# Japan urged to ban manga child abuse images



## Deleted member 23 (Oct 28, 2015)

> Japan must ban sexually abusive images of children in manga comics, despite claims that such a move would threaten freedom of expression, the UN?s special envoy on child protection has said.
> 
> Maud de Boer-Buquicchio praised Japan for passing a law last year that banned the possession of abusive images of children, but said it contained loopholes that allowed exploitation to continue.
> 
> ...


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/27/japan-urged-to-ban-manga-child-abuse-images?

Mael, might have to get his cartoon porn underground.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 28, 2015)

What are you expressing when you put children in sexual situations with adults I wonder?


----------



## HaxHax (Oct 28, 2015)

NaS said:


> What are you expressing when you put children in sexual situations with adults I wonder?



Dunno mane. You can watch kids get crucified on HBO. Wonder what you are expressing then.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 28, 2015)

HaxHax said:


> Dunno mane. You can watch kids get crucified on HBO. Wonder what you are expressing then.



What show is that on HBO? I don't watch HBO.


----------



## Mael (Oct 28, 2015)

NaS said:


> What show is that on HBO? I don't watch HBO.



Game of Thrones.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 28, 2015)

Mael said:


> Game of Thrones.



Wow well I've never watched it.


----------



## Muah (Oct 28, 2015)

Lol Japan has always been the un's bitch. Though they better keep them white people happy or else you know what will happen. It's funny  how the other nations who are flooded with child abuse  use japanese cartoon as a escape goat. Like Russia doesn't enjoy let the right one in or if every college student doesn't enjoy teeth or drool over porn stars the second they turn 18. The pedo tendencies of the US are only surpassed by their underlying homoerotic agenda and constant need to pressure people into concepts they've just learned even if they were the biggest offender.


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Oct 28, 2015)

Mael said:


> Game of Thrones.


This guy replied so fast. Must have all the nude kid shows on lock.


----------



## Mael (Oct 28, 2015)

That was literally -1/10 trolling, klad.


----------



## Punished Pathos (Oct 28, 2015)

UN spreading SJWism across the East


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 28, 2015)

Hillarious part is that Japan (and the majority of the world) doesn't care what the UN says


----------



## makeoutparadise (Oct 29, 2015)

It's sad when I younger I thought the UN had more binding power


----------



## Bungee Gum (Oct 29, 2015)

harmless fodder for perverts. lets ban it!


----------



## Cormag (Oct 29, 2015)

won't happen anyways and i don't think banning lolicon will achieve anything either


----------



## rajin (Oct 29, 2015)

I always took stand with a ban. You just have to search a bit and 12- [under 12, gore japanese content]is easily available.


----------



## Zaru (Oct 29, 2015)

They shouldn't ban it since it's fiction, but there's obviously something wrong with a country where it's so widespread in the first place.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

Well, banning sexual harassment pictures is right, I suppose, but I'd lol hard if they'd suggest to ban ALL the pictures that can be treated as cruel ones - they'd have to stop both Naruto and Bleach lol

I don't think it's wrong, probably, even such obsessed with traditions country can change it's ways.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Oct 29, 2015)

Religion of PEDOPHILES


----------



## EJ (Oct 29, 2015)

I believe pedophiles should seek help/scrutinized for indulging in their lust but I understand the notion of what can happen if we start banning fiction. 

What's going to make things more difficult is they are going to start making that 3d digital porn soon. They are definitely (if they haven't already) going to start making realistic shit of child pornography, so the urge to ban fiction is going to become even stronger. 

Absolutely disgusting shit, but a tough situation to be upon to make a decision regarding penalties and shit.


----------



## EJ (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> How thew hell is this even remotely a difficult question?
> 
> Are real children being abused and harmed?
> -Child pornography, ban it and send the creators to prison.
> ...



I do get the point of what you're making, but in these threads with how passionate you are with defending the right to hold fiction child pornography is just suspect at times.


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 29, 2015)

Zaru said:


> They shouldn't ban it since it's fiction, but there's obviously something wrong with a country where it's so widespread in the first place.


Not really especially not if its about 13+ girls given how people all over the world married at that age before 1885


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

*MadmanRobz*
You sound like you really think there was one single person who said "lets ban this as pedophilia!" and everyone else around disagreed.
Such serious decisions as banning a huge part of the media and entertainment industry are not taken by a single someone. They undergo long procedures and discussions.
You may be passionate when your grandma calls a random dude a p*d*p****, but not when it's about national policy.


----------



## scerpers (Oct 29, 2015)

NOT MY MUNGO DOE


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

*MadmanRobz*
"You" is not the problem. The thing is that you assume that society and it's... spokesman took their decision from nowhere and don't have arguments to prove it right. Like you do assume that policy makers in the entertainment and supervising authorities are idiots and you are the most clever one.
There is a goal - reduce rates of crimes against children, reduce pedophilic beauty icons popularity and so on. There is a way - ban certain images in certain media. The side effect that you won't get to read that manga and lol around does not mean that you are considered p*d*p****. It's just a side effect of a global decision.
Otherwise I don't get what you mean by that talk as if someone is being under discrimination after that ban.


----------



## Garcher (Oct 29, 2015)

that's like saying saying being p*d*p**** is a crime. Today's politicians are just a bunch of hypocrites after all seemingly

the reason why child porn is illegal is not because it depicts certain sexual actions, it is because actual human beings are abused to produce it. To protect the children, not to prohibit people to jerk off to what they want


----------



## Zaru (Oct 29, 2015)

GARcher said:


> Today's politicians are just a bunch of hypocrites after all seemingly



The biggest irony is that various countries appear to have droves of politicians involved in p*d*p**** rings. Most notably the UK.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> ...
> Pedophiles are *already* discriminated against basically everywhere, this policy is offensive because it's pushed specifically because of the ignorant stereotypes about pedophilia that are already prevalent everywhere.
> ...
> The burden of proof is not on me, the stereotypes about pedophiles are not proven to begin with. Someone else needs to prove that the vast majority of pedophiles are incapable of self-control and active rapists before I need to prove that they're not.
> ...






k.
I am actually scared now.
Guys, someone, please get a superman cloak on an save me. I understood my grievous mistake and will never repeat it anymore. Please.


----------



## Lucaniel (Oct 29, 2015)

madmanrobz sure is passionate about this


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

madmanrobz has always been a defender of pedos


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

He likes his Jap Manga child porn.


----------



## Lucaniel (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> I was just wondering when my second least favourite troll would show up and try to bait.
> Let's just ignore you were ever here, alright? Better for everyone. Literally, everyone.
> 
> Edit: Great. Does Lucaniel have some kind of cancer-attracting aura or something?
> He shows up, makes some half-retarded attempt at insulting me and now there's at least 3 dudes here just to fuck around who don't spend half a thought on the topic.



*mad*manrobz indeed


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

all i said was that you were always a defender of paedophiles

i've seen you consistently post in these types of threads before

never said anything bad, it was a neutral statement


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

Why would I spend half a thought on your obsession to manga child pornography? Tell me, when you see a fictional child having sex with an adult, or getting raped.. or whatever. What is your train of thought on that? WHat do you get out of that? And what do you think the message the artist is trying to portray?


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Oct 29, 2015)

just scrolled up to see him say 

'pedophiles are discriminated against'

bruh 

BRUH  

Man U know what 

I feel u bro

Murderers are discriminated against too 

Some people are actually better off dead 

why do they gotta jail us all


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

WAD said:


> just scrolled up to see him say
> 
> 'pedophiles are discriminated against'
> 
> ...



he means that not all of them want to rape children, some of them have urges but don't act on it. comparison u made isn't valid


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

This is going to be a long ass thread.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

You guys are making it worse. The rehab is almost impossible now.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Oct 29, 2015)

Itachі said:


> he means that not all of them want to rape children, *some of them have urges but don't act on it*. comparison u made isn't valid



100% bullshit
just because some can inhibit themselves from actually raping little kids doesn't mean they don't act on in in a much more reserved or coy manner


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

WAD said:


> 100% bullshit
> just because some can inhibit themselves from actually raping little kids doesn't mean they don't act on in in a much more reserved or coy manner



not saying that i believe it, just my interpretation of his post


----------



## Lucaniel (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Sorry, following Lucaniel your post inherited a negative context.
> 
> I didn't see how stating that I post on these topics often could have been meant in a non-derogatory fashion following Lucaniel's prompt, as Lucaniel has a habit of starting or trying to start flamewars against me whenever he can.
> 
> ...




whatever you say herr goebbels-fritzl


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> I suppose you go around raping attractive women if none of them sleep with you for long enough then.
> 
> 'Cuz you know, that's exactly what you're accusing pedophiles of doing. Literally without any evidence what so ever that pedophiles have any more trouble with it than anyone else.



well ur already kinda derping since who said im heterosexual 

but for the sake of arguments

let's say I am 

i wouldnt rape them but i would surely solicit them by talking to them with the intent of charming or seducing them to get into my pants

i think this holds true for any sexuality, no?

and for predators like urself it's far easier to accomplish that mission when preying on innocent minds


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

Itachі said:


> not saying that i believe it, just my interpretation of his post


Look how suppressing urges worked out for the Catholic church.

To deny base urges is the path to growth.
But some covet some strange things indeed.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

There is no such thing as a p*d*p****, who 'does not do anything'.
Do you always base your opinion on wikipedia articles?

There is a person who wants to fuck with kids and can't fuck with adults. Sooner or later this person will come to an edge of no return and commit a crime. Because molesting a child is a crime.


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

Fact you are defender of pesos in any shape or form is disgusting.

Out of all the causes to defend , wtf is wrong with you in all seriousness?


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

If a violent movie is going to implant in your head a thought that you can take a bat and go rob a store, than yes, you are to be jailed.

Calling pedophilia a disease is not changing the fact that it is also a crime.


----------



## Stunna (Oct 29, 2015)




----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Imagine now, that you're a heterosexual male.
> You see attractive women around you everywhere.
> 
> None of them will sleep with you.
> ...


I'm sorry, not that care for WAD's sexual life... but why? Why would none of the beautiful women sleep with a dude? Adult healthy women and a heterosexual guy. Why would they bitch about all at once?

Are you seriously assuming that adult women and children are in the same boat?..


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

That Jared from subway payed a teen girl to fuck him.  so pedo don't necessarily resort to rape, still taking advantage of trafficked kids and underground trading networks via internet etc.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> I don't think there's any message, and even if there is, I don't give a shit. *it's a message. If it's an evil message, I just don't listen to it.*



That doesn't explain anything really. There is definitely a reason why someone would draw a child in a sexual situation involving an adult.




> What's my train of thought when I see such content?
> "Ooh, this image is arousing."
> 
> That's it.
> ...



What are you watching being raped? Because since the child is not real, the act of rape shouldn't be real. The act of sex shouldn't be real. So you have an arousal to nothing because it's not real.



> Maybe we should start throwing people in jail for enjoying violent movies too. You know, because that obviously means they can't be trusted to not do horrifically violent acts in real life, right? Exactly like with pedophiles, right?



Movies and paper are different. They are actors. The people you masturbate to have no conscience. Has no cognitive ability to think for themselves. And they (the actors) are real regardless of what depiction they are shown in. After that child gets raped in the manga, there is no page at the end with the child claiming how morally wrong it is to rape someone, or how it was to be depicted as being raped.


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

Think it was about 2 years ago, heard on npr (national public radio)
Kid talking about going to therapy group to talk about pedo urges. Think he is a teen. Anyways was disturbing to listen to, but ya there are pedo who uh choose not to act on urge and seek help.


Anyways last post in here, took a lot of crime related courses and so criminality of all sorts is a favorite topic of mines.


----------



## MakeEmum (Oct 29, 2015)

I think the problem is that the people trying to ban Loli's or whatever is putting this stuff in the same moral frame as Child Pornography when in reality everything involved in their creation from production to consumption is radically different.  it's solely a moralistic and though crime-ish legislation.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> And no, pedophelia is not the same as touching children. Pedophilia is *feeling that underaged humans are visually attractive just like an adult would be.*
> 
> Implant a thought in your head? Are you even serious?
> You realize that literally means that every violent movie ever that doesn't end with everyone who's been violent being punished for it should be made illegal and censored, right?
> ...




1. Not visually.
Sexually.
Sexually attractive.
And this is the difference.
People who enjoy looking at photos with kids are ok.
People who want to rape those children are not ok.
A building can be visually attractive, duh. A sex-partner is sexually attractive. We don't fuck buildings we find attractive, do we?

2. You asked if you we should throw to jail people who don't understand the difference between movie and irl violence. I say - yes. They are to be commited - in any sense of this word.

3. No, your comparison is retarded.
Adult women know what sex is.
And know what to expect from adult men.
They can give their consent.
Children do not know what sex is, they can't agree to have because they do not understand what's about to happen. To make you understand - women understand the concept of a dick inside of them. 6-years old girls - don't.


And now.
Stop that "fuck, fucking, fuckilicious" in your answers. I can curse too in every single sentence. Doesn't make me sound more mature.


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

I still think that loli is fucked up though. Even if paedophiles don't actively go around raping children, loli still reinforces their attraction to children. It's like a psychopathic gun nut that resists the urge to shoot people but plays GTA to do it instead. The urge is still there, I think paedophiles should just get some help instead of jacking off to loli. If you derive pleasure from it, it means you're still attracted to that sort of thing.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 29, 2015)

Itachі said:


> I still think that loli is fucked up though. Even if paedophiles don't actively go around raping children, loli still reinforces their attraction to children. It's like a psychopathic gun nut that resists the urge to shoot people but plays GTA to do it instead. The urge is still there, I think paedophiles should just get some help instead of jacking off to loli. If you derive pleasure from it, it means you're still attracted to that sort of thing.



Well, with both examples, it isn't nor should it be anyone's concern until they attempt to act on, or there is reasonable assumption to believe they would act on those urges against individuals that actually exist.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Simple.
> 
> a) Because they want to earn money from selling the product.
> b) They consider it arousing imagery.
> ...



I never stated the legality of any of that. But you're selling something of real value that closely resembles the same thing And let's not pretend Japan doesn't have a long history of actually sexually abusing children. And what is the statement to watching a fictional child get raped?  What is arousing about a child regardless if it's fiction or not?




> I'm watching pixels on a screen that have been arranged to form imagery which I find arousing, with absolutely none of the consequences that the depicted imagery would hold in real life.
> 
> There's no child being abused, and no immoral douchebag making money off of exploiting an innocent child. Simplt, pixels on a screen, straight from someone's mind.



Again, you're so focused on the legality of the issue rather than focusing on the issue at hand. What is so arousing watching a child having sex? Is it a fact that the child is being dominated? Stripped of their choice? There has to be some correlation as why you are aroused to a child. It doesn't matter if it's a real child or not, because in that fictional world that child is being depicted in, they are real. 




