1. The NF rules of conduct have been updated in response to the Xenforo upgrade. Please review them here.
  2. Discussion for the forum medals contest is happening here. Please drop in and give your input.

Lolicon

Discussion in 'Debate Corner' started by ~Flippy, Apr 19, 2009.

  1. ~Flippy OM NOM NOM NOM

    Messages:
    6,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I dont think this has been made into a debate thread in this section...

    Anyways.

    Here, debate lolicon- its legal status, morality, depictions from culture to culture, etc.

    Lolicon is the label for the preference, or interest, in very young girls, or girls that have [physical] childish characteristics.

    It does *not* only refer to the pornography genre, though it is possibly most commonly used to reference it in this day and age.

    Debate whatever you want about it- however, these are some questions that you may be interested in answering and discussing in the process:

    -Should animations, computer games, manga, etc. featuring female children, or women who resemble children, in sexual situations be outlawed or atleast heavily regulated?
    -Do you believe that an individual who is interested in lolicon-based animations, videogames, artwork, etc. is necessarily a pedophile? How would you explain someone who takes a universal interest in women of all age ranges?
    -Some argue that the legalization of lolicon animated material may actually reduce occurances of real-life pedophillic actions by providing users with an outlet of questionable healthiness. Would you agree? Why or why not?
    -The term "moe", as a classification of various fetishisms in anime and manga is sometimes used as a synonymous definition to "lolicon". How do you feel about this?
    -While child pornography was outlawed in Japan around 1999, the attempts of Japanese interest groups to end lolicon animated materials thus far have been either ignored, unconsidered, or rejected. Do you feel that this is for good reason?

    Of course, don't feel *expected* to answer these. They serve as a mere topic starter ideas.

    My opinion?

    Well, I don't necessarily disagree with lolicon animation, but at the same time I am very against real-life pedophilia. I guess the way I see it, is that there is a difference between a drawing and an actual photo or picture. However, I do not feel that it is appropriate for someone who is possibly in danger of participating in, or conducting, real-life pedophillic behavior to consume and enjoy lolicon animated materials. I treat that matter in the same way that I would treat this question: should a suicidal individual be given a handgun?

    Also, I feel that the focus on lolicon is biased to one gender. When you wiki "shotacon", the male equivalent to "lolicon", you will find a much more limited, if not non-existent, controversy section. Also, the comparison of groups focusing on lolicon to the groups also focusing on shotacon is, well, unfair. The reality is that both sexes are targeted by pedophillic individuals, and both young boys and girls can and will sometimes be abused and violated.
     
  2. Mintaka Active Member

    Messages:
    21,682
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    IT'S AWWWRIGHT!!!!
     
  3. Seto Kaiba God Hand Crusher

    Messages:
    39,686
    Likes Received:
    236
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It's not my cup of tea, but for those that do enjoy should have the right to do so without fear of being punished by the law.
     
  4. Fran I'm with <b><font color="#000080">Bruce</font></b>

    Messages:
    13,387
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    In before Zaxxon.

    I hate to give the usual trite answer, but I think it's absolutely fine if its manga/anime. Actual paedophilia is however, immoral and morbid. Also, moe-esque characters :wtf. I love 'em. Although, seeing them in actual sex even in hentai is ... :oh
     
  5. ~Flippy OM NOM NOM NOM

    Messages:
    6,562
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I knew you'd come here :ho
     
  6. Bryan Paulsen Fitness Q and A

    Messages:
    2,336
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Given that morality is based on a bunch of emphemeral rationalizations designed to allow, or disallow behaviors it should be determined by the cultural values of a given society.

    And since rationalizations are designed to mask guttural reactions in an attempt to convince other people of a viewpoint it's a waste of time to even think a rationalization could ever be objectively correct (only possessing subjective truth value so far as the individual is concerned).

    If a society is okay with it, let it be. If not, just as well. Both sides are equally "correct".

    Maybe I'm wrong, maybe there is some objective standard for morality in general, and therefore this has some kind of clear-cut standard I'm unaware of.
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2009
  7. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Lolicon is still wrong, its pedophilia and regardless of whether its drawn, imagined or real little kids, you're a pedophile for liking it.
     
