NOTE: In my last paragraph I'm talking about pictures of children in general, not CP. I made it clear (and I think all of us are smart enough to realize) that child porn is really really wrong.

Question: if the authorities show up at your door and demand to know why you've been downloading massive amounts of lolicon, could you just pretend that you thought you were jacking off to cartoon midget porn?

At 1/18/12 11:20 AM, phsychopath wrote:

At 1/18/12 11:17 AM, RobJohnson wrote:

At 1/18/12 11:10 AM, phsychopath wrote:

At 1/18/12 10:37 AM, RobJohnson wrote:

We should not cater to the needs of those who enjoy these sorts of things.

Actually, research shows that we should cater to those needs. When pornography became prominent on the internet rape started to take on a massive decline, porn isn't starter fuel, it's an outlet.

please provide a source.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/every day_economics/2006/10/how_the_web_preven ts_rape.html

There is no REAL evidence in that article anywhere.... just a study. The individuals posting their mind at the bottom of the page seem to share my view on the article as well.

Perhaps you should actually read the article and see the opinions shared at the bottom of the page.

While this article, for example, states that there is no correlation with the two.
http://www.ricestandard.org/authors-sp-a uthorspornography-creating-rapists-and-a busers/

but again... these are just studies.... and to say one is more correct than the other is foolish.

They are both incorrect.

Unless you can survey 100% of the individuals in question, a study is innately invalid.

The fact of the matter is...

If viewing this type of pornographic material sparks the intent to rape (even if it is only 1 individual), your argument is invalid.

Even if the material does not effect everyone, it does not mean it will not act as a catalyst in others.

At 1/18/12 11:28 AM, Halberd wrote: NOTE: In my last paragraph I'm talking about pictures of children in general, not CP. I made it clear (and I think all of us are smart enough to realize) that child porn is really really wrong.

Someone may rebutt what I said about lolicon and say that by looking at lolicon pedophiles will facilitate bad thoughts but I kind of disagree with that. Like I said, there are people out there who are obsessed with their sexual fetishes, these people are usually the ones who end up being convicted pedophiles.

They are going to become obsessed anyway and if anything lolicon might at the very least stop them from doing any bad things just maybe.

Its depressing to know that there can't be anything done about impulsive pedophiles, but maybe there can be more awareness when it comes to who handles your children, and we should all work together to make our societies better places where we know whats good and bad and we all have morals and etc.

Believe in your morals and you can achieve almost anything.

At 1/18/12 11:34 AM, Halberd wrote: Believe in your morals and you can achieve almost anything.

Morals don't exist retard. Also we shouldn't be facilitating pedophiles sexual attractions with lolicon, that just makes them harbor bad thoughts and it is a fact that this makes them commit the crimes they commit.

And second of all pedophilia IS wrong and if you've seen the Louis Theroux show then here in the U.S.A they have a correctional facility for pedophiles, and if it doesn't change them then they keep them there for the rest of their lives and away from our children.

Like I said, morals don't exist and why should we have morals shoved up our throats? People will always be the way they are so don't be a fucking fool.

arguing with myself because no body takes me seriously anyway

Like someone said "implying that lolicon* causes child abuse by extension implies that normal porn causes sex". :P
* - it was originally CP, but CP requires child abuse to exist, loli/shota is victimless;

At 1/18/12 11:33 AM, RobJohnson wrote:

If viewing this type of pornographic material sparks the intent to rape (even if it is only 1 individual), your argument is invalid.

As opposed to the thousands upon thousands of other individuals who would have engaged in rape without it.

At 1/18/12 11:24 AM, Gagsy wrote:

At 1/18/12 11:10 AM, phsychopath wrote:

That's the equivalent of saying that maybe if Homosexuals never set eyes on Homosexual porn, then maybe they wouldn't be Homosexuals even though it's been scientifically proven that they're like that from birth.

In short, he found the porn; the porn did not find him.

Yeah but its not illegal to be a homosexual. The point I was trying to get across is that if that kind of illegal porn wasn't available to people online then maybe things would work out better for future victims. Maybe.

My point was that they would have embraced the fetish with or without the porn, they're naturally drawn to it in just the same way a Homosexual is attracted to a member of the same gender.

At 1/18/12 11:46 AM, phsychopath wrote:

At 1/18/12 11:33 AM, RobJohnson wrote:

If viewing this type of pornographic material sparks the intent to rape (even if it is only 1 individual), your argument is invalid.

As opposed to the thousands upon thousands of other individuals who would have engaged in rape without it.

There is no proof of that, unless you can see the future.

What IS tangible proof is internet viewing history, ie: looking into the past.

If you see that an individual has been delving into strange types of fetish porn and he acts upon one of his sexual urges because he learned about it from the internet... that is it.