> And why would all fictional stories have to end with statements and messages to enforce your moral standings? I'm not saying that the stance "abusing children is a bad thing" is wrong, but that doesn't mean that every fictional instance of children being abused need to broadcast in capitol letters that child abuse is wrong, otherwise it will convince readers that it's fine.



Because there is nothing that shows otherwise the issues of displaying such. The only thing we can assume is it's ok because it's fiction. But again it goes back to the other question at hand in which what exactly is the artist trying to depict? 



> The characters are literally non-existent, their suffering isn't real and there are no consequences to them. You're literally trying to censor something because you disagree with the idea of it and it doesn't end with a clarification that you're belief about it is correct.



It doesn't matter if they are real or not. They show real emotions, or a sense of feeling that can lead to arousal in your case, or a sense of sympathy. The feelings we get from reading such are real Your arousal is just as real as a person who may feel grief from watching such.


----------



## MakeEmum (Oct 29, 2015)

Itachі said:


> I still think that loli is fucked up though. Even if paedophiles don't actively go around raping children, loli still reinforces their attraction to children. It's like a psychopathic gun nut that resists the urge to shoot people but plays GTA to do it instead. The urge is still there, I think paedophiles should just get some help instead of jacking off to loli. If you derive pleasure from it, it means you're still attracted to that sort of thing.



But we don't ban GTA, People who jack off to Loli, the "object" of their attraction, at that moment at least, is a drawing not an actual child being molested by an adult. the only similarities to these drawings and real children is the identified age of the "object" literally everything else is a fabrication.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

MakeEmum said:


> But we don't ban GTA,



Are you sure about this?


----------



## Catamount (Oct 29, 2015)

...


... and again - no fucks given.
I'm out.
This is pointless.


----------



## Whitebeard (Oct 29, 2015)

Leave it to a SJWede to take it up for pedos


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Well, with both examples, it isn't nor should it be anyone's concern until they attempt to act on, or there is reasonable assumption to believe they would act on those urges against individuals that actually exist.





MakeEmum said:


> But we don't ban GTA, People who jack off to Loli, the "object" of their attraction, at that moment at least, is a drawing not an actual child being molested by an adult. the only similarities to these drawings and real children is the identified age of the "object" literally everything else is a fabrication.



Yeah, it doesn't harm anyone but it's a problem for the person in question. I don't think it should be banned but I still don't think it's good to reinforce/enable those urges.


----------



## MakeEmum (Oct 29, 2015)

NaS said:


> Are you sure about this?



Ok you got me, at least in the US we don't ban simply cause someone MAY try to duplicate the fantasy violence in real life.

I'll just restate the point that other than the identified "underageness" of the object of attraction whether they look the part or  outright stated, Lolicon and Child Pornography are complete different in almost every way, so much so that you can't even guarantee that people attracted to those loli's would be attraction to say an actual 8 year old.


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 29, 2015)

Lel at the people who want rules based on feels


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

Was wondering when you would say it, the defense makes sense now.


----------



## MakeEmum (Oct 29, 2015)

I think another thing  that's worrying in this narrative is the idea that not only is consumption of media that depict terrible stuff is morally bad, but that the depiction is "real" and the creator/s is sort of like conscientiously making the choice to put these characters into these situations and are morally responsible for what happens to them.

Stuff like that ruins art and is pretty much the bases of banning this stuff and other offensive and "harmful" art.


----------



## Magic (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Would you mind clarifying what you're referring to?


You speak from experience. Figured, since you are being rather vocal and adamant on this subject.


----------



## Itachі (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> I'm... still not quite sure what you were getting at.
> 
> Are you saying I'm talking nonsense but now you at least get why?
> The opposite?
> ...



He's saying that he understands your passion for this topic since you're into loli yourself.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> A person's reasons for finding children visually attractive isn't actually important unless it has to do with directly abusing children in real life.
> You're just interested in evaluating whether or not you approve or disapprove of their reasons for holding their opinions, and that isn't relevant.



LOL oh no, brother. That's completely bullshit. If you see something sexually arousing in a manga,  you would find that same thing arousing in real life. The only difference is you know it's a taboo to like a real life child, so you hide behind fictionally depicted characters. The only difference is you know a piece of paper can't be harmed.



> I'm into loli stuff because I find the visuals appealing, and I'm a masochist so I have a thing for dominance. Thus, by extension, I can enjoy fictional loli rape because it has elements that I enjoy without any of the negative sides of it that prevent enjoyment of it in real life.



So you're justifying your like of rape and child porn only because these are things you can't act upon since they are in a form of fiction. So now the question reflects to this. If this medium of fictional rape is taking from you, will you act upon it? Stuff like this shouldn't be the reason why you need this around. It sounds like this is a crutch you lean on to keep you in check. You can make all the comparison to movies and video games you want, but if you take those away, you won't have an increase of car jacking, killing people in lakes. Etc etc. 




> (Good stuff: Displays of Dominance, submissiveness and visually attractive bodies.)
> (Bad stuff that doesn't actually impact the enjoyment because it's fiction so none of the consequences that make them NOT good in real life aren't there: Rape, child abuse, infliction of trauma, damaging behaviours etc.)



Sheesh. I really can't provide a rebuttal to this without invoking emotions.




> You're assuming that just because something is real within it's own fictional context, everyone who enjoys it perceives it to be just as real. Which simply isn't true.
> That kid I see in front of me is not real, it's just someone's painted thoughts and nothing more.



Again, the same feelings you get when you're aroused is the same feelings that be applied of disgust.



> *Actually* seeing a real child being abused with the understanding that it's for real is an *entirely* different thing, not even remotely comparable. Fiction can be tolerated because there is nothing real about it no matter what happens.
> Emotional reactions to fiction is just a person feeling that something is more real than it is because it's managing to convey something realistically enough.



I disagree because if for some odd reason the child enjoys it, the argument can be made that since they did enjoy it nothing wrong was done.





> You're assuming that because someone gets away with something in a fictional story that it is shown positively as an okay thing. You're making an assumption that if the author does not explicitly state Case B, he must mean Case A. Even though it's just as possible he means nothing at all or any number of other things.



Rape isn't something so casual. And the fact they can so easily express it without easily suggesting it's wrong has to say something about them.





> If a movie doesn't punish the rapist and you can't stand that, then you simply had a bad time, so just don't watch the movie again.



In all slasher movies the slasher is being or attemptedto be prosecuted.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> This was the largest amount of pretentious drivel I've seen in quite a while.
> I especially like how you basically just said "You're wrong about yourself, THIS is how you really function."
> 
> Honestly, it's really people like you - who argue that watching something which is entirely fictional is equal to watching something which is completely real - who are truly disturbing.



But we are talking about children being depicted into pornography.



> Can you really not discern fiction from reality enough to be able to experience a difference?
> When you read a manga, do you actually experience it as if it was completely real and happening right in front of you?
> 
> Of course you don't, and arguing that you do and that the same applies to everyone about all fiction, is complete and utter bullshit.



You are using (fictional) child pornography as a crutch because you can't act upon those urges in real life. In every pron I've watch I can replicate it without any worries of shaming from others. You however...can not. It's people like you who we fear because without your crutch, you could give in to your urges.


----------



## Pliskin (Oct 29, 2015)

People sure are passionate about their childporn here.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 29, 2015)

NaS said:


> He likes his Jap Manga child porn.



And you like Dragon Ball GT. Think ur any better?

Concerning the thread, this ban wouldn't  even effect all of the main sources of lolicon content. So it's not even worth getting heated over no matter which side you are on with the issue.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 29, 2015)

oh my goodness. madmanrob is just a disgusting human being. We shouldnt ban loli but i consider you a disgusting person if you engage in reading that crap. You should stay away from children. I dont even have children of my own but if i did i would probably feel even worse about this.  What the fuck you find so sexy about children having sex? Japan is gross as well. These people have some of the creepiest, nastiest, weirdest sex fetishes in the world. i want to throw up.


----------



## Matariki (Oct 29, 2015)

lol what is going on here


----------



## Admiral Hakuryō (Oct 29, 2015)

This entire thread is completely fucked


----------



## ExoSkel (Oct 29, 2015)

Whats up with so many weebtards advocating for jap child porn hentai in this thread?

Get a better fetish you delusional weebs.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 29, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> And you like Dragon Ball GT. Think ur any better?
> 
> Concerning the thread, this ban wouldn't  even effect all of the main sources of lolicon content. So it's not even worth getting heated over no matter which side you are on with the issue.



Yes. Yes i do.


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Oct 29, 2015)

Admiral Hakuryō said:


> This entire thread is completely fucked



beautiful, isn't it?


----------



## hammer (Oct 29, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> And you like Dragon Ball GT. Think ur any better?



such a weak comparison


----------



## HaxHax (Oct 29, 2015)

Adamant said:


> Calling pedophilia a disease is not changing the fact that it is also a crime.



No, it isn't. And it won't ever be.



NaS said:


> You are using (fictional) child pornography as a crutch because you can't act upon those urges in real life. In every pron I've watch I can replicate it without any worries of shaming from others. You however...can not. It's people like you who we fear because without your crutch, you could give in to your urges.



Everyone who has any sexual attraction to anyone or anything is a rapist waiting to happen in that optic.



Adamant said:


> *MadmanRobz*
> "You" is not the problem. The thing is that you assume that society and it's... spokesman took their decision from nowhere and don't have arguments to prove it right. Like you do assume that policy makers in the entertainment and supervising authorities are idiots and you are the most clever one.
> There is a goal - reduce rates of crimes against children, reduce pedophilic beauty icons popularity and so on. There is a way - ban certain images in certain media. The side effect that you won't get to read that manga and lol around does not mean that you are considered p*d*p****. It's just a side effect of a global decision.
> Otherwise I don't get what you mean by that talk as if someone is being under discrimination after that ban.



And let's ban those dastardly vi-de-o-games too, they cause shootings. My son got noscoped r.i.p.

In other news: Anyone who defends gays is _gaaaay_ and one who defends women is a sissygirl

But really, do any of you people have arguments that aren't dogshit, or are you all just here to point fingers at rob?


----------



## DeK3iDE (Oct 29, 2015)

with all of the real life things that need to be addressed, the UN wants to focus its priorities on telling another country to ban its fictional porn. Porn that for all anybody knows isn't hurting anybody 

It's nice to know that there's an international governing body that is concerning itself with the important things


----------



## HaxHax (Oct 29, 2015)

Big Bad Wolf said:


> with all of the real life things that need to be addressed, the UN wants to focus its priorities on telling another country to ban its fictional porn. Porn that for all anybody knows isn't hurting anybody
> 
> It's nice to know that there's an international governing body that is concerning itself with the important things



This isn't a statement from the general assembly. It's a UN envoy.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Oct 30, 2015)

Yeah, so no, that's a terrible idea ma'am. And i don't like the thought of it 

By those very broad definitions, basically 99% of all manga would have to be banned, including the mainstream ones.


----------



## Island (Oct 30, 2015)

Oh man, I came to post the "anime was a mistake" macro, but, fuck, how am I supposed to compete with defending-pedophilia-guy?



10/10 thread


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

hammer said:


> such a weak comparison



What? Isn't that what we're doing here? Just bashing bashing posters based on their fictional preferences? Nobody is being  exploited or harmed by a manga  so that's what I thought we were doing. Don't see why else this got to 6 pages.


----------



## hammer (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> What? Isn't that what we're doing here? Bashing posters based on their fictional preferences? No real child is being exploited or harmed by this so that's what I thought we were doing.



because one is porn and the other is for kids?

you're better off comparing germen shit porn and anything else


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> A person's reasons for finding children visually attractive isn't actually important unless it has to do with directly abusing children in real life.
> You're just interested in evaluating whether or not you approve or disapprove of their reasons for holding their opinions, and that isn't relevant.
> 
> I'm into loli stuff because I find the visuals appealing, and I'm a masochist so I have a thing for dominance. Thus, by extension, I can enjoy fictional loli rape because it has elements that I enjoy without any of the negative sides of it that prevent enjoyment of it in real life.
> ...



kiddy diddler spotted


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

hammer said:


> because one is porn and the other is for kids?
> 
> you're better off comparing germen shit porn and anything else



So he can bash someone  because of a sexual preference, but I can't bash him for liking a shit anime? Isn't this an anime forum? 

Do you actually have an argument that the manga is hurting someone?


----------



## hammer (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> So he can bash someone  because of a sexual preference, but I can't bash him for liking a shit anime? Isn't this an anime forum?
> 
> Do you actually have an argument that the manga is hurting someone?



the reason your comparision is shit is because it has nothing to do with porn, you should bash his taste in porn.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

hammer said:


> the reason your comparision is shit is because it has nothing to do with porn, you should bash his taste in porn.



Nope it was fine. Both attacks were simply meant to shame the person. He personally finds lolicon detestable. I find GT detestable. Neither of us brought any arguments to support our attacks. They were on the same level.

Ok so you aren't going to make the claim that real people are being harmed by manga then right?  Proceed. I'll let the wannabe SJW circle jerk continue.


----------



## hammer (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> Nope it was fine. Both attacks were simply meant to shame the person. He personally finds lolicon detestable. I find GT detestable. Neither of us brought any arguments to support our attacks. They were on the same level.
> 
> Ok so you aren't going to make the claim that real people are being harmed by manga then right?  Proceed. I'll let the wannabe SJW circle jerk continue.



when did I give the impression I actually care, in fact most people in this head think freedom of expression should be upheld, the only issue is madrobertz is going way beyond the scope and making questionable remarks.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

NaS said:


> He likes his Jap Manga child porn.





kidgogeta said:


> And you like Dragon Ball GT. Think ur any better?





hammer said:


> such a weak comparison





kidgogeta said:


> What? Isn't that what we're doing here? Just bashing bashing posters based on their fictional preferences? Nobody is being  exploited or harmed by a manga  so that's what I thought we were doing. Don't see why else this got to 6 pages.





kidgogeta said:


> So he can bash someone  because of a sexual preference, but I can't bash him for liking a shit anime? Isn't this an anime forum?
> 
> Do you actually have an argument that the manga is hurting someone?



another kiddy diddler spotted


----------



## Wolfarus (Oct 30, 2015)

Why do people bother with trying to debate the lolicon/fictional character topic anymore? Anytime it's brought up, it always, always, ALWAYS ends up the same way.

Some people expressing the thought that not real = no real victim/no real crime or reason to judge. Others coming in just to troll, flame and otherwise harass some posters with the "you sick bastard child rapist pedo scumbag!" routine.

Would think that even mega, as ineffective a mod as he can be, would just auto-lock these things at the first post of the usual above regurgitated crap. Or any smod who happens to be online, for that matter


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> another kiddy diddler spotted



You disagree with my viewpoint. You are a terrorist. 