  8. Zabuzalives Active Member

    Messages:
    4,845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    If your getting excited about pre-pubescent children then your a pedophile.

    Doesnt matter if its a drawn representation or the real thing.


    What does seperate it from real pictures is that no children were harmed in the creating of it.
    I would like to know if such material would increase the chance for pedophiles to act on their urges. If not...i would not criminalize it, but would want it restricted cause i dont need that disgusting sexual preferance in the public view/space.
     
  9. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I think that the whole "Its just cartoons" thing is a way to not look like "real" pedophiles.
     
  10. Pilaf The Doom that came to Sarnath

    Messages:
    17,069
    Likes Received:
    95
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Lolicon is no more an actual depiction of a child having sex or in a sexual position than a decapitation or other form of murder in a video game is an actual depiction of murder.

    The two things can and should be compared. Either both are legal and permissible for adults to view, or neither, but don't be a fucking hypocrite and say one is worse than the other.
     
  11. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48

    Threatening me with being a hypocrite?

    Here is the thing, viewing a murder isn't illegal. Viewing child porn is.
     
  12. Pilaf The Doom that came to Sarnath

    Messages:
    17,069
    Likes Received:
    95
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Here's the thing...lolicon isn't child porn.
     
  13. vervex Art prevails! Advisor

    Messages:
    10,334
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I totally agree with this statement.

    Whether someone who watches child porn is a pedophile changes from a dictionary to the other. Some definitions say that a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to kids, others say that it is someone who actually abuses a kids for his own pleasure.

    There is, however, still a big step between actual child porn and lolicon. By watching child porn, you are witnessing an act of raping and not reporting it to the police, which goes straight against the law and encourages more abuse of that kind. By watching lolicon, you are simply enjoying a cartoon, a simulation of drawn kids having sex. I could be wrong, but I strongly believe that many lolicon fans aren't aroused by actual kids having sex. Just as some people like hentai and dislike actual porn.

    Pilaf's example of murder was a good one too. If you murder in a game, are you a murderer? If you like to watch movies where people get killed, does it mean you'll be on a rampage in a public high school with a gun the next day? Or if you fap to gore, are you a potential serial killer? Of course not. It takes more than watching simulations to make you disturbed enough to kill people, or even to rape kids.

    For the ones against lolicon, you should consider that. No one is harmed in lolicon, and, well, it's obviously, after all, a simple cartoon.
     
  14. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36

    The context is completely different and the distinction arbitrary.

    Let's go back to my old reliable example.

    Let's say you caught a MALE friend masturbating to cartoon depictions of male-on-male sex: would you buy his explanation that it's not "really gay" because it's not "real" men, just depictions of men, having sex? No, you'd call him full of shit. What's different here?

    There is no argument over the definition of pedophile, Vervex. The definition is anyone sexually attracted to prepubescent children. They don't have to act on it to be labeled as such hence why being a pedophile isn't a crime in and of itself. Claiming to not be gratifying oneself via the rape of children, while a clarification worth making, doesn't expunge the label of being a pedophile. Just like having fantasies in your head would make you a pedophile, so does jacking it to cartoon 9 year olds.

    As for Pilaf's analogy, perhaps violent video games/movies are fulfilling peoples' fantasies of violence and mayhem. Establishing that hypocrisy does nothing to dismiss the claim that people who enjoy loli are pedophiles. No one's arguing it will cause them to actually act on it thus the "school shootings" bit is no longer analogous and the whole point's moot. By the way, if you "fap to gore," that's a fetish worth looking into a psych evaluation over.
     
  15. Wolfarus Mrgrgr

    Messages:
    10,418
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    If the majority of lolicon was "realistic" when it comes to the consequences of 6-11 year old girls having sex (the injuries, the screaming, ect) then yes id agree that lolicon is made to appeal to pedophiles. Maybe even seriously deranged pedophiles, if watching a pre-pubescent girls vagina being torn open gets them off.

