# Japan to finally outlaw possession of child porn, but manga gets free pass



## rajin (Jun 7, 2014)

manga genre is most polluted by such things. take action against them too





> A ban on the possession of child pornography came a step closer on  Wednesday, but it would exclude pedophilia portrayed in manga.
> Japan is the last major developed country to address the possession  of child porn. Under current law, only production and distribution are  banned, a situation that activists say is damaging to children.
> The Lower House Judicial Affairs Committee discussed a bill to expand  the scope of the legislation on Wednesday and was expected to send it  on to the chamber later in the day. The House of Representatives is  expected to swiftly pass the bill and move it to the upper chamber for a  vote before the current Diet session ends June 22.
> The bill would ban possession of photos and videos depicting real  children, but would exclude manga and anime following calls to protect  freedom of expression.
> ...


----------



## Deputy Myself (Jun 7, 2014)

how do you even define child pornography in manga


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 7, 2014)

wait 
possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?


----------



## Katou (Jun 7, 2014)

Dem Doujinshis . .


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> wait
> possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?



That was my thought as well. Da Fuck?


----------



## Alicia (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> wait
> possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?



my reaction exactly as well


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 7, 2014)

rajin said:


> manga genre is most polluted by such things. take action against them too


You really have no idea what you're talking about. People like you are why pointless laws are created in the first place.



Deputy Myself said:


> how do you even define child pornography in manga


You don't.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jun 7, 2014)

Yay, no action against the lolis  But seriously, i'm glad the anime and manga(as well as doujinshi) industry wont be effected by this, you'd have to take out a majority of anime shown today if that was the ruling, and that's basically a lot of what you'd find on pixiv, the most mainstream art website in japan.

Also considering that..yknow real life CP actually hurts children for one thing  I'm surprised it hasn't already been banned, what were they thinking?


----------



## J★J♥ (Jun 7, 2014)

It was legal ?.. From what age ?


----------



## Kathutet (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> wait
> possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?



Oh Japan, what the fuck


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jun 7, 2014)

From whatever age the legal limit starts is where i guess itll take effect  i know in some areas 14 is the earliest they will go for age of consent..


----------



## scerpers (Jun 7, 2014)

OH THE JAPANITY


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 7, 2014)

If they outlawed anime or manga too, it would be illegal to possess a copy of Sailor Moon or Negima.

Pointless laws are pointless.


----------



## Xiammes (Jun 7, 2014)

I assume this some plan to get all the pedophiles to move to Russia or Africa now 



Anyways, a great step forward, bravo Japan, for once.


----------



## J★J♥ (Jun 7, 2014)

Xiammes said:


> I assume this some plan to get all the pedophiles to move to Russia or Africa now
> 
> 
> 
> Anyways, a great step forward, bravo Japan, for once.



 Russia is worst place for p*d*p**** to go.
1)He wont go to jail he will be beaten to death by whoever finds out
2)If he gets lucky and goes to jail he will be murdered there.
3)If he somehow survives he will be chemically castrated


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 7, 2014)

Inuhanyou said:


> From whatever age the legal limit starts is where i guess itll take effect  i know in some areas 14 is the earliest they will go for age of consent..


Last time I looked, 14 was the jp age of consent. And some countries in Europe have the age of consent at 11. In the global scheme of things, America is rather backwards and has absurdly high rates of consent that does not reflect reality. For example, by the time I reached grade five (we were either 10 or 11) every girl in the class had had sex except for one. I imagine that it would be more or less the same over there.


----------



## Katou (Jun 7, 2014)

at least they didn't harm the manga's Freedom


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jun 7, 2014)

10 or 11? where the fuck do you live lol, that wasn't what it was like when i grew up


----------



## Mr. Black Leg (Jun 7, 2014)

SaCrEdpOoL said:


> Russia is worst place for p*d*p**** to go.
> 1)He wont go to jail he will be beaten to death by whoever finds out
> 2)If he gets lucky and goes to jail he will be murdered there.
> 3)If he somehow survives he will be chemically castrated



4 - And after chemically castrated he'll die poisoned by uranium .


----------



## Katou (Jun 7, 2014)

5.)He'll lose his 10 fingers slowly


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Jun 7, 2014)

Excellent


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 7, 2014)

Inuhanyou said:


> 10 or 11? where the fuck do you live lol, that wasn't what it was like when i grew up


That was a town just south of Brisbane. The early 90's was the best time to be alive. *insert-that-emote-with-hands-behind-head*

also why the hell are half the emotes gone.


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jun 7, 2014)

Australia? lol i thought you were talking about the US. that's definitely not my experience at all. And yes, sex at 11 years old would definitely be considered a crime here.  Although i dont know the exact situation in australia


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> wait
> possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?


i thought the same, but japan is fucked up so it didnt suprise me much


i presume the manga mentioned is all those lolis in anime/manga


----------



## Katou (Jun 7, 2014)

Loli is justice  . .
they should leave it alone


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 7, 2014)




----------



## Wolfarus (Jun 7, 2014)

Im surprised thread hasnt been derailed by the whole loli/pedo/cp/harmless dead-horse yet. 

But yeh.. surprised that up until now, it was legal to possess cp there. Wonder if the ultra-conservatives will target anime/manga/games next, or will they know to leave that alone, as it would take a near-total rework of the culture to get rid of "child-like" characters.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

the only loli i like


----------



## Inuhanyou (Jun 7, 2014)

it would untennable to touch manga and anime over there. its so ingrained in the culture, that it would be like trying to restart the prohibition era


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

>Begins reading title.

OMFG Another retarded govenment about to ban fictional imagery that doeasn't harm anyone and keeps plenty of pedophiles perfectly harmless. WHY ARE PEOPLE SO FUCKING STUP-

>Finishes reading title.
...Wait... what? They actually... draw the logical line between fiction and reality? THEY'RE ACTUALLY BEING INTELLIGENT?

>Reads article.

...

...
Jesus Christ, how did the *Japanese* government actually just become the first in the world to officially acknowledge the simple and obvious difference between fictional and real content?

Even here in Sweden, the furthest we've gotten is a court ruling that fictional content can't legaly be considered child pornography since there is no victim and no crime involved. That's pretty big since it sets a precedence for future courts, but it's not a law and could very possibly be ignored.
(I believe it was a swedish guy translating manga who got accused of possession of CP because of one of the manga he was translating.)

Japan, I may have misjudged you a bit. I think this may possibly be the most sincere usage of this phrase on this forum to date, but *faith in humanity restored.*
Holy shit, you have no idea how amazed I am right now.

Brb, I'mma go dance a few laps around the apartment and toss some money at a homeless guy.



babaGAReeb said:


> the only loli i like


*Fixed for you.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 7, 2014)

No one should want child porn out of manga. Aside from being harmless, it actually deters people with that fetish from seeking it in real life.


Japan's smart about this. Our country? Not so much.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> wait
> possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?



exactly this.


----------



## Lortastic (Jun 7, 2014)

Yeah, possession of child porn being legal before is quite a disturbing thought. 

Someone earlier mentioned something about Australia. I believe 16 is the legal age for most states in Australia.


----------



## Linkofone (Jun 7, 2014)

Oh Jesus Christ ...


----------



## Risyth (Jun 7, 2014)

Also don't see how this is so surprising: People in the West were easily able to import child pornography from Japan because of the freedom to make it there.


----------



## Linkofone (Jun 7, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Also don't see how this is so surprising: People in the West were easily able to import child pornography from Japan because of the freedom to make it there.



Is that really a thing?


----------



## Vermin (Jun 7, 2014)

well at least they finally banned it


----------



## Zaru (Jun 7, 2014)

Golden Circle said:


> For example, by the time I reached grade five (we were either 10 or 11) every girl in the class had had sex except for one. I imagine that it would be more or less the same over there.




What kind of fucked up place is that


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Firstly, child pornography was legal? 

Secondly, anything that's drawn is not child pornography and shouldn't be illegal for multiple reasons.

Edit: Opps, I forgot : wtf and : wth are totally different emotes.


----------



## Rabbit and Rose (Jun 7, 2014)

someones lying.


----------



## Punk Zebra (Jun 7, 2014)

i*c*st anyone?


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Firstly, child pornography was legal?
> 
> Secondly, anything that's drawn is not child pornography and shouldn't be illegal for multiple reasons.
> 
> Edit: Opps, I forgot : wtf and : wth are totally different emotes.



that emote changes the tone of your question completely
wtf is wrong with u?


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Firstly, child pornography was legal?
> 
> Secondly, anything that's drawn is not child pornography and shouldn't be illegal for multiple reasons.



If someone is watching pictures of naked little kids touching or having sex then they need help. Yes, it should be illegal.


----------



## Linkofone (Jun 7, 2014)

Pretty fucked up.


----------



## Zaru (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> If someone is watching pictures of naked little kids touching or having sex then they need help. Yes, it should be illegal.


Yes, people who get sexual stimulation from such imagery obviously most of the time aren't normal and shouldn't be allowed to live out their desires, but the difference here is that nobody is hurt/exploited in the making and possession of such fictional drawings. 
There's a long list of things that are completely illegal to do/enjoy yet are often depicted without anyone complaining.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> If someone is watching pictures of naked little kids touching or having sex then they need help. Yes, it should be illegal.



Fictional imagery (drawn or animated etc, where no real person exists) is 100% completely fine. There is no such thing a something that's "off limits" when something's entirely fictional.

You taking pictures of a real kid sucking dick?
Go to jail you asshat.

You draw a manga of a fictional kid sucking fictional dicks?
As with every other fetish, kink or sexual orientation in the world, don't shove it in people's faces or throw it at kids, but if that gets you off then have fun.

As long as there is no victim, there is no crime. There is absolutely no justification for censoring fiction. Regulating it is fine, but never censorship. What judgement you throw at people for their interests is up to you, but until a crime is commited, being judgmental is all you may do about it.

If it's not your thing, that's fine. You can think it's the grossest and evilest thing on the planet if you want, just don't go crucifying people for having an interest that you think badly of.


----------



## ThunderCunt (Jun 7, 2014)

The first time someone mentioned about CP to me was when we were having a discussion on Japan. Back then I had no idea that such a thing ever existed, I was surprised that why is that even a thing. Apparently Japs like this kind of stuff more than your regular shit.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> that emote changes the tone of your question completely
> wtf is wrong with u?



I did  but at first I did  thinking that : wtf looked like  And then I saw it and was like. 



Flow said:


> If someone is watching pictures of naked little kids touching or having sex then they need help. Yes, it should be illegal.



"Pictures Photographs of naked little kids touching or having sex" is child pornography and should be illegal. Manga is not composed of photographs, manga is drawn artwork which is not a crime, nor should it be. And "naked little kids touching" isn't automatically a crime, otherwise lots of parents would be going to jail over bathtime pictures of their children.


----------



## Zaru (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> otherwise lots of parents would be going to jail over bathtime pictures of their children.



I wouldn't be surprised if that happened before though.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

...I feel like I've actually heard of that happening somewhere...


----------



## Juda (Jun 7, 2014)

How do you not feel disturbed by watching child porn? females don't even grow breasts as a child. . . what is there to like about them?


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> that emote changes the tone of your question completely
> wtf is wrong with u?



I like how he's trying to play it off while in VMs he's talking with people about how "delicious" Carl (the little boy) from _The Walking Dead_ television show is.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

I literally was just looking at that, but I confused Carl with Rick. 

Toroxus and his friend are calling the Carl kid "hot" and talking about a "pig trying to rape him" and they wished they showed more of Carl's skin. 

Not surprising in the least to see Toroxus fighting for his shota porn or whatever it is.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> Toroxus and his friend are calling the Carl kid "hot" and talking about a "pig trying to rape him" and they wished they showed more of Carl's skin.



Fixed for accuracy. Your fail reading comprehension amuses me yet again. I love how popular my profile page seems to be. 



> Not surprising in the least to see Toroxus fighting for his shota porn or whatever it is.



Most nations correctly divide photographs of child abuse and artwork into different categories. It's a shame you can't.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:
			
		

> Pics of Carl or it didn't happen. Furthermore, I guess I'll start watching Walking Dead on Netflix.
> Dat tummy and back.



Yeah, come again?


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:
			
		

> Season 3 of Walking Dead. Carl is happily on his way to become a totally hot shota soon.





This is why I think that anime kid stuff should be monitored and discouraged.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> Yeah, come again?



Yeah, and that's relevant to what you claimed I said how? Learn to fucking read. You literally have the ability to quote me, yet you constantly fail to.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Yeah I'm sorry.

"I didn't say I'd enjoy him being raped by a pig....just that he was on his way to becoming a totally hot shota soon! There is a difference!"


----------



## Zaru (Jun 7, 2014)

>Keeping your VMs open to everyone

A mistake you only make once


----------



## teddy (Jun 7, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> wait
> possession of child porn has been legal in Japan this whole time?



This so much. how exactly was possession of child porn upheld for so long there?


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

Zaru said:


> >Keeping your VMs open to everyone
> 
> A mistake you only make once



Not really a mistake since this is like the umpteenth time stuff like this was posted by folks like him and Ash in VMs - they do it on purpose now because after multiple complaints against them, they've realized they actually can't get in trouble for it and embrace their "tendencies" fully.

Only thing they've removed are the links to the kiddy porn they posted.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> This is why I think that anime kid stuff should be monitored and discouraged.



Yeah, how dare we talk about official art:
[sp]

And then Fanart

[/sp]

Of an all but explicitly-stated malexmale relationship in an anime. So yeah, like usual of Flow, you're trying to discourage malexmale relationships in the world.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus go regroup, think about what you said, then come back and actually type up a better defense if you can think of one.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

pedos.......


----------



## Mider T (Jun 7, 2014)

In b4 the lobby gets this overturned.


----------



## Firo (Jun 7, 2014)

So..... They are just banning this now?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> Toroxus go regroup, think about what you said, then come back and actually type up a better defense if you can think of one.



You linked to a conversation I was having. Of what I said:
I talked about Noragami, an anime, and linked the three pictures above.
The Tales of Series is very geared towards yaoi lovers.
The Walking Dead is something I only watch in the day.
Carl will be visually appealing soon.

Now I know you disagree with everything I said because it of course talks about homosexuality (except for zombies).


----------



## Mider T (Jun 7, 2014)

Red Hood said:


> So..... They are just banning this now?



Post Count +1

Seriously how many people have asked this in the thread now?


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

Ya know, last time I checked, talking and wanking isn't a crime.
I don't care much for Shota, but if that's their thing then that's their thing. It's not like they're actually raping kids you know, you should tone down the hating and not be so judmental. It's kinda like you're trying to bait a fight about it.

*EDIT:* Toroxus, would you mind putting those pics in spoiler tags? They're so wide that they stretch my forum screen.


----------



## Mider T (Jun 7, 2014)

> Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 15 (6 members and 9 guests)
> DemonDragonJ+, Toroxus, Donquixote Doflamingo



The usual suspects


----------



## KidTony (Jun 7, 2014)

that's because cartoons are not child porn.


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

>Still talking about cartoons
>Ignoring the fact that a member here was talking about watching a _living human child_ get raped by a farm animal


----------



## Firo (Jun 7, 2014)

Mider T said:


> Post Count +1
> 
> Seriously how many people have asked this in the thread now?



Because its the first thing that anybody would question. But isnt the age of consent in Japan like 13 or something?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

babaGAReeb said:


> most of us dont wanna see em anyway



Apparently enough people do to merit an entire thread conversation about it.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Carl will be visually appealing soon.



What do you even mean by this?

You said:



> Season 3 of Walking Dead. Carl is happily on his way to become a totally hot shota soon.



definition of that stuff in a nutshell:



> It refers to a genre of manga and anime wherein pre-pubescent or pubescent male characters are depicted in a suggestive or erotic manner,



You were also talking about the character Carl's "tummy and back" when one of you for some odd reason think the developers of the show were "teasing the watchers when his shirt was riding up a lot"

It's literally in the conversation I linked. So excuse me if I don't take your opinion on this matter seriously, considering who is defending this stuff.


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 7, 2014)

krory said:


> >Still talking about cartoons
> >Ignoring the fact that a member here was talking about watching a _living human child_ get raped by a farm animal





I just read thier convo. I didn't see anything about somebody fantasizing about a human child getting raped by an animal. Did I read over it?


----------



## KidTony (Jun 7, 2014)

krory said:


> >Still talking about cartoons
> >Ignoring the fact that a member here was talking about watching a _living human child_ get raped by a farm animal



that has absolutely ZERO to do with the article in the op. try again.


----------



## Kathutet (Jun 7, 2014)

> For example, by the time I reached grade five (we were either 10 or 11) every girl in the class had had sex except for one. I imagine that it would be more or less the same over there.


This guy got game at an age when I didn't even know game existed

What in the everliving cuntfucks, where do you even live


----------



## SLB (Jun 7, 2014)

pretty sure golden circle is talking right out of his ass, kenneth.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> What do you even mean by this?



Okay, let's sit back and learn English folks.

"Carl will be visually appealing soon."
As in "Soon, Carl will be visually appealing."


> soon
> so͞on/
> adverb
> adverb: soon; comparative adverb: sooner; superlative adverb: soonest
> ...



In case you're so stupid and still don't understand. The "Soon" means "not now, but in a future time."



> definition of that stuff in a nutshell:



How about a definition by terms of a dictionary? Like the one above.



> You were also talking about the character Carl's "tummy and back"



It was just a reference to conversation. If you actually could read and read my entire conversations like it seems is so popular, you'd know that I have yet to watch any of the scenes talked about in the conversation. When "pig almost raped Carl"  Because, shockingly, someone who isn't talking much about scenes and happenings in episodes they said they haven't watched, probably hasn't watched them yet.



> when one of you not toroxus for some odd reason think the developers of the show were "teasing the watchers when his shirt was riding up a lot"



Fixed.



> It's literally in the conversation I linked. So excuse me if I don't take your opinion on this matter seriously, considering who is defending this stuff.



I know what's in the conversation. Shockingly, I read it myself. Yet context isn't even needed in most of the things you quote me in because the sentences define themselves in a way that disagree with your twisted lack of comprehension.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

You can try to nitpick what you said and cut words out but you specifically said:



> Season 3 of Walking Dead. Carl is happily on his way to become a totally hot* shota* soon



Let's look at the definition, again. 



> It refers to a genre of manga and anime wherein pre-pubescent or pubescent male characters are depicted in a suggestive or erotic manner,


----------



## Xiammes (Jun 7, 2014)

Mider T said:


> Post Count +1
> 
> Seriously how many people have asked this in the thread now?



They have been trying to ban it for awhile, but the previous bills were also protested and shot down because the law didn't differentiate between anime/manga and actual child porn. It would have banned the likes of Dragonball, Sailor Moon, a lot of of other series.


----------



## DemonDragonJ (Jun 7, 2014)

I suppose that I should be pleased about the outlawing of child pornography in Japan, but I actually am indifferent to the subject, since it does not affect me in any way, but I am very glad that the law does not affect illustrated or animated material, since such media does not contain any depictions of actual minors (hopefully), and restricting it would be a violation of freedom of artistic expression.


----------



## Wolfgang Grimmer (Jun 7, 2014)

at some of the posts in this thread


----------



## Mider T (Jun 7, 2014)

Moody said:


> pretty sure golden circle is talking right out of his ass, kenneth.