That's basically your logic. Maybe you should go back to  your corner. Adults are talking.


----------



## hammer (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> You disagree with my viewpoint. You are a terrorist.
> 
> That's basically your logic. Maybe you should go back to  your corner. Adults are talking.


Real adults only diddle other consenting adults.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

hammer said:


> Real adults only diddle other consenting adults.



A real man would never hit a woman! *snaps fingers


----------



## hammer (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> A real man would never hit a woman! *snaps fingers



I would also like to point out, the moment you talked about gt you lost all right to the real adults are talking comment, yes GT is fucking shit, but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand all you are doing is reflecting blame, which is not something an adult should do.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

That one guys tastes didn't have anything to do with the thread either. Lmfao

Let's not pretend that this thread didn't go off the rails from page 1. NF has proven incapable of civil discussion on this matter. So why can't I join in on the fun and bash people on what I perceive to be  their shitty opinions?

I gotta say... that's not very adult of you....


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> You disagree with my viewpoint. You are a terrorist.
> 
> That's basically your logic. Maybe you should go back to  your corner. Adults are talking.



spare me your condescension, herbert

your "logic" is  contrarian apologetics, attempting to deflect valid criticism toward contemptible mental disturbia by insisting you're merely being objective

enjoying fictional depictions of children getting raped isn't merely a hobby that's akin to favoring a particular color or enjoying a bike ride on wednesdays you mulish casuist

when consuming fictional media there are generally two reference frames that the audience assumes; viewing the story happen as an observer (third person) and self inserting (first person).  typically when people watch something that contains say violence, the violence itself serves as a plot device for a broader intended effect (story telling, symbolism, character development etc) than simply the violence itself; viewers usually receive a negative emotional effect when someone innocent or "good" is the recipient of violence and a positive or neutral one when someone "bad" is the recipient of violence.  rarely does someone feel a positive visceral reaction to an innocent person getting beaten or killed in fictional media, and if they do it's most likely a symptom of being mentally disturbed. what value we extract from media relies entirely on our personal sensibilities; it's not merely what a piece of fiction contains and whether or not we consume that piece of fiction that necessitates the criticism, but for what purpose that particular piece of fiction is consumed, and what value is taken from it

people that enjoy fictional children getting raped, and jack off to it, are self inserting into that narrative and fantasizing about doing it themselves.  whether or not you insist that this "fantasizing" is ultimately harmless since nobody gets hurt is beside the point; it reveals a sinister character trait in the person that consumes such a product in that context


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

>This thread

Pedophilia by itself is not a bad thing, it's only when people act on the urges and commit crimes that it becomes a problem. Yet society as a majority (at least in America, i can't speak on other cultures) likes to put them all in the same boat as molesters and treat them worst than thieves and killers, which is ignorant and wrong. Even hebephilia is classified as pedophilia, when they are different attractions all together. The same logic being extended to fictional works is even more ridiculous and regardless of people refusal to acknowledge it, it is an actual problem.


Regardless, Robz your "passion" in this thread is quite creepy to say the least. You do not have to go so far to defend yourself, nor do you have to stoop down to the level of flaming, and to be honest this entire argument is your fault because you started going off-topic with your own agenda in this thread.


----------



## Plague (Oct 30, 2015)

I like lolita dresses (hence my outdated set xD) but lolicon isn't my thing. 

But overall, if I had to give a verdict I don't see the harm in fictional depictions of underage characters. 

Banning it seems pointless. At the end of the day, it's just a picture. And a fictional one at that.


----------



## Magic (Oct 30, 2015)

Freddie Mercury said:


> >This thread
> 
> Pedophilia by itself is not a bad thing, it's only when people act on the urges and commit crimes that it becomes a problem. Yet society as a majority (at least in America, i can't speak on other cultures) likes to put them all in the same* boat as molesters and treat them worst than thieves* and killers, which is ignorant and wrong. Even hebephilia is classified as pedophilia, when they are different attractions all together. The same logic being extended to fictional works is even more ridiculous and regardless of people refusal to acknowledge it, it is an actual problem.
> 
> ...



Did you know in prison, they will severely beat/kill child molesters. 

Code among prisoners lol.


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

RemChu said:


> Did you know in prison, they will severely beat/kill child molesters.
> 
> Code among prisoners lol.



I know lol. Most recent example i can think of was that bastard from brazil who in all honestly had it coming. 

However i also heard stories about teachers getting beat up in prison because they had consensual sex with 16 years old, and the prisoners who attacked him didn't even know the full details of the crime and attacked him anyway because of the stigma alone.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> spare me your condescension, herbert
> 
> your "logic" is  contrarian apologetics, attempting to deflect valid criticism toward contemptible mental disturbia by insisting you're merely being objective
> t




Did you copy paste that? How am I insisting on being objective when I'm clearly mocking one side? Even if you did manage to accurately explain what I was doing, that wouldn't then make it inherently wrong. So it comes off as you just trying to appear intelligent. Maybe use a thesaurus before you trying using big words like objective that you don't understand.

The argument you make afterwards has no basis. You think people are deliberately inserting themselves into the position of someone deplorable, and then getting off?   You got all that information based off what? A physical attraction?


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> Did you copy paste that? How am I insisting on being objective when I'm clearly mocking one side? If you are going to attempt to appear intelligent, at least read what you write before you post it.
> 
> The argument you make afterwards has no basis. You think people are deliberately inserting themselves into the position of someone deplorable, and then getting off?   You got all that information based off the fact that they have an unusual attraction? I can't wait for your evidence of that.



can't tell if you're deliberately dodging or you're genuinely this retarded

the entire point of your "mockery" is to illustrate the subjectivity of the criticism imposed on the person you're defending 

that method of argument is by definition an attempt at objectivity 

then you proceed to waive off the rest of the post based on plausible deniability, neglecting the fact that porn consumption is predominantly in the context i referenced

you're a joke, next time don't posture when you're called out for the kiddy diddler you are. it should say something when your defense is "hurr durr stop using big words, i wasn't trying to say anything i was just shitposting man" lmao


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

You misuse objective and I'm retarded? Ok.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

run along bud, don't flex next time


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

So you don't deny that you misused it? Why are you acting like you proved that people insert themselves into this material? Cite your sources?


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

is that the best reply you came up with in your 7 minutes of contemplation? 

i didn't misuse shit, you're just deflecting and throwing red herrings after having your argument exposed and i'm not taking your bait


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

Gogeta make an actual argument instead of going "hurr your gammar iz shit" to delude from the fact that pride is owning you like a slave in rome.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> is that the best reply you came up with in your 7 minutes of contemplation?
> 
> i didn't misuse shit, you're just deflecting and throwing red herrings after having your argument exposed and i'm not taking your bait







You make an insinuation which involved you using a word incorrectly.

Then you make this argument.

"People that enjoy fictional children getting raped, and jack off to it, are self inserting into that narrative and fantasizing about doing it themselves."

Then you say that I simply wave it off, but can you cite your source for this or not? If you can't , then where does your sense of  victory come from? I was very clearly attacking one side of an argument. Now are claiming that I am backing off and saying I am shit posting. When did I do that? Does misrepresenting someones intent and even putting words in their mouth mean that you win?


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> You make two insinuations. One involved you using a word incorrectly.
> 
> The other is this.
> 
> ...



my "using a word incorrectly" is a blank statement on your part.  prove it or shut up 

as for repeatedly asking me for "sources" on something as simple as people watching porn mentally self inserting into the scene (top lmao), do you agree that if this is the case then it's worthy of criticism? or are you going to admit asking me for sources is nothing more than a red herring on your part 

you're looking more like an idiot with every post, save yourself the embarrassment and move along


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> *Spoiler*: __
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Again you don't understand. It's the way you come off when you make your points that are strange. What was the need to bold sentences and make whole paragraphs in a thread where most agreed with the opinion that the ban was unjust? If you're passionate about a subject you can still discuss it without making yourself look like a loud nutjob.


You should have just ignored Flow instead of making yourself out to be the victim.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> you're looking more like an idiot with every post, save yourself the embarrassment and move along



Why are you trying to shame me into to leaving the thread? Because you actually don't have a source?  You realize you could shut me up really quickly if you just support your conclusion. 

"People that enjoy fictional children getting raped, and jack off to it, are self inserting into that narrative and fantasizing about doing it themselves."


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

crying out "source" while ignoring practically everything someone says doesn't make you look any less like an idiot, retard-chan


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

So I guess I get to conclude that those claims where just your opinion then.  Glad we sorted that out.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

when you're reading to explain how i misused the word "objective", and whether or not me factually proving something that's extracted from deductive reasoning would even change your mind, you can have another go at the buttblasting i just gave you 

till then continue trying to stop the bleeding, your intellectual dishonesty isn't fooling anyone


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

I take a side.  You claim I'm pretending to be objective. Lol... who's the one deflecting man? You got called out and you are upset.

So in your mind you win because you were incapable of supporting your only argument, BUT you tacked on cute insults at the end of every post. But that only works if everyone's ego is as brittle as yours.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

more incoherent rambling for damage control

fascinating


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

I'd say what you are doing is damage control. Since you attempted to label me a pedo, I threw your pathetically weak logic for doing so back at you and you got upset. PM me anytime with those sources bud. I'm open to learning new things.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 30, 2015)

RemChu said:


> You speak from experience. Figured, since you are being rather vocal and* adamant *on this subject.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 30, 2015)

Well this topic is a minefield. Keep it civil please.


----------



## Magic (Oct 30, 2015)

RemChu said:


> Did you know in prison, they will severely beat/kill child molesters.
> 
> Code among prisoners lol.


Is Bannai a pedo?

He negged me over this comment. 

LOL, I will give you attention Bannai, post you piece of shit troll


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Oct 30, 2015)

so let's summarize here 

kidgogeta defends against criticism toward a loli porn consumer by taking on an attempt at objectivity; by deducing that the criticism is subjective and thus has no basis, he assumed an objective frame of reference (otherwise he wouldn't be able to make the argument)

kidgogeta then claims he was never trying to be objective, and that claiming so was misusing the word, though he still had a point to make and was still correct, but never bothered to explain why this is the case.  meanwhile he repeatedly asks for "sources" proving that people who watch porn mentally self insert into the scene.  he refuses to disclose whether even doing so will change his mind 


is anyone familiar with this guy?  does he have schizophrenic tendencies?


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> So I guess I get to conclude that those claims where just your opinion then.  Glad we sorted that out.



Jesus christ....

agfpride's claims hold weight. People that watch any genre of porn and enjoy it are obviously attracted to it, that is undeniable as day. self-insertion is naturally a by-product of that so your argument that people don't is bullshit.

The topic may involve children, but this is rape fantasy in general. Like violance people can be turned on by acts that goes against societies laws, and fantasize about fulfilling these desires. Even woman think about it.

Morals and judgement however wouldn't allow to a person to commit, or want the acts committed to themselves in real life, so that's all you really had to say on the subject. Any criticism towards you that came afterwards could have been ignored because your own points would have proved that it wasn't true.


I don't believe you're a pedo, but i do believe that you are for lack of a better word an idiot who would rather call people SJWs, insult a community's capability of having reasonable discussions, and fail to make an actual argument for yourself and the person you're defending.


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

Freddie Mercury said:


> agfpride's claims hold weight. People that watch any genre of porn and enjoy it are obviously attracted to it, that is undeniable as day.
> 
> self-insertion is naturally a by-product of that so your argument that people don't is bullshit.



First part is true. The second part is a reach. Especially since we're talking about a particular genre of lolicon ( abusive / violent ) . You can't make the jump from the first point that people insert themselves into something like that. That's absurd.


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> First part is true. The second part is a reach. Especially since we're talking about a particular genre of lolicon ( abusive / violent ) . You can't make the jump from the first point that people insert themselves into something like that. That's absurd.



Saying that people don't is even more absurb, if you admit that there is an attraction present, then what would stop a person from imagining themselves preforming it.


But again, this is speaking soley towards fiction.


----------



## Catamount (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> First part is true. The second part is a reach. Especially since we're talking about a particular genre of lolicon ( abusive / violent ) . You can't make the jump from the first point that people insert themselves into something like that. That's absurd.


Why do you watch it then? 
What, you follow the loli-fashion and need to see new dresses? Check the fashion blogs for it. Why watching or reading something were violence is depicted in all the details and the fictional criminal does not get caught, yet has his good times? We're not talking about L&O Special Victims, where you can claim that you watch it for the sake of seeing punishment and knowing that there is protection.
So.
Why do YOU watch it?..


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

Freddie Mercury said:


> Saying that people don't is even more absurb, if you admit that there is an attraction present, then what would stop a person from imagining themselves preforming it.
> 
> 
> But again, this is speaking soley towards fiction.



" typically when people watch something that contains say violence, the violence itself serves as a plot device for a broader intended effect (story telling, symbolism, character development etc) than simply the violence itself; viewers usually receive a negative emotional effect when someone innocent or "good" is the recipient of violence and a positive or neutral one when someone "bad" is the recipient of violence. rarely does someone feel a positive visceral reaction to an innocent person getting beaten or killed in fictional media, and if they do it's most likely a symptom of being mentally disturbed. "


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> he's got a point you know, people that jack off to fictional children getting raped don't actually feel a positive reaction from it, it's literally for plot and atmospheric tension.  it's not the act of fucking a child that turns them on, it's the character development of the rapist



The scariest part of that idea to him must be the hollywood movie adaptions getting the rapist characters wrong.

"WHY IS HE FUCKING A 12 YEARS OLD, SHE WAS 8 IN THE MANGA!"


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 30, 2015)

What the fuck happened here?


----------



## Punished Pathos (Oct 30, 2015)

lmao so people that read Child abuse manga are actually going to imitate art in life somewhere later on?
This is stretching into the realm of Precrime.
I see it here... IE: anyone that reads/defends child abuse manga is a pending Pedo (Precrime applied in such scenario) 

U.N is doing what it does best 
If this continues I bet citizens everywhere will be jailed just for having "child abuse manga" in their possession


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> he's got a point you know, people that jack off to fictional children getting raped don't actually feel a positive reaction from it, it's literally for plot and atmospheric tension.  it's not the act of fucking a child that turns them on, it's the character development of the rapist



His prior embarrassments were bad enough, but that was on another level entirely.


----------



## Freddy Mercury (Oct 30, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> You have a very bad habit of telling off people who react to being harassed rather than the people actively committing the harassment.



Didn't i just tell you about the victim card...


