We can joke about that off work, but when in the workplace, we'll get Vanned!      

 

I smell bias.

 

Was wondering how long it was going to take for something of this nature to happen.

 

Man Vikings would be dissapointed.

Sure they loved their dirty drawings.

 

thats my line of thinking as well

I'm all for prosecuting people who have actually committed the crime. Arresting people beforehand just because they "MIGHT maybe sometime probably but we're not really sure" is ridiculous.


[unless you have a precog]

 

I agree with this. Being a pedo doesn't mean you're going to go out and rape some kid. Using a different equivalent, shouldn't we arrest all men who like women? They might get sexually frustrated and rape one!

Don't get me wrong: Adults who jerk off to photos of nude children deserve to rot. Loli hentai is fictional, however, and doesn't harm anyone directly(except the guy in the article, obviously). If anything, it probably takes the edge off that twisted frustration and makes them less likely to act on impulse.

Plus, I've seen some Loli-H mangas in passing on certain sites and it's generally consensual. If I had to make an assumption on that, I'd say rape isn't what most of those guys are looking for.

 

This old chestnut again, fucking joy. Allow me to clarify (as a fan of anime and manga in general) my position on this matter.

Ny opinion of an actual child molestor:

+


A simple metaphor to get across a simple feeling.

My opinion of people who collect (for whatever reason) lolicon and shotacon hentai



So yeah, I don't think they need hung in the street, but I don't want them drinking my beer either. I don't like that this genre of anime and manga exist, but until a crime is actually committed, its just shitty drawings of a deeply shitty subject. So far as I am aware, there is no more proof that an interest in these manga or anime, when kept in the home, is any more an indicator of impending desire to violate a child (see sword and hole picture) than playing Grand Theft Auto is an indicator of impending desire to mow down pedestrians with an M-16.

Prove that it is, and I'll change my tune. Until then, its just conjecture using a hot button topic to avoid rational discourse.

 

Neither do you. Better safe than sorry, I say.

People play violent video games for a variety of reasons. To kill time, to be entertained, to blow off steam, et cetera. True, a certain subset might play them to fuel savage fantasies and work up a bloodlust to commit actual crimes based on the games they play. But that subset is small; the other, harmless gamers do not deserve to be punished for the crimes of the deviant few.

On the other hand, people look at lolicon material for only one reason - to derive sexual pleasure from it. You want someone who gets aroused by the sight of young children out on the street, possibly eyeing your kids?

I say it's just as likely to throw oil on the fire burning inside of them. One fine day, someone is going to realise that the images no longer do anything for him, and he'll have to go for something more tangible.

'Generally consensual'. That's fucked up. It's only going to make these sickos think that their tastes are normal and acceptable. A young child cannot consent to sex, period.

 

Except that molestation and victimisation of children doesn't always mean rape. Exploitation of a child through child pornography is abhorrent, almost as much as physical rape of a child. Even if you never touch a child, owning and/or distributing or creating child pornography is a violation and exploitation of children and those people are no better than those who do physically assault a child. Emotional harm is not *less* than physical harm.

I had no idea that this type of media existed - to that extreme - and finding out about it has changed my views a lot.

What happens when the people who buy this sort of media, decide that illustrated images are no longer enough? That they need real images? Then they find that the girls of legal age just don't look young enough, now that they have a taste for very young, pre-pubescent looking girls? So they look for porn that does satisfy their desire aka, *real* child pornography?

I honestly don't believe that paedophiles wake up one day and just download kiddy porn. I think that even the vast majority of paedophiles know deep down that their desires are wrong, and they may not act on them for years and then gradually they dip their toes in the water. I can see how this type of Manga would lead to exploitation of real children.

I do have to agree that I can't see how people can be arrested for what they *might* do. But, I do think this type of media needs to be made illegal. Then people won't be arrested on what they might do, but what they have done.

 

See, this is something I've never understood about the whole pedo angle. Like, if I'm gonna have sex with a girl, I'd kind of like girl parts to be involved.

Otherwise, I'm better off riding into town the lone gunman style. Less mess to clean up, both literally & figuratively.

 

Did you ever see Doki Doki School Hours? It involes "a 27-year-old high school teacher who looks no older than 12". If there were sexually-themed images of her, does that constitute child pornography or not?

What?! A while ago you were advocating that Sweden shouldn't pursue this because they're not real children. Now you're advocating that owners of this sort of manga "needs their balls cut off"? What, did you change your mind in the space of a day?  