Unless he's from the hood.


----------



## Rabbit and Rose (Jun 7, 2014)

Someones lying again.


----------



## Vermin (Jun 7, 2014)

? said:


> This so much. how exactly was possession of child porn upheld for so long there?


somebody correct me if i am wrong but the age of consent is extremely young over there at what, age 13?
some itt even said the consent can go as young as 11 

when you think about it that age are infact children and i am asuming that since it is over concentual age they would make porn out of it?

but that stuff is kind of tricky considering in a lot of states in america the age is 16 but you can't send naked pics until your're 18 and being in possession will cause the person (even if youre in a relationship with em,) to suffer extreme punishment


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> You can try to nitpick what you said and cut words out but you specifically said:



You're the one cutting words out:


> Season 3 of Walking Dead. Carl is happily on his way to become a totally hot shota *soon*





> Carl will be visually appealing *soon.*





> Let's look at the definition, again.



Yes, lets.



> soon
> so͞on/
> adverb
> adverb: soon; comparative adverb: sooner; superlative adverb: soonest
> ...




Example C:



> in or after a short time.




Learn English.


----------



## Wolfgang Grimmer (Jun 7, 2014)

you still used the word shota which means young boys


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

hes rite, bad wordin mang

shota is baby boy

its like your saying this young boy will be a hot young boy soon


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Wolfgang Grimmer said:


> you still used the word shota which means young boys



I used the word "shota" to mean "boys" aka "males <24." I've been around enough yaoi to make a fair assessment that my definition is in line with the majority in the yaoi world.'

"Young boys"/"Prepubescent boys"/"baby boy" is toddler stuff, which I'm sure there is a word for besides nepiophilia.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Shota means an underage kid, so looking at the quote you were basically saying "he'd look hot after awhile"

Saying "Elijah Wood will be visually appealing soon" isn't the same as saying "Elijah Wood will look like a hot shota soon"

How about you explain by what you meant by the word "shota" because you keep trying to skip around it by quoting the same definition "soon" as if anyone doesn't understand what it means. Trying to insult people's intelligent by nitpicking what you say to dodge the cringe worhty stuff you said before isn't helping you here.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

> george bush will be a totally hot shota soon



does this sentence make sense? i h8 bushie


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> I used the word "shota" to mean "boys" aka "males <24." I've been around enough yaoi to make a fair assessment that my definition is in line with the majority in the yaoi world.



I gave you an accepted term of the word "shota" and you're still trying to save face here because you know for a fact that you're completely in the wrong. On account of the fact that you were talking about Carl's "tummy and back" with your friend, we all know exactly what you meant. Stop trying to act like people are dumb here and they completely misinterpreted what you said.


----------



## Wolfgang Grimmer (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> I used the word "shota" to mean "boys" aka "males <24." I've been around enough yaoi to make a fair assessment that my definition is in line with the majority in the yaoi world.'
> 
> "Young boys"/"Prepubescent boys"/"baby boy" is toddler stuff, which I'm sure there is a word for besides nepiophilia.



ahahahah it's ok I don't judge just found it funny how you valiantly tried to twist and turn the statement


----------



## Esdese (Jun 7, 2014)

why fck are they just starting to ban this shit? Should of been done ages ago


----------



## Juda (Jun 7, 2014)

It gets me really upset seeing how its banned "now" but as Xiammes stated, its the bills was what made it hard to ban in the first place. 

Thousands of kids are kidnapped and exploited for adults and more then 2million children are suspected for child exploitation, it really sucks but at least they're doing something about it then nothing which really what matters.


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

At least Japan is starting to finally do more than NF about child endangerment.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> Shota means an underage kid, so looking at the quote you were basically saying "he'd look hot after awhile"



Not according to the usage of the word I see everywhere in the yaoi community.



> Saying "Elijah Wood will be visually appealing soon" isn't the same as saying "Elijah Wood will look like a hot shota soon"



You're right, they aren't the same, but I did say both. But since you don't know the definition of the word "Soon" I was using it as an example. "Elijad Wood will look like a hot [male <24]". Example: Here's one of the most popular shota, if not the most popular, with another shota that they are shipped together with.


It's even suggestive.  

"Oh no, the toddlers!"  

Edit: What flavor ice-cream is blue? 



> How about you explain by what you meant by the word "shota" because you keep trying to skip around it by quoting the same definition "soon" as if anyone doesn't understand what it means.


Well, you had no idea what "soon" meant, so I saw that I had to define it and highlight it because you kept removing it from my sentences in your replies.



> Trying to insult people's intelligent by nitpicking what you say to dodge the cringe worhty stuff you said before isn't helping you here.



"Cringe-worthy?" Maybe for you as a homophobe. The actor who plays Carl in TWD will be visually attractive soon. Probably. In Ice World, Elijah Wood would be visually attractive soon, and he was. I would have said it then as well. Be real, your hang up is that Tales of Series and Noragami have explicit (as close to being so without having it in a character bio) homosexual relationships, which is exactly the conversation you linked to on my page.



Flow said:


> I gave you an accepted term of the word "shota"


No, you gave an accepted term of the word "toddlercon"



> Stop trying to act like people are dumb here and they completely misinterpreted what you said.


No need to act when I can quote you failing to read English in almost every discussion you have. Let alone you trying to understand a Japanese topic.


----------



## teddy (Jun 7, 2014)

The sheer amount of linguistic gymnastics here has me at a complete lost..


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

? said:


> The sheer amount of linguistic gymnastics here has me at a complete lost..



If "X will happen soon" then that means it hasn't happened yet. This incredible difficulty of the adverb "soon" is too much for Flow.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> snip



No one believes your fake ass cover up. Everyone knows by "shota", you more than likely meant a young teenager. 

Were you going to go into detail about how you were talking about Carl's "tummy and back"? when your friend said the producers were "teasing the watchers?" Or were you going to dodge that portion?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> No one believes your fake ass cover up. Everyone knows by "shota", you more than likely meant a young teenager.



If I used the term "shota" to mean "young teenager" and said that "Carl will become a [younger teenager] soon" how does that make sense when Carl is almost 15? I know I'm not up-to-date on TWD, but I know enough that Carl isn't a timelord. And barring that time-loop, why wouldn't I just say "young teenager?"



> Were you going to go into detail about how you were talking about Carl's "tummy and back"?



I already explained this. I can't "go into detail" about it because I didn't see it. It was just a vague reference to what I was replying to.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> snip



You using the term 'shota' then saying "oh, I don't mean little boys by it" makes me believe that your defense is crap. I'm sure if I typed in "shota" on google, I'd see a bunch of cringe worthy images of drawn little kids. Not "boys above the age of 18" like you're trying to lie about. 




> I already explained this. I can't "go into detail" about it because I didn't see it. It was just a vague reference to what I was replying to.



So you gave a 'vague response' about a kid's "tummy and back" after your friend told you that the producers were "teasing the watchers by having Carl's shit ride up his chest?"

You also specifically asked for pictures of Carl with his shirt about to come off. I don't understand how that's vague.

Do you really think anyone here is buying your story?


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

Fucking Japan 

Also why is everyone acting surprised about Toro? 

Its been known that he is a p*d*p**** for awhile now.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> You using the term 'shota' then saying "oh, I don't mean little boys by it" makes me believe that your defense is crap. I'm sure if I typed in "shota" on google, I'd see a bunch of cringe worthy images of drawn little kids. Not "boys above the age of 18" like you're trying to lie about.



You googled "Shota?" Wouldn't that mean that you just did something that, according to you, should be illegal? 
Okay, not to keep talking to a brick wall on a subject that isn't on topic, but your claim that I meant I was referring to someone would become attractive when they reach an age in the future that happens to be less than the age they currently are involves time-travel. Of course, my definition of the word that I share with my yaoi peers makes sense in the space-time continuum, unlike yours. 

I know this is a distraction from the topic at hand because you can't rationalize the illegality of artwork, but that's okay, I know you can't rationalize much. I also know that many people stalk my user page because they have nothing better do to. And instead of bringing up a topic of my user page in my user page, they try to use it as an ad hominem on other topics they disagree with me about.



> So you gave a 'vague response' about a kid's "tummy and back" after your friend told you that the producers were "teasing the waters by having Carl's shit ride up his chest?"



You could have just quoted me quoting you and you would have said the same thing.



> You also specifically asked for pictures of Carl with his shirt about to come off. I don't understand how that's vague.



And why wouldn't I ask? Someone is talking about the appearance of XYZ and I don't know what that looks like, so I want to see XYZ to see if I agree. Banana forbid I come to my own conclusions. And jezz, if I said I googled "shota," I'd get a whole ear-full more from you. But when you do something you think should be illegal, it's okay.



> Do you really think anyone here is buying your story?


Do you think it matters to me? It was a conversation with one other person, all that mattered to me is that the person I was talking to understood what I was saying to them. I could not care less about what eavesdroppers or homophobic witch-hunters think. If you somehow think that because I'm attracted to males around my age group makes me an invalid source on the topic of artwork, go for it. That logic would make about as much sense as the rest of your statements.

Anyways, I'm done with this thread until it gets back on topic. If you want to talk about my user page then talk on my user page.


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

Fiona said:


> Fucking Japan
> 
> Also why is everyone acting surprised about Toro?
> 
> Its been known that he is a p*d*p**** for awhile now.




Certain people have taken a decent effort to cover it up.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

does torusudf liek cats too? it says hes a cat boy


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

krory said:


> Certain people have taken a decent effort to cover it up.



Which is pathetic in and of itself.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> You googled "Shota?" Wouldn't that mean that you just did something that, according to you, should be illegal?



I said "I'm sure if I googled"

I think adults that get off to pictures of little kids should get mental help. 




> And why wouldn't I ask? Someone is talking about the appearance of XYZ and I don't know what that looks like, so I want to see XYZ to see if I agree. Banana forbid I come to my own conclusions.




Why would you want to see a picture of a kid with his shirt off to see if he'll become a "hot little shota" in the first place? 





> Anyways, I'm done with this thread until it gets back on topic. If you want to talk about my user page then talk on my user page.



I'm glad you understand why I don't take your opinion seriously for the topic at hand.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Anyways, I'm tired of everyone pointing out the fact that I am a p*d*p**** and I keep putting my foot in my mouth while trying to deny it. I am gonna ignore the thread until a few pages pass and hopefully then everyone will forget or leave.



Fixed that for you


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

Wait, why did this user suddenly coincidentally log back on and log back off like two minutes ago? He hasn't been on for nearly a month.

What the hell is going on?


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

its every pedo for himself !


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

HINT: Don't click the links that Shukumei linked on Toroxus' profile. NSFW.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

krory said:


> HINT: Don't click the links that Shukumei linked on Toroxus' profile. NSFW.



What in the actual fuck is wrong with Toro


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

is this stuff seriously allowed on NF?


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

babaGAReeb said:


> is this stuff seriously allowed on NF?



I've reported it to several mods in the past - the links just get removed, I don't know if it's by mods or if they do it themselves after being warned.

They've had worse, like links to actual shota porn.

And you probably don't want to know why one of them likes it when a little boy has foreskin...


----------



## Zaru (Jun 7, 2014)

Thread successfully turned to shit

Can someone just delete the last few pages from NF history


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

And yet again, the Cleaners sweep in.

Thanks, Zaru.


----------



## Kathutet (Jun 7, 2014)

It's a cafe thread about Japan plus pedo awfulness, ofc it's going to turn to shit

But yes
Gladly
Jesus fucking christ people


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

Zaru said:


> Thread successfully turned to shit
> 
> Can someone just delete the last few pages from NF history


no dont! this drama must be preserved


krory said:


> I've reported it to several mods in the past - the links just get removed, I don't know if it's by mods or if they do it themselves after being warned.
> 
> They've had worse, like links to actual shota porn.
> 
> And you probably don't want to know why one of them likes it when a little boy has foreskin...


so they remove( or at least warn dem bout it) the shota it but never punish the person posting it? that sounds suspicious....

..............you mean actual human being shota porn? 

yes i dont wanna know


----------



## Kathutet (Jun 7, 2014)

krory said:


> And yet again, the Cleaners sweep in.
> 
> Thanks, Zaru.



Oh man put on your fucking tin foil hat and start preaching, pal, cuz the system is obviously here just so Tazmo can spread his kiddie porn, right? And every staff member is obviously fucking kids in their spare time while simultaneously keeping the pedo ring alive

It all makes sense now
I always wondered why exactly all staff meetings happened on a playground


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 7, 2014)

Seems a certain cat needs to be neutered to protect the children of the world.



Zaru said:


> Thread successfully turned to shit
> Can someone just delete the last few pages from NF history





krory said:


> And yet again, the Cleaners sweep in.
> Thanks, Zaru.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow, could you stop spouting your judgmental and derogatory hate for someone's interests please? You're being both off-topic and insultingly intolerant and offensive.

Toroxus has commited no crime and is merely discussing an interest, and you're nitpicking his posts and twisting them to fuel your arguments for why you don't approve of them. If you're not into that kinda thing, that's perfectly fine and you can think of it however the hell you want, *but no one cares what you think about shota stuff, stop trying to force your opinions of it onto other people.*

There is no victim or perpetrator here, stop acting as if you're a bastion of truth talking to a condemned rapist.

Actually, just drop it entirely. Your dislike for Toroxus is irrelevant here, and you're borderline flamebaiting him right now. Why not stay on topic? Or at least not pick a fight?

*Edit:* As a sidenote, Toroxus is also off-topic, so he needs to back down as well. Just sayin', 'cus I don't want to seem like I'm just white-knighting him in particular.


----------



## Krory (Jun 7, 2014)

Kenneth said:


> Oh man put on your fucking tin foil hat and start preaching, pal, cuz the system is obviously here just so Tazmo can spread his kiddie porn, right? And every staff member is obviously fucking kids in their spare time while simultaneously keeping the pedo ring alive
> 
> It all makes sense now
> I always wondered why exactly all staff meetings happened on a playground



I never said that - you're the one sounding paranoid. I'm stating a simple fact of what happens.

1) It gets reported
2) It gets deleted

You really need to get over yourself, Kenneth.


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 7, 2014)

heh nf never change


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

> As a sidenote, Toroxus is also off-topic, so he needs to back down as well. Just sayin', 'cus I don't want to seem like I'm just white-knighting him in particular.



It's kind of too late for that. 

No one is making fun of him. Just discussing what he's said/posted and trying to show why his opinion isn't valid for this topic. If I were flame baiting I would say things like "You're a sick fuck! GO GET HELP"


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

I am just confused as to why he has not been banned for any of it  

I mean if its true that stuff has been posted before and reported and deleted then how it is as a repeat offender he has not been disciplined?

People have been banned for less on NF.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 7, 2014)

some ppl have been banned for saying "hi" but pedo stuff is fine?


----------



## Arcana (Jun 7, 2014)

Mider T said:


> Unless he's from the hood.


Not sure how that makes sense. 



Zaru said:


> Thread successfully turned to shit
> 
> Can someone just delete the last few pages from NF history


Basically this


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow said:


> It's kind of too late for that.
> 
> No one is making fun of him. Just discussing what he's said/posted and trying to show why his opinion isn't valid for this topic. If I were flame baiting I would say things like "You're a sick fuck! GO GET HELP"



A fair point I guess. I was more refering to how you keep trying to imply that he's an immoral future child rapist in denial because of those quotes, and you're nitpicking his phrasing into somehow becoming evidence of it. _And then you keep insisting that it's a truth and he has to admit it._

To me, that's baiting in that you're basically demanding that he either outs himself as a sick and twisted human being or he'll just have to keep counter arguing you until you're convinced otherwise and, face it, your opinion isn't gonna change regardless of what he says or proves to you.
Basically, the most likely outcome is that you make him rant with you for hours upon hours until he finaly tires of picking apart your posts, which in turn are just picking apart *his* posts, and ragequits.

You're being offensive and judgmental of someone's interests when, at the moment, you have little reason to think much of them. He likes to look at shota stuff. And?
I could easily replace the "shota parts" of you guys' arguments with, for example, an interest in violent imagery, a widely accepted and prevelant interest shared by millions of ordinary movie goers, and the flawed logic becomes immediately apparent.

*Either way, you are both fighting and are off-topic.*

Another sidenote, I don't know about him breaking forum rules or anything like that. If that's the case then obviously he should be banned, but I don't know anything about that particular situation so I can't really talk about whether or not a ban is justified. Either way, that's hardly relevant here either I don't think.


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 7, 2014)

oh shut up thread


----------



## Platinum (Jun 7, 2014)

Inuhanyou said:


> Yay, no action against the lolis  But seriously, i'm glad the anime and manga(as well as doujinshi) industry wont be effected by this,* you'd have to take out a majority of anime shown today if that was the ruling*, and that's basically a lot of what you'd find on pixiv, the most mainstream art website in japan.
> 
> Also considering that..yknow real life CP actually hurts children for one thing  I'm surprised it hasn't already been banned, what were they thinking?



>implying this would be a bad thing


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> snip



Yeah, poor Toroxus. Everyone is ganging up on him and trying to make him out himself when just about everyone already knows what he likes. 

I was explaining to him why his opinion wasn't being taken seriously. Keep the TL;DR post coming, it's funny watching you white knight him.


----------



## Savior (Jun 7, 2014)

The Japanese obsession with MCs that are preteens or teens is definitely disturbing to me. Especially when it's an adult manga yet the characters are drawn like they're kids. I don't get it...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 7, 2014)

Well, this thread has left me profoundly disturbed.


----------



## Aduro (Jun 7, 2014)

I think it really hurts the whole industries' reputation when you see pre-teens getting attacked by tentacle monsters in hentai, it gives the whole media a bad name. Its impossible to ban characters who look a little younger in an animated series but some are blatantly and clearly intended to be children, in school uniforms or just obviously kids rather than even vaguely in their teens, these should be banned as should any gratuitous rape (although stuff which is clearly meant to horrify and not really be enjoyed isn't so bad as it is a real issue that the media should comment on). 

Its just in terrible taste and society should treat anyone who wants to enjoy the idea of rape as sick and abnormal, not show hentai that gets them hooked on the idea, even if one in a thousand fans of the most horrible hentai entertain the possibility of really enacting their fantasies, turning them into sex symbols doesn't help.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

So I have read through the entire thread now. 

Things I learned. 

- For a time Child Pornography was legal in japan. 

- Madman robs supports drawn child pornography on the basis that he incorrectly believes its harmless. 

- Toro is profoundly disturbed. 

- Some people in the cafe who I considered assholes or degenerates actually have a conscience and are not nearly as bad as I thought they were.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 7, 2014)

I am against prosecution for drawn material to be honest, we may find it personally disgusting but I feel going after that sets a bad precedent that would better be avoided. Resources should always be focused on actual children that are exploited and abused.


----------



## xenopyre (Jun 7, 2014)

You would also have to ban most of the renaissance art(what's with all those naked baby angels and watnot) as well if anime was to be banned for that reason 
Also surprised that real life child porn wasn't banned already, it seems like common sense isn't so common after all .


----------



## Aduro (Jun 7, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> . Resources should always be focused on actual children that are exploited and abused.