----------



## kidgogeta (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> he's got a point you know, people that jack off to fictional children getting raped don't actually feel a positive reaction from it, it's literally for plot and atmospheric tension.  it's not the act of fucking a child that turns them on, it's the character development of the rapist





afgpride said:


> when consuming fictional media there are generally two reference frames that the audience assumes; viewing the story happen as an observer (third person) and self inserting (first person).  *typically when people watch something that contains say violence, the violence itself serves as a plot device for a broader intended effect (story telling, symbolism, character development etc) than simply the violence itself; viewers usually receive a negative emotional effect when someone innocent or "good" is the recipient of violence and a positive or neutral one when someone "bad" is the recipient of violence.  rarely does someone feel a positive visceral reaction to an innocent person getting beaten or killed in fictional media, and if they do it's most likely a symptom of being mentally disturbed. what value we extract from media relies entirely on our personal sensibilities; it's not merely what a piece of fiction contains and whether or not we consume that piece of fiction that necessitates the criticism, but for what purpose that particular piece of fiction is consumed, and what value is taken from it*



Lol.... you sure you didn't copy paste? You just mocked your own premise.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Oct 30, 2015)

cull them all


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

hammer said:


> I would also like to point out, the moment you talked about gt you lost all right to the real adults are talking comment, *yes GT is fucking shit,* but it has nothing to do with the topic at hand all you are doing is reflecting blame, which is not something an adult should do.



Bro 



afgpride said:


> so let's summarize here
> 
> kidgogeta defends against criticism toward a loli porn consumer by taking on an attempt at objectivity; by deducing that the criticism is subjective and thus has no basis, he assumed an objective frame of reference (otherwise he wouldn't be able to make the argument)
> 
> ...



I think he's some kid I trolled in the Dragon Ball section as that's the only thing he had to say about. Revenge post since he can't neg I guess.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

Freddie Mercury said:


> The scariest part of that idea to him must be the hollywood movie adaptions getting the rapist characters wrong.
> 
> "WHY IS HE FUCKING A 12 YEARS OLD, SHE WAS 8 IN THE MANGA!"



Bro. I don't care how you send me the money... but you owe me a new monitor and I will spend millions on lawyers to take you to court... Which defeats the purpose of just buying a new monitor myself.  Huh...


----------



## Catamount (Oct 30, 2015)

my god, how energetic


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Oct 30, 2015)

Adamant said:


> my god, how energetic



an almost childlike exuberance


----------



## Catamount (Oct 30, 2015)

WAD said:


> an almost childlike exuberance


well... they sure know about kids a lot!


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

WAD said:


> an almost childlike exuberance




Did you just use _child_ and _exuberance _in the same sentence insinuating only children can experience cheerfulness without realizing there are adults out that who would also like to experience cheerfulness with children in sexual situations?




*Link Removed*


----------



## Magic (Oct 30, 2015)

if you wish to express your fondness of questionable material in a public forum, naturally you will be shunned and ridiculed... 

To expect anything else is moronic.


----------



## lokoxDZz (Oct 30, 2015)

You know what, humans are fucking disturbed in their mind , i honestly don't care of what people are drawning, fantasing about people are pretty twisted, as long it stay in the fiction stays in the fiction, i honestly rather have some weirdo fantasy on a fucking draw than maybe fantasing about my child.


People are crazy, i think restricting more and more the right to express everything they want in fiction just helps to make they urge to do something on reality, so i rather have they do what they want and fiction staying on fiction.


----------



## hammer (Oct 30, 2015)

NaS said:


> Bro



im sorry bro


----------



## baconbits (Oct 30, 2015)

afgpride said:


> is anyone familiar with this guy?  does he have schizophrenic tendencies?



I think he's part of the new school guys who can't form coherent arguments.  They have strong passion but lack the intellectual framework to make the rest of us understand them.  Most of the time these posters hide behind the fact that what they most is mainstream enough that it doesn't attract notice.  But once they stand against someone who actually knows how to form a logical argument that cover is gone and they get exposed.

@kidgogeta

I'm not getting your argument.  For someone to watch something they are saying they are being entertained by it.  That's an assumption we can all agree with.  Now if you think seeing kids getting abused sexually is entertaining then you're messed up.

Where do you disagree with me?


----------



## Imagine (Oct 30, 2015)

This thread is great


----------



## SLB (Oct 30, 2015)

kidgogeta said:


> You make an insinuation which involved you using a word incorrectly.
> 
> Then you make this argument.
> 
> ...



You shitting me? 

How else do you climax without self insertion? Where are YOUR sources?


----------



## teddy (Oct 30, 2015)

Moody said:


> You shitting me?
> 
> How else do you climax without self insertion? Where are YOUR sources?



Lord knows i wish it was me smashing mia malkova


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 30, 2015)

> I'm into loli stuff because I find the visuals appealing, and I'm a masochist so I have a thing for dominance. Thus, by extension, I can enjoy fictional loli rape because it has elements that I enjoy without any of the negative sides of it that prevent enjoyment of it in real life.
> (Good stuff: Displays of Dominance, submissiveness and visually attractive bodies.)
> (Bad stuff that doesn't actually impact the enjoyment because it's fiction so none of the consequences that make them NOT good in real life are there: Rape, child abuse, infliction of trauma, damaging behaviours etc.)





How did I miss this? You can't just expect people to like...just maintain any sense of normalcy in discussion when you drop a bomb like that! Just what the fuck...? You mean to say you find the child figure sexually appealing...worse, you find it appealing when they are not only sexually abused but in a way that is also has a degree of violence.

OK, so maybe you aren't acting out on it in real life, thankfully. Yet this is just admittance of pedophilia here. People aren't just going to react casually to that. It was always odd how violently you reacted on these topics...well, I see why...


----------



## Atem (Oct 30, 2015)

Thread is beyond salvation. 

Burn it with fire or switch topics to Mia Malkova.

Whichever works.


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> How did I miss this? You can't just expect people to like...just maintain any sense of normalcy in discussion when you drop a bomb like that! Just what the fuck...? You mean to say you find the child figure sexually appealing...worse, you find it appealing when they are not only sexually abused but in a way that is also has a degree of violence.
> 
> OK, so maybe you aren't acting out on it in real life, thankfully. Yet this is just admittance of pedophilia here. People aren't just going to react casually to that. It was always odd how violently you reacted on these topics...well, I see why...



Where did he say this at?


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

Flow said:


> Where did he say this at?



In the argument he was having with me. It's on page 4 depending on your view.


----------



## Atem (Oct 30, 2015)

The more I read what he posts the more I want to stab my eyes out with sharp things.

They're useless anyway.


----------



## Lina Inverse (Oct 30, 2015)

This thread


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Oct 30, 2015)

yeah how did anyone miss what madmanrob said........ He basically admitted to being a pedo. I called this shit a while ago and now look, I was right. He's a fucking creep. Someone warn the police.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

Normality said:


> yeah how did anyone miss what madmanrob said........ He basically admitted to being a pedo. I called this shit a while ago and now look, I was right. He's a fucking creep. Someone warn the police.



We all knew of his support of fictional child porn. We just didn't know why until I drew it out of him.1


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Oct 30, 2015)

Normality said:


> yeah how did anyone miss what madmanrob said........ He basically admitted to being a pedo. I called this shit a while ago and now look, I was right. He's a fucking creep. Someone warn the police.



why didn't you warn the police when mael started giving you talks?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 30, 2015)

> and I'm a masochist so I have a thing for dominance. Thus, by extension, I can enjoy fictional loli rape because it has elements that I enjoy without any of the negative sides of it that prevent enjoyment of it in real life.



That's not masochism. Masochists are supposed to get off on their own pain or humiliation. Not the pain or humiliation of others.

...Which is probably the least of the self deception in that post, but uh.


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

reiatsuflow said:


> That's not masochism. Masochists are supposed to get off on their own pain or humiliation. Not the pain or humiliation of others.
> 
> ...Which is probably the least of the self deception in that post, but uh.



I was going to point this out earlier. He has the terms mixed up. He's a sadist, one who enjoys inflicting pain or humiliation on others.


----------



## Kitsune (Oct 30, 2015)

It's not really known whether looking at these images serves as an outlet for pedophiles and reduces child abuse or if it simply reinforces their desires and causes them to act. This is a question that really needs to be answered before we make too many condemning statements. Unfortunately it's hard to study for obvious reasons. The whole topic is disturbing but it does need to be better understood.

That said, I'm personally disgusted by anyone who enjoys it.


----------



## Atem (Oct 30, 2015)

ted. said:


> Lord knows i wish it was me smashing mia malkova



Lifeselector: A Day with Mia Malkova.

You're all welcome.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

Flow said:


> I was going to point this out earlier. He has the terms mixed up. He's a sadist, one who enjoys inflicting pain or humiliation on others.



You was not.


----------



## aiyanah (Oct 30, 2015)

^ (use bro)
stop it
its just a drawing
let people find their entertainment in drawings ffs


----------



## Atem (Oct 30, 2015)

That feel when you can ask Mia Malkova to make you a sammich.

Best part of lifeselector.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

aiyanah said:


> ^ (use bro)
> stop it
> its just a drawing
> let people find their entertainment in drawings ffs



Nevah. SJW ring activate.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 30, 2015)

Let's use tentacle porn as an example, because tentacle porn should be the go to example for everything. Hypothetically, maybe I forgot to be a paragon of decency and derring-do for a moment and accidentally masturbated to tentacle porn once or twice or three thousand eighty four times. That doesn't mean I would summon a real lovecraftian sea monster to undress and have its way with well proportioned women. Good heavens no. But if someone else happened to summon a giant loveraftian sea monster with an affinity for female hourglass figures, I might watch it run amuck for a little bit. And maybe my pants would be down. Maybe.

I"m sure this is relevant to something.


----------



## teddy (Oct 30, 2015)

Normality said:


> yeah how did anyone miss what madmanrob said........ He basically admitted to being a pedo. I called this shit a while ago and now look, I was right. He's a fucking creep. Someone warn the police.



I caught that ages ago and I have him on ignore


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

The argument of "Well should we ban video games where you kill other people?"

Is pretty stupid. Like others have pointed out, in many games there's an actual plot, character development, reason as to why you have to accomplish different parts of the game and some involves killing another person to get to the next check point.

And even so, rarely in a game will you attack some innocent bystander, and kill them in some manner for your own personal pleasure. At the end of the day though, people play video games for different reasons.

If I had a son/daughter that took too much pleasure into playing a game where they were killing other people and I saw that was the portion they loved about it the most, I would take it away from them.


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

For fucks sake, that mission in Call of Duty MW2 where you are given the option of doing a mass-shooting at an air-port caught controversy not just in the United States, but different countries around the world. Didn't it get banned in Australia/Russia or something?

You can't compare watching loli/rape porn to video games where you kill people in it's entirety. There are many reasons why you would have to kill someone...

Regardless, anyone that gets off to that kind of stuff from rape, exploitation of little kids, killing etc should seek help.


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 30, 2015)

Yeah we should totally ban everything that doesn't fit into the social norm
Because the social Norm is ALWAYS  right


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

Zyrax Pasha said:


> Yeah we should totally ban everything that doesn't fit into the social norm
> Because the social Norm is ALWAYS  right



No one/few people here have really been calling for this.

You don't like what's being criticized here is what irritates you.


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 30, 2015)

Flow said:


> No one/few people here have really been calling for this.
> 
> You don't like what's being criticized here is what irritates you.


You mean like how everyone called me a racist when I criticized the Ghetto Culture ?


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

No, that's not what I mean.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 30, 2015)

> Is pretty stupid. Like others have pointed out, in many games there's an actual plot, character development, reason as to why you have to accomplish different parts of the game and some involves killing another person to get to the next check point.
> 
> And even so, rarely in a game will you attack some innocent bystander, and kill them in some manner for your own personal pleasure. At the end of the day though, people play video games for different reasons.
> 
> If I had a son/daughter that took too much pleasure into playing a game where they were killing other people and I saw that was the portion they loved about it the most, I would take it away from them.



That's important.

The reason we make assumptions out of porn is because we all know the kind of stimulation and release people get from porn. You're not supervising a porn habit wondering what kind of enjoyment a person is getting out of it, or how they're interacting with it.

People can interact with violent games and movies in ways that raise red flags too. They aren't illegal, but they're cause for questions. If someone has a library of only violent gorehound movies, that doesn't mean they're going to kill someone. But it's cause for questions if they are your neighbor, your relative, friend, kid, whatever. It's good that we're careful to put too many regulations on pretend fantasies, but interpersonally, everybody intuits these things and makes judgment calls. We all know there are unhealthy ways to interact with fantasy. If someone plays violent videogames with unusual attention and stimulation around the killing itself, that's cause for concern too. What that concern is specifically might be arguable, but not the concern itself.

We all know imagination can become fixated on fantasies that are unhealthy, or signals of something unhealthy. Certain pornography is just a bullseye for being unhealthy in every conceivable way, which is where you get these regulations creeping up. You don't want to censor expression, even in the underbelly, but every now and then you see something that's so thoroughly sick or unacceptable that you have to wrestle over whether or not it should be regulated. Like anal sex. No offense to The Gays.


----------



## EJ (Oct 30, 2015)

Yeah, anyone can take something and make something fucked up about it.

IE

Charles Manson taking that Beatles song and making it about a race-war which encouraged the shit he did.


----------



## Punished Pathos (Oct 30, 2015)

Zyrax Pasha said:


> Yeah we should totally ban everything that doesn't fit into the social norm
> Because the social Norm is ALWAYS  right



Its deeper than that.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 30, 2015)

There is a scene in CoD where you can shoot up an airport? Dafaq you doing GTA? Get on in that action.


----------



## SAFFF (Oct 30, 2015)

Yep I remember the scene being pretty brutal. 

But yeah...Japan is not getting rid of their loli love anytime soon. Maybe 60 years from now or less if something major happens in the anime/manga industry that influences them from marketing loli..


----------



## MegaultraHay (Oct 31, 2015)

Japan is like the youngest of 3 brothers who always follows what ever the middle child says. And the rest of the world is the older brother who hits the little shit every time he thinks he does it.
Jesus what happened to UN from being created to prevent another world war to general sjw garbage or empty please the press shit like this that won't even fix the root of the problem.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 31, 2015)

Some of y'all got a lot of nerve posting in here.


----------



## Zyrax (Oct 31, 2015)

MegaultraHay said:


> Japan is like the youngest of 3 brothers who always follows what ever the middle child says. And the rest of the world is the older brother who hits the little shit every time he thinks he does it.
> *Jesus what happened to UN from being created to prevent another world war to general sjw garbage or empty please the press shit like this that won't even fix the root of the problem.*



I blame this on the fact that they gave up on preventing war since the Countries with Veto powers(and their allies) don't care what they think


----------



## hammer (Oct 31, 2015)

all you guys calling this SJW bs, fact of the matter is SJW's are more likely to defend kiddie porn then anything


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Oct 31, 2015)

People literally making the excuse in this thread that because its not real children this crap shouldn't be banned?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 31, 2015)

hammer said:


> all you guys calling this SJW bs, fact of the matter is SJW's are more likely to defend kiddie porn then anything



Just attach whatever stigma you want to that boogeyman.