    But in MOST of the lolicon ive seen, the girls are physically "ok", if not perfectly well with the act. They are not being torn open, as a real girl of that age would be. And most of them seem to be enjoying the sex, if not portrayed as being the one who wanted it in the first place. I realize that this would prob be written off as "well, they are giving the sicko's the justification for their obsession. The little girls like it, want it and can take it"

    Which is a perfectly valid point to have, ill admit. But the physical fact of the matter is that the majority of lolicon females dont respond physically or mentally to sex as a real girl of the same age would, so i dont consider them to be human(in mind or body), and therefore human morals and standards / laws shouldnt apply to them.

    And yeah.. besides the fact that they arnt REAL TO BEGIN WITH (as opposed to real child porn. which is just 1001 differant ways of nasty and reprehensible). :oh

    Do i like it? not particularily. But am i going to slam the label of "pedophile rapist monster!" on somebody who does? Of course not. Its their fetish, let them enjoy it.



    (and im 75% sure this topic has been done before here)
     
  16. Seto Kaiba God Hand Crusher

    Messages:
    39,686
    Likes Received:
    236
    Trophy Points:
    63
    You can't arrest someone purely on the basis of being a pedophile. It's a reason to keep a look out for them, but if there isn't anything showing they plan to or have exploited real children you cannot touch them.

    But it is just cartoons. Fictional content in which no real person(s) are being exploited. You can't assume because they take part in consumption of fictional content that they are going to go out and actually rape a kid.

    Lolicon isn't child porn.
     
  17. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Pedophiles aren't required to be rapists or be turned on by violence.

    It's just the reality that any pedophile who acts on his attraction (note how one is a pedophile even before acting on it) will inevitably lead to rape since a child legally can't (and more importantly won't) consent.

    Lolicon is made to appeal to pedophiles because it's a depiction of children in sexual situations.

    Of course in a fantasy world designed to appeal to pedophiles the children are "ok" with it. The fact you won't go that extra step into "perfectly well" even within this fantasy context is very telling that you're rationalizing.

    I imagine you're one of the people who would read Lolita and buy Humbert's embellishment that the girl seduced him.

    Learn the actual definition of pedophilia before arguing it.

    As I said, it's a pedophilic fantasy world designed to appeal to pedophiles.

    If anyone was saying children being raped was a requisite for pedophilia, you'd have a point. We didn't, you don't.

    You're the one who's not separating "pedophile" from "rapist monster."



    I'm 175% sure since I've been in at least 3 of them.
     
  18. Zaxxon Active Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I propose that if you think that an attraction to drawn young girls automatically makes someone a pedophile, you probably also think that if someone likes guro, that automatically makes them want to mutilate for pleasure.

    I mean, logically that's what it sounds like you're saying to me. :zaru
     
  19. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Obviously, it makes one ponder the correlation.

    Your analogy doesn't stand because one requires an action (mutilation) while pedophilia doesn't.
     
  20. E Active Member

    Messages:
    11,429
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    it's all for teh lulz
     
  21. Vanity away fighting dragons

    Messages:
    33,275
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not into it but I don't really have a problem with it. There aren't any actual kids being harmed in it or anything. I don't see why something that's basically 'fake' like that should ever really be wrong.

    Also, people can't really help what they are attracted to. I am attracted to adult males which is considered normal for an adult female like myself. I know I can't 'help' feeling attracted to them though so people who are attracted to these other things probably can't 'help' feeling attracted to it either. And at least with lolicon, they aren't doing anything illegal. They might as well be able to see something like that.
     
  22. Wolfarus Mrgrgr

    Messages:
    10,418
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Thats your explanation for everything, isnt it? :zaru

    Bush's election wins? For the lulz

    The forming of the UN? For the lulz.

    Ect, ect so on and so forth. :pimp
     
  23. Vegitto-kun HOMUHOMUHOMU

    Messages:
    20,705
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    lolicon is awwwrrriight baby
     
  24. Jello Biafra Now Look What You Made Me Do Advisor

    Messages:
    8,311
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    No, if you're sexually attracted to young girls, you're a pedophile. End of discussion. It comes from the Greek words "pais", meaning child, and "philia", meaning love or friendship.

