/loli/ - Lolis

>>14358

Are there actually any countries that aren't complete shitholes where lolicon is legal?

(Japan doesn't count)

>>25952

Not OP, but I had to do a map a few years ago regarding this, and the status of pornography and other things.

The Netherlands is one iirc.

>>25908

But where's the fun in that?

>>25951

Not the same.

Remember, behind every depiction of a 2D loli there is pain, the pain of repetitive strain injury on the artist.

>the more the ill-disposed may think it’s acceptable

That's not how it works. If you are ill-disposed, you already think it's acceptable.

>>25954

I wouldn't cound the Netherlands as safe haven though. Even if it's legal, in '11 they tried to introduce a law banning it, so while it's okay for now it doesn't mean they're not going to try it again. The only countries that have actually shows to have anything but a hostile attitude to loli are Spain, Denmark, Japan and the US.

>>25979

US is fine regardless of memes from paranoid types.

>>25979

It's technically a grey area be cause of the risk of obscenity charges and the certainty that any loli image would be ruled obscene in a trial. But on the other hand you have bureaucracy protecting loli from being blanked banned because every single image has to be examined and ruled obscene separately.

So yeah, if at some point in the future someone raises obscenity charges against the entirety of the gelbooru loli archive for instance, it'd be a huge deal, and for the judges and jury to examine thousands and thousands of images it'd take months, if not years. And even if they'd manage to declare all of the image obscene, it there are hundreds of thousands of other loli images out there they would also need to pass judgement on. It'd be Sisyphus' worst nightmare. They're much better off sitting idly by as foreign countries pressure their sites into submission, because the chilling effect is just as good of a censorship tool, if not a better one, than actual illegality.

Because of this improbability of the US government to make any effort when such a "problem" can pretty much solve itself through noninterference with outside pressures is why I listed the US under "legal".

>>26005

>any loli image would be ruled obscene in a trial

Not true since loli art is just that, art. Since it is art it is protected. In the US is is some what a grey area but a grey in our favor at the moment. In reality no one has been arrested for viewing or owning loli alone, there are isolated cases of people being arrested for importing though, so it seems like in the US as long as you don't stand out by importing physical materials they never look your way.

>>26007

>loli is just art

It's porn first, and art second, so it's not immune to obscenity charges.

Doesn't really matter, though, as I've said. Ya don't have to make something illegal to make it disappear almost completely.

>>26050

Being porn first doesn't change it as art. The test set up for it covers art and since there is no art that lack artists value it passes 99.9% of the time. Illegal or illegal, as long as there is a want for it it will exist. Why drugs still make billions a years and alcohol became more popular and profitable during prohibition.

>>26050

It's art first and porn second.

>>14826

>there are those who cannot differentiatie between right from wrong, and seeing Lolicon, might decide it is okay to force oneself onto an underage girl.

This is a terrible argument and, if people took it seriously, it could permanently cripple the fiction industry. Imagine a film where cops are chasing robbers that have hijacked a train. This is a simple action film, yet based on this argument, it should not be shown because some of the audience cannot differentiate between right and wrong, and will therefore try to kill the police officers.

>>26056

It may be a terrible argument, but people actually tried to use it in favour of banning first-person shooter games like Counter Strike. While you're correct that it could as well be applied to action films, I think people tend to employ it only regarding media with 'extreme' contents, like sex, demagogy, or violence. I might be wrong though; there are people who even tried to ban Harry Potter books because he 'takes drugs' and this might have a negative impact on children.

>>26063

I thought people wanted Harry Potter banned because it was "satanic," and taught "black magic" and "witchcraft?"

>>26066

It's because he constantly breaks the rules and is rewarded instead of punished by the headmaster.

>>26005

>>26000

well then!

how should i download these loli games i've been wanting to play for years? tor, or is vanilla browser fine?

>>26056

I believe that technically, if you have those who "cannot differentiatie between right from wrong" they'd be just as likely to think it's okay to force oneself on a girl without seeing lolicon first as they are with it. If you have people who "cannot differentiatie between right from wrong" then that is a very serious issue for society, and these measures, if they even treat anything well at all, only treat a symptom and not the causes.

>>26084

The way violence is glorified in popular media is fundamentally different from the depiction of child sex. You can't compare them 1:1.

>>26087

It would be less armful if we had AAA budget CP movies?

I'm calling Hollywood right now!

>>14363

Sure is good to be a burger fat right now

Drugs and Crime are low here

>>26089

Depiction of violence in popular media is always justified by having the protagonist inflict it on mostly faceless enemies. If violence is depicted in a unjustifiable or sadistic way it's done so exclusively to vilify the antagonists.