----------



## HaxHax (Oct 31, 2015)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> People literally making the excuse in this thread that because its not real children this crap shouldn't be banned?



Let's ban all depictions of illegal activities.


----------



## Atem (Oct 31, 2015)

Slippery slope argument, going by the assumption that just because we would ban child porn we would ban anything else remotely offensive.

Why are people always on the extremes. You either have absolute freedom with no restraint or you restrain everything and it becomes 1984. What about the middle ground? Freedom within reason. I like that one.


----------



## hammer (Oct 31, 2015)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Just attach whatever stigma you want to that boogeyman.



pretty much


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 31, 2015)

What really concerns me is that Japan has the monopoly on deciding who is born gay, like they did with Craig and Tweek. Who gave them that right?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 31, 2015)

Savan said:


> Slippery slope argument, going by the assumption that just because we would ban child porn we would ban anything else remotely offensive.
> 
> Why are people always on the extremes. You either have absolute freedom with no restraint or you restrain everything and it becomes 1984. What about the middle ground? Freedom within reason. I like that one.



No one disagrees with banning child porn because it involves actual victims. Fictional content does not, and in that regard it is a valid point to make.

Because people are rarely like that.


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 31, 2015)

We should ban this topic because someone said "child sex" and that makes me visualize it in my head.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 31, 2015)

OK, don't go back on this thread. There's worse than that.


----------



## Pilaf (Oct 31, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> OK, don't go back on this thread. There's worse than that.



Fuck you Kaiba. I do what I want. #BanSetoKaiba

edit: I immediately regret my decision to read through this thread.


----------



## hammer (Oct 31, 2015)

Pilaf said:


> edit: I immediately regret my decision to read through this thread.


----------



## Atem (Oct 31, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> No one disagrees with banning child porn because it involves actual victims. Fictional content does not, and in that regard it is a valid point to make.



I get that but it's still child porn. It's not like it is depicted as horrifying, wrong or there to make a point. Say for example a detective finds and stops a sex trafficking ring involving minors in a novel, and the sex isn't shoved into your face it's instead in the background because fuck no one wants to read that. Though you know it's happening. 

This it's just there to titillate. Graphically, and for long periods of time. 



> Because people are rarely like that.



It's a tragedy isn't it?


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Oct 31, 2015)

Savan said:


> I get that but it's still child porn. It's not like it is depicted as horrifying, wrong or there to make a point.



There is so much horrific content out there that is the same way, that is not a valid reason to ban it however. 



> Say for example a detective finds and stops a sex trafficking ring involving minors in a novel, and the sex isn't shoved into your face it's instead in the background because fuck no one wants to read that. Though you know it's happening.
> 
> This it's just there to titillate. Graphically, and for long periods of time.



Eh, why should this matter at all? The reason CP is bad is because of the victims made, i.e., the children. Without that factor, it is a disturbing thing to be in to but that is not enough basis to prohibit it.



> It's a tragedy isn't it?



Well, that is why you have to be more critical on not setting precedent. You can't assume that everyone will be rational as yourself or those you know.


----------



## Hand Banana (Oct 31, 2015)

Beating your dick to images that look like children is weird as fuck. Just want to point that out. Disagree with me and I'll draw out your inner love for child porn like i did with mad. Come at me.


----------



## DeK3iDE (Nov 1, 2015)

HaxHax said:


> This isn't a statement from the general assembly. It's a UN envoy.


i was generalizing. I know it was a statement made by 1 person


----------



## Amanda (Nov 1, 2015)

Pilaf said:


> Fuck you Kaiba. I do what I want. #BanSetoKaiba
> 
> edit: I immediately regret my decision to read through this thread.




This post touched me on a spiritual level.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Nov 1, 2015)

HaxHax said:


> Let's ban all depictions of illegal activities.



What you just said is stupid and you should feel stupid. 

We're talking about people drawing grow men fucking children not shooting drugs up their own arm.


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 1, 2015)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> What you just said is stupid and you should feel stupid.
> 
> We're talking about people drawing grow men fucking children not shooting drugs up their own arm.



You being too fucking stupid to understand things does not make said things stupid.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Nov 1, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> How did I miss this? You can't just expect people to like...just maintain any sense of normalcy in discussion when you drop a bomb like that! Just what the fuck...? You mean to say you find the child figure sexually appealing...worse, you find it appealing when they are not only sexually abused but in a way that is also has a degree of violence.
> 
> OK, so maybe you aren't acting out on it in real life, thankfully. Yet this is just admittance of pedophilia here. People aren't just going to react casually to that. It was always odd how violently you reacted on these topics...well, I see why...



Could you have read that any more out of context?
Let's just ignore the entire "fiction is appealing because the bad things aren't actually real so they don't hinder the experience from being enjoyable like they do in real life, thus *only* the aspects that would also be appealing in real life are actually being experienced."
You know, what half that post was about?
The base *concept* of submission/dominance? *Not* the whole "rape a child" thing? Of course, that doesn't align with everyone's pre-determined stereotypes about lolicons, so obviously that'll just be ignored in favor of the words that support your assumptions when taken out-of-context.

Let's also ignore that nothing at all was said in reference to reality, you literally just *assume* that I would fine it enjoyable to watch real children be raped even though I've made several extensive posts explicitly to clarify both that this isn't true *and exactly why it isn't.*

This bullshit here is why I started fighting for discussions on this topic to be taken seriously.
Nobody here gives a single shit about actually evaluating or discussing what pedophiles are or do, they've already decided based on their knee-jerk reactions and emotions exactly what they believe about them and they'll throw rocks at people who dare argue otherwise.

Even though all these sacks of shit have no idea what pedophiles actually are, they think they do and they will never acknowledge the idea that they don't. "p*d*p****" simply means child molester who can't go a week without having irresistible urges and making extensive plans to abuse and kidnap children, all the while twirling their evil mustaches.

Where did they learn all those facts? *Nowhere at all, they just know it.* Obviously it's true, because it feels like it is!

I'm done, it's obvious the majority of users here are simply incapable of getting past their bigotry, or even realizing that they're bigoted to begin with.
I wonder if this is what it was like back in the day when people tried to convince racists that the stereotypes about black people were entirely unfounded and nothing but assumptions that everyone just decided was fact because they think it.

I'm not posting in this section again. With such a frighteningly high amount of ignorant scumbags, there's no way this topic will ever be reasonably and properly discussed around here.

In particular you Whitebeard. As disgustingly offensive and opposite of what humans should be that some users here are, that borderline death threat puts you on a special level of absolute *filth*.

_-Cue negs because the pedo guy said something I don't like to hear-_

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

do you think bolding makes you sound smarter?

also I find itfunny you say its not about rape just having a kid submit to dis dick


----------



## EJ (Nov 1, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Could you have read that any more out of context?
> Let's just ignore the entire "fiction is appealing because the bad things aren't actually real so they don't hinder the experience from being enjoyable like they do in real life, thus *only* the aspects that would also be appealing in real life are actually being experienced."
> You know, what half that post was about?
> The base *concept* of submission/dominance? *Not* the whole "rape a child" thing? Of course, that doesn't align with everyone's pre-determined stereotypes about lolicons, so obviously that'll just be ignored in favor of the words that support your assumptions when taken out-of-context.
> ...



No, no, no, no..

You're missing the point out of all this.

If you have an attraction towards little kids, depictions of them being raped, etc you should seek help. That's the main thing you should get out of all this.

The way you express yourself doesn't help. Saying "FUCK FUCK FUCKITY FUCK FUCK FUCKING FUCK", bolding what you're saying which can imply people are idiots..

And what bigotry? People have every right to feel uncomfortable and disturbed towards someone that has an attraction towards children. Just like like people shouldn't hold it against another individual that is uncomfortable towards someone that fantasizes about killing people or some shit for their instant-gratification.

We aren't talking about some hobby or something, we are talking about something that isn't a healthy way to think or be as an individual..

Again, if you get anything out of this, feel inclined to seek help. I'm not saying that as an insult or to demean you.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

Also don't you fucking dare compare being a p*d*p**** to being black in the day, you don't the police will never spry so much water on you your skin fucking gets peeled off, you don't have to go to different schools either.


----------



## EJ (Nov 1, 2015)

That comparison was fucking stupid.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

I would like to see him rally the oppressed people and do a whole I have a dream speech 


also wasn't there a south park episode about oppressed pedos


----------



## EJ (Nov 1, 2015)

I can't believe he even tried to make that comparison...

You can't hide your ethnicity , seek help to control your urges for 'being this race', etc..


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

my grandparents marched with MLK jr and Bernie Sanders comparing that struggle with lolicon is laughable


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 1, 2015)

hammer said:


> my grandparents marched with MLK jr and Bernie Sanders comparing that struggle with lolicon is laughable



wait wait wait wait.

Wut.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

Yami Munesanzun said:


> wait wait wait wait.
> 
> Wut.



is the wut because everyone thinks im asian?

:edit or is it because i worded the post badly


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 1, 2015)

neither         .


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2015)

Hammer is an amazin blasian.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

im a blackorican


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2015)

afgpride said:


> spare me your condescension, herbert
> 
> your "logic" is  contrarian apologetics, attempting to deflect valid criticism toward contemptible mental disturbia by insisting you're merely being objective
> 
> ...



Lol triggered.  I know his response would bring this out of you, as soon as I read his post I started popping popcorn.



RemChu said:


> Did you know in prison, they will severely beat/kill child molesters.
> 
> Code among prisoners lol.



Have you ever been to prison?  You know nothing RemChu.


----------



## Sferr (Nov 1, 2015)

Not sure if anime child porn creates pedophiles or prevents them from attacking real children by providing a 2D substitute.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

I sense a tl dr from guy who said he quit comin


----------



## MadmanRobz (Nov 1, 2015)

Response to Flow and the bullshit about my comparison being "between black people and pedophiles." (Which it fucking isn't ffs)

*Spoiler*: __ 





Flow said:


> No, no, no, no..
> 
> You're missing the point out of all this.
> 
> ...



The only reason I'm replying to this is because you're (Flow) actually civil in spite of the circumstances.

Firstly, I'm swearing and being overly aggressive because that's what everyone else has treated me with _on principle_ since the very start. I'm _beyond_ pissed at the inexcusable amount of bullshit that people here get away with, so I don't give any craps about being civil towards people who have behaved like they have.

I'm not _implying_ that people are idiots. The people who have tossed their illogical slurs at me since the start have straight up _proven_ themselves to be quite astoundingly idiotic. I thus treat them precisely as well as I believe they deserve.

Secondly, and this is the most important part:
Are you people just incapable of connecting my words on fiction with my words on preferences?
Because I got tired of being told I like to watch kids get raped as if it had any bearing on reality a long damn time ago.

*Fiction is fiction.*
Literally the only difference between jerking off to a rape manga about an adult character and doing it to a rape manga about a child character *is the visuals.*
There are no moral dilemmas because it's not god damn real, and I'm going to repeat myself but this just can't be said enough; You lot who keep acting as if experiencing fiction and experiencing reality are even remotely comparable are by far the much more terrifying people.

Imagine that you were watching a real rape in front of you, involving bondage. It's not at all appealing, obviously. (*Including for me*, I will fucking stab the next person who tells me I like to watch real people get raped, I've stated otherwise far too many fucking times!)
Now remove the rape from it, and suddenly you're just watching Bondage. Suddenly, appealing.

It's the same god damn process. The things that make rape unappealing are the destructive and harmful traits of it. The knowledge that an *actual* person is *actually* suffering is what makes it not enjoyable.

Fictional rape isn't real, so it _by definition_ does not contain any of the things that make the idea of rape non-appealing. Fictional rape is no worse than immersive S&M play.

Even if you specifically don't experience it like that, you can't just up and decide that nobody else does, and much more importantly you can't just decide that everyone experiences it like you do and thus your conclusion about what they feel is fact.

*That's what literally all of you are doing.*

Furthermore, if you had actually read all of my posts (few ever do, thus this shit happens.) you would be well aware of the fact that I *don't* blame people for feeling uncomfortable or disturbed, it's entirely within their rights to feel however they want towards me for whatever reasons.

What I'm calling people scumbags over is the fact that they use their discomfort as an excuse to just plain assume whatever they want about me and ignore whatever I say which contradicts their assumptions as outright lies. Completely without proof or reason, entirely just because they feel disgusted and refuse to not believe their knee-jerk assumptions as fact.

I don't even remember anymore how many times I've explained in detail how the inherent differences between the concepts of fiction and reality make it entirely possible to enjoy close to _any_ fictional premise regardless of how disgusted I am with it in reality, without at all affecting my willingness or reluctance towards the real life equivalent.

I can enjoy a rape manga, but I *don't* enjoy watching actual rape or anything that manages to evoke the actual emotional response to a real rape happening in front of you.

Still, no matter how many god damn times I explain that, everyone either just ignores it entirely in favor of just quoting the most rape-y sounding line they can find outside of its required context or they just choose to refuse to believe it and call me a liar who's just making up excuses.

*Completely without any shred of actual proof or reason to claim this besides that they arbitrarily believe it and refuse to stop doing so.*

And what exactly is so unhealthy about cranking one out to a loli rape manga?
The only trouble I have around people and children is that I'm socially inept.

I don't dream about raping people or touching children, I don't feel any desire to do either of them and I don't need to do anything at all to keep it that way.
Aren't you just assuming that because I can jerk off to a rape story that it would affect me as a person or instill a desire in me to enact it for real?
Where do you even *get *these assumptions from? It's just one of those things that everyone believes about lolicons as a matter of fact, you just don't question that you don't actually have any basis for believing it.

That's why I'm calling people bigots. They're automatically assuming what it means to be a lolicon without factually knowing a damn thing, and then they categorizing themselves as objectively better people and human beings than them while condemning lolicons as the scum of humanity _even though they know nothing and have assumed everything that they're condemning them for without proof._

I don't *need* help, because I don't have a problem to begin with. My ability to enjoy fictional stories about horrible things does not at all affect how I live my life or what I deem to be morally acceptable. Real rape is wrong, that doesn't change just because fictional rape is free of the real equivalent's bad points. I don't need help because there's nothing about it that makes me feel bad or makes me more willing to do bad things for real.

The misconception that it _does_ is the specific misconception that I'm trying to fix to begin with.



hammer said:


> Also don't you fucking dare compare being a p*d*p**** to being black in the day, you don't the police will never spry so much water on you your skin fucking gets peeled off, you don't have to go to different schools either.





Flow said:


> That comparison was fucking stupid.





Flow said:


> I can't believe he even tried to make that comparison...
> 
> You can't hide your ethnicity , seek help to control your urges for 'being this race', etc..



No.

No.

No.

No.