    That's what it means. A pedophile is sexually attracted to young children, often to the exclusion of adults. Whether you act on those urges is another story. If you do, you're a pedarest.

    So, in review, pedophilia = liking children sexually. Pederasty = having a sexual relationship with children.
     
  25. Zaxxon Active Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I'm sure that someone can get a visualization of mutilation in their head and possibly get off on it, hence they don't necessarily need to act. :zaru
     
  26. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Likewise, getting off on a visualization of a child engaging in sex, whether assisted through cartoon depictions or purely mental, makes you a pedophile. :zaru

    You and others are attempting to skate along a gray area that just isn't there.
     
  27. Zaxxon Active Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Maybe in thought, but not in practice, and maybe not a threat to anyone . . .
     
  28. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    There is no "being a pedophile in practice." If you are sexually attracted to children, you're a pedophile. Bottom line. You're confusing it with pedarests as Jello pointed out.

    Again, no one (except maybe CTK) is calling you a threat to children. Not all, or even probably most, pedophiles go on to rape children.
     
  29. Zaxxon Active Member

    Messages:
    10,876
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I'm just gonna agree with guy and leave it at that, before I go and put my foot in my mouth again. :nod
     
  30. vervex Art prevails! Advisor

    Messages:
    10,334
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    If watching lolicon does not make people rape children or encourage actual children pornography, then what is the problem with it? It does not harm, does it? Why should it be banned then?

    I also disagree with the "hypocrisy" argument. I used the example of gore earlier, as in people who get turned on by anime characters getting killed. That people aren't called psychopath because of their preferences, that is unless their fetish is extended in real actions or by watching videos featuring real people getting killed.

    I understand your point though. I just don't think it's applicable in all the cases. There are people who are only aroused by cartoons (girls getting fucked by bugs or octopuses are other examples) and that wouldn't react the same way if such fantasies would happen in real life.

    Basically, what I'm trying to say is that lolicon is not responsible for the real cases of pedophilia and kids raping police is dealing with. One can like watching the cartoon but can be completely disgusted and revolted by actual kids getting raped. The authorities should focus more on actual child porn and rapists instead of pointing a finger at drawings.

    I agree with this wholeheartedly. :p But still, people should have the freedom to like it or not.
     
  31. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    I'm not saying it should be banned and I'm not one of those people who think we should mark all pedophiles and sexual deviants with scarlet letters. I'm simply pointing out the flaw in saying, "I'm sexually aroused by cartoon depictions of children but I'm not a pedophile."

    To be honest, I'd rather a pedophile have loli as an outlet although I believe that just as most heterosexual males don't have to resist an urge to rape women, most pedophiles probably don't go out and rape children.

    One must wonder if they have elements of psychopathy in order to be sexually turned on by depictions of murder and rape.

    Regardless, as long as they don't act on it, it's really not an issue though such people may warrant observation (not by the government, I mean by friends and family and the like).

    I'll concede that the workings of the human brain/mind is practically labyrinthine and you can't neatly categorize it all. I'm not above making connections, though, and wondering why cartoon bestiality is such a stretch from "the real thing." I admit, it's not like I'm a neuroscientist or psychiatrist.

    I never said it was the cause nor do I believe it is. I'm saying that enjoying loli probably stems from an existing preference.

    That's where it gets sketchy for me. I don't understand how one could be repulsed by rape but get off on a depiction of it, even in a fictional setting. As for why we don't mind murder and the like in fiction, I think there's a line between enjoying it within the context of a narrative and simply getting off on it.

    I never said otherwise.
     
  32. Daron Elle m'Ennuie

    Messages:
    1,711
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36

    The only point I feel like addressing at this time and before I do; I'd like to state that I am extremely against any child pornography; However...
    During my last year in high school a fellow peer encountered problems and backlash due to his portrayal of the musical Cabaret. I am not 100% familiar with this musical, although from what I was told the problems he was facing were due to the musical portraying young girls in lingerie; however if it is a part of the musical, I believe taking from it would have been taking away from its artistry. All in all, I believe if it has its purpose such as art, it can be allowed; But don't think that simply deciding "oh I am going to paint a child nude" you will get off on it being art, there has to be some restrictions to protect the well-being of the children at all times.