True, they should focus their efforts more on those who produce real child pornography involving children in it, but failing to make it illegal suggests to all those who produce child rape hentai that what they are doing is okay. It would be better to make it all illegal but only focus police time on the live-action stuff in the same way that police make most dangerous drugs illegal but tend to ignore most people in possession of weed because they need  to stop the heroin dealers.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 7, 2014)

Aduro said:


> True, they should focus their efforts more on those who produce real child pornography involving children in it, but failing to make it illegal suggests to all those who produce child rape hentai that what they are doing is okay. It would be better to make it all illegal but only focus police time on the live-action stuff in the same way that police make most dangerous drugs illegal but tend to ignore most people in possession of weed because they need  to stop the heroin dealers.



You can do a lot of things that are not "OK", but personal disgust isn't a valid reason to make things illegal. Actual CP exploits real children and should be illegal because actual lives are being harmed in the process of making such material. Drawn depictions of exist purely in the realm of fiction, and while we may find it distasteful that is not enough to say it should be illegal.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

Aduro said:


> I think it really hurts the whole industries' reputation when you see pre-teens getting attacked by tentacle monsters in hentai, it gives the whole media a bad name. Its impossible to ban characters who look a little younger in an animated series but some are blatantly and clearly intended to be children, in school uniforms or just obviously kids rather than even vaguely in their teens, these should be banned as should any gratuitous rape (although stuff which is clearly meant to horrify and not really be enjoyed isn't so bad as it is a real issue that the media should comment on).
> 
> Its just in terrible taste and society should treat anyone who wants to enjoy the idea of rape as sick and abnormal, not show hentai that gets them hooked on the idea, even if one in a thousand fans of the most horrible hentai entertain the possibility of really enacting their fantasies, turning them into sex symbols doesn't help.



This is absolute nonsense. By that kind of logic, all violence must be censored out of all mediums, because they don't preach love and compassion and often glorify violence in the same way that hentai glorifies rape and sex in general.
Fictional content is completely harmless, it's the person who is responsible for his actions.

Watching tentacle porn is no worse than watching a Saw movie.
If some dude jerks off to a shota pic that's his god damn business and no one's harmed by it. I *do* give a shit if he's actually trying to bone a five year old, because that's an entirely seperate situation where a victim is actually involved.

The difference between me and you guys is that I don't try to crucify the man until he actually tries to do something, whereas you seem to feel content with just looking at his interests and *judging* that he's a monster pre-emptively.

Censorship is *ALWAYS* wrong, it is never a viable solution.



Fiona said:


> So I have read through the entire thread now.
> 
> Things I learned.
> 
> ...



...So basically you've learned absolutely nothing and missunderstood exactly everything? 


It really disturbs me how you people seem to *decide* what others will and won't do and how they are as people based on an interest. With that nonsensical logic, every single person on this planet who enjoys the Saw movies needs to be locked away in prison forever, because *obviously* they're horribly insane people who get off on causing others pain, and it's just a matter of time before they all start hunting people to torture, right?
'Cuz that's your logic. 
Oh, you watch tentalce hentai? Then clearly you can't control yourself and will one day rape a child horribly!
Oh, you watch porn? Clearly you're a depraved freakshow who rapes women, because *no one who gets consensual sex would surely watch something like that, would they?*
Oh, you watch violent movies? Then clearly you're just a future criminal in the making, because no good person would ever watch something so horrible, and *CLEARLY* you have to be completely immoral in order to take any enjoyment from watching violence!

You see the problem in that logic yet?


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> It really disturbs me how you people seem to *decide* what others will and won't do and how they are as people based on an interest. With that nonsensical logic, every single person on this planet who enjoys the Saw movies needs to be locked away in prison forever, because *obviously* they're horribly insane people who get off on causing others pain, and it's just a matter of time before they all start hunting people to torture, right?
> 'Cuz that's your logic.
> Oh, you watch tentalce hentai? Then clearly you can't control yourself and will one day rape a child horribly!
> Oh, you watch porn? Clearly you're a depraved freakshow who rapes women, because *no one who gets consensual sex would surely watch something like that, would they?*
> ...



Are you even listening to yourself? 

EDIT: Negging me does not make your point any less idiotic Madman


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

I know what I wrote, you have yet to actually write anything that disproves my claim. You're being massively judgmental because of your own views on shotacon/lolicon, that is painfully obvious as soon as one replaces the shotacon/lolicon with, for example, "violence."
If someone tried to write what you've written in a discussion on violent content rather than shotacon and lolicon, they'd be laughed at for how stupidly nonsensical and and judgmental it was.
You take offense from something that inherently doesn't produce any victims, because you *believe* that it's moraly wrong.

Your entitled to not liking lolicon and shotacon, but when people start saying it should be censored and removed because it's wrong and harmful, they need to be stopped from censoring things just because they don't agree with the idea of it.

Until there is a victim, there is no crime. You disagreeing with it, and you thinking it *might* give some very specific people ideas is no where near enough to validate censorship and jailing for possession.

And also, I didn't neg you to prove anything. I did what the rep system exists for.
I didn't do it to offend you, I did it simply because I disagree with the claim in that post. You know, _what negging is really meant for._


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

So you're basically saying that people that get off to watching little kids have sex in anime are no worst than someone who watches a horror movie. 

You do realize most people don't watch horror movies to get off to them, right?


----------



## Itachі (Jun 7, 2014)

Being aroused by cp is biological while enjoying some violence or ass-kicking is not.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

Flow made my point for me. 

I don't have to make an argument against what you are saying because what you are saying is absolutely insane. Only an idiot tries to reason with a idiot. 

You are equating someone who enjoys watching child pornography in anime to someone who enjoys scary movies. 

That comparison in itself invalidates your entire post.


----------



## The Pink Ninja (Jun 7, 2014)




----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> Flow has made no such points, and you are absolutely idiotic. I've seen a lot of people disregard you as a well-known idiot, and I've honestly never understood why because you've seemed like a good enough guy to me so far.
> 
> I think I've glimpsed why.
> 
> ...



First off I'm a girl genius. 

Second of all you are the one who compared liking scary movies to liking child pornography so I am not the idiot in this situation. You can try and dance around your own statements or whatever you want, but in my eyes you are completely insane. There is no defense for any form of child pornography or those that watch it.  I dont care what form it takes or how you try and fail to rationalize it. 

I am done feeding the troll. This entire thread is just


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 7, 2014)

Jeez, what a mess this discussion has become...


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 7, 2014)

I would argue there has never been much of a discussion, only people like Fiona constantly showing up and deciding to be offended and shout derogatory and idiotic assumptions and insults at people with different opinions, simply because they don't like them.

I'm thinking Torox had the right idea by just leaving, this is litterally like talking to a wall that shouts idiocy in your face every time you try. People like Fiona, who disregard all arguments in favor of nitpicking for insults when they disagree with you, just aren't worth the effort. 

Fuck it, I'm out. Have fun talking shit about me Fiona, 'cus I know that's what you'll be doing.


----------



## EJ (Jun 7, 2014)

> I've said nothing about horror movies, I said violence. Anyone who's watched Commando and enjoyed the violence must be incapable of compassion if one were to apply your logic to this.
> A person with a good moral compass and who is capable of feeling sympathy and compassion can't possibly enjoy watching someone get shot, right? Only murderers and immoral people could, right?
> 
> In that same way, a person who can jerk off to a drawing of a manga character younger than 15 must certainly be incapable of self-restraint and a future rapist, right? Because it's not like this is totally just me being an assumptious douchebag who's trying to censor things that I don't want to see from other people's lives, right?
> ...




You're putting words in people's mouths in order to support your own baseless argument. Who in here has been saying 

"Pedophiles are hellspawn creatures sent from the devil himself with no moral values"?

Send a direct quote from someone that said that. Most people in here have said  they need help and are disturbed in the heads. And yeah, I'm willing to bet someone that gets off to little kids having sex is more fucked up than someone who watches an action movie.

You do realize that most action movies have a "morality" to them right? Like the guy that wants to avenge the person that killed his dead brother? Or the assassin that is killing some evil leader? All of that cheesy stuff Hollywood likes to spoon feed people. Most people aren't sitting there stroking their dicks and getting off to someone getting killed. 

Keep making a fool out of yourself by comparing pedophiles that watch kids have sex to someone watching an action movie.


----------



## Sygurgh (Jun 7, 2014)

I'm against all kind of child pornography, but I wonder what it would mean for things a bit more soft like Negima, Kill la Kill, Bakemonogatari or even Evangelion or Toaru (Othinus!) or Fate/stay night.

There are a lot of series with sexualized teenage characters. I would be against it if it were to have an influence on more non-hentai content.

Edit: Considering Fate/stay night is an eroge, I'm not even sure I'm for outlawing hentai-related content. The characters are technically teenagers.


----------



## TheSweetFleshofDeath (Jun 7, 2014)

I have no problems with cannibalism in manga so I don't see why I should have a problem with child porn.  I mean at that point you may as well ban Game of Thrones and Lolita as both of the have under 18 sexual situations.

Actually now that I think of it Naruto would have to be censored.  Sexy: Boy on Boy Technique is a perfect example of this.  Two underage, imaginary boys are rubbing their naked flesh against each other.  Naruko would obviously have to be censored as she's underage, and even gives sexual favors to an older man in order to receive training.  Of course if any law intends to be fair you can't let something slide censorship wise just because you enjoy a story.  So that would mean blacking out those parts of Naruto.

And as I ruminate more on this issue I realize that by blacking out those images in Naruto I am directly prevent child abuse and rape.  It's kind of like how Columbine could of been prevented if the American Government had banned Doom.  I see the light.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 7, 2014)

TheSweetFleshofDeath said:


> I have no problems with cannibalism in manga so I don't see why I should have a problem with child porn.  I mean at that point you may as well ban Game of Thrones and Lolita as both of the have under 18 sexual situations.
> 
> Actually now that I think of it Naruto would have to be censored.  Sexy: Boy on Boy Technique is a perfect example of this.  Two underage, imaginary boys are rubbing their naked flesh against each other.  Naruko would obviously have to be censored as she's underage, and even gives sexual favors to an older man in order to receive training.  Of course if any law intends to be fair you can't let something slide censorship wise just because you enjoy a story.  So that would mean blacking out those parts of Naruto.
> 
> And as I ruminate more on this issue I realize that by blacking out those images in Naruto I am directly prevent child abuse and rape.  It's kind of like how Columbine could of been prevented if the American Government had banned Doom.  I see the light.



Finally...someone gets the gist of it. **


----------



## Takahashi (Jun 7, 2014)

Fiona said:


> - Madman robs supports drawn child pornography on the basis that he incorrectly believes its harmless.



Why is it harmful then?  We as a society are perfectly fine with fictitious depictions of all kinds of things we consider wrong in reality.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 7, 2014)

Linkofone said:


> Is that really a thing?



Yes, but you went to jail for it if caught, since cp is illegal in any form in the US.


And the fact that this thread devolved into an argument just goes to show what a terrible state the Cafe's in.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

SaCrEdpOoL said:


> Russia is worst place for p*d*p**** to go.
> 1)He wont go to jail he will be beaten to death by whoever finds out
> 2)If he gets lucky and goes to jail he will be murdered there.
> 3)If he somehow survives he will be chemically castrated



Sounds appropriate. 

Go Russia.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 7, 2014)

Pedophilia is a fetish and can't be controlled. 

Aren't you progressive?


----------



## Fiona (Jun 7, 2014)

Risyth said:


> *Pedophilia is a fetish and can't be controlled. *
> 
> Aren't you progressive?



Nice try 

I give it a 4/10


----------



## Risyth (Jun 7, 2014)

So you're just ignorant of what the word "fetish" means.

Or were you looking for another one of my smartass replies?


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 7, 2014)

Moody said:


> pretty sure golden circle is talking right out of his ass, kenneth.


No, not lying. There was a bunch of bushes behind the school field across the road where all the kids went to make out. Technically it was in the adjacent property, you'd crawl through a nature trail from the field, cross the fence about three times, and you reached a small area where the bushes didn't let anyone see what was going on.

Btw the one girl who hadn't had sex yet was my friend (not-quite gf, though it was going there) for a short time. She was fairly shy and hadn't had any boyfriends. To make it worse she'd put little tests in front of the boys to kind of vet them. So being the top-third smartest guy in the class, I was tasked with beating them. After about two weeks, me and my friend became good friends with her and her friend, respectively. Though I switched schools after the end of the year due to missing too many days. (I found the class boring beyond belief, and when asked what she was teaching, the teacher said she wasn't teaching the class anything. Instead we spent time doing plays and playing music on recorders.) It can't be helped.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 8, 2014)

Golden Circle said:


> No, not lying. There was a bunch of bushes behind the school field across the road where all the kids went to make out. Technically it was in the adjacent property, you'd crawl through a nature trail from the field, cross the fence about three times, and you reached a small area where the bushes didn't let anyone see what was going on.
> 
> Btw the one girl who hadn't had sex yet was my friend (not-quite gf, though it was going there) for a short time. She was fairly shy and hadn't had any boyfriends. To make it worse she'd put little tests in front of the boys to kind of vet them. So being the top-third smartest guy in the class, I was tasked with beating them. After about two weeks, me and my friend became good friends with her and her friend, respectively. Though I switched schools after the end of the year due to missing too many days. (I found the class boring beyond belief, and when asked what she was teaching, the teacher said she wasn't teaching the class anything. Instead we spent time doing plays and playing music on recorders.) It can't be helped.


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 8, 2014)

What? I gave enough details.

Oh, wait, are you jealous? Step it up.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 8, 2014)

Golden Circle said:


> What? I gave enough details.
> 
> Oh, wait, are you jealous? Step it up.



Yeah sorry I forgot details = facts 


*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 




*Spoiler*: __ 



Sarcasm


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 8, 2014)

Well I'm sorry that you think I'm lying. To be honest I have nothing to add.

What do I have to add to that we were banging girls at 10/11.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Fiona said:


> Yeah sorry I forgot details = facts
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



Okay, I gotta respect that. :ho


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (Jun 8, 2014)

rajin said:


> *manga genre is most polluted by such things. take action against them too*


With that logic,you can outlaw any anime,eroge or manga series which have young teens as main characters. 




KidTony said:


> that's because cartoons are not child porn.





krory said:


> >Still talking about cartoons
> >Ignoring the fact that a member here was talking about watching a _living human child_ get raped by a farm animal


There's a diffrence between a cartoon and a draw.




Toroxus said:


> Firstly, child pornography was legal?
> 
> Secondly, anything that's drawn is not child pornography and shouldn't be illegal for multiple reasons.
> 
> Edit: Opps, I forgot : wtf and : wth are totally different emotes.





Flow said:


> If someone is watching pictures of naked little kids touching or having sex then they need help. Yes, it should be illegal.





MadmanRobz said:


> Fictional imagery (drawn or animated etc, where no real person exists) is 100% completely fine. There is no such thing a something that's "off limits" when something's entirely fictional.
> 
> You taking pictures of a real kid sucking dick?
> Go to jail you asshat.
> ...





MadmanRobz said:


> Flow, could you stop spouting your judgmental and derogatory hate for someone's interests please? You're being both off-topic and insultingly intolerant and offensive.
> 
> Toroxus has commited no crime and is merely discussing an interest, and you're nitpicking his posts and twisting them to fuel your arguments for why you don't approve of them. If you're not into that kinda thing, that's perfectly fine and you can think of it however the hell you want, *but no one cares what you think about shota stuff, stop trying to force your opinions of it onto other people.*
> 
> ...





Fiona said:


> So I have read through the entire thread now.
> 
> Things I learned.
> 
> ...





MadmanRobz said:


> This is absolute nonsense. By that kind of logic, all violence must be censored out of all mediums, because they don't preach love and compassion and often glorify violence in the same way that hentai glorifies rape and sex in general.
> Fictional content is completely harmless, it's the person who is responsible for his actions.
> 
> Watching tentacle porn is no worse than watching a Saw movie.
> ...



WTF is going on here?


----------



## Linkofone (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Yes, but you went to jail for it if caught, since cp is illegal in any form in the US.
> 
> 
> And the fact that this thread devolved into an argument just goes to show what a terrible state the Cafe's in.



Oh dang. I didn't know that it was a thing.


----------



## Sieves (Jun 8, 2014)

and yet as long as the internet is available...


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jun 8, 2014)

is this the place to +1?


----------



## Wolfarus (Jun 8, 2014)

Nightbringer said:


> is this the place to +1?



Yep.

Tiz' also the place to rant and rave about your subjective-selective morality.



Wolfarus said:


> Im surprised thread hasnt been derailed by the whole loli/pedo/cp/harmless dead-horse yet.



Took a cple more pages then i thought it would take, but it happened.


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (Jun 8, 2014)

Can you believe that Kodomo no Jikan(the mangaka is a woman ffs) is forbdidden in countries like USA and Canada?just by importing it?

Australia has a law where any pics or videos of adult women(20+) who barely have cup-A chest is CP!!


----------



## Xiammes (Jun 8, 2014)

Yeah that Australia ban on A and b cups is ridiculous.



> Can you believe that Kodomo no Jikan(the mangaka is a woman ffs)



The head writer of the Rance series is a female also, though the Rance series has very little loli fanservice.


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (Jun 8, 2014)

Xiammes said:


> *Yeah that Australia ban on A and b cups is ridiculous.*
> 
> 
> 
> The head writer of the Rance series is a female also, though the Rance series has very little loli fanservice.



Conservative assholes ruin the entire country.


----------



## Golden Circle (Jun 8, 2014)

```
\o/
   |
 =>+-->o
   |
  / \
```
*not cp, characters under one minute old


----------



## Linkofone (Jun 8, 2014)

> \o/
> |
> =>+-->o
> |
> / \



I don't get it.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

its givin birth i think


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 8, 2014)

Shota and Lol'is shouldn't be banned.

By that logic nearly every guy here is a friggin p*d*p**** in a sense. A lot of shounen,Shoujo, ecchi and or hentei have highly sexualised teenage females/males with big tits and asses and such/ripped body. And inb4youwannamaketheargumentthatthierbodytypesdon'tmatch thier age. *You still have people who are in to dolls or bishounen* I don't see many people complaining about fairy tail, Bleach, Code Geass, Neon genesis etc

Then you have real ecchi like animes like, Seiken no Qwaser, Manyuu hickenchou, Queen's blade, High school DxD,High school of the dead, sekirei and even more.

Heck many people shippers who also create highly sexually suggestive art have well at the very least something to explain here as well.

Shota and Loli's is not much different other then the age.

But what Toroxus is saying is at the very least pretty damn vague. Due those words he will always be seen as a potenial p*d*p**** by some people even if he weren't. Personally given the ambiguity of his words and the fact that you really can't prove what meaning he actually assigned  to his words. Even if he were discussing the ''hotness'' of the actual boy. He still didn't act on those urges.

Anyways regardless of him bieng a pedo or not. Having such convo's in the VM box is bound to take many risks with it.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

If you masturbate to pictures of small girls getting fucked you're a pedo, whether its animated or not.

Shouldnt be punished for a victimless crime so it should be legal to download loli or whatever the fuck its called, but you'd still creep me the fuck out


----------



## Zaru (Jun 8, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I am against prosecution for drawn material to be honest, we may find it personally disgusting but I feel going after that sets a bad precedent that would better be avoided. Resources should always be focused on actual children that are exploited and abused.