Whenever gratuitous unjustified violence is displayed and not acted out by the protagonist, it's viewed as sadistic and "bad". This is what everyone sees when they look at or imagine loli. Not justified violence, but sadistic violence acted out by the protagonist. In case of solo or lesbian loli pics, the sadistic violence is projected onto the imaginary(pedophile male) viewer, for which all of lolicon is created for in the minds of the public.

If a type of media ends up glorifying sadistic, unjustified violence, it always ends up causing outrage - just look at the game Hatred an all of it's spiritual predecessors.

For the vast majority, no matter how cute, innocent or absent of sexual violence or abuse the image, lolicon is the epitome of unjustified sadistic violence. They don't need to see it or know anything about it, all that matters is what they imagine it to be. For the public there is no justification for child abuse. It doesn't matter if the imaginary child portrayed in a lolita like forbidden love romance with her teacher, or if it is depicted with as sex slave with all of its limbs removed and its body covered in old cum and blood. It's the same. Rape is a genre in hentai, a trope, a plot device, that can be used or not, but those who know nothing about it think it's an integral part of loli and shotacon. That they're irrevocably connected. It's what society has indoctrinated us to think about real pedophilia. It's always rape, no exceptions.

With that established, it's easy to see why people can't allow lolicon and shotacon to a lesser degree to exist. There is no way for them internally to justify child abuse in these fictional settings. Sexual attraction, curiosity or love are irrelevant, since in any real world counterpart, they'd also be completely irrelevant. The perceived severity and amount of harm child abuse is imagined to cause has been exaggerated by out society to such a degree that no one can(or dares to because of the taboo) even fathom any action or circumstance in which the protagonist could be absolved for his sacrilegious actions. Pedophilia is unforgivable is what's being told to us everywhere, it's the worse crime imaginable to man. It's never said but clearly implied that it is worse than murder. The only crimes allowed to be thought of as worse are torture of an equally or more innocent(innocent = young) person, and mass murder. How many doujins, images or stories involving lolicon or shotacon have you seen and read that have the protagonist put in a situation where he's forced to choose between having sex with a child or being responsible for the torture of her sister or parents? That would be the only circumstance in which the judging public could allow itself to sanction the protagonist's acts of child abuse.

(cont…)

>>26099

Okay, we have found a justification for letting someone commit child abuse in a story, and even though the amount of creative freedom this allows couldn't be any more limited we should be safe from the public's general hatred, right? Wrong. Even if every underage porn image, manga, anime and story were based on this "choosing the lesser evil" premise, people would start asking questions about why any of the content has to spend so much time on focusing on the act of child abuse when it's not conductive to the plot of the story at all. Furthermore, in their opinion, lolicon tends to depict an entirely impossible circumstance, that of the victim enjoying the sexual abuse, even to the point of showing absolutely no physical or mental trauma. The first and most obvious explanation, outside of one of two exceptions, would be that the content is targeted at pedophiles, but not in what the public perceives to be a healthy way. It is strongly believed that allowing pedophile interests to flourish, even if it never causes any harm, increases the risk of them to go out and rape. Because the subject is so unique taboo there are no conclusive(e.g. an overwhelming amount of) studies showing that allowing pedophiles to indulge in pedophile fantasies does not increase the risk of them abusing. There are some studies, but those are easily dismissed or omitted in any discussion because they go against what people have been told, and at this point like to think about pedophilia. It's much easier and more satisfying(for those who enjoy focusing their hate and fears on pedophilia) to bury the uncomfortable subject matter, and choosing to believe that depicting children enjoying sex with adults could potentially reinforce the pedophile's mind and make things worse. Even with morally justifiable motivations for the character and/or the viewer in lolicon to abuse a child, the public would still want to deny people the ability to masturbate to the impossibility of the idea of children enjoying sexual contact with adults.

(cont…)

>>26100

The idea of children always being harmed in some way by child/adult sex is the core notion in society's push to exterminate anything related to pedophilia, and under that premise the only thing that would allow lolicon and shotacon to ever resurface again as a tolerated and accepted part of hentai is if that central dogma breaks down. However, should that ever happen, society's stance towards pedophilia at large would change, and for that to eventually happen much more than just a few decades have to pass. Underage art has only managed to flourish like it did because of a unique set of coincidences, namely the advent of the early, largely uncommercialized and uncontrolled web and the relative obscurity of hentai, especially lolicon and shotacon. Japanese culture never really developed an irrational fear of pedophilia to the degree the West did, and having been isolated from Western cultures for the longest time lolicon and shotacon had the opportunity to become an accepted part of their culture. When globalization shifted into the next gear around 2000 with the web breaking down barriers, those cultural oddities moved to the net at large and had the chance to mix and mingle with Western ideas, allowing Western ideals to influence Japanese and vice versa. Many Western pedophiles and non pedophiles alike felt mesmerized by the lack of, or open depiction of taboos, sexual or not, or anything Westerners have always fantasized about in private but didn't allow themselves to express. An online culture developed that was inclusive of every idea and open to new ways of thinking, even if it disagreed with some.