    And no, I do not believe that any hentai portrayal of adult women with the bodies of young girls should be restricted based on the sole accusation that it would encourage pedophilia. Unless otherwise noted in research that it in fact increases the amount of pedophiles, I believe we should not focus on that, but rather further monitor children and their safety especially after school has let out. I believe a way to protect their safety would include at least two patrol cars in and about the area to at least discourage pedophiles from harming any children. And I understand that this wouldn't solve the problem, but for the most part its a step towards their safety.
     
  33. Utopia Realm Love me?

    Messages:
    12,153
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Don't have a problem with lolicon. If someone wants to watch it, let them. Not my business to interfere and its ot hrting anybody. Some people here in this thread are just too uptight with this issue.
     
  34. Inuhanyou Ever Cry, Never Life.

    Messages:
    34,909
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Mmmmm lolis :awesome

    Eh, being in my position i feel a little awkward inside this thread here..but in my opinion, its not hurting anyone, and for many artists it is an artform, so i can't really say myself even if was an as outsider that there was reason enough to ban it or accost anyone with legal prosecution.

    People who look at loli's or lolicon in general are not pedophiles, and it doesn't mean that they look at that kind of stuff IRL or in regards to real kids anyway, art and IRL can be two different things, to one's mind and otherwise, so they should be treated differently than used in conjunction with erroneous generalizations.
     
  35. Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki アルかわいい

    Messages:
    9,331
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Whether or not the people who enjoy it are paedophiles does not actually matter in the slightest unless one considers the orientation/fetish to be criminal in itself. Any argument about whether or not they are is ultimately about mudslinging and a waste of time.

    If I look at pictures of people eating shit and I get aroused by it, I am obviously coprophile. Even if the shit is not photographic, I am still a coprophile.

    The problem here is that the term paedophile has been "hysterified" by the media so that it is now synonymous with being a serial rapist and worse than a murderer.
     
  36. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Winner!

    If that friend would be gay, and he would be (I'm even suspect about those of you that masturbate to trannies and those damn dick girls) then likewise, another person masturbating to children, drawn or otherwise is a Pedophile.

    Of course I am going with the classic definition of Pedophile, not just, a person who likes people under 18...but a person who like prepubescent boys or girls. (really the word is meant for boys in its original context)
     
  37. Inuhanyou Ever Cry, Never Life.

    Messages:
    34,909
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    38
    ^ An male artist draws a naked man in a compromising position, is it because he's gay or because its art? People including males gather around to see it, is it because they're gay or because they enjoy the art?

    The whack off comment is not particularly even valid, because people do not necessarily have those urges when viewing the material concerned.

    And even if they did, sexual orientation aside, its hardly the same.
     
  38. Adonis Logical Positivist Nazi

    Messages:
    6,837
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Depends on the context. If the artist drew it pornographically, he can't hide behind the "art" shield. If the group of men are masturbating to it, neither can they.

    This is where my skepticism flares.

    People view pictures of cartoon children in sexual compromising scenarios for it's artistic merit? Bah! Do you take me for a simpleton?
     
  39. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48

    When people start getting all situational like this, it usually means they've run out of sensible arguments.

    Viewing a nude man doesn't make you gay, masturbating to two men having sex is suspect.
     
  40. GrimaH Tilting on a tightrope

    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    If I fap to a pubescent person, am I a pedophile under the law?
    IIRC the law labels all under a certain age (14-18) as children, so since many people fap to pubescent or post-pubescent high school cartoon characters that are under that age and are yet unattracted to prepubescent children, then how does that work?

    Are you looking down on the wonderful art of masturbation? :pek
     
  41. vervex Art prevails! Advisor

    Messages:
    10,334
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36

    To be honest, it is a bit sketchy for me as well. For instance, I enjoy reading/watching yaoi, and sometimes soft/light hentai. On the other hand, porn disgusts me. Porn often doesn't have a story and is only pure sex. It is blunt and direct. Perhaps anime and drawings are less direct, or request more your imagination. I personally believe that too much isn't arousing. There has to be a hint of mystery left for me to enjoy sexual images. :p

    There must be other reasons for that, but I ain't a psychologist either. It would be interesting to see a study explaining it.
     