Sadly no matter how many cp circles are busted by international investigation efforts, there seems to be no end to them.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Mill?n Vasto said:


> Then what about sexualised teenage girls in mainstream anime? A good portion on this forum definately don't mind the fanserived espically not in fairy tail. And sure you could argue that thier body type is more akin to that of adult but this still leaves dolls, and petite teenage girls. They go to as young as roughly 13/14 years old.
> 
> Same applies to female who have a thing for ripped teenage boys(ichigo,luffy etc) and even then you can discard the strong physique and use the bishounen characters. Who look more like little girls have little to no muscle.



Yes you are a pedo if you masturbated to pictures of wendy.

lower than 16 and you're a pedo imo, which is the exact border set in my country (used to be 15).

If you love pictures of small girls you're a pedo, not that hard to understand.

ps the fanservice in fairy tail is only for desperate losers


----------



## Zaru (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> lower than 16 and you're a pedo imo, which is the exact border set in my country (used to be 15).
> 
> If you love pictures of small girls you're a pedo, not that hard to understand.



First you say age, then you say "small girls". Well which is it? Because there are 12 year olds that could pass as 20 year olds and 20 year olds that could pass as 12 year olds.


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> Yes you are a pedo if you masturbated to pictures of wendy.
> 
> lower than 16 and you're a pedo imo, which is the exact border set in my country (used to be 15).
> 
> ...





Zaru said:


> First you say age, then you say "small girls". Well which is it? Because there are 12 year olds that could pass as 20 year olds and 20 year olds that could pass as 12 year olds.



Yeah I'm kinda confused about this as well. Fairy tail has that kind of difference in which girls which are stated to be like 17 year look like little girls. For example leffy or whatever her name is. The flat girl with the blue hair. Even tough she by your definition would be considered legal right?


But then you have girls like lissana and lucy who are not of legal age. But have a friggin pornstar body. And tits that defy gravity.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Zaru said:


> First you say age, then you say "small girls". Well which is it? Because there are 12 year olds that could pass as 20 year olds and 20 year olds that could pass as 12 year olds.



Who knows wth you quoted. Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to prepubescent children in general.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to prepubescent children in general.



True, but most of this topic actually focuses on hebephilia and ephebophilia themes in media.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Huh? It said child pornography. I wasn't there, but why would anyone have strayed?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Huh? It said child pornography. I wasn't there, but why would anyone have strayed?



I understand, and child pornography in Japan is pedophilia and nepiophilia. But in the media discussed, such as ecchi animes and mangas, hebephilia and ephebophilia are much more popular, probably because ephebophilia is *extremely* popular in all media. There is biology behind that one, but that's a whole different topic. But since all four of the -philias gets grouped into "child porn" in some nations, like the US, then you have a large gap between developmental stages in what one nation (Japan) considers legal and another nation (US) considers illegal (and vile due to McCarthistic logic). Not to mention that one is photographs and one is artwork.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Zaru said:


> First you say age, then you say "small girls". Well which is it? Because there are 12 year olds that could pass as 20 year olds and 20 year olds that could pass as 12 year olds.



You're a pedo. you want an excuse to be hard for small girls so much you'd actually writing shit like that after i stated around 16.

Dont touch real girls and i wont mind though


----------



## Itachі (Jun 8, 2014)

>Zaru
>Pedo

Now I've read everything.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

yah

the end is nigh


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

@Toroxus: I don't understand how anyone can mistake pedophilia for ephebophilia. Sure, the character in question may be drawn to look younger than they really are, but pedophilia more of an attraction to the character's being that age, and less that they look like that age.

Then again, America's dumb sometimes. We may be more progressive in most things than Japan, but we're lagging severely on other, more trivial things. It's ironic.


----------



## Zaru (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> You're a pedo. you want an excuse to be hard for small girls so much you'd actually writing shit like that after i stated around 16.
> 
> Dont touch real girls and i wont mind though



The point is that age isn't a sufficient factor
Arbitrarily drawing the line at some age doesn't make sense other than being the lazy option

>Show someone a pic of a 15 year old
>She has the body of a 20 year old
>"Yeah I'd bang that"
According to you he is now a pedo because he's attracted to adult female features

>Show someone a pic of a 20 year old
>She's petite and flat-chested, passes as a 12 year old
>"Yeah I'd bang that"
According to you he is not a pedo although he's attracted to immature female features


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Zaru said:


> The point is that age isn't a sufficient factor
> Arbitrarily drawing the line at some age doesn't make sense other than being the lazy option
> 
> >Show someone a pic of a 15 year old
> ...



you were argueing about ages of girls we knew, not random stares where you get surprised.

the fact that you want to debate against age is a requirement just tells me want to fuck small girls and need an excuse for your spare time masturbating.

Just get some girlie hentai and enjoy life


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> You're a pedo. you want an excuse to be hard for small girls so much you'd actually writing shit like that after i stated around 16.
> 
> Dont touch real girls and i wont mind though



i've seen 14 year olds that could pass as adults
i dont feel bad for getting hot and bothered about them


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

aiyanah said:


> i've seen 14 year olds that could pass as adults
> i dont feel bad for getting hot and bothered about them



as long as you dont fuck em... most of us men can have the thoughts

The key difference is that you dont masturbate to animated pictures of a 12 year old with the body of a grown woman.

Which just goes to show that people who like that are so into the thought of fucking small girls that they dont care about the looks fitting the age, as long as its a mentally small girl its whats they want..

Quick research showed me that like 90% of girlie hentai is either rape or a brother fucking his own little sister..


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> Which just goes to show that people who like that are so into the thought of fucking small girls that they dont care about the looks fitting the age, as long as its a mentally small girl is whats they want...



That's not pedophilia, though. They aren't prepubescent. So what are you arguing about?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> @Toroxus: I don't understand how anyone can mistake pedophilia for ephebophilia. Sure, the character in question may be drawn to look younger than they really are, but pedophilia more of an attraction to the character's being that age, and less that they look like that age.



Many people in the US think "pedophilia" means anything under 18. You'll hear it in news stories about someone being a "pedophilia" for having a sexual relationship with someone who is post-pubescent, heck, you'll see it in this very thread, on this very page. But many nations make the correct distinction. 

But honestly, even drawn pedophilia media should remain legal because there's no reason why it shouldn't.



Mathias124 said:


> Quick research showed me that like 90% of girlie hentai is either rape or a brother fucking his own little sister..



Citation needed. 

Quick research showed me that like 100% of girlie hentai is lesbian seme-uke alien shower sex. That's the only hentai I've seen (at an Anime Con no-less) and so there's my own BS statistic.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> That's not pedophilia, though. They aren't prepubescent. So what are you arguing about?



what they want is a mentally to young girl, thats being a pedo.

Lot of people on the defensive here, grasping for straws because you're ashamed?


----------



## Itachі (Jun 8, 2014)

Thread turned from shock about Japanese laws to seeing Shota Japenis.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Many people in the US think "pedophilia" means anything under 18. You'll hear it in news stories about someone being a "pedophilia" for having a sexual relationship with someone who is post-pubescent, heck, you'll see it in this very thread, on this very page. But many nations make the correct distinction.
> 
> But honestly, even drawn pedophilia media should remain legal because there's no reason why it shouldn't.
> 
> ...



It was my own BS research which i wrote in the post.
Are you that defensive about your urges to the point you cant even be bothered to read?

also to your first point about how it should be legal, i've said that as well, good job avoiding reading that as well /clap

Admit who you are. will be a lot more comfortable than convincing the entire world to think differently


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

I have an idea guyz

lets end all porn!!! that would solve everything and make us all happy


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> what they want is a mentally to young girl, thats being a pedo.
> 
> Lot of people on the defensive here, grasping for straws because you're ashamed?



Mental qualities aren't physical. An adult can still have the mind of a child.

I suggest looking the word up before making yourself look even more stupid.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Many people in the US think "pedophilia" means anything under 18. You'll hear it in news stories about someone being a "pedophilia" for having a sexual relationship with someone who is post-pubescent, heck, you'll see it in this very thread, on this very page. But many nations make the correct distinction.
> 
> But honestly, even drawn pedophilia media should remain legal because there's no reason why it shouldn't.


Yes, the only way to distinguish a child from an adolescent is how far they are in pubescence. A child be more mature mentally than an adult, and they can have more responsibilities as well. 

This is why those nations, and you, get it. Putting a number on a person won't change anything. If the government decided to make 16 adult age, well, is it? Is 18 even adult age? That's still adolescence. Puberty is taking place even at 21. But it's about when it begins that counts for pedophilia.


Yeah, like I said, anything that doesn't involve real life should be encouraged because it detracts from a p*d*p****'s desire to seek out a real-life medium.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Mental qualities aren't physical. An adult can still have the mind of a child.
> 
> I suggest looking the word up before making yourself look even more stupid.



I suggest you learn how to think instead of spouting more bs 

that was among the top retarded comments i have ever seen

"what they want is a mentally to young girl, thats being a pedo."


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> It was my own BS research which i wrote in the post.
> Are you that defensive about your urges to the point you cant even be bothered to read?



Of yeah, as a homosexual male, I think drawn lesbian relationships should be legal because of "my urges." Alternatively, I think it should be legal for the primary reason it is legal: Making it a crime distracts from real child abuse.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Of yeah, as a homosexual male, I think drawn lesbian relationships should be legal because of "my urges." Alternatively, I think it should be legal for the primary reason it is legal: It distracts from real child abuse.



You are definately a pedo, cant even read what is written because your brain shuts down at the thought of admitting you are one and someone is calling you out on it


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 8, 2014)

this thread tho


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> You are definately a pedo, cant even read what is written because your brain shuts down at the thought of admitting you are one and someone is calling you out on it



So is this the extent of your discussion? A false appeal to motive claim that's part of a circular argument: Person A supports Claim 1, so Person A must benefit from Claim 1, so person A supports Claim 1, so Person A must benefit from Claim 1......


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

^ No Toroxus, he's read the thread and actually came to his conclusion.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

yeah u pedo toxicus


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> ^ No Toroxus, he's read the thread and actually came to his conclusion.



This doesn't address the topic.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

He's saying your opinion isn't valid.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> So is this the extent of your discussion? A false appeal to motive claim that's part of a circular argument: Person A supports Claim 1, so Person A must benefit from Claim 1, so person A supports Claim 1, so Person A must benefit from Claim 1......



You kept repeating things i had already written as if it was new information / a stance a hadn't already expressed, most likely due to clouded judgement because of the feelings of shame flooding your body as the realization hit.

Its ok to get off to girlie hentai or small boy hentai or whatever, i dont judge.

Just dont touch real children and its cool with me,


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> He's saying your opinion isn't valid.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

He's saying he doesn't take you seriously due to what was discussed earlier in this thread with you and your friend talking about Carl.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> He's saying he doesn't take you seriously due to what was discussed earlier in this thread with you and your friend talking about Carl.



Ad hominems are off-topic. Answer my question:


----------



## Zaru (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> you were argueing about ages of girls we knew, not random stares where you get surprised.
> 
> the fact that you want to debate against age is a requirement just tells me want to fuck small girls and need an excuse for your spare time masturbating.
> 
> Just get some girlie hentai and enjoy life




It's rare to see a post so stupid that it leaves me speechless


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Respond to this post first. Why should people take your opinion seriously with your fight to allow people to draw child porn when you have continuous conversations with your friend about a child actor and talk about how he's going to turn into a "hot shota?"

That's what happens when stuff is taken overboard with that kind of stuff.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Edit: Ad hominems = Logical Fallacy



Not on topic.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Zaru said:


> It's rare to see a post so stupid that it leaves me speechless



Go enjoy pedo porn mate, its ok


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> Go enjoy pedo porn mate, its ok



Thoughts?


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> I'm afraid to engage further into this discussion Flow is bringing up.



I can do the same thing.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Thoughts?



if you knew how to read you would know my stance already


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

sweden the pedo country


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> I can do the same thing.



But you can't seem to stay on topic.  You can't just use any topic you please to attempt ad hominems.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> if you knew how to read you would know my stance already



Oh sorry, I assume that means you agree with them and you're just here to flame and flamebait in return. After awhile, stupid posts that say the same thing start to blend together.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

whao! 

fuck happened to your rep mathias m8?
scourge of da forum

dats what you get for calling zaru a pedo


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> I suggest you learn how to think instead of spouting more bs
> 
> that was among the top retarded comments i have ever seen
> 
> "what they want is a mentally to young girl, thats being a pedo."



Oh, a circular argument and projection?

Yeah, I'm done with you. I don't have the time to deal with idiots.


----------



## Itachі (Jun 8, 2014)

Unlucky mate. :ignoramus


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Oh sorry, I assume that means you agree with them and you're just here to flame and flamebait in return. After awhile, stupid posts that say the same thing start to blend together.



So you are still incabable of reading.. cute


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Oh, a circular argument and projection?
> 
> Yeah, I'm done with you. I don't have the time to deal with idiots.



He learned the usual words coming out of a retarded internet post who thinks he knows how to argue.. cute <3

edit: next up AD HOMINEM raur raur raur


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> So you are still incabable of reading.. cute



No, actually I was spot on. You think it should be legal (agree with Sweden and Japan), but are just here to flame.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> He learned the usual words coming out of a retarded internet post who thinks he knows how to argue.. cute <3
> 
> edit: next up AD HOMINEM raur raur raur



A post can't argue.

And not every insult is an ad hominem. Your trying to use "ad hominem" is pretty ugly.


----------



## Zaru (Jun 8, 2014)

I'm gonna go with the explanation that Mathias is some kid trying his hands at babby's first passive-aggressive trolling attempt

I refuse to believe someone can be this dense


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> No, actually I was spot on. You think it should be legal (agree with Sweden and Japan), but are just here to flame.



4th time is the charm, good job finally understanding a normal sentence 

I knew that if i didnt answer you then you'd eventually figure it out yourself


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> And not every insult is an ad hominem. Your trying to use "ad hominem" is pretty ugly.



Exactly. I call people titles that I think they are all the time. But as soon as that name-calling distracts from the topic, then it's an ad hominem. 
For example: Half this thread that accuses others of being pedophiles by way of the appeal to motive fallacy.



Mathias124 said:


> 4th time is the charm, good job finally understanding a normal sentence
> 
> I knew that if i didnt answer you then you'd eventually figure it out yourself




So I said you believe in Claim X, to which you said I was wrong, so then I just reiterated the same thing, and then you said I was correct.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Zaru said:


> I'm gonna go with the explanation that Mathias is some kid trying his hands at babby's first passive-aggressive trolling attempt
> 
> I refuse to believe someone can be this dense



Its ok for you to want small kids man.

just dont act on it


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> But you can't seem to stay on topic.  You can't just use any topic you please to attempt ad hominems.




Many people don't think this stuff should be legal since it encourages pedophilia like behavior. You and your friend look at "shota" porn all the time and have even discussed openly about a real young actor and talk about him without his shirt on and wanting to see pictures of him. 

Do you see the issue now? What is your opinion towards people that jack off to little kids having sex and also discuss child actors not even 16 looking like "hot little shotas"? Do you believe the government should do something to discourage this kind of behavior? Because by just saying "Oh, it's alright. Let people jack off to drawn pictures of shotas" obviously isn't good enough when there are people on this very forum that jack off not just to drawn pictures, but are encouraged by actual little kids as well.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> A post can't argue.
> 
> And not every insult is an ad hominem. Your trying to use "ad hominem" is pretty ugly.



I don't think English is his first language.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> A post can't argue.
> 
> And not every insult is an ad hominem. Your trying to use "ad hominem" is pretty ugly.



Retard alert here  ty for proving me right


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Many people don't think this stuff should be legal since it encourages pedophilia like behavior.


[Citation needed]

The Swedish Supreme Court (easily researchable) found the exact opposite. It sort of "satiates" that desire in the same way pornographic material does. However, unlike child pornography, there is no child victim in drawn pornography, which is the actual reason why child pornography is illegal.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:
			
		

> You and your friend look at "shota" porn all the time and have even discussed openly about a real young actor and talk about him without his shirt on and wanting to see pictures of him.
> 
> Do you see the issue now? What is your opinion towards people that jack off to little kids having sex and also discuss child actors not even 16 looking like "hot little shotas"? Do you believe the government should do something to discourage this kind of behavior? Because by just saying "Oh, it's alright. Let people jack off to drawn pictures of shotas" obviously isn't good enough when there are people on this very forum that jack off not just to drawn pictures, but are encouraged by actual little kids as well.
> __________________



Do you see the issue, Toroxus?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Do you see the issue, Toroxus?



You being off-topic? Yeah, it's always been an issue with you. I've just learned to ignore your off-topic posts and not feed the troll.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

By you ignoring the rest of that post, you're basically admitting that you see the issue with people that get off to that kind of stuff.


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 8, 2014)

itt: people dont know what porn is
itt: people cant differentiate between drawings and photos
itt: you're a pedo but you're not a pedo but you're a pedo


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> By you ignoring the rest of that post, you're basically admitting that you see the issue with people that get off to that kind of stuff.



No, by ignoring the rest of that post, I'm staying on topic.



> The Swedish Supreme Court (easily researchable) found the exact opposite. It sort of "satiates" that desire in the same way pornographic material does. However, unlike child pornography, there is no child victim in drawn pornography, which is the actual reason why child pornography is illegal.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> No, by ignoring the rest of that post, I'm staying on topic.



You only want to discuss what you want to, but when people bring up the fact that people that get off to "hot little shotas" (as you phrase it) and real children, you want to jump ship. 

So why should people take your opinion seriously if you don't want to look at all sides of the argument?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Off-topic





> So why should people take your opinion seriously if you don't want to look at all sides of the argument?



You don't need to take my opinion seriously. I provided the opinion of the Swedish Supreme Court. If you think they are invalid, then provide evidence as to why.


----------



## buff cat (Jun 8, 2014)




----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> Retard alert here  ty for proving me right



You know, it's fine that you're an idiot. Your unpopularity makes me smile.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Which I've already taken into account. Now answer this:



> You only want to discuss what you want to, but when people bring up the fact that people that get off to "hot little shotas" (as you phrase it) and real children, you want to jump ship.
> 
> So why should people take your opinion seriously if you don't want to look at all sides of the argument?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Which I've already taken into account.



But you think they are wrong, so provide us with the evidence that makes them wrong.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

I'm cracking the fuck up.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> But you think they are wrong, so provide us with the evidence that makes them wrong.



Provide me with the evidence that shows that it's right that adults are motivated by shota porn and will openly discuss children being attractive and that your opinion should be taken seriously.


----------



## Krory (Jun 8, 2014)

This getting almost as dumb as the time Bioness defended Toroxus when he admitted to being excited by having sexually harassing boys in a high school locker room (at almost 30).


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Provide me with the evidence that shows that it's right that adults are motivated by shota porn and will openly discuss children being attractive and that your opinion should be taken seriously.



How can there be any evidence to support that?


----------



## Itachі (Jun 8, 2014)

It's all okay if you say "no pedo".

@Krory

u wot m8


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Provide me with the evidence that shows that it's right that adults are motivated by shota porn



The Swedish Supreme Court says that none of what you say happens. So it's not applicable to talk about the consequences of something that has to be proven to occur.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 8, 2014)

krory said:


> This getting almost as dumb as the time Bioness defended Toroxus when he admitted to being excited by having sexually harassing boys in a high school locker room (at almost 30).