We all know what happened next. The net became commercialized and image wary about the content they were promoting with their ads and hosting space, and much broader range of people started using the internet, many of which flocking to social media which allowed anyone to cook up a storm about things they disagree with. Lolicon and Shotacon were no longer hidden in obscurity, with the increasing number of people violently opposed to its premise starting to complain to whatever authority they thought would hear them. Advertizers, governments, admins. Sites started excluding underage art, first for financial reasons, but as time went on and the social justice movement, which funnily enough supported pedophilia at first before they realized the battle uphill is too steep, made having a perceived right not to be offended by any content fashionable, ending in more sites removing their "most offensive" material. Then government agencies, always being the last to adapt to social changes, came in and pressured sites half around the world to remove content their laws disagreed with. The results of that development were living right now. The golden times for loli and shota are over. TOR and co. may allow for a short lived renaissance, but until the world grows out of their fear of pedophilia, this is it. I'm happy to have been alive during this era and also have had the fortune to see massive amounts of porn of my all time favorite anime and cartoons. But it's also sad knowing that people who're in their teens right now will once again learn to obey the taboo of expressing anything related to the celebration of pedophilia.

In other news, as predicted, the loli scene has started to move to the darknet: http://pomfyyoqgwqzven7.onion/

>>14358

Nope, pleading guilty does. I'm pretty sure it does so no matter country or charge.

>>26070

There is most certainly more than one pretext people put forward in order to get Harry Potter banned.

https://books.google.de/books?id=O65TBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA120&lpg=PA120&dq=%22Harry+Potter+takes+drugs%22+USA&source=bl&ots=twS-xBCFWE&sig=OSYC9gkAp05dLDYXdBB9sNbQZlY&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0CDoQ6AEwA2oVChMIs7iKq4a2xwIVgdsaCh20OQ1Y#v=onepage&q=%22Harry%20Potter%20takes%20drugs%22%20USA&f=false

(Sorry, couldn't find the website this refers to in a rush.)

>>26102

They fight for freedom of expression… while hiding away on a Darknet instead of out in the open. /:)

>>26112

Yeah, looks more like a refuge to me.

Also empty as fuck, guess it just became a thing

>>26099

>>26100

>>26101

Excellent writing.

Honestly, pedophilia is bad by the "candy van" stereotype, but the fact that fringe cases and fictional cases are considered taboo is the reason such topics are discussed to begin with, and why candy van type people exist. Liberals and conservatives alike can hardly understand that certain things that are illegal are not bad. Liberals, for all their revolution talk, are hardly revolutionary, and purely exist because they think they should be able to be irresponsible and have no cultural backlash, and conservatives think they need to act as the Fun Police, where anything enjoyed needs to have rules and regulations because they perceive it as irresponsible, even if the person was secretive about it, doesn't mention it, and if the person is very responsible and respectful about it. Thus, conservatives create liberals, because the natural reaction to disagreement is to go as FAR from the opinion you agree with as possible.

But then there are the people who know that things like pedophilia are culturally bad, but think that fringe cases and fiction shouldn't be touched. These people get fucked by conservatives for being "immoral", and by liberals for being "too restrictive" or "offensive".

There are very few winning points, and until society can distinguish between a child predator and someone who enjoys the body type (or God forbid; actually likes children, albeit a little sexually as well, not that they would ever rape a child) there are no winning points.

>>26115

Should've spell checked, but it was a spontaneous write up and I didn't have any time.

>pedophilia are culturally bad

I wouldn't phrase it like that, since it's just another generalization demonizing anything connected to pedophilia, real or not. Calling something "bad", "unhealthy", or any other vague terms without being specific about it always creates a bias for the negative for the entire subject matter.

I don' think fringe cases, like you said, would be that rare if society would distinguish between child abuse and pedophilia. There are a few cases in which I could imagine sexual interaction(always initiated by the child's curiosity/interest) to be justified, but having groups of drooling men sit around the playground picking their targets is obviously not one of them.

