Nocilol

[archbishopjabber]

Should it be legal/illegal? Is it pedophilia? Is there anything inherently wrong with it? I'm fairly neutral on the subject but am curious to hear what everyone else thinks on the matter.


If you are unfamiliar with what it is... here is a link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolicon

[spinal_compression]

Re: Lolicon

It seems more to be like a sub-category of pedophilia. It's one of those things that's so rare that it'll go right under the radar.

But from what Wiki tells me it doesn't necessarily involve any direct pornography. Just a depiction of what it's meant to allow the viewer to see.

I'm not a critical thinker so whatever I said makes no sense...

[wickedawesomeful]

Re: Lolicon

I see no problem with it. It's not like it's real people, so no one is getting harmed. Plus, it's unbelievably easy to get off to.

PS. lol custom title

[devonin]

Re: Lolicon

Well in Canada (as well, according to Wiki, in the USA, Germany, and several other countries, but not Great Britain) it actually qualifies as child porn regardless, even though as a drawing or animation it doesn't necessarily involve the abuse or misuse of minors for pornographic purposes.

I mean, I guess on the one hand its -less- bad than actual child pornography, but it sounds suspiciously to me like someone who -wants- to look at child porn but wants to do so in a way that can seem less morally objectionable if they get caught at it.

[jamuko]

Re: Lolicon

I don't think it should be illegal. I mean, yeah, it does sort of emulate real child porn which I'm highly against, but by that logic we'd have to outlaw other such fictional emulations like violent video games, and everyone knows how we stand on that.

Also, how exactly does one draw the line on whether a hand-drawn person is underage or not? With anime characters, it's often tough to tell.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Lolicon

The more abstract a representation becomes the less it actually remains a representation. Lolicon is to paedophilia what furry porn is to bestiality; which is to say, sometimes there's a link, more often there isn't. Child pornography is harmful to the children who are used to produce it, and for that reason production of child pornography should be punishable as should the purchase of child pornography. When something is just a drawing there's no victim. It's a victimless crime. Your gut feelings may scream moral indignation, but since when do feelings get in the way of realities? Oh wait, I forgot what society I live in. My mistake.

Seriously, outside of some elaborate slippery slope argument I doubt anyone can give me a reason why anything made with pen and paper should be illegal.

[devonin]

Re: Lolicon

The more abstract a representation becomes the less it actually remains a representation. Lolicon is to paedophilia what furry porn is to bestiality; which is to say, sometimes there's a link, more often there isn't. Child pornography is harmful to the children who are used to produce it, and for that reason production of child pornography should be punishable as should the purchase of child pornography. When something is just a drawing there's no victim. It's a victimless crime. Your gut feelings may scream moral indignation, but since when do feelings get in the way of realities? Oh wait, I forgot what society I live in. My mistake.

Seriously, outside of some elaborate slippery slope argument I doubt anyone can give me a reason why anything made with pen and paper should be illegal.

I'm not sure that "A drawing of a naked little girl is at least somewhat as morally problematic as a picture of a naked little girl" would really consitute an "elaborate" slippery slope.

I'm not trying to draw a connection between the two to say that lolicon = child porn, so much as I am making an implication that those who are into the lolicon culture are looking at it as a "legal" avenue to child porn.

[Wlfwnd91]

Re: Lolicon

I think that child pornography is disgusting and wrong and it honestly hurts to even hear about it. But, I love Lolicon, so should I be punished for liking Loli? As far as I was concerned, a fetish wasn't punishable by law, and hentai is there for those "messed up" little fetishes that we ALL have somewhere in our minds and allows us to indulge in them. Some people who like lolicon are into real child pornography, but there are some people who like football who are into child pornography too. What I'm saying is that there's people like that, and lolicon does allow people to indulge in a fetish which is deemed "wrong", but it doesn't mean that those people are criminals or harming anyone in any way shape or form. You can argue that lolicon promotes child pornography, but if someone involved with loli is involved with CP then chances are they were into CP long before they ever found loli. It's a drawing and it's not harming anybody, so I don't think it should be illegal in any way.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Lolicon

I'm not sure that "A drawing of a naked little girl is at least somewhat as morally problematic as a picture of a naked little girl" would really consitute an "elaborate" slippery slope.