.... now thats sick

this isnt even about cartoon pedo stuff anymore, hes done actual pedo stuff!


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

krory said:


> This getting almost as dumb as the time Bioness defended Toroxus when he admitted to being excited by having sexually harassing boys in a high school locker room (at almost 30).



I remember reading that but I didn't know Toroxus was actually 30. I thought he was a kid as well. It was still weird that he said he was stripping in front of them. It just furthers my belief that Toroxus's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously on a matter dealing with why he thinks drawn children having sex should be legal.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

babaGAReeb said:


> .... now thats sick
> 
> this isnt even about cartoon pedo stuff anymore, hes done actual pedo stuff!





I know I have Krory on ignore because he's a passive-aggressive troll, but some of the things he says are pretty funny.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> I remember reading that but I didn't know Toroxus was actually 30. I thought he was a kid as well. It was still weird that he said he was stripping in front of them. It just furthers my belief that Toroxus's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously on a matter dealing with why he thinks drawn children having sex should be legal.


There have been many others in this thread who agree with him, though.


...we're still cool, though, right?


----------



## sworder (Jun 8, 2014)

krory said:


> This getting almost as dumb as the time Bioness defended Toroxus when he admitted to being excited by having sexually harassing boys in a high school locker room (at almost 30).



not to miss the point of why you posted this, but it's been this dumb for a few pages now


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> I remember reading that but I didn't know Toroxus was actually 30. I thought he was a kid as well. It was still weird that he said he was stripping in front of them. It just furthers my belief that Toroxus's opinion shouldn't be taken seriously on a matter dealing with why he thinks drawn children having sex should be legal.



Again, off-topic ad hominems. I'm not even going to bother to talk about them because this isn't what the thread is about.


----------



## buff cat (Jun 8, 2014)

popcorn.gif


----------



## blk (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> The Swedish Supreme Court (easily researchable) found the exact opposite. *It sort of "satiates" that desire in the same way pornographic material does. *However, unlike child pornography, there is no child victim in drawn pornography, which is the actual reason why child pornography is illegal.



But the article that you linked says nothing like that.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> There have been many others in this thread who agree with him, though.
> 
> 
> ...we're still cool, though, right?



I think people that engage in pedophilia like behavior should get help and arrested (the ones that try to seduce a kid or something should be arrested) and "shota and loli" stuff should be discouraged if it can't be illegal. 

@Itachi, he's not lying. I literally remember watching Toroxus say that in his vms. I just thought he was like around their age or something at the time he did it. I didn't know he was 30.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

blk said:


> But the article that you linked says nothing like that.



Read the court ruling and expert witness testimony.



Flow said:


> "shota and loli" stuff should be discouraged if it can't be illegal.



[citation needed]




> @Itachi, he's not lying. I literally remember watching Toroxus say that in his vms. I just thought he was like around their age or something at the time he did it. I didn't know he was 30.



Hell, I didn't know I was 30, or that I ever have been.  Yet more time-traveling paradoxes.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 8, 2014)

Are we actually going to discuss the concepts related to this topic or what?


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

You need a citation after I just proved that people that like shota/loli also drool over real child actors? 

How old are you, Toroxus?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Are we actually going to discuss the concepts related to this topic or what?



How. Fucking. Dare. You. Don't you see? Every page that this thread goes through, I learn more things about myself that I never knew before. I know it's going to be hard trying to convince my mom that because "Krory said so", that I'm in fact over half a decade older than her or I originally thought, but banana-damn-it, I'm going to try.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> I think people that engage in pedophilia like behavior should get help and arrested (the ones that try to seduce a kid or something should be arrested) and "shota and loli" stuff should be discouraged if it can't be illegal.



As egregious as this sounds, that's like saying homosexuals should get help. Though pedophilia's a fetish, it's still a sexual attraction to a certain type of individual. You might be able to change a few people that way, but you can't force the majority to. It's genetic and too deeply ingrained into their biology.

Now, giving said person an outlet in the form of non-harmful media: what's wrong with that? If you try to restrict those things, the sexually deprived individual will more than likely try to obtain it anyway despite it being illegal. And since it's all going to be illegal here, they'll go for the real deal, which isn't even comparably worse because they're actual people.

Engaging in the behavior doesn't just mean shooting CPs. It can also mean buying anything related to CP, or searching CP up. We've had a lot of arrests over here because of accidental mis-clicks leading to such sites. Zero-tolerance is almost never the answer. Arresting someone and jailing them or sending them to prison won't curb their sexual attraction. Even torturing someone to "fix" them rarely works, and that's inhumane anyway.

If you don't someone to act out on their desires, you need to give them an innocuous alternative that'll curb those desires. If they have something to sexually satisfy them already, they won't be trying to go for children in real life, or at least they'll be less likely to. They know the consequences of doing that, but they have their alternative to go to in case they ever want it.  

That's progressive.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> You need a citation after I just proved that people that like shota/loli also drool over real child actors?



You didn't prove anything because you didn't cite anything. I cited a court ruling that concluded the opposite of what you said.


----------



## ClandestineSchemer (Jun 8, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Are we actually going to discuss the concepts related to this topic or what?



Nope.
This thread has become about judging Toroxus guilt.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> As egregious as this sounds, that's like saying homosexuals should get help.



No, it's not. 

Are we really going to start trying to discuss how homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia, as in you shouldn't have to try and get help for being attracted to the same gender?

@Toroxus, why should people take your opinion seriously if you don't want to look at all sides of the argument?


----------



## blk (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Read the court ruling and expert witness testimony.



In the article that you linked there are just two people giving their (contrasting) opinion on what should count as cp []:


*Spoiler*: __ 





> "These are cartoons depicting antropomorphic humans with rabbit ears and tails. The expert says Donald Duck and The Simpsons cannot be child pornography, *but these Japanese paintings are child pornography.* That's not a judgement the courts should be making," Bror Hellman continues.







*Spoiler*: __ 





> *Do you think Manga should be more subject to censorship than other cartoons?*
> 
> "*No, I do not think that.* There are a lot of Western comics that are explicit. We talk about heavy metal titles, usually from France and Italy, with a lot of sex and violence in combination. Except the females are usually – I'm not saying always – but they're usually drawn as women and not young teenagers," says David Borgstr?m.






Both sides haven't presented evidences. If you have other sources, please provide them.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> No, it's not.
> 
> Are we really going to start trying to discuss how homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia, as in you shouldn't have to try and get help for being attracted to the same gender?
> 
> @Toroxus, why should people take your opinion seriously if you don't want to look at all sides of the argument?



Is that all you read? Come on, man.

They're both sexual attractions and deviant behavior. Deviant as in "deviating from the norm". While one is harmless in contemporary society, and the other isn't, they're both still biological processes that an individual can't control.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

ClandestineSchemer said:


> Nope.
> This thread has become about judging Toroxus guilt.



Seriously, it's really amusing actually. So many "facts" have surfaced about me that I didn't even know:
I'm 30 or almost 30.
People _still_ stalk me. 
I strip in high school locker rooms.
I'm a p*d*p****.
I'm a nepiophile.
I'm a hebophile.
I'm all three of these things at the same time.
The yaoi communities' definition of "Shota" is incorrect.
I support child pornography.
I look at lesbian loli media.
I think someone will be attractive in the future when they reach an age lesser than their current age.
It's wrong of me to think someone will be attractive in the future.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Again, off-topic ad hominems. I'm not even going to bother to talk about them because this isn't what the thread is about.



Notice that this guy says Ad Hominem  every time someone calls him out on being a pedo?

Can't wait for him to tell the same to the judge at his soon-to-come trial.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> Is that all you read? Come on, man.
> 
> They're both sexual attractions and deviant behavior. Deviant as in "deviating from the norm". While one is harmless in contemporary society, and the other isn't, they're both still biological processes that an individual can't control.



Which one should still get help if they feel the need to act on their urges.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> snip



Some of that stuff may be incorrect, but you literally asked for pictures of a little kid without his shirt off to see his "tummy and back"

Please stop with the woe as me crap.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Which one should still get help if they feel the need to act on their urges.



I get the feeling you didn't read my entire post at all.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Risyth said:


> I get the feeling you didn't read my entire post at all.



Takes one to know one


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> Takes one to know one


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

I did read your entire post, but I don't see what there is to disagree on. If someone has an uncontrollable urge to go out and have sex with a kid they should go seek help. There are pedophiles that can "control" their lust, so I don't even know what you're trying to argue with me about.


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 8, 2014)

dat ass doe
liek dayum


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> Notice that this guy says Ad Hominem  every time someone calls him out on being a pedo?



It's a red-herring illogical fallacy. It's not part of the topic, so to do so is to pull a red herring.

ITT: McCarthyism.



Flow said:


> Some of that stuff may be incorrect







			
				Flow said:
			
		

> If someone has an uncontrollable urge to go out and have sex with a kid they should go seek help.



Go figure. The only thing Flow says that's factual in this thread is something so blatantly obvious that it goes unspoken.


----------



## aiyanah (Jun 8, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> Are we actually going to discuss the concepts related to this topic or what?



no
we shall debase the opposers opinion by calling them out on either idiocy or pedophilia


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> It's a red-herring illogical fallacy. It's not part of the topic, so to do so is to pull a red herring.
> 
> ITT: McCarthyism.



Sure it is mate.. sure it is 

When debating CP its totally not relevant to call someone out when they give a pedo vibe at all ^^

Its an ad hominem to stay on topic !


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Nice nit-picking there, Toroxus.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> I did read your entire post, but I don't see what there is to disagree on. If someone has an uncontrollable urge to go out and have sex with a kid they should go seek help. There are pedophiles that can "control" their lust, so I don't even know what you're trying to argue with me about.



It's not about controlling their "lust". Everyone has a different libido, and it's not right to ostracize anyone because of its circumstantial nature if they aren't a threat to society.

Just because you're a p*d*p**** doesn't mean you have an uncontrollable urge. Do heterosexuals have uncontrollable urges sometimes? Yes, so they can watch or read whatever. Why can't pedophiles read comics to help them out? There is no consistent and humane treatment for pedophilia.


----------



## EJ (Jun 8, 2014)

Alright I made all; my points, and I'm sort of tired of arguing for now and restating my opinions/facts. 

brb


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Flow said:


> Nice nit-picking staying on topic there, Toroxus.



Thanks, I try despite all the trolls.



Mathias124 said:


> When debating CP its totally not relevant to call someone out when they give a pedo vibe at all ^^



Even if an avowed p*d*p**** was arguing for p*d*p****-rights, like NAMBLA or NAMGLA, it doesn't make them invalid. Saying someone is invalid because they may benefit from something is another type of red herring called an "appeal to motive" logical fallacy. A woman arguing for women's rights is not invalid just because she has a motive and something to gain from it.



> Its an ad hominem to stay on topic !



An ad hominem is an attack on the speaker's credibility because of something unrelated.



Flow said:


> Alright I made all; my points, and I'm sort of tired of arguing for now and restating my opinions/*facts*.


----------



## Deleted member 23 (Jun 8, 2014)

How did this topic span 16 pages since yesterday? Go to my football game miss the shitstorm 

Has Mael posted here yet? I know he love something like this.


----------



## Ceria (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> How. Fucking. Dare. You. Don't you see? Every page that this thread goes through, I learn more things about myself that I never knew before. *I know it's going to be hard trying to convince my mom that because "Krory said so", that I'm in fact over half a decade older than her* or I originally thought, but banana-damn-it, I'm going to try.



Hey Toroxus, what do you mean by this? If you were 30 and half or more of a decade older than your mother, is your mom in her mid to lower 20's, implying she had you really really young? 

This caught my attention more than anything else.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Ceria said:


> Hey Toroxus, what do you mean by this? If you were 30 and half or more of a decade older than your mother, is your mom in her mid to lower 20's, implying she had you really really young?
> 
> This caught my attention more than anything else.





> than her or I originally thought


the "her or I" is attached to the "originally thought." "Than" is comparing our "original thoughts" to "what Krory said so."

So if it helps:


> than her/I originally thought.



In reality, I'm not even half way through my 20s. Hell, I'm not even half way through the half-way of my 20s.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Thanks, I try despite all the trolls.
> 
> Even if an avowed p*d*p**** was arguing for p*d*p****-rights, like NAMBLA or NAMGLA, it doesn't make them invalid. Saying someone is invalid because they may benefit from something is another type of red herring called an "appeal to motive" logical fallacy. A woman arguing for women's rights is not invalid just because she has a motive and something to gain from it.
> 
> An ad hominem is an attack on the speaker's credibility because of something unrelated.



None of those things are related to whats happening but fair enough.

I outright stated that you are a pedo and its ok as long as you dont act it, so i didn't say it to hurt your credibility.

Needless to say, talking about Pedo's in a thread about the legality of certain types of porn whose target audience is a pedo is no irrelevant.  

Furthermore i never called your opinion invalid nor did any of the rest who said you were a pedo /facepalm.

Before you make use of concept and spout them like the internet warrior you are, make sure you already READ what was WRITTEN and not what you thought we wrote 

Try again


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

Mathias124 said:


> None of those things are related to whats happening but fair enough.


You did it right here:



> When debating CP its totally not relevant to call someone out when they give a pedo vibe at all ^^ [/sarcasm]



It's irrelevant. Saying it's relevant means that somehow a person being a p*d*p**** or not affects their credibility. 



			
				Mathias said:
			
		

> Blah blah blah



But since I can quote you directly claiming it's relevant when it's an appeal to motive fallacy because it's an irrelevant point meant to distract as part of an ad hominem, that entire part of your post is unimportant because it argues that you didn't say something when the post before you said exactly that.

I wasn't born yesterday (or 30 years ago for that matter). I've had many debates with students trying to give them grant money for research under me. You're not fooling me.


----------



## blk (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> *The Swedish Supreme Court (easily researchable) found the exact opposite. It sort of "satiates" that desire in the same way pornographic material does. *However, unlike child pornography, there is no child victim in drawn pornography, which is the actual reason why child pornography is illegal.



This claim is still unsubstantiated, since you have provided no evidences for it.
I read the wikipedia page (had to translate it, so some part was a bit confusing) and the article that you linked and none of them present any research on the matter, nor there is anything like the bold written in them.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

blk said:


> This claim is still unsubstantiated, since you have provided no evidences for it.
> I read the wikipedia page (had to translate it, so some part was a bit confusing) and the article that you linked and none of them present any research on the matter, nor there is anything like the bold written in them.



There's a transcript of the court ruling in swedish floating around places, they had expert witnesses from police agencies to sexual therapists. I briefly looked for it, but I'm going to have to ask my Swedish friend for it again. The main argument from police was that it was a waste of resources and the main argument from sexual therapists was that functions like all other pornography does: "satiating" that desire.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 8, 2014)

TIL that lots of people think viewing pornography of any type will turn anyone into a rapist.


----------



## blk (Jun 8, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> There's a transcript of the court ruling in swedish floating around places, they had expert witnesses from police agencies to sexual therapists. I briefly looked for it, but I'm going to have to ask my Swedish friend for it again. The main argument from police was that it was a waste of resources and *the main argument from sexual therapists was that functions like all other pornography does: "satiating" that desire.*



I haven't read that in the article or the wiki page.
But regardless, obviously masturbating temporarily satiates the sexual desire; the question is whether people who masturbate to pictures/video of drawn kids and loli (or whatever they are called) will eventually switch to the real thing, or even try to approach a kid.
In the wiki page, you can read that Marie Eneman (a researcher of cp and computing), of the university of G?teborg, says that yet there are no evidences for saying whether the above is likely to happen or not.


----------



## Mathias124 (Jun 9, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> You did it right here:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Haha you're pathetic 

Hillarious to watch you deny everything you dont like though, very strong mental self defence that keeps you thinking you're smart.

By the way, when i bring up a topic and you respond to it, im not off topic because you just acknowedged the topic   GL debating in the future


----------



## Palpatine (Jun 9, 2014)

Holy shit, Japan


----------



## Jake CENA (Jun 9, 2014)

Does Kiss X Sis counts as CP?


----------



## creative (Jun 9, 2014)

holy fuck this thread

better late than never japan?


----------



## Shukumei (Jun 9, 2014)

blk said:


> But regardless, obviously masturbating temporarily satiates the sexual desire; the question is whether people who masturbate to pictures/video of drawn kids and loli (or whatever they are called) will eventually switch to the real thing, or even try to approach a kid.



Not everyone who looks at shota/loli actually faps to it. I know I don't.


----------



## EJ (Jun 9, 2014)

Yeah, your totally normal and healthy obsession with the young actor that plays Carl totally means you don't like that kind of stuff.


----------



## blk (Jun 9, 2014)

Shukumei said:


> *Not everyone who looks at shota/loli actually faps to it.*I know I don't.



I didn't write the contrary.

On a side note, sorry if i don't believe you about what you do or not.


----------



## Zyrax (Jun 9, 2014)

*Sees Title*
NOOOOOOOOOOOO 
*Manga and Anime loli is still legal*
What a relief


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 9, 2014)

Just a general question guys. I'm not judging anybody and shit. But seriously can anybody explain to me what is so attractive about shota's and Loli's? To me they're just kids with really big eyes. I'm just curious here.


----------



## Shukumei (Jun 9, 2014)

Mill?n Vasto said:


> Just a general question guys. I'm not judging anybody and shit. But seriously can anybody explain to me what is so attractive about shota's and Loli's? To me they're just kids with really big eyes. I'm just curious here.


This should be good. *breaks out popcorn*


----------



## EJ (Jun 9, 2014)

Mill?n Vasto said:


> Just a general question guys. I'm not judging anybody and shit. But seriously can anybody explain to me what is so attractive about shota's and Loli's? To me they're just kids with really big eyes. I'm just curious here.





Shukumei said:


> This should be good. *breaks out popcorn*



The fucking hell..


----------



## Shukumei (Jun 9, 2014)

Flow said:


> The fucking hell..


Popcorn is lip-licking good.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jun 9, 2014)

Deputy Myself said:


> how do you even define child pornography in manga



You guys can argue what you want , but anything depicting a child made for the sake of arousal whether the child is real or imagined is child porn. You can whine and bitch and moan all you want about how they're not real kids, but if you beat off to that shit you're still a real p*d*p**** because all it takes to be a p*d*p**** is an attraction to children.


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 9, 2014)

Shukumei said:


> Popcorn is lip-licking good.



So yeah. The fuck is that gif supposed to mean?


----------



## Vasto Lorde King (Jun 9, 2014)

Mill?n Vasto said:


> Just a general question guys. I'm not judging anybody and shit. But seriously can anybody explain to me what is so attractive about shota's and Loli's? To me they're just kids with really big eyes. I'm just curious here.



Yeah fuck this question. I think I already kinda know the answer to this one.

Stupid question is stupid question guys. I'm sorry


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 9, 2014)

SO HEY YOU KNOW...

I take a measure of being true to one's principles is if you are able to understand why just because you don't like something or find it in bad taste is not enough reason to make it illegal. I mean a lot of you guys are going about the most irrelevant shit. I really could care less where one's proclivities lie so long as _actual individuals_ are not being harmed or exploited in the indulgence of such things. Of course, it makes them someone to look out for...but unless they act on it in the real world, what can else can you do?