  42. GrimaH Tilting on a tightrope

    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The fictional setting makes all the difference.
    The whole problem with a rape fetish (is that the right word for it? i'm groggy now) is that in real life situations a person is being violated, and that goes against the moral code of almost every single conditioned being in civilised society. However, simulated or drawn rape lets the guy get off to it, thereby satisfying his fetish, while keeping his own moral sanity intact.

    .....Am I making sense here?

    Isn't getting off on it simply a category of enjoyment of it?
     
  43. Yume-chan DOES

    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I find the analogy between a man viewing an anime of two men having sex and someone watching lolicon inaccurate simply because I have never heard of anyone who is attracted to cartoon men but not real men, while most lolicons are genuinely not sexually interested in actual underage girls. It's not, in most cases, that they are attracted to children and are directing that attraction into lolicon, but that there is something in the lolicon genre that appeals to them more than other types of hentai. I don't know why this distinction between real and drawn is so much more pronounced in lolicons than other hentai watchers, but I suspect it has something to do with the appeal of trust and innocence. For instance, Hinata from Naruto is often referred to as a "big-tittied loli." She's clearly not prepubescent, but she's still seen as a loli because of her quiet and devoted personality. You can also see, even from looking at the sigs of various members on these forums, that many lolicons like their lolis to have breasts. In short, they aren't attracted to the physical appearance of underage girls, but to something about the way those girls are portrayed in lolicon.

    That does still leave open the question of whether someone who is attracted to little girls only in anime could be considered a pedophile, but for some people to argue that the label doesn't apply doesn't mean they're unaware of the definition of a pedophile. Rather, that definition as it applies in these cases has not yet been worked out, since the idea of being attracted to something only when it's fictional, as opposed to being attracted to it in real life but suppressing that attraction, has only become widespread with the growing popularity of hentai.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2009
  44. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48

    I have seen lesbians watch yaoi and enjoy it, the same way some men watch lesbian porn and enjoy it I guess.

    Even then, most of them wouldn't admit it because they'd be called a pedophile. Remember when everyone thought Vegitto was one and how he got teased? Yeah, that's why they don't do it.
     
  45. GrimaH Tilting on a tightrope

    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Offtopic, but I've always seen people at the board I frequent (guess which one) screaming 3D PIG DISGUSTING, and I wonder how many of them are serious about it.
    Is there a name for the fetish for fictional characters?
     
  46. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Name? There's probably some psychological term. :notrust
     
  47. Yume-chan DOES

    Messages:
    679
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    I don't think it's "the same way," exactly, since the men are attracted to the lesbians, but the lesbians are not attracted to those involved in the yaoi. At any rate, this is another example of what I was trying to get at. I don't think a lesbian enjoying yaoi should be considered evidence of her bisexuality, since she still isn't attracted to actual men, and probably not even to the anime men.

    That may be true in some cases, but consider how this relates to your own example of lesbians watching yaoi. The lesbians of course are not claiming they aren't attracted to real men in order to avoid societal pressure. If lesbians could be aroused by yaoi, then why couldn't there be people aroused by lolicon but not by actual children?
     
  48. GrimaH Tilting on a tightrope

    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Yeah, yeah, everything you don't like is unnatural, wrong and a sickness. We get it, you don't have to remind us.
     
  49. Cardboard Tube Knight Heads or Tails?

    Messages:
    56,070
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    48

    I didn't know fictional characters naturally occurred.

    Even then a lot of other psychological things occur naturally, if you pulled your head out of your ass maybe you'd see that?
     
  50. GrimaH Tilting on a tightrope

    Messages:
    6,347
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Because it's impossible for the imagination to naturally make up characters amirite?

    Whoa, no need to bait me into a flamewar now, I know you too well to fall for that.
     

Share This Page