Pedophile enough to prosecute him? This is not pedophilia, it's called escapism. These aren't real children, so what's the harm in indulging in one's own fantasies?

 

That's not the one I was thinking of when making my post, but I vaguely know what that is. Not enough to take a stand on whether or not I'd consider it porn if it took that turn, but unless there's hardcore porn in it or whatever, I probably wouldn't argue in that direction. Plus, since nobody's actually being victimized either way, it'd still be hard for me to see it as anything other than adult material that's not for everyone.

 

I don't care if the character in question is an 18-year-old or a 9000-year-old vampire. The fact remains that she looks like a three-year-old, and whomever is beating his meat to her likeness is a pedophile.

Not pedophilia, you say.

Suppose I walk in on a friend of mine jerking off to a manga featuring gay sex. "I'm not gay!" he frantically tells me. "Those images aren't of real men!"

Yeah, right.

 

Hahahh, got me there. However, simply being gay doesn't hold the perceptions & negative connotations that being a pedophile does, at least not widely. That's the main difference I see.

At any rate though, fiction is still fiction. If you have something in a drawing or porno (aka, real people or not), its not something I see victimizing anyone (at least not anyone intelligent or who's old enough to be allowed to see that in the case of kids). However, if someone is to actually do the nasty with a 3 year old, then that's a different story.

 

I just read the entire thread. I'm not surprised there's people who defend this kind of behaviour in toy fandom forum... typical.

You guys should write about these kind of fantasies and distribute them in your neighborhood and see what happens. No you don't need to draw stick figures...

 

My initial reaction was with the knowledge that *I* had on Manga - which wasn't a lot. What I have seen involved girls who, while young looking, did not appear without a shadow of a doubt as an underage child.

Someone THEN posted a pic of what could only be a very, very young child and I had NO IDEA that these were the images we were discussing. I had an entirely different idea/concept of the images when I made my first post. When I was talking about how we couldn't be sure the way the girls looked were not just artistic techniques used to convey vulnerability, I honestly did NOT realise that the images were of girls who actually looked like they were 8 or 9 years old. I was thinking of images where the girls have breasts and curves and are obviously developed....but have baby faces and large eyes meant to simulate a young child's face. If I had known the images were of girls with no breasts and who are clearly very young children (so obvious that by no stretch of the imagination could they be seen as anything BUT children) I would have felt this way from the start.

Anyone who would look at the picture posted that I quoted and be turned on by it DOES deserve to have his nutsack cut off with a rusty spoon! There is no way that attraction to the image I quoted could be the result of anything BUT paedophilia!

Do I think people looking at that should be arrested and thrown into jail, in reality? Probably not, because it's still a drawing and I don't know how you can convict someone for paedophilia over a drawing, without conclusive proof that the image is of a child. Ultimately, the image is NOT a child...it's ink on paper, so TECHNICALLY, I don't think it would be justifiable to convict them. I think we have a justice system that needs to operate with a high level of fairness and minute level of error - and convicting over an ink image......is neither fair, nor with a minute risk of error.

Personally, I think anyone who looks at that image with lust is a sick bastard!!! And my heart is wanting them to rot in jail - my head is thinking that it would not work without compromising the justice system that I feel privileged to have. Rock and hard place........

 

See, while I think that from a fair justice system standpoint that arresting these people is just a slippery slope, and if the images in these things were the type of images I thought they were (and not what I later discovered they were) I would say that legally they shouldn't be convicted.

I have to disagree that images that look like the one I quoted (which, shocked the shit out of me - omg...disgust doesn't even begin to describe my feelings) don't hurt anybody. They can lead to escalation in men (or women, but 99% of paedophiles are men) who may go on to harm a real child.

Yes, we can't go around arresting people because of what they *might* do, but we can't sit around and claim that this sort of shit is not harmful, or has no potential to be harmful to anyone.

 

Well if nothing else, it make for an interesting subject.

 

Two questions:

1-What the hell does that phrase mean?

2-What is that actually from?

 

I'm a mother....it's a terrifying subject  

Honestly, the thought of people who may be looking at my 4 year old son or my 18 month old daughter while they play outside at daycare, in my backyard or my son's kindergarten sometimes makes me wish I could keep them inside my house all day.........

Also, the whole thing how you can't pick them.....freaks me out. It's not like people with those sorts of perversions wear a badge that say's "hi, i'm Fred....i'm a paedo". We have had teachers, doctors etc arrested on child pornography charges here in Australia over the last few years.

I worry about re-partnering in the future because it stresses me out to think that I might bring a predator into my home and expose my children to them (unknowingly, obviously).