----------



## EJ (Jun 9, 2014)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You guys can argue what you want , but anything depicting a child made for the sake of arousal whether the child is real or imagined is child porn. You can whine and bitch and moan all you want about how they're not real kids, but if you beat off to that shit you're still a real p*d*p**** because all it takes to be a p*d*p**** is an attraction to children.



Yeah, pretty much.


----------



## Zaru (Jun 9, 2014)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You guys can argue what you want , but anything depicting a child made for the sake of arousal whether the child is real or imagined is child porn. You can whine and bitch and moan all you want about how they're not real kids, but if you beat off to that shit you're still a real p*d*p**** because all it takes to be a p*d*p**** is an attraction to children.



Was anyone who's not trolling here arguing that attraction to sexual depictions of young children doesn't make you a p*d*p**** or at least dangerously close to being one?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Jun 9, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> SO HEY YOU KNOW...
> 
> I take a measure of being true to one's principles is if you are able to understand why just because you don't like something or find it in bad taste is not enough reason to make it illegal. I mean a lot of you guys are going about the most irrelevant shit. I really could care less where one's proclivities lie so long as _actual individuals_ are not being harmed or exploited in the indulgence of such things. Of course, it makes them someone to look out for...but unless they act on it in the real world, what can else can you do?


Where did I say anything about making something illegal? I'm simply calling the people what they are.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 9, 2014)

I was just trying to veer the topic back to the relevant matter at hand.


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jun 10, 2014)

The problem with child porn is that I feel bad for the kids who take part in it against their will (and it's by default against their will since by law they're not yet at the age of consent). That being said, I don't care about fictional kids having sex because...they're fictional (and freedom of art...).


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 10, 2014)

Mill?n Vasto said:


> Yeah fuck this question. I think I already kinda know the answer to this one.
> 
> Stupid question is stupid question guys. I'm sorry


i dont get the extremely huge eyes part though, why would anyone liek kids with big eyes? they would be mutant freaks in real life


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Deputy Myself said:


> how do you even define child pornography in manga



Yeah I don't know you can make a character look 8, say shes 16-18 and draw her as explicitly as you want. But if you do vicea versa you go to jail understandably but still a massive loophole and the only way you go to jail is if you deliberately break the law. So yeah really really bad. 

You can label a child in a drawing as older than 16-18 and do whatever you want to it. 

I am extremely surprised that child porn was actually legal anywhere, especially a place like Japan. 

That's insanely depressing and I'm shattered that children are being exploited like this legally.  

I view Japan and its culture totally different now due to being misinformed prior. I always knew about the young girls in drawings but didn't know this or even some of the drawings would be legal. 

How can other major countries allow children to be sexually assaulted for profit in Japan? This is fucking sickening so much anger and depression. 

Countries get raided for harboring terrorists but children are raped daily in daylight and I assume people thought they would fix that up later?


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Shukumei said:


> This should be good. *breaks out popcorn*



You should be stomped because your a piece of shit. The only way I can be satisfied that you won't stink the street is if your stuck to my foot you fucking pleb. 

I would shave 25% of my hope for humanity just so I could watch you get hit by a car. 

I'm getting out of here before I say worse.


----------



## Deputy Myself (Jun 10, 2014)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You guys can argue what you want , but anything depicting a child made for the sake of arousal whether the child is real or imagined is child porn. You can whine and bitch and moan all you want about how they're not real kids, but if you beat off to that shit you're still a real p*d*p**** because all it takes to be a p*d*p**** is an attraction to children.


 You misunderstand
In drawn media, how do you determine the age of the characters being depicted?
In the real world it's easy. You say anything younger than 15-18 or whatever is illegal to portray in a sexual manner. The child either is or is not younger and therefore there either has or has not been committed a crime.

How are you going to do that in hentai?
Are you going to show the images to a panel of unbiased judges, and if the majority finds the depiction to be too young it's illegal?
How about the Australia route, where if they have A cups it's automatically kiddy porn?
HOW?

I mean I get there's some obvious shady work out there, with characters who look like they should be in preschool. But there's a massive grey area and if you're unwilling to supply a credible way to account for the difficulties in determining  at what point EXACTLY it crosses the line then I suggest you just stop.


----------



## Mider T (Jun 10, 2014)

I think people misunderstood that gif.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jun 10, 2014)

I'd assume the actual age is probably irrelevant in a lot of cases.

it would be the physical appearance and or mannerisms that determine attraction right? 

So yes, if you get hard to a 10000 year old dragon monster thing in the body of a young girl, that doesn't make you a furry or anything else that makes you a paedophile


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 10, 2014)

Mider T said:


> I think people misunderstood that gif.


well the guy who posted it is toroxus's pedo buddy...


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> The problem with child porn is that I feel bad for the kids who take part in it against their will (and it's by default against their will since by law they're not yet at the age of consent). That being said, I don't care about fictional kids having sex because...they're fictional (and freedom of art...).



That view is so fucked up. 

In art especially sexual art people will try to make them look as close to as real as possible. 

So I ask you this, if a hologram of a child appeared could you really do the things you say you would do? Its not real its art? Its literally pixels and the same shit your happy with getting off too. Its not a real person so whats your problem or is it because you might get labeled with negative connotations now? Your sick and you don't understand the words you say. 

Your happy with engaging with a pedophillic community and distributing child porn/art to each other as well wtf? 

You would masturbate to children if they weren't harmed or if they aren't real or both? Because even still thats just fucked up. 

You people who are into this big googly eyes kiddy porn shit are fucking putrid, fucking disgraces. I can't believe people die for freedom and the only time I've seen someone mention freedom of art is in a thread about child pornography. 

I should just make a painting with a bunch of white people in the 1800's whipping a black person and laughing about it because you know freedom of art. Make paintings of Jews tipping milk on money in a bowl because you know freedom of art. 

But this really is way too far.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Shukumei said:


> Popcorn is lip-licking good.





I'm believing this...


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> That view is so fucked up.
> 
> In art especially sexual art people will try to make them look as close to as real as possible.
> 
> ...



I feel like a lot of people in this thread are getting too caught up in their emotions. The reason why the matter of freedom of expression is brought up in threads like these is because they are the true test of whether we truly have such principles. Matters like this really force us to consider it, because it pushes the limits of taste and personal tolerance; however, we need to acknowledge that just because we find something distasteful is not a good enough reason to have it outlawed. 

Such freedoms ultimately mean that yes, people are allowed to express themselves in ways you may find personally abhorrent. However if the rights of others are not being violated (that being children in this case), then what can you expect to do? If you are going to turn back and deny that on matters that personally disgust you, then where does it stop? That ultimately is the real test here isn't it? I don't think enough people consider that.


----------



## Deputy Myself (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> In art especially sexual art people will try to make them look as close to as real as possible.


 Nice factual reasoning backed by sources


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> That view is so fucked up.
> 
> In art especially sexual art people will *try to make them look as close to as real as possible*.



Only if it's intended as such. As noted before when they're in a manga they usually have disproportionately large eyes on purpose.



BashFace said:


> So I ask you this, if a hologram of a child appeared could you really do the things you say you would do?



I said that I wouldn't care (=I am against its criminalization) if the hologram was that of a fictional child (so an actual person didn't have to to go through nonconsensual sex) but I would care (and thus I would be for its criminalization) if the hologram depicted a real child.



BashFace said:


> Its not real its art? Its literally pixels and the same shit your happy with getting off too. Its not a real person so whats your problem or is it because you might get labeled with negative connotations now? Your sick and you don't understand the words you say.




If it doesn't depict an actual person bellow the age of consent but it's just a drawing or an artistic hologram that doesn't show an actual person it's alright.




BashFace said:


> Your happy with engaging with a pedophillic community and distributing child porn/art to each other as well wtf?



Get it right for once, it's "you're". I'm not particularly interested in engaging with the pedophillic community, it's a psychiatric disorder. 
Distributing child porn, no. Cartoon/manga child porn, no but I wouldn't criminalize it.



BashFace said:


> You would masturbate to children if they weren't harmed or if they aren't real or both? Because even still thats just fucked up.



Personally? I don't masturbate to any kind of fiction or prepubescent children...



BashFace said:


> You people who are into this big googly eyes kiddy porn shit are fucking putrid, fucking disgraces. I can't believe people die for freedom and the only time I've seen someone mention freedom of art is in a thread about child pornography.



Lol.




BashFace said:


> I should just make a painting with a bunch of white people in the 1800's whipping a black person and laughing about it because you know freedom of art. Make paintings of Jews tipping milk on money in a bowl because you know freedom of art.
> 
> But this really is way too far.



Do it, who cares.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> I feel like a lot of people in this thread are getting too caught up in their emotions. The reason why the matter of freedom of expression is brought up in threads like these is because they are the true test of whether we truly have such principles. Matters like this really force us to consider it, because it pushes the limits of taste and personal tolerance; however, we need to acknowledge that just because we find something distasteful is not a good enough reason to have it outlawed.
> 
> Such freedoms ultimately mean that yes, people are allowed to express themselves in ways poo you may find personally abhorrent. However if the rights of others are not being violated (that being children in this case), then what can you expect to do? If you are going to turn back and deny that on matters that personally disgust you, then where does it stop? That ultimately is the real test here isn't it? I don't think enough people consider that.



This is something that should be sentimental not just some freedom of art shit? 

Its fucked me up because this whole freedom of expression is just a way to excuse the grotesqueness of the act/acts being depicted and whether people can feel comfortable masturbating to it or not. Some of these people don't have principles because they are dictated by the law they don't give a darn that this isn't illegal at all. 

The reason it should be outlawed is because it depicts children and yes the way Australia does it probably is the best way to avoid confusion. Give them large breasts. Or would that wreck these people being able to masturbate to kids inadvertently. 

The only way this is testing my tolerance is by the people who sit there and pretend there is no solution to poo this. Don't draw children explicitly, yes have people judge or check whether it passes standards(like big breasts etc). Have it so age needs to be defined for images or characters undefinable. So if someone has the facial features of a 12 year old it will just be a cute manga/anime face(I use the word cute descriptively not how I actually view it, I wanna bash those faces) and adult features to compensate. Then we will see if people want to masturbate to disfigured/disproportional people. It would change definitely. 

The reason this is also extremely bad is that it tantalizes and fucks with the way some pedophiles on this thread are rationalizing. It will be ok to touch a child softcore but not penetrate and that shit. Its just a fucked up thing where people draw their boundaries at like how serial killers hate child killers etc. 

Also Kaiba I can understand what people are saying. There is the fuck pedophiles side, the I'm a p*d*p**** but I'm not side, and the how can we define age in art and why should something be illegal side. 

To me this is like making poo synthetic drugs. Thats the best way to describe my views on this and I disagree more than my words can describe when people act like Japans child porn/art can't be toned down or halted.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Deputy Myself said:


> Nice factual reasoning backed by sources



So you obviously disagree that as we have progressed through time, graphic quality hasn't been affected? And in porn they are going for as blurry and obscured an image as possible.


----------



## Deputy Myself (Jun 10, 2014)

> To me this is like making poo synthetic drugs. Thats the best way to describe my views on this and I disagree more than my words can describe when people act like Japans child porn/art can't be toned down or halted.


 
Sure it can be toned down or halted, but that would open up the door to all sorts of slippery slope nonsense.

Nearly everything you said I can imagine a soccermom saying about "Violent videogames". Once we accept policy being made based upon this kind of reasoning, no matter how morally correct it appears, we'll lose all credibility when trying to argue against people wanting to ban for example the aforementioned "violent videogames", but also rapmusic, tattoos, piercings, porn in general, blasphemous writing, etc.

I doubt it's a road you think a decent society should go down.

Yes Japan is messed up but whatever, let the people who jack off to this shit be the perverts they are, if they actually act upon the fantasies depicted in these fictions then yes throw them in jail and let them rot.



> So you obviously disagree that as we have progressed through time, graphic quality hasn't been affected? And in porn they are going for as blurry and obscured an image as possible.


 
I'm saying you shouldn't generalize something as inheretly vague as art


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> Only if it's intended as such. As noted before when they're in a manga they usually have disproportionately large eyes on purpose.



Yes but the intention is to make them look cute or innocent in a way that is very similar to my first thought of a child. I don't doubt this is coincidence. 



> I said that I wouldn't care (=I am against its criminalization) if the hologram was that of a fictional child (so an actual person didn't have to to go through nonconsensual sex) but I would care (and thus I would be for its criminalization) if the hologram depicted a real child.



Is this seriously how you come to terms with yourself? Your sexually attracted to children? So why do you think thats ok to indulge in when its a victim-less crime. I would vomit before I come even close to where your at. 



> If it doesn't depict an actual person bellow the age of consent but it's just a drawing or an artistic hologram that doesn't show an actual person it's alright.



No I meant like how they did 2-Pac, a hologram of a random person who looks real but has been generated. You would masturbate to it you've already admitted that. Your putrid. 

I don't care if you laugh at me because your opinion is worthless and your mind is deluded. I regret wasting my time and emotionally investing in something so helpless.


----------



## Deputy Myself (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> No I meant like how they did 2-Pac, a hologram of a random person who looks real but has been generated. You would masturbate to it you've already admitted that. Your putrid.


I'm going to admit you have a valid point here, at some point these depictions will become real to the point where there really is no distinguishable difference between reality and fiction. 

Thankfully we're not there yet, because I can see it becoming a legal and moral clusterfuck and one which I will once again admit I have no answer to.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Deputy Myself said:


> Nearly everything you said I can imagine a soccermom saying about "Violent videogames". Once we accept policy being made based upon this kind of reasoning, no matter how morally correct it appears, we'll lose all credibility when trying to argue against people wanting to ban for example the aforementioned "violent videogames", but also rapmusic, tattoos, piercings, porn in general, blasphemous writing, etc.



You bastard that actually offended me because thats exactly what I sound like and the poo thing made me laugh. 



> I doubt it's a road you think a decent society should go down.



I don't think violent video games should be compared to child porn but fuck you thats the best way to put it. I need a gif that says cheese= tomato= lettuce= patty= 911(You know the middle easterners being all jelly of the fast food and western lifestyle). 

I'm sure that tantalizing a p*d*p**** is a bit different to playing a violent video game. Its silly to assume everyone is a potential mass murderer waiting to be awakened or whatever lol. 



> Yes Japan is messed up but whatever, let the people who jack off to this shit be the perverts they are, if they actually act upon the fantasies depicted in these fictions then yes throw them in jail and let them rot.



How can we allow child porn and then say if someone touches a kid we will throw them in jail? I understand its whats being done but wtf? 

I still believe that [/QUOTE]


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> This is something that should be sentimental not just some freedom of art shit?



No, it shouldn't be sentimental, it's clear that on topics that really test our principles of freedom, emotion and sentimentality allow us to cross lines that set dangerous precedents for them falling apart. If you can't hold it together in the face of the most challenging situations, then what worth are they?



> Its fucked me up because this whole freedom of expression is just a way to excuse the grotesqueness of the act/acts being depicted and whether people can feel comfortable masturbating to it or not. Some of these people don't have principles because they are dictated by the law they don't give a darn that this isn't illegal at all.
> 
> The reason it should be outlawed is because it depicts children and yes the way Australia does it probably is the best way to avoid confusion. Give them large breasts. Or would that wreck these people being able to masturbate to kids inadvertently.



This is why you shouldn't get too sentimental. First of all, Australia's law is ridiculous, plenty of women have A and B-cup breasts. 

Secondly, regardless of whether or not we find it fucked up or disgusting is again, not a valid reason to make it illegal. Consumption of fictional material with such depictions is ultimately just that, fictional.



> The only way this is testing my tolerance is by the people who sit there and pretend there is no solution to poo this. Don't draw children explicitly, yes have people judge or check whether it passes standards(like big breasts etc). Have it so age needs to be defined for images or characters undefinable. So if someone has the facial features of a 12 year old it will just be a cute manga/anime face(I use the word cute descriptively not how I actually view it, I wanna bash those faces) and adult features to compensate. Then we will see if people want to masturbate to disfigured/disproportional people. It would change definitely.



That again, sets a dangerous precedent on exactly where we stop. If freedom of expression is going to be judged by what's considered tasteful. In CP actual children are being exploited, it is a matter that should be cracked down upon because it is involving actual human beings, human beings with rights. Fictional characters do not have rights. 

How would you define such features though? Humans look very different and age very differently. These standards would be completely arbitrary, and there is again far too much to constrict freedom of expression in ways and to a length you aren't considering. This is why you have to separate your personal disgust from the concept here. 



> The reason this is also extremely bad is that it tantalizes and fucks with the way some pedophiles on this thread are rationalizing. It will be ok to touch a child softcore but not penetrate and that shit. Its just a fucked up thing where people draw their boundaries at like how serial killers hate child killers etc.



I think again, you are getting far too emotional about this. No one ever said touching children "softcore" is ok, that would be illegal anyway. We're talking purely about the legality of fictional material; regardless of whether or not you like it, it is fictional. 



> Also Kaiba I can understand what people are saying. There is the fuck pedophiles side, the I'm a p*d*p**** but I'm not side, and the how can we define age in art and why should something be illegal side.



This is exactly what I'm getting at! The former "side" is just base emotional reaction. What the hell can you do to those if they haven't attempted to act on their proclivities in real life? If you can't prove they have? You are letting that indignation blind you to the fact that as deplorable as they are, freedom of expression applies to them too and their consumption of fictional material is not making a victim of actual children. 



> To me this is like making poo synthetic drugs. Thats the best way to describe my views on this and I disagree more than my words can describe when people act like Japans child porn/art can't be toned down or halted.



It's not a matter of can't, in regards to fictional material but a matter of it shouldn't.


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> Yes but the intention is to make them look cute or innocent in a way that is very similar to my first thought of a child. I don't doubt this is coincidence.



You could just say "many times" or "many artists" do that. Because you implied that everyone did that which is wrong.



BashFace said:


> Is this seriously how you come to terms with yourself? Your sexually attracted to children? So why do you think thats ok to indulge in when its a victim-less crime. I would vomit before I come even close to where your at.



As I've said above I don't masturbate to prepubescent children nor am I attracted to them. But yea, you're coming close to my thought process here. It's a victimless crime and one of those that causes the least harm to anyone.




BashFace said:


> No I meant like how they did 2-Pac, a hologram of a random person who looks real but has been generated. You would masturbate to it you've already admitted that. Your putrid.



I see then. That would fit my second definition (which, again, would make it a victimless crime). It's just a fake, but realistic to some degree, hologram. Please bring me the quote of me admitting that I masturbate to that stuff. 



BashFace said:


> I don't care if you laugh at me because your opinion is worthless and your mind is deluded. I regret wasting my time and emotionally investing in something so helpless.



I don't laugh at you (despite the "lmao" smiley above ), or do any of the stuff that you claim as far as this is concerned, you're the one making things up and assuming things without evidence.


----------



## oprisco (Jun 10, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> Censorship is *ALWAYS* wrong, it is never a viable solution.



Yes, but CP is a big exception to this. Even if you post childporn (or loli/shota/whatever you call it) on 4chan, you get rightfully banned, and we all know that 4chan is not a place of censorship. Even they got common sense.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Deputy Myself said:


> I'm going to admit you have a valid point here, at some point these depictions will become real to the point where there really is no distinguishable difference between reality and fiction.
> 
> Thankfully we're not there yet, because I can see it becoming a legal and moral clusterfuck and one which I will once again admit I have no answer to.



