171
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
171 points (77.1% liked)
Unpopular Opinion
6216 readers
393 users here now
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Lol pedos. So does that word just mean nothing now?
Which child is involved here exactly? Can you point them out?
Aren't those anime girls specifically drawn to look like sexualized kids? Because if you're attracted to such features, real or not, I have some news for you
That's the most absurd thing I've read. If we're talking about photorealistic depictions of kids, sure, that might mean you're a pedophile. I'm not saying no one who looks at loli shit is a pedophile. Of course I'm sure lots do. But what exactly do most anime lolis have in common with real kids. They're small? Anything else? In most cases that we talk about in these stupid threads the only thing that differentiates whether a character is 12 or 22 is the artist saying what their age is.
The whole thing of those characters is that they look like kids. That’s the whole thing. And if you’re looking out material specifically for that reason, then guess what that makes you
It’s not exactly rocket surgery.
???
Most likely. I could entertain reasons for looking at that without being attracted to it. But either way, it's a drawing. I'm 100% fine with pedophiles looking at computer generated photorealistic images like that. Why would you be against that? Would you rather them look at two kids?
I was just explaining to you why those people are labeled as pedophiles.
Ok but a lot of people are in labeled as pedos even in this thread when it doesn't apply. Pedophilia is being attracted to kids in real life. Or fantasizing about real kids. Applying that to things that aren't human and don't even exist is just abusing the term and making it meaningless
I don't know how you don't get it. If you are sexually into those charcters because they've been specifically drawn as kids, then you're a pedo. You're claiming that you can't be gay for watching drawn gay porn since it's drawn. Think about that shit for a moment.
I'm absolutely not saying you can't be a pedophile for looking at lolis. It just doesn't automatically make you one. The same way looking at gay hentai/furry doesn't make you gay. People can have fantasies about things that they are 100% not into or attracted to in real life.
And what's the specific feature that makes "lolis" "lolis"?
The fact that the creator publishes their age. What else?
And what's their age?
They don't have an age, they're a drawing
You just told me this
I'm asking what's the age
The point is it doesn't matter. If the creator says they're 12 or 16 or 29 or 3000. If that's what you're basing it on (and, that's the only thing you really could be basing it on) then, if you can't see how absurd it is to base whether or not something is moral/legal/ethical purely on a number the creator arbitrarily assigns to their creation, I'm not sure what to tell you. But I can tell you you're certainly not protecting kids, or anything actually useful.
I mean we both know they're drawn to look like kids too but I don't think you're going to admit that anytime soon tbh. But even just specifically looking for characters where the author says they're 12 for kicks is obviously that gets one labeled as a pedo.
Some are drawn to look like little kids, sure. But even still, it's a drawing and doesn't necessarily correlate to real life attraction to kids. Same way as I mentioned earlier watching gay hentai, or even gay porn, doesn't mean you're gay or even attracted to men in real life at all. Same way you can watch violent movies or play violent games and enjoy the fantasy without having any interest at all in real life.
So sure, I'll bet there's lots of pedos that watch loli stuff. But at the end of the day, who cares? They're either going to watch that, or go find real kids. And lumping everyone who has a fantasy as being a pedophile just makes the conversation impossible and does nothing to protect or defend anyone
It's the sexual fantasy that makes one pedo was the whole point.
But it's a fantasy involving a drawing that could represent anything. If they're not actually attracted to real kids, they're not a pedophile.
It could represent anything but what is it representing in this specific case? Yeah.
Well, for a lot of people it's not actual kids. So I don't know what to tell you
What do they represent if not kids?
The same thing furries represent. Just characters, that don't necessarily have an age, or gender, or species. It's the abstract representation of something you can project onto for various fantasies. Maybe they like that they're small, or cute, but don't necessarily relate it to a real life kid. When I look at furry stuff I'm not thinking about it in terms of real animals. They're completely different and they only bear a superficial resemblance to animals, just like an anime character only bears a superficial resemblance to a human.
What separates those specific characters from your regular anime characters?
Again, nothing, that's my point, they're all friggen drawings, and don't necessarily correlate to anything real. This whole argument is about assigning an arbitrary number to a drawing. And unless you're going to tell me that liking yiff makes you into bestiality, you understand my point and can stop asking questions.
Pretty interesting that those people are looking specifically for that certain category of material and that such a category exists separate from regular anime characters when nothing separates them from the rest of the anime characters.
I'm not actually asking those questions to know the answer, it's just to see you running around in circles trying to avoid the obvious conclusion. Lolis are lolis because they're supposed to be recognized as kids, for their age and looks. People who specifically look out for material featuring drawn children in sexual situations or just in general to jerk off to it is looking at that material because they're drawn and identified as kids. Person who is sexually into that type of stuff is a pedophile. You're going around and around saying "but it's drawn, it doesn't mean anything". Yeah, it doesn't mean anything that they're specifically looking for drawn stuff featuring children. It doesn't suddenly stop mattering when it's drawn.
If you're looking for stuff featuring animals meant to look like animals and jerking off to that then I have bad news for you.
No shit
The conclusion is pretty clear. Pedophiles are likely drawn to loli. Looking at loli doesn't necessarily mean you're a pedophile. Either way we should stop policing people's fantasies and getting outraged at cartoons
What? Are you kidding? It absolutely stops mattering when it's drawn, the same way murder stops mattering when it's drawn, or in games, or in movies.
If you think most loli anime shit look like actual kids, that says more about you than anyone else. Unless we're talking about photo-realistic shit, anime characters don't resemble humans any more than any other fantasy shit. Is anyone who was into Kes (https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Kes) a pedophile? She was only 4. Is anyone that dates https://wikibiography.in/shauna-rae-wiki-bio/ a pedo automatically because she looks like a kid? Sure, I'll bet pedophiles flock all over her because of that, but is there no way someone could be attracted to her despite her looks? Or just not care? Or is it only pedophiles. That's my point, and I don't care that you don't give a shit and just want to label everyone a pedophile because it makes you feel good or whatever reasons you have to be so invested with how and why people look at drawings
I guess this is as close to agreement as we will get. I'm sure there is the odd one out who is into it for the plot.
Pedophilia isn't an act, it's sexual attraction. And cartoons can trigger that.
Bet
A cartoon can "trigger" pedophilia? Not sure what that even means.
So fantasizing about being raped doesn't make you a rapist, but fantasizing about being a child makes you a pedophile?
Here's the uncomfortable bit that follows from your analogy: fantasizing about rape does not make you a rapist, it means you have a fetish.
Fantasizing about children does not make you a child abuser, it means you have a fetish.
The uncomfortable part is that simply having that fetish makes people hate you, whether or not you actually abuse any children. If you have a rape fetish, people might think that's weird but they wouldn't be demanding your execution.
Society draws no distinction between pedophiles and child abusers.
It's the attraction that makes one a pedophile, yes. Your logic would be like if someone into the opposite sex claimed they weren't straight (or bi) since they've never had sex.