I'm not sure how it's at least somewhat as morally problematic as a picture of a naked girl. I'm sorry to say it but I think your argument is less sound than the typical elaborate slippery slope argument might be.

so much as I am making an implication that those who are into the lolicon culture are looking at it as a "legal" avenue to child porn.

Two responses:

1. So?
2. Prove it.

Emphasis on the first.

[ToshX]

Re: Lolicon

It seems more to be like a sub-category of pedophilia. It's one of those things that's so rare that it'll go right under the radar.

But from what Wiki tells me it doesn't necessarily involve any direct pornography. Just a depiction of what it's meant to allow the viewer to see.

I'm not a critical thinker so whatever I said makes no sense...

Actually, a LOT of people like loli. And I really do mean that. It actually usually appeals to people in the 14-20 range and sometimes older from what I've seen. In some cases younger people like it because they're around the same age.

Seriously, outside of some elaborate slippery slope argument I doubt anyone can give me a reason why anything made with pen and paper should be illegal.

With that logic, it should be legal to write "I'm going to bomb the airport on Saturday" and put it on every telephone pole in town.

[jamuko]

Re: Lolicon

I really think the parallel between this and violent video games is rather high. It seems like pretty much the exact same argument to me.

Violence hurts people. Violent video games, however, are harmless, and if they assist in coercing someone into following through in reality, the person has more underlying problems that video games can't be blamed for.

Child porn hurts children. Loli, however, is harmless, and if it assists in coercing someone into following through in reality, the person has more underlying problems that loli can't be blamed for.

I think it would be hypocritical of someone to take one side on one of those arguments and the opposite on the other.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Lolicon

With that logic, it should be legal to write "I'm going to bomb the airport on Saturday" and put it on every telephone pole in town.

THANK YOU. I was beginning to doubt anyone would bring it up; this is the basis of the elaborate slippery slope argument.

Now, as I'm sure we all know, the US supreme court has ruled that freedom of speech can be restricted in circumstances where the speech itself inherently creates a level of danger or harm. Your example fits the bill. Surely this is a fair point and a fair restriction. Now, the problem is that people try to use this argument to apply to things like lolicon.

The question then is: What inherent danger is there in lolicon? The only answer people can give to this question is an elaborate slippery slope argument. Lolicon can lead to child pornography, which is harmful to children. Lolicon can lead to child abuse, which is harmful to children. Lolicon can lead to a devaluation of social rules and mores that leads to a decline in our cultural fabric that leads to people going to Mcdonalds more often and getting fat which leads to heart attacks. Or whatever you prefer.

There's no causation involved. No inherent evil even by some elaborate chain. The cry to pass restriction on things such as this is driven purely by an emotional knee-jerk reaction which overshoots logic and infers relationships and evils where there are none fundamentally.

[devonin]

Re: Lolicon

Well, I suppose it depends on your view of -why- child porn is wrong. If the -only- reason you don't think child porn is a perfectly valid form of pornography is that "It is inherantly harmful to a child" then your point it perfectly valid.

There are those, though, that think there is something inherently wrong about children in a sexual context regardless of the medium.

[Kilroy_x]

Re: Lolicon

There are those, though, that think there is something inherently wrong about children in a sexual context regardless of the medium.

I know. You don't particularly need to justify your thoughts (or feelings, rather) for this, but you do need to provide reasoning for why you think it's ok to send people off to jail for what's in some cases the entire rest of their lives based on your sense of indignation at something which hasn't harmed anyone. The difference between lolicon and child pornography is that lolicon is a medium for the artists imagination rather than for something to which an actual child was subjected. It's not just a difference in medium, but in what that medium is actually transmitting. Or, even further out than that, the difference is that by taking a picture of a child you're using a camera as an excuse to abuse a child, and although the abuse is independent of the camera the camera is still an accessory to the crime. There's a fundamental difference between a picture which is the direct result of an immoral action and a picture which came into existence and continue's its existence independently of any moral outrage.

[devonin]

Re: Lolicon

You don't particularly need to justify your thoughts (or feelings, rather) for this, but you do need to provide reasoning for why you think it's ok to send people off to jail for what's in some cases the entire rest of their lives based on your sense of indignation at something which hasn't harmed anyone.

Even if I feel it is justified for lolicon style imagery to qualify as child porn (which my country also seems to think) that doesn't mean that it should be treated in all instances as 100% identical either.

I mean, hitting someone is hitting someone, and there are a great many different types of assault charges.