I found loli porn when I was young and I masturbated to it I became a pedo. Now my masturbating to loli is indicative of the fact that I am a pedo.