How come every god damn time I make a comparison, people always - without fail - manage to fail to understand it?

The comparison is between the positions of being the persons trying to get people to stop assuming that the stereotypes about a demographic of people are true when there is nothing to support the claim that they are.
Back in the days of racism, it was in general a universally accepted truth that black people were an inferior race with various negative stereotypes associated with them. Said stereotypes were simply not true, and were really nothing more than commonly held beliefs without real substance.

In current times, it is in general a universally accepted truth that pedophiles are scumbags without remorse who molest real children and have to fight to resist their powerful urges to assault them. *These are are simply negative stereotypes that have been assumed, that aren't true and that have no real substance to support them.*

I would imagine that trying to argue with people back then that the stereotypes about black people were just unproven opinions without any actual credibility would be a very similar experience to my current experiences with trying to argue with modern people that the stereotypes about lolicons and pedophiles are just unproven opinions without any actual credibility.

*The comparison is not between pedophiles and black people, or between the hardships of either.* I don't even see how any logical mind could possible even remotely read that as the intended meaning. It's just not what the words _mean._ In fact, this is doubly stupid because how one would compare to the other doesn't at all matter towards the intended point no matter how or what they would be compared. 

And for crying out loud, stop talking about this _"urges"_ nonsense.
How strong urges do you have to fuck a random good looking woman around you?
How much do you have to struggle to not go and try to fuck that woman?

It's not even remotely difficult, you have massively exaggerated expecations about how strong sexual urges people have. Being a lolicon doesn't have jack shit to do with your libido or how compelled you feel to have sex.


----------



## EJ (Nov 1, 2015)

Sferr said:


> Not sure if anime child porn creates pedophiles or prevents them from attacking real children by providing a 2D substitute.



There are no studies that state it does or doesn't.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Nov 1, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Could you have read that any more out of context?
> Let's just ignore the entire "fiction is appealing because the bad things aren't actually real so they don't hinder the experience from being enjoyable like they do in real life, thus *only* the aspects that would also be appealing in real life are actually being experienced."
> You know, what half that post was about?
> The base *concept* of submission/dominance? *Not* the whole "rape a child" thing? Of course, that doesn't align with everyone's pre-determined stereotypes about lolicons, so obviously that'll just be ignored in favor of the words that support your assumptions when taken out-of-context.
> ...



waaaaaah waaaaaaaaaaaah people aren't being tolerant toward my fantasizing of raping children 

waaaaaaaah these people are scumbags because they're not patting me on the back for getting off to depictions of children being victimized

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah this is exactly like when black people used to be enslaved just for for the skin color 

waaaaaaaaah especially you white beard, with your filthy scummy threats, my fetish for children getting raped is not filthy or scummy at all, waaaaaaaaaaaah

waaaaaaaaah


----------



## Island (Nov 1, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> And what exactly is so unhealthy about it cranking one out to a loli rape manga?


The lack of sunlight you get, for one.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2015)

Sferr said:


> Not sure if anime child porn creates pedophiles or prevents them from attacking real children by providing a 2D substitute.





MadmanRobz said:


> *Spoiler*: _tldr desperate struggle to justify being a piece of shit_
> 
> 
> 
> ...



hammer with the 20/10 foresight


----------



## EJ (Nov 1, 2015)

MadmanRobz said:


> Response to Flow and the bullshit about my comparison being "between black people and pedophiles." (Which it fucking isn't ffs)
> 
> 
> The only reason I'm replying to this is because you're (Flow) actually civil in spite of the circumstances.
> ...



MadManz, I'm quotting this so others can read/respond to it since your post is the last post on the previous page.

I probably won't respond to it since I got a long week next week, and I got to go to sleep early.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

Didn't he claim he is an autist with assburgers


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2015)

Flow said:


> MadManz, I'm quotting this so others can read/respond to it since your post is the last post on the previous page.
> 
> I probably won't respond to it since I got a long week next week, and I got to go to sleep early.



Because it wasn't already quoted 2 times before on this page.

Oh wait, this is just a post count +1.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 1, 2015)

Mider, shut up.



> And what exactly is so unhealthy about cranking one out to a loli rape manga?



Everything, truthfully speaking. Pedophilia is a mental illness. Just because it is not illegal, just because I don't think it should be illegal for you to indulge in that fictional content, does not mean it isn't indication of an unsound mind. It's specifically the loli aspect you seek, and specifically them in explicit, violent, sexual situations for the purpose of gratification. It is fortunate that you are able to separate reality from fiction, and that you don't act on those desires IRL. Nonetheless, the fiction one chooses for particular outlets can say something about an individual.


----------



## Deleted member 222538 (Nov 1, 2015)

rob has gone completely off the rails. typing essays just to defend himself. listen, finding children attractive is WRONG, fictional or not. especially the part where you like them being raped......wth.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 1, 2015)

My question still has yet to be answered. What does an artist portray by having a child assaulted and raped in their fiction?


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

NaS said:


> My question still has yet to be answered. What does an artist portray by having a child assaulted and raped in their fiction?



Art


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 1, 2015)

hammer said:


> Art: zaru



Are you asking me to ask Zaru or did you make a mistake in trying to form that emote?


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

NaS said:


> Are you asking me to ask Zaru or did you make a mistake in trying to form that emote?



My phone auto spaced


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 1, 2015)

That's what you get for dissing DBGT. Really tho i can't believe that one guy compared me to liking DBGT to lolicon in a sense that they are the same.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

NaS said:


> That's what you get for dissing DBGT. Really tho i can't believe that one guy compared me to liking DBGT to lolicon in a since that they are the same.



Fair enough 

But yea dissing your taste in porn would make more sense


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 1, 2015)

Bro requote me..

Also yea. DBGT porn would be awkward  since the main cast would be children. Well Rob would probably masturbate to it.


----------



## Mider T (Nov 1, 2015)

Nikushimi said:


> Medically-speaking, there is nothing wrong with 13-year-olds having sex; people usually develop their secondary sex characteristics by then and start _wanting_ to have sex. The concept of an adolescent (not kid or adult, but inbetween) hasn't even existed except in the last hundred years or so, chiefly as a way to offset adult responsibilities and work before someone was ready to handle them.
> 
> Society has just conditioned us to think it's "icky" when someone that young has sex with someone much older, using "experience" and "maturity" as excuses--even though if you really wanna kick the can down the road, 18-22 can seem borderline mentally retarded to somebody in their mid 20s, which can seem positively foolish to somebody in their late 20s/early 30s, and so on, yet it's totally acceptable for someone in their 40s, 50s, etc. to bang 18-year-olds because the law doesn't enforce any consequences for it (except if you turn back the clock just one more year, then it's abominable and punishable). If you want to be completely fair about it, which you don't, because most people don't.
> 
> And even playing the numbers game doesn't paint the whole picture, because different people mature at different rates according to their experiences and their own innate ability to mature. Age restriction is just the easy answer to a complicated issue that people generally don't want to put effort into thinking about. Just like there's no fucking rational reason why anybody has to be 21 to drink alcohol.



lol no.  There's a reason royals in the past waited until the age of 17/18 instead of sexual maturity to marry their children off.


----------



## hammer (Nov 1, 2015)

Requote what now

I actually wonder if we can report him he seems like he needs profesional help


----------



## Godly Giraffe - King of the Uverworld (Nov 1, 2015)

Rob says he doesn't need help for getting sexual gratification from children being raped in mang0s

Someone call the cops on this guy


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 1, 2015)

Giraffe of Fellatio said:


> Rob says he doesn't need help for getting sexual gratification from children being raped in mang0s
> 
> Someone call the cops on this guy



You do illegal drugs. Maybe we should call the cops on you. Unless you buy from me.


----------



## Godly Giraffe - King of the Uverworld (Nov 1, 2015)

At no point was I fantasizing about children, even under the influence of drugs

I should get a medal for that


----------



## lacey (Nov 1, 2015)

I can't even describe my disgust at Rob right now.
He needs to be perm'd and have the cops called on him.


----------



## MegaultraHay (Nov 1, 2015)

.


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 1, 2015)

RemChu said:


> Fact you are defender of pesos in any shape or form is disgusting.
> 
> Out of all the causes to defend , wtf is wrong with you in all seriousness?



What is wrong with defending pesos? Is a good currency.


----------



## hammer (Nov 2, 2015)

Orochibuto said:


> What is wrong with defending pesos? Is a good currency.



pesos is a shit currency


----------



## ExoSkel (Nov 2, 2015)

Pedophilia is a form of mental disease. If you have mental disease, then seek help. Don't try to justify and expect people to buy it. Only makes you look like a sick fuck who should be locked up inside an asylum and throw away the key.


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Nov 2, 2015)

holy shit, this thread is gold. it keeps on getting better and better. toroxus isnt even here to derail it.

also, when i was 11-14, i tried to find kiddie porn of girls my age getting raped


----------



## Magic (Nov 2, 2015)

Orochibuto said:


> What is wrong with defending pesos? Is a good currency.


I caught this auto correct on the phone, was too funny, so I let it slide. 
so srs



Sferr said:


> Not sure if anime child porn creates pedophiles or  prevents them from attacking real children by providing a 2D  substitute.



It has been known that pedo people, in some cases, where they  masturbate to child videos, they also masturbate to like regular  cartoons like bugs bunny etc. 

so not even explicitly sexual  animation. I can recall one case, forgot the dudes name, he was in the  navy and would travel a lot. He kidnapped and killed a girl when he came  back to the states and was off duty. His sister suspected him and  turned him in.

His kiddie porn collection had like bugs bunny shit spliced in between the kiddie porn or some shit.

really whack,


----------



## Bill G (Nov 2, 2015)

I have fantasies of raising my children, but what kind of sick fuck has fantasies of raping children. You're supposed to protect children


----------



## Catamount (Nov 2, 2015)

geez, this thread is still on


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

Adamant said:


> geez, this thread is still on



Like your period.


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 2, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Everything, truthfully speaking. Pedophilia is a mental illness. Just because it is not illegal, just because I don't think it should be illegal for you to indulge in that fictional content, does not mean it isn't indication of an unsound mind. It's specifically the loli aspect you seek, and specifically them in explicit, violent, sexual situations for the purpose of gratification. It is fortunate that you are able to separate reality from fiction, and that you don't act on those desires IRL. Nonetheless, the fiction one chooses for particular outlets can say something about an individual.



Seto pretty much said here my opinion on the issue. Indeed while this fictional content is often sick and twisted, it shouldnt be illegal, no fiction should be illegal.

That being said just because something shouldnt be illegal, it doesnt mean it should be free from social judging, a concept SJWs seem to ignore who want to legislate every single aspect of life.

This is what I cant stand from SJWs, this includes those who want this banned, they cant seem to think of how to solve what they dont want in anyway that isnt legislation and/or censorship.


----------



## EJ (Nov 2, 2015)

Ok. What SJWs have been defending anything pedophilia related?


----------



## Zyrax (Nov 2, 2015)

Itt : "WHY CANT YOU CONFORM TO DA SOCIAL NORRMMMMMSSSS"


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Nov 2, 2015)

Bill G said:


> I have fantasies of children.



Couldn't resist. 



Zyrax Pasha said:


> Itt : "WHY CANT YOU CONFORM TO DA SOCIAL NORRMMMMMSSSS"



If you want to fuck kids, just admit so we can shun you...


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 2, 2015)

Flow said:


> Ok. What SJWs have been defending anything pedophilia related?



Nothing, they want to ban fictional pedophilia. Is it sick? Yes. Twistes? Yes. But it shouldnt be illegal, no fiction should be.

If people are going to want to ban stuff like lolicon, an easy argument then could be made to ban Game of Thrones, Naruto and nearly every Ecchi in existence.

See how every proposed by SJW has to do with banning or legislation? That is what I cant stand from them.


----------



## Lucaniel (Nov 2, 2015)

hammer said:


> Didn't he claim he is an autist with assburgers



yes


----------



## Punished Pathos (Nov 2, 2015)

Orochibuto said:


> See how every proposed by SJW has to do with banning or legislation? That is what I cant stand from them.



The U.N itself is heavily influenced by SJWs
If you speak against them, you'll be labeled a Racist, Homophobic, Transphobic or Pedo 
You don't have to even like "Abusive child manga"
You can be for logic, for saying "Hey, some just folks read these things, they don't want to actually act it out in real life. Its fiction." yet the SJW and the conformist masses will swoop in to vilify you.

What a wonderful world we live in where U.N and SJWs influence the West to the East 
You have no choice but to eventually acquiesce to whatever they say, whatever Media shows you
If not, you are whatever the PC crowd labels you


----------



## EJ (Nov 2, 2015)

I read your post wrong Orochibuto.  I apologize.


----------



## Amanda (Nov 2, 2015)

Zyrax Pasha said:


> Itt : "WHY CANT YOU CONFORM TO DA SOCIAL NORRMMMMMSSSS"




Some social norms are there for a reason. Such as that kids are off limits.


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 2, 2015)

Amanda said:


> Some social norms are there for a reason. Such as that kids are off limits.



Nobody's talking about kids.


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Nov 2, 2015)

HaxHax said:


> You being too fucking stupid to understand things does not make said things stupid.



Sure... Defend your rape porn bro. 



HaxHax said:


> Nobody's talking about kids.



Then what the hell is this thread even about?!?!


----------



## Pliskin (Nov 2, 2015)

Its the language of 'I find child rape visually appealing' that gets me the most in this thread. 

Its like, ok, you are a pedo, you are a sick puppy but that makes you kinda tragic and you should deserve the medical help you need. But then there is this whole pseudo intellectual analysis why which specific kinds of dick-to-child action are the most stimulating that make me think of a Hannibal Lector kind of sicko, musing about what kind of classical music and wine to enjoy his childporn to.


----------



## Island (Nov 2, 2015)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> Then what the hell is this thread even about?!?!


About tickling your pickle to _drawings_ of kids. Which is totally separate and unrelated in every single way, apparently.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

From the article said:
			
		

> Previously, Japan had been the only G7 country where it was legal to own videos, photographs and other imagery depicting sexual crimes against children, provided there was no intention to sell them or post them on the internet.


.



Also MadmanRobz deleted all of his posts in this thread. Fucking pedo ^ (not the meaning of the word "respect".).


----------



## Jersey Shore Jesus (Nov 2, 2015)

Island said:


> About tickling your pickle to _drawings_ of kids. Which is totally separate and unrelated in every single way, apparently.



So the drawing is of a underage child getting to perform sexual acts fine with you as long as its a _drawing_? 

The people defending this is amazing...


----------



## Island (Nov 2, 2015)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> So the drawing is of a underage child getting to perform sexual acts fine with you as long as its a _drawing_?
> 
> The people defending this is amazing...


I was being sarcastic, bruh. Did you see MadRobz posts before he deleted them? He was pretty saying that but with a pinch of autism on the side.