At 1/18/12 11:51 AM, RobJohnson wrote:

What IS tangible proof is internet viewing history, ie: looking into the past.

If you see that an individual has been delving into strange types of fetish porn and he acts upon one of his sexual urges because he learned about it from the internet... that is it.

And what about all the convicted pedophiles who existed prior to the internet? Let's also not disregard the people who don't flesh out their fetish with piles of porn on their hard drive such as myself.

I really doubt lolicon makes pedophiles any worse. I just somehow doubt it.
Should we get rid of porn to stop sex offenders or something? If homosexuality suddenly became evil somehow (like every time you had gay sex some random child in the universe lost their innocence or some shit) would we cut off their gay porn drawings?

Do you mean lolicon in terms of drawn characters? If so, then no, I do not consider that child porn, because it's just a drawing and drawings are not something from real life. You see drawings of people being killed and stuff, but that certainly doesn't mean anyone is actually being killed. If you do it with actual people, then yes, to a certain extent, that could count, but maybe only if it involves nudity or anything.

At 1/18/12 11:51 AM, phsychopath wrote:

My point was that they would have embraced the fetish with or without the porn, they're naturally drawn to it in just the same way a Homosexual is attracted to a member of the same gender.

Rob used the right word, "Catalyst". Sure many crimes involving rape of minors or adults would have happened regardless of the content the rapist/pedo was viewing. But I've no doubt that it helps create fiendish obsessions in others that might have been avoidable. Its always, the more you have the more you want and the desire to up the game once you're into something. Because for some people, after viewing so much of that kind of pornography over long periods, it becomes not enough for them anymore, not enough to just be the viewer. At least thats how I see it.

The main difference is that child porn has victims, the children don't do it out of their will thery are forced, usually tortured etc. as well to get the things done.

art work, it is drawn / animated and has no victims. Thus is infinitly more times better.

It might still be illegal, but it should never be categorized together with CP, it is far nicer than such cruel things.

At 1/18/12 12:04 PM, Gagsy wrote:

At 1/18/12 11:51 AM, phsychopath wrote:

My point was that they would have embraced the fetish with or without the porn, they're naturally drawn to it in just the same way a Homosexual is attracted to a member of the same gender.

Rob used the right word, "Catalyst". Sure many crimes involving rape of minors or adults would have happened regardless of the content the rapist/pedo was viewing. But I've no doubt that it helps create fiendish obsessions in others that might have been avoidable. Its always, the more you have the more you want and the desire to up the game once you're into something. Because for some people, after viewing so much of that kind of pornography over long periods, it becomes not enough for them anymore, not enough to just be the viewer. At least thats how I see it.

This is why I'm interesting in psychology though to be honest I still personally think that with the right morals and values pedophiles can avoid their impulses and I also don't see the correlation with child predators and people who look at lolicon, and even so I think they would go after this sort of stuff anyway.

And even even so there is no way to get rid of lolicon cause of that weird loophole about the fact that they can't outright prove its of a child (its law bullshit I know)

At 1/18/12 07:46 AM, Nintharmed wrote: My question is: should sexualized drawings of children be restricted in a similar manner as CP is restricted?

I feel like I'm treading on dangerous territory by announcing my stance on this because the stuff is now illegal in my country but I don't think they should be. Drawings cannot be victims because they are not real people and cannot have their lives ruined because of these things. There is no victim in lolicon and nobody being abused therefore it should be legal.
I too would compare this to a game. Murder is sick and wrong but people playing games know it. So do people watching lolicon. They know that child abuse is sick and wrong. They are not promoting child abuse by watching these nor are they neccessarily going to turn into child rapists. Games can cause people to copy scenes from games but only if they are in a very unstable environment. The same goes for lolicon. Not everybody lives or grows up in an unstable environment that will turn them into murderers or rapists. Violent games don't turn people into murderers and neither does lolicon. I'm sorry I have to make this comparrison but it's the way I see things.
lolicon is illegal in the UK apparently and I want it legalised again.

I also think that cases like the one Gagsy said on the first page are probably pretty isolated cases...

Also why haven't we taken away heterosexual porn yet? I'm sure that is a catalyst for sex offenders too.

At 1/18/12 12:13 PM, jeremyCOOL wrote: I also think that cases like the one Gagsy said on the first page are probably pretty isolated cases...

Also why haven't we taken away heterosexual porn yet? I'm sure that is a catalyst for sex offenders too.

Okay RobJohnson, lets take away heterosexual porn and violent video games, they are catalysts

screw morals, they have nothing to do with pedophiles acting on their impulses. Lolicon is evil and is the main source in pedophiles raping and doing inappropriate things to children in their reach!!!!!!!