If I could summarize most of the people in the world for a second. 

Nearly half are mindless idiots and nearly half only have morals because its logical. People will be offended by that but its true. 

There is nothing humane about morality its just a way to stop us from raping and eating each other. Things like empathy, sympathy and yeah a little bit of logic should be what defines morality and why someone wouldn't do this shit.

But what actually stops someone from having sex with a child is whether its real or not. If someone viewed that child as inferior then its ok to do what you want. Thats logic.

If its victimless its ok apparently even though it could have grave consequences. Lets not think its wrong to masturbate to children lets think its wrong to rape them, makes perfect sense. 

And I haven't even elaborated on how fucked up it is that things like this are preached but so under-thought.

*Even better is your the only who understands this dilemma and I'm in a forum where people debate each other hourly. *

Fucking great looking forward to all these educated responses.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> I see then. That would fit my second definition (which, again, would make it a victimless crime). It's just a fake, but realistic to some degree, hologram. Please bring me the quote of me admitting that I masturbate to that stuff.



It's very odd for you to play devils advocate on something like this. 

If I'm not speaking to you directly then I'm speaking to anyone with your viewpoints and you won't be bothered because your arguing your's or not your view. 

So if an animation was based off a real child and it was sexually animated would that then be acceptable or unacceptable? Its victim-less but its a real child animated is this appropriate to view?

If you can answer this then i'm definitely talking to you directly. 

Is anyone with this view or who finds this view acceptable understanding how stupid/immoral they are? Also adding that her information isn't present on the art/film so there is no slander of the child or her information.

If you say yes then you are implying a real child can be used for "yours or others"  pleasure. If you say no then why not?

This also isn't a matter of how you would know whether a real child is being used or not this is a what if scenario and very very clear.

Fuck peoples caveman logic and as I already stated about how peoples morality works. As well as how when I debate at the moment I'm not having an argument of logic, i'm bitching about how ignorant people are. 

And it would be taken as whining from whichever side you disagree with despite me mentioning this. I don't expect to change the views of stubborn fools so I just bicker.


----------



## Freechoice (Jun 10, 2014)

This thread


----------



## Wolfarus (Jun 10, 2014)

Still waiting on somebody, anybody, who froths at the mouth regarding this topic to give me a logical, common-sensed response on why they go batshit over fantasy beings (loli/fake kids) being exploited, but seem to be a-ok with the torture, violence and murder in other mediums (such as tv and video games)

Given that anybody who enjoy's loli or any other sexualized, non-existent minor is a child-raping monster just waiting to happen (by their morals logic), then people who enjoy violent video games and whatnot must be psycopathic mass-murderer's waiting to happen.


----------



## oprisco (Jun 10, 2014)

Wolfarus said:


> Still waiting on somebody, anybody, who froths at the mouth regarding this topic to give me a logical, common-sensed response on why they go batshit over fantasy beings (loli/fake kids) being exploited, but seem to be a-ok with the torture, violence and murder in other mediums (such as tv and video games)
> 
> Given that anybody who enjoy's loli or any other sexualized, non-existent minor is a child-raping monster just waiting to happen (by their morals logic), then people who enjoy violent video games and whatnot must be psycopathic mass-murderer's waiting to happen.


 
Are you fucking real, making this comparison


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> So if an animation was based off a real child and it was sexually animated would that then be acceptable or unacceptable? Its victim-less but its a real child animated is this appropriate to view?



Probably not because you'd obviously need the parents agreeing to it and because of privacy issues.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> Probably not because you'd obviously need the parents agreeing to it and because of privacy issues.



Not if the parent was the one making the art/film. Your an idiot I knew you couldn't answer the question and you would be looking for some loophole. 

You quoted a tiny subsection of what I wrote only to say something moronic. I told you its a what if and to answer validly not to find some loophole.

If a man wanted to make an animated version of his daughter I don't see why he wouldn't be allowed to do that (for fun or to see if he can, not some sick shit but he can by your morality or the view you accept). 

But you obviously can't answer it, you don't seem like one who suppresses what they want to say.

Thats another thing too is a father can make an animated version of his daughter and depict him molesting her and its all not real so it doesn't matter right? As long as he has his signature, might be a bit hard to obtain right?


----------



## Hozukimaru (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> Not if the parent was the one making the art/film. Your an idiot I knew you couldn't answer the question and you would be looking for some loophole.



I said "and because of privacy issues". The state or anyone who sees that stuff can accuse the guy. If the character looks so much to the child it's sure to cause problems later in its life. 




BashFace said:


> You quoted a tiny subsection of what I wrote only to say something moronic. I told you its a what if and to answer validly not to find some loophole.



The rest was a rant of yours. Not to mention that you edited your post while I was replying to you so I didn't really see half of it.



BashFace said:


> If a man wanted to make an animated version of his daughter I don't see why he wouldn't be allowed to do that (for fun or to see if he can, not some sick shit but he can by your morality or the view you accept).



Yes, why not? As long as he isn't some "sick shit" as you call him and wouldn't hurt the kid in any way.




BashFace said:


> But you obviously can't answer it, you don't seem like one who suppresses what they want to say.



Alright...?



BashFace said:


> Thats another thing too is a father can make an animated version of his daughter and depict him molesting her and its all not real so it doesn't matter right? As long as he has his signature, might be a bit hard to obtain right?



That could cause problems to the kid's life later so no, that'd go too far into breaching privacy laws. A parent isn't some kind of absolute ruler over a kid's life, if the state (or anyone for that matter) thinks that the father goes as far as hurting the kid in some way (that includes mental abuse or placing obstacles in the kid's life) with his actions it can move legally against him.


----------



## Wolfarus (Jun 10, 2014)

oprisco said:


> Are you fucking real, making this comparison



Of course. Murder is just as bad, if not worse then exploitation of minors. And yet none of you "morality champions" seem to see that. Or do you think that simulated murder is far more morally acceptable vs. simulated sex with a minor?

You psychopath


----------



## BashFace (Jun 10, 2014)

Wolfarus said:


> Of course. Murder is just as bad, if not worse then exploitation of minors. And yet none of you "morality champions" seem to see that. Or do you think that simulated murder is far more morally acceptable vs. simulated sex with a minor?
> 
> You psychopath



Good point but tantalizing pedophiles with sexually explicit material of children is worse to me then simulated murder. 

I don't assume everyone who plays games is a psychopath(or whatever word you want to use) but I assume every person viewing child pornography is a p*d*p****. 

Your acting as if there is a possibility of me getting eaten by a shark and I don't swim in the ocean. Those are the odds your looking at.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 10, 2014)

BashFace said:


> Good point but tantalizing pedophiles with sexually explicit material of children is worse to me then simulated murder.
> 
> I don't assume everyone who plays games is a psychopath(or whatever word you want to use) but I assume every person viewing child pornography is a p*d*p****.
> 
> Your acting as if there is a possibility of me getting eaten by a shark and I don't swim in the ocean. Those are the odds your looking at.



But simulated murder could be argued to tantalize killers, going along these lines. 

I asked you before, if they are not acting on it in real life what can you do? The most you can do is be cautious of them, but at the end of the day, like simulated murder, they are not making a victim of anyone. You have to understand that until they act on such desires in the real world, having them in itself are not a legally punishable offense.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 11, 2014)

Hozukimaru said:


> That could cause problems to the kid's life later so no, that'd go too far into breaching privacy laws. A parent isn't some kind of absolute ruler over a kid's life, if the state (or anyone for that matter) thinks that the father goes as far as hurting the kid in some way (that includes mental abuse or placing obstacles in the kid's life) with his actions it can move legally against him.



Your not answering the fucking question. That is as close as you've gotten to an answer. 

You said it doesn't matter if its animated/virtual kids. But now its inappropriate if these animated/virtual kids look like peoples family members?

You said it doesn't matter if its a victim-less crime but now your worried about consequences in the future. So if there is a chance of something bad happening is it wrong/bad/putrid. 

You think its ok to tantalize pedophiles internationally but its not ok for a man to make an animated version of someone who looks like a family member or someone he knows. I know it makes it worse but it doesn't make it more or less legal or even dangerous. 

What you also don't understand is that people will selectively look for children that look like their own and others they have seen before. You want all this to be allowed and obviously not monitored. 

So now are you starting to get how fucked up yours and others beliefs/views are?


----------



## BashFace (Jun 11, 2014)

Seto Kaiba said:


> But simulated murder could be argued to tantalize killers, going along these lines.
> 
> I asked you before, if they are not acting on it in real life what can you do? The most you can do is be cautious of them, but at the end of the day, like simulated murder, they are not making a victim of anyone. You have to understand that until they act on such desires in the real world, having them in itself are not a legally punishable offense.



Yeah I obviously don't have international lists of every crime thats ever been recorded and motives for all criminals. 

But I'm positive that murderers/mass murders/serial killers/violent offenders very very very rarely have ever had their motives as anything video game related. 

Whereas pedophiles with child porn and that being a trigger or antagonizing them is a lot lot lot more common.

Your too partial and tolerant in my opinion Kaiba. I don't mean that in a bad way your obviously good for debates and stuff. 

I might be ignorant on the subject matter but I can't even think of when video games have been responsible for mass murders or serial killings. 

I don't doubt a kids probably got a 2-50 k/d ratio on a game and slaughtered members of his family in butthurt rage. But the link between murder and games is a lot weaker than pedophiles and child porn. 

Especially when GtaV grossed insane amounts of money. Where as if those were all pedophiles spending money on child porn. We would definitely have more children being touched or in danger. 

I doubt murder rates spiked in the US when GtaV come out? Well it probably went down actually, everyone being inside gaming hard lol.


----------



## Deputy Myself (Jun 11, 2014)

Bashface, let it go.

Obviously everyone agrees that morally, anything pedophilia is wrong, but taking legal action against this sort of imagery without a victim is and should be impossible for reasons I myself and others highlighted earlier in the thread.

The world isn't a perfect place.

I think the best we can do is hope the culture changes in such a way that people move away from this kind of imagery out of their own violation by either finding a new kink, growing up mentally, or having the genre as a whole shift towards a less problematic alternative.

With some luck, the ban on actual pedophilic imagery will help make this shift begin. And I imagine discussion on it will certainly help some people see these things in a new perspective that will move them away from their related kinks.


----------



## BashFace (Jun 11, 2014)

Deputy Myself said:


> Bashface, let it go.
> 
> Obviously everyone agrees that morally, anything pedophilia is wrong, but taking legal action against this sort of imagery without a victim is and should be impossible for reasons I myself and others highlighted earlier in the thread.
> 
> ...



I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate. 

Thats what the problem is its not morally. Its logically, its morally acceptable if its a victim-less crime. I'm saying its not. But I get that most people aren't even understanding what I'm saying so baby steps lol. 

The worlds fucked nobody would debate anyone on that.  

Banning child pornography is something that I think should have never been legal to begin with. Children being exploited for sex legally is a fucking disgrace and I wouldn't be able to elaborate on this without ranting again lol. But yeah its getting banned now so great I get it. But now people are like fuck we have no child porn lets masturbate to animated children and real children in our heads and its ok because its a victim-less crime I'm saying its not. Besides it being massively detrimental to the person doing that shit it can have massive consequences to children.  

I understand that view but I don't feel like I can actually rely on society or the government to implement these things. I don't believe everything will just happen. People are going to do whatever they want as long as its seemingly victim-less, without consequence, or some "new found logic" so morals can be twisted to make it acceptable. 

People aren't logical they are dumb as dog shit and can't do shit for themselves unless they are forced or guided. Give man a brain and logic can convince him its ok to masturbate to his children. This is fucking disgusting and I personally don't believe this change is going to do anything more than give pedophiles "blue balls" with everyones mentality.

Yeah child porn is illegal but it probably won't be any less acceptable in Japan cause of this very very frustrating way that people think.


----------



## Savior (Jun 18, 2014)

*Sexually explicit Japan manga evades new laws on child pornography*

Top story on CNN right now..



> (CNN) -- They stare wide-eyed from the pages of magazines, childlike in stature but engaged in extremely explicit sexual activities.
> 
> They may be drawings, but critics say the images found on the pages of some of Japan's erotic manga are so disturbing they should be banned.
> 
> ...





Video is worth a watch.


----------



## stream (Jun 18, 2014)

> "'Cuteness is a problem," she said. "Because cuteness is something that makes you feel you have to protect the person, and there's a very fine line between 'I can protect the person' and 'I can control the person.'"
> 
> She said the prevalent depiction of young girls, especially in "Lolita complex" material, risks giving "the wrong impression of women."


Well, maybe? But on the other hand, I don't think I want to live in a society where cute girls are removed from books and comics for political correctness


----------



## SwordKing (Jun 18, 2014)

This only applies to fictional cartoon females, but I think it's OK as long as she's at least old enough to have a decent chest.


----------



## Katou (Jun 18, 2014)

Hurray for kawaii 

They're finally getting national attention


----------



## Seto Kaiba (Jun 18, 2014)

Sorry, but I just can't care when it comes to fictional content. It is literally victimless. 

I mean this is some kind of slippery slope we are going down, this is the same route of logic people go when they say video games like gta influence criminal behavior. Focus on this just takes a hell of a lot away from actual child exploitation. Mainly because in contrast to the difficulties of reality, it's easy to target fictional material and give yourself a pat on the back for a job well done, even if it accomplishes nothing in reality.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

This is just disgusting. 

Inb4 Toro comes in to defend his rights as a p*d*p****.


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (Jun 18, 2014)

SwordKing said:


> This only applies to fictional cartoon females, but I think it's OK as long as she's at least old enough to have a decent chest.





Fiona said:


> This is just disgusting.
> 
> Inb4 Toro comes in to defend his rights as a p*d*p****.


News is 2 weeks old.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Jun 18, 2014)

Disgusting              .


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

> The U.S. report noted that no national law addresses the *"unfettered* availability of sexual explicit cartoons, comics and video games, some of which depicted scenes of violent sexual abuse and the rape of children."
> Actual children suffering and crying is not acceptable. But manga doesn't involve actual children
> Ken Akamatsu
> 
> It added: 'While the NPA continued to maintain that no link was established between these animated images and child victimization*, other experts suggested* children are harmed by a culture that appears to accept child sexual abuse."



This is what we call "biased journalism."


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Jun 18, 2014)

Fiona said:


> This is just disgusting.
> 
> Inb4 Toro comes in to defend his rights as a p*d*p****.



I would like to defend Toro rights as a p*d*p**** if i may. 

To which my response is what Seto said.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Jesus fucking Christ this article needs to be cleansed with fire.
Holy mother of Batman, do you even realize how many innocent people would be suffering in jail for absolutely jack-shit if they actually enforced such nonsensical drivel?

Newsflash: This is not a difficult matter. People are not as simple as to take their perception of the female gender from a specific nische of manga that they read, and insinuating otherwise is litterally retarded. At no point in the universe ever has *any* proof of such fantasy existed. People who complain that "but it will create pedophiles" are talking straight out of their own ignorant asses, because people are not *indoctrinated* to have a sexual preference, and a person's understanding of morals doesn't go out the window just because you see a *fictional* example of something you don't agree with.

If you don't like reading loli manga then no one is ever going to force you, so leave those who do alone already. Or would you like us to advocate a ban on any and all violence in *your* manga? Because if loli content makes people pedophiles and rapists, then violence should *definitly* make people murderous lumps of hate and death.

^---A lot more aggressive than it should be, but Jesus Christ this article pissed me the hell off. At least learning that Akamatsu is once again being the bastion of reason that he is made it better, my faith in this guy has gone up even more. No seriously, this guy deserves my money already. How is he not the monarch of Japan already?


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

Don't we have a thread on this? Mega merge this thread.


----------



## Zaru (Jun 18, 2014)

Wasn't the last one a huge disaster and probably locked?


----------



## Imagine (Jun 18, 2014)

Zaru said:


> I lost it when the video interviewed Ken Akamatsu



No fucking way.


----------



## hcheng02 (Jun 18, 2014)

Zaru said:


> I lost it when the video interviewed Ken Akamatsu



I can understand why he would be upset. Technically all of Mahou Sensei Negima would qualify as kiddy porn considering all the female leads are teenage girls plus the ridiculous amount of fanservice in the manga.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

Mathias, what do you mean?


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 18, 2014)

i think he means da pedos sayin watchin pedo stuff dosent make em pedos


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

I think the main argument in this thread that it didn't harm anyone so it shouldn't be illegal.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

But there's the potential to seek out one's fantasy so the threat still exists.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 18, 2014)

yeah, down with pedo stuff! shouldnt be legal even if it dosent harm any1


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

Yeah but in return people say

"WEll, does playing GTA make me a potential serial killer!??!?!"


----------



## stream (Jun 18, 2014)

Wolfarus has a good point. Some horror movies, like the Saw series or the human centipede, are really sick in my opinion. If I had to choose between a roommate who likes watching those movies and a roommate who likes to watch manga child porn, I'd choose the second in a heartbeat. It would save me the nightmares.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Hand Banana said:


> But there's the potential to seek out one's fantasy so the threat still exists.



And you suggest instead that people should be forced to supress their fantasies and never be given a harmless and safe outlet for them? Because history has really not proven that solution very efficient you know.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

^ Let's be honest, they'd just find other means of jacking off to that stuff.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> ^ Let's be honest, they'd just find other means of jacking off to that stuff.



"Other means" = Child pornography.


----------



## Mako (Jun 18, 2014)

I just read the CNN article.
I bet you none of authors actually like anime/manga. Even though one of the authors is stationed in Japan, I doubt he actually gives a damn.



> Ken Akamatsu, who lobbies lawmakers on behalf of the Japan Cartoonists Association, said a total ban on explicit content would damage the entire industry, making creators too scared to put pen to paper in case they risked breaking the rules.
> 
> So the pedophiles might bring the animation and say 'this is how you practice with adults'
> Shihoko Fujiwara, Lighthouse
> ...



lolwat.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> "Other means" = Child pornography.



How would you know that a child p*d*p**** would result to real child pornography if they didn't watch the "shota/loli" stuff?


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

You're basically implying that if loli and shota was banned, I would instead go snap pictures of real children, or look up real kids being forced to fuck?

That's a pretty harsh insult right there, and incredibly judgmental and assumptious of you.

I'd march in protest for the rest of my life, but there's a moral line that 99% of people have absolutely no problem keeping to. That line won't magically go away.


----------



## Kisame (Jun 18, 2014)

I think video games/manga/etc are more capable of stimulating the intent to rape in a human being than it is at stimulating the intent to murder; as the former's driving force is libido - leaving the only "hurdle" on the "path of rape" as the _"indecency in forcing someone to it"_.

Unless you are really poor in real life and have some psychotic issues (no problem with ending someone's life), a video game isn't going to do much.

I guess another way to put it is like this: There's two aspects to each of these crimes (rape and murder):

The aspect that stimulates the offender (the bounty/temptation):
Rape: Sexual pleasure
Murder: Money/material reasons (and in some crazy cases, pleasure from the act of killing itself)


The aspect that a normal human must overcome before being able to commit the crime (the obstacle/hurdle):
Rape: The indecency to "take" someone forcefully.
Murder: The indecency to end someone's life.

I think rape wins on both for most people.

