Should lolicon / shotacon be considered drawn child pornography?

  • ATTN NEW USERS: I strongly suggest using a real, alter-ego email address from a reputable provider and using a Password Manager to securely keep tack of it. If you forget your email and password I cannot restore your account. These are good practices in general so stop being lazy.

Is OP a pedophile?

  • yes

    Votes: 817 75.1%
  • no

    Votes: 167 15.3%
  • it should be regulated, not outright banned

    Votes: 104 9.6%

  • Total voters
    1,088

Ido

Still alive
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jun 16, 2014
Porn itself should already be banned and the production thereof prosecuted by anti-obscenity laws. Children, adults, animals—the content of pornography does not matter. Pornography itself is a grave sin and a cancer to society.

Paying lip service to the immorality of child pornography is just a pathetic way for people that masturbate to virtue signal. The topic of child porn is just a scapegoat for self-loathing perverts to attempt to excuse their own sins. Do not fall into this stupid trap. Understand the base premise of pornography.
No porn yet you browse this site, which has nudes (of cows), porn comics (made by cows), and overall degeneracy?

Also child porn is bad.
 

Boroqcin

Woofus
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Except we have studies that prove otherwise.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=248706

And not to mention the fact we feel an emotional connection to cartoon characters in movies etc. because they represent real people.
There's a reason we actually enjoy and make cartoons you know?

Also, loli IS actually illegal in a lot of countries, this includes many US states, Australia, England, Canada.
Most of the English speaking world, really.
So "It's not illegal because it's not bad" is not really an argument.

I'd like to add that I'm playing devil's advocate, I am ever so slightly on the side of allowing CP.
I’m not arguing the legality of it. I’m a dirty leaf, I know it’s illegal.
I’m arguing the morality of it. The fact is the art itself is a victimless crime. There are no children hurt anywhere along the line of production. The same can’t be said about real CP. the fact that there’s a victim is what makes CP illegal.
Now obviously there are exceptions to this rule. A lot of people would argue that the Tracy Lords incident had no victims but the fact is it still fell on the wrong side of the law. The law was written that way to protect victims and making any exception could lead to the victimization of more people. I feel this same thing is happening with the loli/shota right now. It’s an older written rule that can’t be bent. All digital representations of children in a sexual situation have to be dealt with or there could be some perceived implications that would lead to a work around.
Lets say they let people away with an image of a highly detailed Loli in a western artstyle. The way the law is written now this could lead to the implication that distribution of actual CP is alright if you add a couple photoshop filters to it.
 

POWER IN MISERY

TRAVERSING THE GRID OF DEATH
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
I’m not arguing the legality of it. I’m a dirty leaf, I know it’s illegal.
I’m arguing the morality of it. The fact is the art itself is a victimless crime. There are no children hurt anywhere along the line of production. The same can’t be said about real CP. the fact that there’s a victim is what makes CP illegal.
Now obviously there are exceptions to this rule. A lot of people would argue that the Tracy Lords incident had no victims but the fact is it still fell on the wrong side of the law. The law was written that way to protect victims and making any exception could lead to the victimization of more people. I feel this same thing is happening with the loli/shota right now. It’s an older written rule that can’t be bent. All digital representations of children in a sexual situation have to be dealt with or there could be some perceived implications that would lead to a work around.
Lets say they let people away with an image of a highly detailed Loli in a western artstyle. The way the law is written now this could lead to the implication that distribution of actual CP is alright if you add a couple photoshop filters to it.
i bet five bucks this nigga is a pedo
 

Roasted

Bullying Βancho
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
I’m arguing the morality of it. The fact is the art itself is a victimless crime.
Read the study I linked earlier.
There is a good group of people who are mentally unstable and do end up increasing their involvement with the fetish/fetish community.
This increases the amount of time they spend thinking about that stuff and desiring it, which in turn makes them more likely to become sex offenders.

Think about it like this: If not for sites like KF or any lolcow discussion boards/communities, would most of us REALLY spend all that much time reading about lolcows, collecting their info, interacting with them?

CP might move a mentally ill person to action in the same way.
 

Autistic Illuminati

cumbucket of a handicaped man
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 15, 2016
The "victimless crime" defense of loli art is often used in the MAP community.
Loli art tend to blur the line in the head of already confused peoples :
"sexualising childrens is bad" become "sexualising childrens is ok IF it's artistic",
and then they find a way to push back the boundaries more and more and more until one day "sexualising children is ok."
 

Boroqcin

Woofus
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
Read the study I linked earlier.
There is a good group of people who are mentally unstable and do end up increasing their involvement with the fetish/fetish community.
This increases the amount of time they spend thinking about that stuff and desiring it, which in turn makes them more likely to become sex offenders.

Think about it like this: If not for sites like KF or any lolcow discussion boards/communities, would most of us REALLY spend all that much time reading about lolcows, collecting their info, interacting with them?

CP might move a mentally ill person to action in the same way.
I don’t disagree that there some mentally unstable people who will be pushed to act because of their exposure to loli/shota. The problem is violent people in the past have been pushed to act by other mediums of entertainment like movies, music and video games . That doesn’t mean there should be a blanket ban on them or even that they’re inherently immoral.
Lets take asphyxiation pornography as an example. That’s some real fucked up abuse if it’s not between two consenting parties and some deranged people have definitely at some point used that as motivation for their sex crimes. That doesn’t mean the act of looking at victimless asphyxiation porn makes you a bad person.
Now let me put this out here now because this thread is starting to turn against me.
I AM NOT ADVOCATING THE “THE PEDOPHILE WHO HASN’T DONE ANYTHING IS A GOOD PEDOPHILE” MEME. I’M FIRMLY IN THE SIDE OF 2D DOES NOT = 3D SIDE OF THINGS. I’M JUST ARGUING THE MORALITY OF THIS.
 