----------



## ExoSkel (Nov 2, 2015)

Pedophilia a strange mental disease.


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 2, 2015)

Jersey Shore Jesus said:


> So the drawing is of a underage child getting to perform sexual acts fine with you as long as its a _drawing_?
> 
> The people defending this is amazing...



Plenty of people get off on themes that would be illegal in real life.

Rape, gore, drugs, vore, necrophilia, general abuse ... You name it. Where do you draw the line? Is it completely arbitrary?

What's more, much of the targeted stuff wouldn't even be illegal in real life - for instance, the age of consent is 13 in Japan. So Takahashi can go out and fuck a 13 year old senseless, but he shouldn't be allowed to whack it to a drawing of a 17 year old in his own home.

So long as nobody is getting hurt, what's the point in outlawing it? What you're supporting is moral policing.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 2, 2015)

JSJ is pretty dumb.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

We have to get Japan to raise the age of consent next.


----------



## Chelydra (Nov 2, 2015)

I think there are more important issues to focus on rather than fictional content, distasteful as it may be, when no one in real life is being hurt by it.

And if by some miracle this content is enough to keep a p*d*p**** from actually going out and raping children, then its worth having around.


----------



## Atem (Nov 2, 2015)

HaxHax said:


> Plenty of people get off on themes that would be illegal in real life.



Be honest, if you met someone who got off on guro and pictures of mutilated corpses covered in jizz. What would your reaction to these individuals be? 



> Rape, gore, drugs, vore, necrophilia, general abuse ... You name it. Where do you draw the line? Is it completely arbitrary?



No, it's not completely arbitrary. Censoring a person's penis with pixels in a porno is completely arbitrary (seriously Japan, fuck you). Censoring graphic and offensive depictions of child pornography in any medium isn't. 



> What's more, much of the targeted stuff *wouldn't even be illegal in real life* - for instance, the age of consent is 13 in Japan. So *Takahashi can go out and fuck a 13 year old senseless*, but he shouldn't be allowed to whack it to a drawing of a 17 year old in his own home.



This should be illegal, you know. This should be very illegal. What the fuck Japan. Is this why there's so much actual child porn on tumblr?

We're not talking about drawings of seventeen year olds. We are talking about drawings of prepubescent or going into puberty children getting locked into a dungeon and rape trained. Then cut into pieces, and then fucked again. That's how deep this hole goes. 

Humanity is disgusting. Why didn't I become a JRPG villain and destroy the world yet? Oh, that's right. I don't have super-powers. I need to fix that. 



> So long as nobody is getting hurt, what's the point in outlawing it? What you're supporting is moral policing.



Sorry, if I think that humanity should feel some measure of shock and disgust at this sort of thing. Oh, and in no way condone it.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 2, 2015)

We are talking about drawings. Banning drawings is stupid. No matter how personally disgusted you are by them, that's not a valid reason to ban them. You're simply reacting on an emotional level, you think "oh well this is the exception", your reaction shows that it will not be. Because for every person like yourself that is disgusted by this, there will be plenty others disgusted by those things you consider arbitrary, and they will too demand that the content they deem offensive be banned as well, regardless of it being fictional. Even if before it was perfectly legal (ex: adult pornography). They will have basis, because precedent has been set. That is why I told you before, that people can't be really trusted as a whole to make rational judgments when they are just going on their own personal feelings than a real understanding of the issue.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

Chelydra said:


> I think there are more important issues to focus on rather than fictional content, distasteful as it may be, when no one in real life is being hurt by it.
> 
> And if by some miracle this content is enough to keep a p*d*p**** from actually going out and raping children, then its worth having around.



And as i pointed it out before. When you use that reasoning to keep them in line, you're simply providing them a crutch.


----------



## Chelydra (Nov 2, 2015)

NaS said:


> And as i pointed it out before. When you use that reasoning to keep them in line, you're simply providing them a crutch.



That crutch is better than having them go out and hurt _real_ people. You can't "fix" these issues, only isolate and contain them, and punish those whom _physically_ act out their desires.


----------



## Eki (Nov 2, 2015)




----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

Chelydra said:


> That crutch is better than having them go out and hurt _real_ people.



I've seen you make better educational responses than that. That should not be the underline of the matter. If you are attracted to child porn with rape and other abusive materials it means you need help. Its not hurting someone is simply a cop out. You're hurting yourself. Ans each time you go deeper with that you're losing yourself.


----------



## Chelydra (Nov 2, 2015)

NaS said:


> I've seen you make better educational responses than that. That should not be the underline of the matter. If you are attracted to child porn with rape and other abusive materials it means you need help. Its not hurting someone is simply a cop out. You're hurting yourself. Ans each time you go deeper with that you're losing yourself.



Thats naive thinking sadly, you cannot "fix" these people at all. Nothing you do will reform them, they have no choice in the matter, its a mental illness, possibly influenced by genetics, that no amount of therapy will cure. They will always have that twisted desire, no matter what. All there is to do is to try and prevent them from harming someone, and if they do, then harsh punishment is required.


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 2, 2015)

Savan said:


> Be honest, if you met someone who got off on guro and pictures of mutilated corpses covered in jizz. What would your reaction to these individuals be?



Not sure why they'd be telling me and why it would be any of my business given that we're talking about illustrations. Do we ban things for no better reason than finding them gross?



Savan said:


> No, it's not completely arbitrary. Censoring a person's penis with pixels in a porno is completely arbitrary (seriously Japan, fuck you). Censoring graphic and offensive depictions of child pornography in any medium isn't.



You saying "it's not arbitrary" does not actually mean that it's not arbitrary. So if you could at least answer the whole question.



Savan said:


> This should be illegal, you know. This should be very illegal. What the fuck Japan. Is this why there's so much actual child porn on tumblr?
> 
> We're not talking about drawings of seventeen year olds. We are talking about drawings of prepubescent or going into puberty children getting locked into a dungeon and rape trained. Then cut into pieces, and then fucked again. That's how deep this hole goes.
> 
> Humanity is disgusting. Why didn't I become a JRPG villain and destroy the world yet? Oh, that's right. I don't have super-powers. I need to fix that.



Once again you completely avoid the point. I imagine this is because you lack a proper response??



Savan said:


> Sorry, if I think that humanity should feel some measure of shock and disgust at this sort of thing. Oh, and in no way condone it.



Not banning something is not the same as condoning it. Say, I don't condone you posting stupid half-baked messages on the internet, but I'm not going to support a law prohibiting them from being posted altogether.

And I'm not going to get caught up in a quote war with someone who goes so far off topic at every turn.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

Chelydra said:


> Thats naive thinking sadly, you cannot "fix" these people at all. Nothing you do will reform them, they have no choice in the matter, its a mental illness, possibly influenced by genetics, that no amount of therapy will cure. They will always have that twisted desire, no matter what. All there is to do is to try and prevent them from harming someone, and if they do, then harsh punishment is required.



Naive thinking is trying to provide them with a crutch to ease their addiction.


----------



## Chelydra (Nov 2, 2015)

NaS said:


> Naive thinking is trying to provide them with a crutch to ease their addiction.



Compared to having them actually go out and rape someone because they had no legal outlet for said addiction. Ok then.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

So tell me. Would you give a drug addict more drugs to keep him from robbing and killing to get money to buy drugs, or would you offer assistance to help him over come his addiction? 

You know how stupid it sounds handing someone a drawing of child porn that resembles an actual child? That's not helping them.


----------



## Atem (Nov 2, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> We are talking about drawings. Banning drawings is stupid. No matter how personally disgusted you are by them, that's not a valid reason to ban them. You're simply reacting on an emotional level, you think "oh well this is the exception", your reaction shows that it will not be. Because for every person like yourself that is disgusted by this, there will be plenty others disgusted by those things you consider arbitrary, and they will too demand that the content they deem offensive be banned as well, regardless of it being fictional. Even if before it was perfectly legal (ex: adult pornography). They will have basis, because precedent has been set. That is why I told you before, that people can't be really trusted as a whole to make rational judgments when they are just going on their own personal feelings than a real understanding of the issue.



Personally, I just think you should be more in touch with your hatred when dealing with the lowest common denominator.

You know I don't understand people who say that in these matters you should push aside your feelings. As if they're something that is inherently bad, and that they will lead you astray. Feelings aren't always wrong Seto. You just have to filter them through reason. 



HaxHax said:


> Not sure why they'd be telling me and why it would be any of my business given that we're talking about illustrations. Do we ban things for no better reason than finding them gross?



There's a difference between gross and horrifying which I don't think you understand. 

So, your reaction is not that they "need professional help" and it's more along the lines of you not caring because you have grown so apathetic that you've become a robot.

I get it. 



> You saying "it's not arbitrary" does not actually mean that it's not arbitrary. So if you could at least answer the whole question.



The fact that I need to provide an answer beyond that it's "explicit child pornography" is what's wrong with this right now. 

Okay, you know what. Why not completely go out there then? I go off tangent after all, like you said. It's corruption of the youth! That same tired excuse that holds no weight anywhere. Now drink some fucking hemlock.



> Once again you completely avoid the point. I imagine this is because you lack a proper response??



I imagine that you run on Windows 8. 



> Not banning something is not the same as condoning it.



You're allowing it to go on, so yes, you are condoning it. I think you need to update your software.



> Say, I don't condone you posting stupid half-baked messages on the internet, but I'm not going to support a law prohibiting them from being posted altogether.



Comparing my stupid half-baked messages to child pornography? Now that is a new low for you Computron. 



> And I'm not going to get caught up in a quote war with someone who goes so far off topic at every turn.



Hey, hey.

Do you dream of electric sheep?


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 2, 2015)

See this is why no one will ever give a shit about what you say.

Feels not reals.


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 2, 2015)

And spitting internet jargon garners you better recognition?  Shut the fuck up.


----------



## Atem (Nov 2, 2015)

It's the only thing his programming understands.


----------



## A Optimistic (Nov 2, 2015)

this thread

great read

keep fighting yall


----------



## MegaultraHay (Nov 2, 2015)

Close this shit thread already christ


----------



## Eki (Nov 2, 2015)




----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 2, 2015)

Jeebus christ, Eki.


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 2, 2015)

NaS said:


> And spitting internet jargon garners you better recognition?  Shut the fuck up.





Savan said:


> It's the only thing his programming understands.



I suppose it sucks when someone who actually knows law crashed your feelie circlejerk.


----------



## Atem (Nov 2, 2015)

I hope you don't know law like you know toasters.


----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 2, 2015)

Savan said:


> I hope you don't know law like you know toasters.



There's too many f'ckin toasters.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 2, 2015)

> And spitting internet jargon garners you better recognition? Shut the fuck up.



But he's right. Savan wants to ban content simply based on his personal feelings, that is a poor precedent to set. Judgments based on feelings when used this way are bad, because they quickly do become arbitrary and illogical, and the door has been opened for further decisions down that road.


----------



## Atem (Nov 2, 2015)

I want to ban it based on the fact it's child pornography, and because I hate it. 

Details Seto.


----------



## HaxHax (Nov 2, 2015)

Savan said:


> I want to ban it based on the fact it's child pornography, and because I hate it.
> 
> Details Seto.



Except it isn't.


----------



## Atem (Nov 2, 2015)

HaxHax said:


> Except it isn't.



Except it is.


----------



## Magic (Nov 2, 2015)

Not rape, banned


----------



## Eki (Nov 2, 2015)

RemChu said:


> Not rape, banned


----------



## ExoSkel (Nov 3, 2015)

Stop with the shitposting shitty anime gifs, weebtard.


----------



## Lucky7 (Nov 3, 2015)




----------



## Yami Munesanzun (Nov 3, 2015)

ExoSkel said:


> Stop with the shitposting shitty anime gifs, weebtard.



Oh dearest me, how edgy and original.


----------



## Eki (Nov 3, 2015)

ExoSkel said:


> Stop with the shitposting shitty anime gifs, weebtard.



lol


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2015)

Savan said:


> Except it is.



No it isn't. Child pornography involves actual children, that is why it is illegal. Production of such is and should remain a concern because it makes victims of actual individuals in its production. In contrast, no matter how much you or I may dislike the particular work, the production of fictional content does not unless proven. It's merely drawings at the end of the day. You are too wound up in how you feel that you can't see the poor precedent you are making. Murder for example is an illegal act, graphic depiction of murder would also become illegal under your logic. You talk of using reason but you are employing none of that here.


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 3, 2015)

Savan said:


> and because I hate it.



That is not a valid reason to have something banned.


----------



## Atem (Nov 3, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> No it isn't.



Yes it is. 



> Child pornography involves actual children, that is why it is illegal. Production of such is and should remain a concern because it makes victims of actual individuals in its production. In contrast, no matter how much you or I may dislike the particular work, the production of fictional content does not unless proven. It's merely drawings at the end of the day.



Up to and including, hyper-realistic drawings depicting child pornography which can only appeal to pedophiles? That are explicit in nature, and don't try to be subtle or portray it in the least pornographic way possible? That instead actively try to sexualize it, and glorify it in the most blatant way possible with characters that are so far away from puberty that it ain't funny. 

I could give a flying fuck if I see a seventeen year old or a sixteen year old fucking. When it crosses the line and goes way below that, and then introduces ideas that could only appeal to serial killers is what irks me. 

Just take that Kill Bill scene, that Lucky7 posted. That sort of thing I group together with the hypothetical detective novel I was talking about earlier. It's not so explicit that it is something that is trying to make it appealing. If anything it's portraying it for how horrifying it actually is. 



> You are too wound up in how you feel that you can't see the poor precedent you are making.



You are being too logical about something that doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt, and you're assuming that banning this would cause some sort of domino effect. 

What proof do you have of it? What makes you so sure that banning stuff like this would lead to the censoring of practically everything else? I don't want an explanation. I want statistical evidence. 



> Murder for example is an illegal act, graphic depiction of murder would also become illegal under your logic.



No, it wouldn't. This is the same slippery slope argument that Computron was using before. Which again doesn't have any proof backing it. 



> You talk of using reason but you are employing none of that here.