For example, ask yourself this question, which would you consider a more shocking video to *watch*: Someone being raped, or murdered?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> How would you know that a child p*d*p**** would result to real child pornography if they didn't watch the "shota/loli" stuff?



Psychology. Sex psychologists say that pornography, even drawn pornography, "satiates" people's sexual desires when combined with masturbation. That's why viewing porn is prescribed as a therapy for rapists, and why many rapists don't view porn.

The important thing about loli/shota is that it's drawn artwork for Nepiophiles, Pedophiles, Hebephiles, and Ephebophiles, as opposed to photographs, which involves real child abuse.



> The aspect that stimulates the offender (the bounty/temptation):
> Rape: Sexual pleasure
> Murder: Money/material reasons



Wrong, the primary reason for rape and murder is control.



MadmanRobz said:


> You're basically implying that if loli and shota was banned, I would instead go snap pictures of real children, or look up real kids being forced to fuck?
> 
> That's a pretty harsh insult right there, and incredibly judgmental and assumptious of you.



Obviously what I said doesn't include everyone. In the same way that the lack of heterosexual adult pornography doesn't result in heterosexual rapists, it'd also carry over to the NPHE. (Nepiophiles, Pedophiles, Hebephiles, and Ephebophiles)


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Shark said:


> I think video games/manga/etc are more capable of stimulating the intent to rape in a human being than it is at stimulating the intent to murder; as the former's driving force is libido - leaving the only "hurdle" on the "path of rape" as the _"indecency in forcing someone to it"_.
> 
> Unless you are really poor in real life and have some psychotic issues (no problem with ending someone's life), a video game isn't going to do much.
> 
> ...



Asking which would be more shocking between watching a real rape and a real murder is a superfluous question, because both are shocking events regardless of which is more so.

It doesn't matter if it's harder to murder than rape, because both are already things that no one would ordinarily bring themselves to do regardless. If you read a rape manga, or a violent manga, and think "How do I do this?" then that person is already not moraly restricted and would still be the same dangerous person with or without having read that work.

Likewise, someone reading such a story and *not* thinking "how do I make this happen" won't magically shake their morals and begin to unrepentantly crave doing so.



Toroxus said:


> Obviously what I said doesn't include everyone. In the same way that the lack of heterosexual adult pornography doesn't result in heterosexual rapists, it'd also carry over to the NPHE. (Nepiophiles, Pedophiles, Hebephiles, and Ephebophiles)


Well made point. The amount of people who would actually take such actions are *not* the norm though, they are the rare minority of people who don't have the moral compass to choose not to do it.


----------



## Kisame (Jun 18, 2014)

I doubt that's the primary reason if at all. And wouldn't control count as sexual pleasure (i.e getting off on the fact that the victim is controlled)?


----------



## Kisame (Jun 18, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> Asking which would be more shocking between watching a real rape and a real murder is a superfluous question, because both are shocking events regardless of which is more so.
> 
> It doesn't matter if it's harder to murder than rape, because both are already things that no one would ordinarily bring themselves to do regardless.


But I'm saying that it is less likely to murder than to rape, *because* murder (for all intents and purposes) is worse/more evil, thus leading to the conclusion that a stimulus is more likely to stimulate "rape" in a person.

However, you _could_ be saying that the difference in immorality/evilness between the two crimes is so little that it should make no overall difference...I guess..


----------



## The Weeknd (Jun 18, 2014)

Those hoes go 0 to 100 real quick


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> Well made point. The amount of people who would actually take such actions are *not* the norm though, they are the rare minority of people who don't have the moral compass to choose not to do it.



I know the media witch-hunters say that NPHEs are 100% rapists, but to me, that's like saying heteros or homos are 100% rapist. I really haven't seen a shred of evidence that says that a heterosexual NPHE male is MORE of a threat to a target underage female than a heterosexual adult male is a threat to an adult female.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Every single human that has ever existed and that ever will exist would murder for some reason. What would convince me to take a life is probably not the same as what would convince you, but it exists for everyone.

Technically, all humans also have some reason that would convince them to rape someone else. It's not a question of *if* a person could be convinced to do it, but *what* would.
I find all arguments that "loli/shota content could potentialy convince someone to physically act out the fictional situation" silly simply based on the fact that it would *require* that, for a notable amount of people in the world, that "thing that would drive me to commit a horrible act towards someone else" is simply _jerking off to fiction._

Which is a ludicrous claim. 

Certainly, there are the rare, specific individuals for whom this is true, but for the majority of humans, we have absolutly no reason to assume that watching a fictional rape or a fictional minor having sex would supress someone's moral compass and instill in them a desire to do horrible things.

On the flipside of things, the notion of giving urges a harmless and non-destructive outlet has proven solid to the extent where other areas of society actively use it everywhere, everyday.
Recreational punching bags and stress balls are well-known and widely accepted examples of this. As someone who had severe anger management issues as a child, I can straight-up testify that all you need is an outlet, and that is enough. If you are flat-out *forbidden* from harmless outlets than it's just going to bottle up, and most people just end up searching for another outlet anyway.

*EDIT:**God dang it NF! Let me rep Torox again already!! *


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

That's some Super Saiyajin level generalization there. But seriously we are talking about a Country who just made child porn illegal. You don't think those guys will get sick of looking at fictional children and go out seeking the real thing? it's like trying to watch people who are trying to quit smoking by using e-Cigarettes only to go back to smoking. Once you're addicted it's slim chances you'll end that addiction. Especially depending on how long you been addicted.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

^According to Toroxus though, sex therapist have said that pornography is "therapy for rapist" or something like that

so he made the connection that loli/shota is the same for pedophiles that would try the same thing.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Hand Banana said:


> That's some Super Saiyajin level generalization there.





Hand Banana said:


> But seriously we are talking about a Country who just made child porn illegal. You don't think those guys will get sick of looking at fictional children and go out seeking the real thing? it's like trying to watch people who are trying to quit smoking by using e-Cigarettes only to go back to smoking. Once you're addicted it's slim chances you'll end that addiction. Especially depending on how long you been addicted.



...That's a *lot* of hypocrisy right there...


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

How so?


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Hand Banana said:


> You don't think those guys will get sick of looking at fictional children and go out seeking the real thing?



No, we don't think that, because it's found to not be true for the same reason that pornography doesn't turn people into rapists and video games don't program murderers.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> No, we don't think that, because it's found to not be true for the same reason that pornography doesn't turn people into rapists and video games don't program murderers.



So I can get on the same level as you, you mind posting these sources?


----------



## Savior (Jun 18, 2014)

Like it was said in the video, what's the stop pedos from praying on kids by showing them manga. By saying "hey, this is how it is" and then taking advantage of them. Why is it necessary to have manga with kids so young doing such acts? How about just draw and write them as adults. It's not that difficult.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

Savior said:


> Like it was said in the video, what's the stop pedos from praying on kids by showing them manga. By saying "hey, this is how it is" and then taking advantage of them. Why is it necessary to have manga with kids so young doing such acts? How about just draw and write them as adults. It's not that difficult.



That *would* be the *logical* way of looking at it, yes. Some people need to justify their illness by drawing fictional children having sex and masturbating to it. And it doesn't help they give them adult like features.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Savior said:


> Like it was said in the video, what's the stop pedos from praying on kids by showing them manga. By saying "hey, this is how it is" and then taking advantage of them. Why is it necessary to have manga with kids so young doing such acts? How about just draw and write them as adults. It's not that difficult.



Lolwhat?
What the occasional sicko chooses to use a material for is hardly something that should be used to argue over the credability of the material itself. I could convince someone that stabbing people is alright by stabbing a doll, does that mean it should be illegal to keep knives near a doll?
Of course not. *Everything in the universe* can be used destructively by someone desctructive, they're just choosing a weapon of choice.

The guy who did that should obviously go to jail, but it wasn't the manga that decieved the child, it was that specific individual wielding it.

Why bring in "necessity"? Loli/shota stuff isn't produced out of principle, it's produced because there's an audience for it and no harm inflicted. It's not made because it's necessary, it's made because some people are interested in it and that's that, just like porn.

"It's not that difficult."
What? 
It's not a question of difficulty, it's about producing the content some people want. Asking a loli/shota artist to just draw them adult instead would be like asking a boxing coach to coach you on football instead of boxing during a fight. You would litterally be doing something completely different from what you were trying to do.
It'd be like asking a fantasy author to re-write their story, only without the fantasy. You're asking them to just *not* do what they're trying to do because you don't want them to, and then asking them to instead cater to *your* ideas of what the content should be.


Oh and Banana, that hypocrisy bit.
That was because you claimed we were generalizing to a ridiculous extent, and you then go on to generalize *every person in japan* into being highly likely rapists and predators in your very next paragraph. Making your original claim indescribably ironic.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> Oh and Banana, that hypocrisy bit.
> That was because you claimed we were generalizing to a ridiculous extent, and you then go on to generalize *every person in japan* into being highly likely rapists and predators in your very next paragraph. Making your original claim indescribably ironic.



Show me in my post where I said every person in Japan.


----------



## Risyth (Jun 18, 2014)

We're still arguing about this?


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

Risyth said:


> We're still arguing about this?



Yes, but if you choose to leave that would be helpful.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Hand Banana said:


> So I can get on the same level as you, you mind posting these sources?


IIRC, I posted relevant sources somewhere else in this thread.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

All of Toroxus's sources weren't good..


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> All of Toroxus's sources weren't good..



IIRC You never even have opened up a source and commented on it. Probably because academic and scientific sources are beyond your scope of reason from a purely vocabulary perspective. Not to mention you fail so hard as reading comphrension of my posts and other's posts, that you'd probably drop the ball on reading a peer review article.


----------



## Savior (Jun 18, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> Lolwhat?
> What the occasional sicko chooses to use a material for is hardly something that should be used to argue over the credability of the material itself. I could convince someone that stabbing people is alright by stabbing a doll, does that mean it should be illegal to keep knives near a doll?
> Of course not. *Everything in the universe* can be used destructively by someone desctructive, they're just choosing a weapon of choice.
> 
> ...



Who cares if it's what people want?
People want a lot of stuff that's illegal.
Child exploitation is a serious issue and we should be doing all we can to stop it. If it means a few sickos can't read some perverted manga then so be it. They'll live.


----------



## Hand Banana (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> All of Toroxus's sources weren't good..



Seems like it.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Savior said:


> Who cares if it's what people want?
> People want a lot of stuff that's illegal.
> Child exploitation is a serious issue and we should be doing all we can to stop it. If it means a few sickos can't read some perverted manga then so be it. They'll live.



And what if getting rid of "perverted manga" didn't accomplish anything? The current theory that's accepted is that "perverted manga" reduces child pornography demands and reduces child abuse the same mechanism that adult porn reduces rape.


----------



## Nighty the Mighty (Jun 18, 2014)

has anyone drawn a tangible link between lolis and raping children yet?


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

Hand Banana said:


> Show me in my post where I said every person in Japan.





Hand Banana said:


> But seriously we are talking about a Country who just made child porn illegal. You don't think those guys will get sick of looking at fictional children and go out seeking the real thing?



^Sentence structure and phrasing would greatly imply your sentence to be in reference to "a notable amount of the japanese population."
So yes, the direct implication of your post is that a very notable chunk of the japanese population *will* leave their houses on the day that fictional loli/shota content is banned and rape the ever loving shit out of children.

*Now listen to reason, you hateful person you.*



Flow said:


> All of Toroxus's sources weren't good..


Oh hey it's you! You're that guy who teamed up with Fiona to bully me and Torox out of the thread because you don't like our views on the subject!

...

...

...

...Man have I missed you.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

I love how Toro and Madman come out of the woodwork to defend their pedophilia whenever a story like this comes out. 

It is not about whether anyone is affected by the material or not. It is about what is right and wrong. 

Child pornography is disgustiung and so are the people who enjoy it. Even if it is just a drawing.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

ITT: Sources are invalid if they don't agree with your preordain conclusion.



Fiona said:


> I love how Toro and Madman come out of the woodwork to defend their pedophilia whenever a story like this comes out.



Ad hominem, false appeal to motive, and flamebaiting.



> It is not about whether anyone is affected by the material or not. It is about what is right and wrong.
> 
> Child pornography is disgustiung and so are the people who enjoy it. Even if it is just a drawing.



Ethos argument. I don't partake in such flimsy fabricated debates that are Ethos-oriented.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> IIRC You never even have opened up a source and commented on it. Probably because academic and scientific sources are beyond your scope of reason from a purely vocabulary perspective. Not to mention you fail so hard as reading comphrension of my posts and other's posts, that you'd probably drop the ball on reading a peer review article.



You still haven't given me the sources I asked for.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 18, 2014)

he never has dem sources


----------



## Savior (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> And what if getting rid of "perverted manga" didn't accomplish anything? The current theory that's accepted is that "perverted manga" reduces child pornography demands and reduces child abuse the same mechanism that adult porn reduces rape.



Do you really care this much about seeing little kids doing sexually explicit acts? That's not good bro. You should get some psychiatric help. Don't let it get any worse.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

No it doesn't Toroxus. Japan just literally made possession of child pornography illegal. They've been creating loli/shota not to "deter pedophiles from harming children" but to give them something to jack off to. The only reason this stuff exist is because Japan hasn't really put a leash on pedophiles and their sick fantasies.


----------



## stream (Jun 18, 2014)

Fiona said:


> Child pornography is disgusting and so are the people who enjoy it. Even if it is just a drawing.



Thank you for making it clear you support . But don't expect other people to agree with this.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> ITT: Sources are invalid if they don't agree with your preordain conclusion.
> 
> Ad hominem, false appeal to motive, and flamebaiting.
> 
> Ethos argument. I don't partake in such flimsy fabricated debates that are Ethos-oriented.



Are you actually trying to sound sophisticated and superior in a thread where you are actively defending your interest in child pornography in Manga? 

I need a better emote than  to show just how funny I find that.


----------



## MadmanRobz (Jun 18, 2014)

OH HAI FIONA! 
Man, this is like a reunion! Could you be a judgmental prick towards me again, and bully me out of the discussion by shouting "I DON'T LIKE THIS, YOU'RE STUPID FOR LIKING THIS, LEAVE!!!!" again!? :33
C'mon, it's been so long now! For old time's sake? 

*Spoiler*: __


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> No it doesn't Toroxus. Japan just literally made possession of child pornography illegal. They've been creating loli/shota not to "deter pedophiles from harming children" but to give them something to jack off to. The only reason this stuff exist is because Japan hasn't really put a leash on pedophiles and their sick fantasies.


yeah they only care for profit not to stop pedos from raping children


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

MadmanRobz said:


> OH HAI FIONA!
> Man, this is like a reunion! Could you be a judgmental prick towards me again, and bully me out of the discussion by shouting "I DON'T LIKE THIS, YOU'RE STUPID FOR LIKING THIS, LEAVE!!!!" again!? :33
> C'mon, it's been so long now! For old time's sake?
> 
> *Spoiler*: __



I don't think you are stupid for looking at child pornography in manga.

I think you are sick in the head and need to seek treatment for your disgusting obsession.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> You still haven't given me the sources I asked for.



Last time you asked for sources from me, I gave a list of hundreds of them. You said they were invalid despite them being cited by a national psychological association which I had just cited myself.



Fiona said:


> Are you actually trying to sound sophisticated and superior in a thread where you are actively defending your interest in child pornography in Manga?
> 
> I need a better emote than  to show just how funny I find that.



Maybe you sound aggressive and on-top of things to NPHE witch-hunters like Flow and associated parties, but to everyone else, you just look like a McCarthy style retard who only justifies things with ethos arguments. You fall head-over-heels into false appeal to motive logical fallacies, that despite constantly being called out on it repeatedly, you still probably have no idea what that logical fallacy means. Probably a willful ignorance because your logos argument is built on two logical fallacies and then all you have is an ethos argument. It's just embarrassing.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus, I asked for more sources since they were invalid and not what I asked for. I asked that you reread my post, yet you kept ignoring that portion.

And cool it with the flamming.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> Maybe if I try to sound extremely logical and intelligent people will look past the fact that i am actively defending my disgusting obsession.



Yeah it is not really working. 

You can try as hard as you want to rationalize your argument or try to provide "proof" through various "Sources" but it does not change the fact of the matter. 

The fact is what you are doing is defending your obsession to look at drawn images of children preforming sexual acts. 

No amount of sophisticated discussion or "clever" argument will change the fact that you have a disgusting fetish regarding children and you seriously need to seek help for it.


----------



## Krory (Jun 18, 2014)

stream said:


> Thank you for making it clear you support . But don't expect other people to agree with this.



>Disgusting
>Illegal

One of these things is not like the other.

One of these things does not belong.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> Toroxus, I asked for more sources since they were invalid and not what I asked for. I asked that you reread my post, yet you kept ignoring that portion.



Do you not read? The only reason they were "invalid to you" was because they proved a stance that did not conform with your preordained conclusion. Thus, no matter what sources I cite, they will always be invalid to you because they do not support your fantasy.



Fiona said:


> Logical fallacy.



Ad hominem with a false appeal to motive. It's literally, all you can output. Whenever you want to make a real logos-based argument, maybe people will actually care about what you say then.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

No, they were invalid because they aren't what I asked for. Go reread what I said a few pages back and finally see what I asked, and what you linked. They don't add up no matter how you look at it.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

I sincerely hope that at some point you realize that you have a serious problem and you seek help for it.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> No, they were invalid because they aren't what I asked for.



They were relevant sources. The only reason they "wouldn't be what Flow asked for" is:
A. You wanted sources that back up your claim, yet I provided the opposite, so you didn't want them.
B. Your fail reading comprehension strikes again.



Fiona said:


> I sincerely hope that at some point you realize that you have a serious problem and you seek help for it.



I sincerely hope that at some point you realize that you have a serious problem and you seek help for it. A false appeal to motive argument at every turn in your life won't get you far outside of the McCarthy era.


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

It's funny how you say I have bad reading comprehension when you didn't give me the correct sources due to misreading my post.


----------



## MegaultraHay (Jun 18, 2014)

Something being horrible doesn't justify illegality.


----------



## Fiona (Jun 18, 2014)

MegaultraHay said:


> Something being horrible doesn't justify illegality.



I guess that could be true in certain instances. 

This is not one of those instances however.


----------



## Toroxus (Jun 18, 2014)

Flow said:


> It's funny how you say I have bad reading comprehension when you didn't give me the correct sources due to misreading my post.



You went through a list of 700 sources and determined that none of them were relevant? Impressive. Forgive me for being so blunt, but I doubt you could read half the words in the titles of those sources based on the reading comprehension you display in this section.


----------



## MegaultraHay (Jun 18, 2014)

Fiona said:


> I guess that could be true in certain instances.
> 
> This is not one of those instances however.



Why So                  ?


----------



## EJ (Jun 18, 2014)

Toroxus said:


> You went through a list of 700 sources and determined that none of them were relevant? Impressive. Forgive me for being so blunt, but I doubt you could read half the words in the titles of those sources based on the reading comprehension you display in this section.



What you linked had nothing to do with what I asked for.


----------



## babaGAReeb (Jun 18, 2014)

wtf is this McCarthy crap toxicus keeps talking about?


----------



## Megaharrison (Jun 18, 2014)

God you Pedos and whiteknighters are ducking annoying. Closing.


----------