Just realizing it's getting too off topic so I'll stop here, this isn't a thread about the merits of pedophilia. Soz.

http://www.fccj.or.jp/number-1-shimbun/item/527-when-otaku-attack-adventures-in-subculture.html

A little article about lolicon subculture in Japan I found. Might be interest for someone.Wish someone would write about its rise and fall in the West, too.

>>25958

yes the same

>>26492

Holy shit

"It Girl"

You the it girl, hey hey, my inspiration

My compass spinnin', baby, it's the right destination

Come on, come on, tell me what I came for

I got treasure to hide, so let's keep it from the strangers

Your waves, they wash all over me

Your tides, they pull me back to sea

When you bite on my lip

And hold my hand, and moan again, I'm a hold that ass

When you kiss on my lips

And hold my hand, and moan again, I'm a hold that ass

You don't know, I've been missin' you

Baby when you, go

Oh the only way you can be a bad girl to me

You the it girl, hey hey, my inspiration

My compass spinnin', baby, it's the right destination

Come on, come on, tell me what I came for

I got treasure to hide, so let's keep it from the strangers

Your waves, they wash all over me

Your tides, they pull me back to sea

When you bite on my lip

And hold my hand, and moan again, I'm a hold that ass

When you kiss on my lips

And hold my hand, and moan again, I'm a hold that ass

You don't know, I've been missin' you

Baby when you, go, I'm missin' you

Truly gettin' me high, I be missin' you

You make me downright seasick

Oh the only way you can be a bad girl to me

You the it girl, hey hey, my inspiration

My compass spinnin', baby, it's the right destination

Come on, come on, tell me what I came for

I got treasure to hide, so let's keep it from the strangers

Your waves, they wash all over me

Your tides, they pull me back to sea

When you bite on my lip

And hold my hand, and moan again, I'm a hold that ass

When you kiss on my lips

And hold my hand, and moan again, I'm a hold that ass

>>26492

His main stance is right there at the beginning "nobody talks about lolicon, nobody acknowledges it". Meanwhile lolicon artists getting sold out at Comiket and the country has a lolicon dedicated magazine. Search lolicon on sadpanda (closest we have to a comprehensive hentai archive). It displays 3139 pages for me, not including western, non-h and asian porn tags. The entire archive is 12392 pages, with lolicon search removed. It means that more than a quarter of all hentai manga and doujinshi and japanese pixiv art that is on panda is related to lolicon. It is deeply integrated in Japan, and is not as fringe of a fetish as this guy's portrays it.

You can't even have drawings but the rich and powerful and elite get to have all the real child sex they want. Seems fair.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/07/07/a-big-political-cover-up-of-1980s-pedophile-ring-in-u-k-parliament

>>14826

>If there isn't a victim, it shouldn't be a crime.

While I definitely agree with you, I do see why violent videogames could be considered illegal.

It doesn't directly harm anyone, no, but it does spread the idea of harming someone. Now, I'll agree that we are all of sound mind and thought, here, but there are those who cannot differentiatie between right from wrong, and seeing violent videogames, might decide it is okay to beat someone to death on the streets.

>>14826

>It doesn't directly harm anyone, no, but it does spread the idea of harming someone

Could making pornography legal lead to lower rates of sex crimes?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm

>Results from the Czech Republic showed, as seen everywhere else studied (Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA), that rape and other sex crimes have not increased following the legalization and wide availability of pornography. In addition, the study found that the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible – a phenomenon also seen in Denmark and Japan.

>>26574

Should the legality of pornography, or any speech, be based on its ability to prevent crime?

Of course not, because then you'd end up censoring content by adjudging perceived negative effects to them. It's the same with guns, or driver's licenses. Not anyone can come and get one of these(speaking on average), and to obtain the right to use a gun/car you have to present a certain level of maturity, which equals responsibility to not do harm with the power those tools give you. Assuming that even adults can't consume porn without some sort of oversight is that needs to protect them from themselves is ludicrous.

Although a separate law, there might be some hope for the UK after all.

https://archive.is/TuYBl

>>26584

I don't think the point is that the legality of pornography should be based on its ability to prevent crime. The point is that the ILLEGALITY of pornography should not be based on the assumption that it will lead to crime when it in fact demonstrably does not.

>>26528

What you fail to understand is that people of sound mind and thought should have their rights infringed upon, because a select few are not mentally capable of differentiating reality from a video game. Those people should be restricted from games, not everyone.

>>27880

shouldn't*

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11970391/Internet-firms-to-be-banned-from-offering-out-of-reach-communications-under-new-laws.html

So the UK just went full Stasi.

>>31429

UK becomes even more of a censored police state everyday. I feel bad for any one living there.

>>31432

Only thing they can hope for is that this insanity rears a generation of Orwell's, although it may be too late by that time