Neither are you, you are so terrified that banning child pornography in a fictional media will restrict all of it that you haven't bothered to bring up hard evidence that it will.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Nov 3, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> No it isn't. Child pornography involves actual children, that is why it is illegal. Production of such is and should remain a concern because it makes victims of actual individuals in its production. In contrast, no matter how much you or I may dislike the particular work, the production of fictional content does not unless proven. It's merely drawings at the end of the day. You are too wound up in how you feel that you can't see the poor precedent you are making. Murder for example is an illegal act, graphic depiction of murder would also become illegal under your logic. You talk of using reason but you are employing none of that here.



not sure about the states but in canada child pornography includes sexual depictions of minors for the purpose of arousal, which includes fictional content 

that's why loli hentai isn't completely legal here

in more universal terms, the legal indictability of child pornography lies in child sexual abuse, which is the actual victimization of real children 


it's like saying yaoi isn't gay pornography because it's fictional; it's still gay pornography, because it's still meant to illicit arousal based on the depiction of two males having sex

the same can be said for fictional child porn because, like yaoi, it's still meant to illicit arousal based on the depiction of sexualized children


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Nov 3, 2015)

Savan said:


> Up to and including, hyper-realistic drawings depicting child pornography which can only appeal to pedophiles? That are explicit in nature, and don't try to be subtle or portray it in the least pornographic way possible? That instead actively try to sexualize it, and glorify it in the most blatant way possible with characters that are so far away from puberty that it ain't funny.


Savan, it's actually better than banning it,  that if pedo have something to masturbate to, it lowers rate of child abuse. So keep in mind that even though it is repulsive, it may have stopped Seto's friend from going outta control and it's the better option

You can only use your imagination so much before it becomes harder to supress your urges


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 3, 2015)

There are 2 problems I see this:

1) I fundamentally believe in the right to draw whatever the fuck you like.

2) Let's say that there is a ban of outright pornographic fictional child porn. What is stopping someone else also claiming the ban should be extended to ecchi? Then someone else extending it to anyone below the legal age? You have to understand a lot of people, A LOT ignore the difference between a child and someone who is not an adult, between pedophilia and ephebophilia and at times willingly, it is NOT a small faction by any means.

The line for making child porn illegal is clear cute, it makes damage and thus it has to be stopped. Fiction on the other hand you have purely or at least a chiefly emotional argument to ban it, basically because you and a lot of people find it repulsive. I find it repulsive too, but that doesn't mean I believe it should be illegal.

Also how will this keep with new technology? Imagine virtual reality for example or the ability to translate thoughts into images. (This is not THAT far)

Let's say in a future a p*d*p**** in a virtual reality makes a scenario, entirely out of his thoughts about child porn. Or what about someone with artistic ability that simply draws cp fiction for himself?

You are then going to make THOUGHTS illegal too? Because making fiction illegal, is basically the surface level of entering into thought policing. That would be completely unacceptable.

Banning fiction is pretty damn near to banning imagination and thoughts, you are basically saying people there are thoughts and imaginations they are not allowed to have.


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 3, 2015)

afgpride said:


> not sure about the states but in canada child pornography includes sexual depictions of minors for the purpose of arousal, which includes fictional content



How does that even work there? Because if it is defined as "minor" rather than "children" ooooh boy. the potential for abuse.

Does that mean someone can get jailed for having hardcore porn of Rias Gremory simply because her character is 17 in her series? That would be bullshit of the greatest degree.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2015)

Savan said:


> Yes it is.
> 
> Up to and including, hyper-realistic drawings depicting child pornography which can only appeal to pedophiles? That are explicit in nature, and don't try to be subtle or portray it in the least pornographic way possible? That instead actively try to sexualize it, and glorify it in the most blatant way possible with characters that are so far away from puberty that it ain't funny.



Horrific, but again feelings is not a valid basis to ban it or any other fictional material. 



> I could give a flying fuck if I see a seventeen year old or a sixteen year old fucking. When it crosses the line and goes way below that, and then introduces ideas that could only appeal to serial killers is what irks me.



Which goes to my point that your judgment is based purely on emotion than what you know.



> Just take that Kill Bill scene, that Lucky7 posted. That sort of thing I group together with the hypothetical detective novel I was talking about earlier. It's not so explicit that it is something that is trying to make it appealing. If anything it's portraying it for how horrifying it actually is.



Refer to previous point. Your criteria are ultimately arbitrary. Based on how you personally feel about this or that particular work, which brings up inconsistency, which does open the door to more people following the same path. You're not going on any consistent basis here. Really, the biggest measure of how consistent a person is on this matter is their ability to recognize the freedom of expression even in regards to material they personally find offensive. I find it offensive just as you do, but I recognize my personal feelings does not lend validity to having it banned.

I care about the prohibition of actual CP because it is actual children being harmed. I do have great concern over people like MadmanRobz who indulge in the fictional content because they do clearly have a mental illness that needs addressing. However, the desires in themselves are not illegal, it's acting on them against actual children that is. Or using material that exploits actual children to indulge.



> You are being too logical about something that doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt, and you're assuming that banning this would cause some sort of domino effect.



You are being too emotional about something simply because you dislike it, and refuse to see that basing judgments simply on what you feel leads to a poor precedent set. Even now there are people pushing hard for the banning of say, violent games and material, simply because they're personally offended by it. As I stated before, depictions of graphic murder for example are legal, despite murder being illegal. We recognize the differences between the two, and anyone claiming to have been inspired to murder by fictional depictions of such are rarely given leeway, as we do recognize personal responsibility of individuals to control their impulses and actions. 



> What proof do you have of it? What makes you so sure that banning stuff like this would lead to the censoring of practically everything else? I don't want an explanation. I want statistical evidence.



A familiarity with court cases that for good or ill, use the precedents set by past cases of a similar nature to make a judgment on the current issue addressed? 



> No, it wouldn't. This is the same slippery slope argument that Computron was using before. Which again doesn't have any proof backing it.



It has entirely logical backing of it. That is how precedents in court are set. When you open the door to one judgment of a similar backing you invite another of a similar nature to meet a similar outcome. I find any person like you that ultimately bases on his emotion what fictional content to ban a little worrisome. Because rarely is it nor does it remain, rational. You again, talked of using reason, but you are not using it at all. It's simply your feelings that you are going on about this, not anything you actually know.



> Neither are you, you are so terrified that banning child pornography in a fictional media will restrict all of it that you haven't bothered to bring up hard evidence that it will.



I'm using recognition of how court cases and laws of all kinds set precedent when one ruling of a particular nature invites others of that similar nature of getting through. It is a bit ironic you demand hard evidence when you haven't even presented any basis for having the material banned other than your personal dislike, the most irrational basis of all.



afgpride said:


> not sure about the states but in canada child pornography includes sexual depictions of minors for the purpose of arousal, which includes fictional content
> 
> that's why loli hentai isn't completely legal here
> 
> ...



Well, I suppose the elaboration should be in order, but I am using it for the sake of avoiding confusion. Loli media referring to the fictional depictions and CP to the exploitation of actual children. The latter is of great concern of course being that there are existing individuals being harmed in its production. The latter while being personally offensive is not, so I see no reason to have it banned. It simply need not be exposed to minors or parties that do not wish to view such content.


----------



## Atem (Nov 3, 2015)

The Handsome Klad said:


> Savan, it's actually better than banning it,  that if pedo have something to masturbate to, it lowers rate of child abuse.



Except they didn't lift a ban on child pornography in specific. They were lifting a ban on pornography in general and instead it caused murder, assault, and robbery to escalate in the very same year. 

It could simply be a coincidence or maybe those people were so sexually frustrated due to the lack of any sort of porn that they were willing to fuck anything regardless of age. 

Nor is it showing me the numbers, and how they came to their findings. Did they interview random people? Did they check crime statistics? How many people were surveyed? How many crimes were reported or not reported that year?



> So keep in mind that even though it is repulsive, it may have stopped Seto's friend from going outta control and it's the better option



Ah, so Seto has a friend. That explains the emotional investment in this. Strange he made the same claim of me but it turns out he has something he cares about too. 

How interesting. 



> You can only use your imagination so much before it becomes harder to supress your urges



So, if a murderer doesn't kill or think about killing he will eventually start killing anyway? No, I don't buy that.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2015)

I don't have a friend on this, he's trolling. Klad has a personal vendetta against me oddly enough, would kill me if he got the chance to his own admittance...


----------



## Magic (Nov 3, 2015)

Orochibuto said:


> There are 2 problems I see this:
> 
> 1) I fundamentally believe in the right to draw whatever the fuck you like.
> 
> ...



Freud slip. ARREST THIS MAN


----------



## Atem (Nov 3, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I don't have a friend on this, he's trolling. Klad has a personal vendetta against me oddly enough, would kill me if he got the chance to his own admittance...



Ah, okay. Not that I would judge you for it. You can't control what dirty secrets your friends have, and the fact you care about them regardless.

I had a friend that was a drug dealer for instance.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Nov 3, 2015)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Well, I suppose the elaboration should be in order, but I am using it for the sake of avoiding confusion. Loli media referring to the fictional depictions and CP to the exploitation of actual children. The latter is of great concern of course being that there are existing individuals being harmed in its production. The latter while being personally offensive is not, so I see no reason to have it banned. It simply need not be exposed to minors or parties that do not wish to view such content.



that's fair enough, as long as elaboration is made your argument is fair 

personally i don't think loli hentai should be banned, as it obviously doesn't victimize actual children and acts as an outlet for urges that could otherwise be accommodated by more harmful actions or subject matter 

but i think outside of legality, when simply assessing mental illness and/or potentially harmful inhibitions, depictions of sexual child abuse and the images of actual sexual child abuse are intended to, more or less, stimulate the same neurological response; arousal toward the sexualization of children


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Nov 3, 2015)

that's why i find it funny when certain people defend their jacking off to loli hentai by insisting they're not sexually attracted to real children, as if the difference in consequence between the two equates to a proportional difference in attraction, despite the fact that depictions of reality are, by definition, meant to represent said reality


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Nov 3, 2015)

I do think someone like MadmanRobz needs actual help. Pedophilia is a mental illness as I stated before. Additionally the fact that he indulges in particularly violent forms I think he should seek help immediately. His violent protests to the contrary are worrisome as well. Most pedos use any form of media for stimulation, even totally innocent pictures. That is how some slip under the radar of law enforcement. So ultimately, it's only those the engage in or facilitate in production of material that exploits actual children that resources should be used on. As long as the rest stay in their dark corners away from kids, indulging in fictional content or are more preferably getting help, I just can't see any basis for jailing them at the end of the day.


----------



## Kitsune (Nov 3, 2015)

afgpride said:


> that's why i find it funny when certain people defend their jacking off to loli hentai by insisting they're not sexually attracted to real children



3D Pig disgusting real children.


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Nov 3, 2015)

Kitsune said:


> 3D Pig disgusting real children.



scorp's full of shit 

(one of) his waifu is literally a 3d video game character


----------



## Orochibuto (Nov 3, 2015)

afgpride said:


> that's why i find it funny when certain people defend their jacking off to loli hentai by insisting they're not sexually attracted to real children, as if the difference in consequence between the two equates to a proportional difference in attraction, despite the fact that depictions of reality are, by definition, meant to represent said reality



Actually this is very possible. Of cours pedophilia and lolicon overlap, but not always. So it is very possible for someone to fap to loli hentail and not being interested in real children.

It might sound crazy, but lolicon can be at times a fetish unto itself, rather than acting as a surrogate children. I remember a thread about catgirls loved nearly everyone saying how they are awesome, etc. and the moment someone posted realistic pics of catgirls..... that's it how catgirls might really look like in 3D some of these people considered the 3D catgirls repulsive. Simply put a lot of anime characters wouldn't look that great in real life.

So yeah, it is possible that lolicon and pedophilia are not the same fetish, I am not saying this is the majority of cases, I do think is likely in fact in the majority of cases it is a shared fetish, but definitively it is possible for the fetishes to be 100% separate from each other.


----------



## Gino (Nov 3, 2015)

AHAHA! THIS THREAD HOLY SHIT!!


----------



## Deleted member 198194 (Nov 3, 2015)

Orochibuto said:


> Actually this is very possible. Of cours pedophilia and lolicon overlap, but not always. So it is very possible for someone to fap to loli hentail and not being interested in real children.
> 
> It might sound crazy, but lolicon can be at times a fetish unto itself, rather than acting as a surrogate children. I remember a thread about catgirls loved nearly everyone saying how they are awesome, etc. and the moment someone posted realistic pics of catgirls..... that's it how catgirls might really look like in 3D some of these people considered the 3D catgirls repulsive.
> 
> So yeah, it is possible that lolicon and pedophilia are not the same fetish, I am not saying this is the majority of cases, I do think is likely in fact in the majority of cases it is a shared fetish, but definitively it is possible for the fetishes to be 100% separate from each other.



catgirls don't depict reality to the degree that loli hentai does; it uses two reference points (cats, girls) and merges them to something that's not really relatable.  "real life" catgirls just end up being a parody of it, so the example isn't very strong

to reiterate, i'm not saying all loli hentai and all (real) child pornography serve all of the same purposes, but the symbolization of a child being sexualized and the image of a child being sexualized stimulate the same response.  the rest of the nuances between the two can tug on different sensibilities but don't override this principle


----------



## Atem (Nov 3, 2015)

Gino said:


> AHAHA! THIS THREAD HOLY SHIT!!



I know it just keeps on going.


----------



## Chelydra (Nov 3, 2015)

NaS said:


> So tell me. Would you give a drug addict more drugs to keep him from robbing and killing to get money to buy drugs, or would you offer assistance to help him over come his addiction?
> 
> You know how stupid it sounds handing someone a drawing of child porn that resembles an actual child? That's not helping them.



A drug addiction is _very_ different than this mental illness. Since its a _chemical dependency_ that is acquired, not something your born with.(Unless the mom was a drug addict) Two very different addictions, with very different consequences and means to combat them. You can reform drug addicts, you cannot reform pedos, rapists and other (dangerous or illegal) sexual deviants.


----------



## HolyHands (Nov 3, 2015)

No real children are abused in loli hentai, thus it is silly to ban it, or any fiction for that matter for its content.

That doesn't mean that lolicon is somehow fine though. It's still creepy, and is seen as such for good reason.

There, thread over. That was all that had to be said. Don't see why this went on to drag for 17 pages.


----------



## FLORIDA MAN (Nov 3, 2015)

uh maybe because the sicko was defending ACTUAL pedophiles, not just lolicons?


----------



## The World (Nov 3, 2015)

i've seen that princess 69 hentai

don't watch it

that shit fucked me up

FUCK U JAPAN

full of panty sniffing greasy smelly pedo hentai rape artists


----------



## clairr (Nov 3, 2015)

wtf did i just read 

oh my god this thread


----------



## Hand Banana (Nov 4, 2015)

Chelydra said:


> A drug addiction is _very_ different than this mental illness. Since its a _chemical dependency_ that is acquired, not something your born with.(Unless the mom was a drug addict) Two very different addictions, with very different consequences and means to combat them. You can reform drug addicts, you cannot reform pedos, rapists and other (dangerous or illegal) sexual deviants.



There is no cure for alcoholism or drug use. But drug/alcohol usage and addiction of Pedophilia can be treated. And the treatment for Pedophilia is not giving them fictional child pornography.


----------



## A Optimistic (Nov 4, 2015)

Ares needs mental help as well, look at his filthy loli avatars.


----------