FierceBrosnan

Father of Birds, Lord of Parrots, Coffee drinker.
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
b89.gif
 

ICametoLurk

SCREW YOUR OPTICS, I'M GOING IN
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Mar 14, 2014
LOLI IS CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
LOLI IS NOT CP

And the stupid fuck keeps conflating loli/shota or just skeevy animu pics with CP.

Colby, since you're a fucking moron, I'll put this in big letters:

LOLI AND SHOTA ARE FUCKED UP BUT LEGAL UNDER US LAW. IF SOMEONE IS A FAN OF THAT BUT DOESN'T HURT A REAL CHILD, THEY ARE NOT A CRIMINAL.

IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT, TOUGH SHIT, ARGUE WITH THE SUPREME COURT.
 

Varg Did Nothing Wrong

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
"These findings challenge the frequent assertion that child-pornography offenders are “only” involved with “pictures,” such that they pose no significant risk of direct commission of a sexual offense against a child. The findings indicate the importance of online criminal investigations that target so-called “Internet sex offenders,” since such investigations are likely to result in the apprehension of child molesters. Although these men may attribute their search for child pornography to “curiosity” or a similar unthreatening motivation, the findings of the current study suggest the likelihood that they have also engaged in the sexual abuse of children."
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=248706

Are you trying to assert there's no difference between seeing drawings and real child pornography? Because the study specifically talks about "internet sex offenders" being people who interact with children online or seek out actual CP. Why do you conflate the two?

You're whipping out the fallacies today buddy.
I never said that everyone follows their sexual fantasies to a T, you claim I do (strawman).
What I did say is that your sex life is influenced by your sexual fantasies, are you claiming they're always 100% seperate in every case?

No, I'm not saying everyone's sexual fantasies are always separate from their actual sex life, you mong. You're putting words into my mouth while complaining I'm somehow doing the same to you.
 

InLivingTuna

True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
I believe that there isn't enough data to suggest that the media we watch influences our behavior in a substantial enough way to cause us to go out and perform abhorrent activities that we wouldn't have otherwise, and given that I'm a very first amendment minded person I feel as if speech and art shouldn't be illegal unless it provably leads to these activities. We do have laws against incitement (calling others to arms for terrorism/lynching/what have you) so speech can and should be regulated if it leads to violence or abuse, and if we can find that people who jack off to lolicon are likely to rape children even if they weren't intending to before then it should reasonably be banned.

Of course, then there is the conversation of the slippery slope. Video games from Doom to Minecraft have been blamed for criminal activity in the past, but I'm sure most of us would agree that killing in a video game hardly makes you a killer in real life. I emphasize the word "provably" a lot because there are a lot of dopey ass neocons still in congress who would love to use this ruling to try and go Jack Thompson on the things we love. It's a mistake to judge this based off our feelings and not off the raw evidence.
 

Roasted

Bullying Βancho
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Jan 14, 2017
I don’t disagree that there some mentally unstable people who will be pushed to act because of their exposure to loli/shota. The problem is violent people in the past have been pushed to act by other mediums of entertainment like movies, music and video games . That doesn’t mean there should be a blanket ban on them or even that they’re inherently immoral.
You're right, and that's true.
However, I do feel like those media have artistic value or cultural meaning, while cp is just4faps, no matter how you slice it.

Now let me put this out here now because this thread is starting to turn against me.
I AM NOT ADVOCATING THE “THE PEDOPHILE WHO HASN’T DONE ANYTHING IS A GOOD PEDOPHILE” MEME. I’M FIRMLY IN THE SIDE OF 2D DOES NOT = 3D SIDE OF THINGS. I’M JUST ARGUING THE MORALITY OF THIS.
Sadly you're never going to be able to discuss this topic without people turning on you, people are very explosive and angry about anything related to opinions about CP, be they positive or negative.
If you're gonna comment on this topic at all you're going to eat shitposts and negrates all day every day.
 

Boroqcin

Woofus
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Sep 20, 2017
You're right, and that's true.
However, I do feel like those media have artistic value or cultural meaning, while cp is just4faps, no matter how you slice it.
This is a terrible slippery slope. Lets break down one of those mediums I mentioned above.
There are plenty of movies that you could argue have no artistic value. Uwe Boll put out a terrible film where multiple children are murdered. Should that film be banned? It meets the criteria of no artistic value and cultural meaning. No one here is going to argue that.
If there’s anything wrong with that film it should obviously be banned right? What about the people that go out of their way to watch it? Should they be jailed for seeking out this harmful, destructive pile of degeneracy?
Also who decides whether a movie has no artistic or cultural value? Should we go by Rotton Tomato’s for movies, Metacritic for videogame and just hand the entire responsibility of judging whether songs should be illigal to the experts at Pitchfork? There has to be some regulating body for this rule of no cultural meaning/artistic value + harmful content = BANNED to even get off the ground.
Not to mention this rule would have the ENTIRE pornography industry instantly banned.
 

Hui

fυ¢к тнє נαииιєѕ
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Joined
Feb 13, 2017
Why is this even a question? The moment you lewd a loli or fap to it you are pretty much a pedo.

I'm fine with it if it's well drawn. I hate when someone draws a pic of an attractive eight year old but she has DD tits it's like wtf
How can a 8 year old be attractive.

we need a loli -> CP wordfilter stat
Wordfilters are aids and retarded.

See?