Forum - View topic

Being an English-speaking fan of lolicon manga really sucks

If you're willing to lend credence to such infantile and baseless analogies, it's hardly suprising that you encounter incredulity on a regular basis.

I wasn't aware that I needed some sort of special dispensation from your good self in order to point out that which is blindingly obvious.

I note, with no great suprise, that you do not bother (or are not able) to attempt to extend upon or justify einhorn303's preposterous assertation...should you wish to do so, however, I will be thrilled to hear exactly how and why your understanding of Western modern social history and sociological trends differs from mine.

It's your personal opinion that his analogies were "infantile and baseless."

Blindingly obvious? Mankind thought the Earth was flat for many, many millennia

Of course I wouldn't bother; how long have you been here on these fora, mate? I've tired of doing it again and again, knowing that no matter how many reasoning I find you won't change your mind a single bit,

for deep in your heart that each and every analogy supporting the legalization of lolicon manga for the Western hemisphere is always "infantile and baseless."

I see. So you could definitively prove (or at least substantially support) your argument...but you're not going to and I'm just going to have to take it on trust that you're right and I'm wrong? That's not tremendously persuasive.

the author also has dōjinshi based on Dennō Coil, Manabi Straight!, and Fushigiboshi no Futago Hime

Moomintroll wrote:

If you're willing to lend credence to such infantile and baseless analogies, it's hardly suprising that you encounter incredulity on a regular basis.

It's your personal opinion that his analogies were "infantile and baseless."

ikillchicken wrote:

dormcat wrote: einhorn303 wrote: I always feel a bit of pity for anime/manga fans who are all "lolicon is evil!", since lolicon has such a large influence on the whole anime industry. Agreed. Like I said before, the phenomenon is not restricted within manga and anime industry, but the entire Japanese realm of artistic creation. So we can't be anime fans if we have a problem with this stuff? I don't really care how deeply this stuff is ingrained in anime/manga or even Japanese Culture. I still find it disgusting and wrong and will speak out against it. Jeez, its at times like these when I think to myself: I just signed up to watch Vampires and/or Giant Robots kill each other. How the heck did I end up in the middle of all this?

As abunai already said of course you can be an anime fan if you don't like loli. Just as someone can be an anime fan if they don't like 80's mecha shows. Though personally those people need their heads examined . The thing is all too often I've run into people against loli that want to say those who do like it are not true fans themselves. So you have one group claiming people who like that particular genre are not fans yet they themselves get upset if they feel someone is saying they have to like loli to be fans. That pisses me off because that's just hypocritical bullshit. You're free to not like whatever you want but don't you dare insult others who do or call them less of a fan of anime because they do like loli, when you yourself wanna get pissy if you feel someone is saying to be a fan yourself of anime you have to like loli. It's a two way street and all too often many seem to forget that.

And just to be clear my post in not made at you directly ikillchicken.

And I no longer want to persuade you people.

As an atheist,

I know how futile it is to disprove the existence of deities in front of fundies.

Now is the time where I step in and say that you will not win in trying to persuade abunai on this argument. And the reason I say that is because I have already had this argument with him some time ago. Trust me when I say that there a little more things in life that he knows about than you or I, because he is older than both of us combined. I think that you are free in what you want to say, but just be careful of what you will say. I already know.

You can't seriously be claiming that there is a reasonable comparison to be made between homosexuality and pedophilia. Factually, they are inherently different as homosexuality is possible to actually act on because it can be between two consenting adults. It is logically impossible to for this to be the case with pedophilia. Therefore the idea that pedophilia will eventually become socially acceptable in the same way homosexuality did is inherently flawed.

Over the past century, general public perceptions of homosexuality have softened across the developed world and the lessening of legislation and social pressures relating to it has followed accordingly.

It's a pretty popular one, since I see it posted pretty often in the places I get my, uh, stuff.

... the author also has dōjinshi based on Dennō Coil...

And just when I was gathering some faith in the discussion. If there is one thing I have absolute confidence in my knowledge of it's the Canadian and American justice systems. I couldn't write a book on them or trace their lineage to every minuscule degree but I can shoot down almost any idea about how it works or what it does.

Where would that be? I used to love desuchan's /loli/ board, but there servers crashed or something and now they only have one or two backup boards. And not4chan has annoying pop-up ads. And 7chan /cake/ is full of...hmmm, I guess "newfags" would be the term.

ikillchicken wrote:

You can't seriously be claiming that there is a reasonable comparison to be made between homosexuality and pedophilia. Factually, they are inherently different as homosexuality is possible to actually act on because it can be between two consenting adults. It is logically impossible to for this to be the case with pedophilia. Therefore the idea that pedophilia will eventually become socially acceptable in the same way homosexuality did is inherently flawed.

I just realized that I didn't express my thoughts about the definition and purpose of the age of consent in my old blog article, so for the record I'll write it down here.


Let me start with two questions.

The legal drinking age of US is 21, while it's 18 in Mexico and 18-19 in Canada. Does it mean a 20-year-old young American is less capable to control the effects of alcohol than youths in the two neighboring countries?

A 17-year-old college freshman has straight-A and is looking for opportunities in Harvard or Yale Law School, yet s/he is still too young to vote. Do you think his/her political awareness is less capable than a 25-year-old illiterate?

I think most people would answer "no" to both questions. If so, then why do you think when someone grows beyond the legal age of consent, s/he suddenly becomes fully responsible of his/her body and can conduct sexual activities that s/he can't do just a few days earlier?

Many would just say "because the law says so."

But why? Why does someone suddenly become more "mature" when the ticking clock simply goes beyond a certain number?

Because a line has to be drawn, yet, similar to my second question, the actual level of mental maturation (knowing the effects of alcohol, political awareness, or consent of sexuality, etc.) is very difficult, if not impossible, to measure, thus an objective (and probably the only objective) standard has to be adopted, and that is the physical age. It's a compromise rather than a perfection, and I personally dislike the system very much. Furthermore, saying "minors can't be effectively consent" is equivalent of saying "blacks can't be effective soldiers and sailors" back in the pre-WWII US Army and Navy. Those who decides that minors can't be effectively consent have the same minds and backgrounds of those who decided that blacks couldn't be effective soldiers: they have power, and they don't want to be challenged, let alone possibly replaced.

However, it is necessary to protect the kids that aren't. Sure, especially nowadays you can make a decent case that maybe the limit should be lower. That doesn't blow the whole concept of "age of consent" though.

Being Black or White does not effect what kid of person you are. Being a Child versus being an Adult clearly does.

then why do you think when someone grows beyond the legal age of consent, s/he suddenly becomes fully responsible of his/her body and can conduct sexual activities that s/he can't do just a few days earlier?

It's a compromise rather than a perfection

Furthermore, saying "minors can't be effectively consent" is equivalent of saying "blacks can't be effective soldiers and sailors" back in the pre-WWII US Army and Navy.

Moomintroll also kept saying the social attitude towards homosexuals has been more and more open for the past decades.

It's the right to vote, stupid.

Nobody then would have predicted the coming of the "gay rights" movement.

As recent as 1970, Nixon's Whitehouse Plumbers broke into the therapist's office of Daniel Ellsberg, a political enemy, attempting to find evidence he was a homosexual...because being outed as a homosexual would "completely destroy his political career."

Also, I wouldn't dismiss myself as "some dumb pedo."

I think one of the major problems occurring in this thread along with any kind of discrimination of would be pedophiles is that people don't want to differentiate between thinking pedophiles and practicing pedophiles.