HEY PSYCHOTIC I AM STICKING UP FOR YOU MAN

At 1/18/12 12:04 PM, Gagsy wrote:

Rob used the right word, "Catalyst". Sure many crimes involving rape of minors or adults would have happened regardless of the content the rapist/pedo was viewing. But I've no doubt that it helps create fiendish obsessions in others that might have been avoidable. Its always, the more you have the more you want and the desire to up the game once you're into something. Because for some people, after viewing so much of that kind of pornography over long periods, it becomes not enough for them anymore, not enough to just be the viewer. At least thats how I see it.

If this had any weight to it, then why is it that I have over 1.5 gigs of furry porn on my hard drive but I've never engaged in sex of any kind, much less sex specified toward that fetish?

Perverts =/= serial killers.

At 1/18/12 12:13 PM, jeremyCOOL wrote: I also think that cases like the one Gagsy said on the first page are probably pretty isolated cases...

Also why haven't we taken away heterosexual porn yet? I'm sure that is a catalyst for sex offenders too.

Theres a major difference in consenting porn and non consenting porn. imo.

At 1/18/12 12:17 PM, Gagsy wrote:

At 1/18/12 12:13 PM, jeremyCOOL wrote: I also think that cases like the one Gagsy said on the first page are probably pretty isolated cases...

Also why haven't we taken away heterosexual porn yet? I'm sure that is a catalyst for sex offenders too.

Theres a major difference in consenting porn and non consenting porn. imo.

You said that lolicon was starter fuel for child rape, so why doesn't heterosexual adult porn lead to rape as well? Porn of all kinds should lead to rape of all kinds, no?

At 1/18/12 12:21 PM, phsychopath wrote:

You said that lolicon was starter fuel for child rape, so why doesn't heterosexual adult porn lead to rape as well? Porn of all kinds should lead to rape of all kinds, no?

You don't hear of many kids consenting, I guess you can change that to, I think that lolicon can be starter fuel for people wanting, or planning to engage in sexual activities with children. Not always, it's a case by case thing I reckon.

No, it isn't.

I'm sorry psychopath, but I grow weary of this conversation...
You have a good head on your shoulders... although I disagree with your views on this matter...

I think we are going to have to agree to disagree.

At 1/18/12 12:23 PM, Gagsy wrote:

At 1/18/12 12:21 PM, phsychopath wrote:

You said that lolicon was starter fuel for child rape, so why doesn't heterosexual adult porn lead to rape as well? Porn of all kinds should lead to rape of all kinds, no?

You don't hear of many kids consenting, I guess you can change that to, I think that lolicon can be starter fuel for people wanting, or planning to engage in sexual activities with children. Not always, it's a case by case thing I reckon.

The person you're describing was interested in engaging the act prior to finding porn of it, you don't need visual examples to develop a fantasy of it, the fantasy is where the material stems from.

people should just have good values

lolicon might be a catalyst for people to do pedophilic things but that is kind of like saying that violent video games is a catalyst for violent/already messed up people and that we should get rid of ultra violent video games

At 1/18/12 12:39 PM, jeremyCOOL wrote: people should just have good values

lolicon might be a catalyst for people to do pedophilic things but that is kind of like saying that violent video games is a catalyst for violent/already messed up people and that we should get rid of ultra violent video games

What can change the nature of a pedophile? belief....belief in love and respect and regret

acceptance of your flaws

philosophical wax

something something

At 1/18/12 12:39 PM, jeremyCOOL wrote: people should just have good values

lolicon might be a catalyst for people to do pedophilic things but that is kind of like saying that violent video games is a catalyst for violent/already messed up people and that we should get rid of ultra violent video games

Those serial killers who adopted their methods from video games were going to murder anyways, the game is just where they picked up their methodology. In case you don't recall, serial killers existed before video games were prominent.

At 1/18/12 12:35 PM, phsychopath wrote:

The person you're describing was interested in engaging the act prior to finding porn of it, you don't need visual examples to develop a fantasy of it, the fantasy is where the material stems from.

Well, I genuinely believe this can happen to people. Even if my experience goes with your own theory. Because I have viewed lolicon before a few times and did enjoy it. No lusting for children occurred afterwards. However, this is just something I believe still.

At 1/18/12 12:46 PM, Gagsy wrote:

At 1/18/12 12:35 PM, phsychopath wrote:

The person you're describing was interested in engaging the act prior to finding porn of it, you don't need visual examples to develop a fantasy of it, the fantasy is where the material stems from.

Well, I genuinely believe this can happen to people. Even if my experience goes with your own theory. Because I have viewed lolicon before a few times and did enjoy it. No lusting for children occurred afterwards. However, this is just something I believe still.

So you've had experience in delving into a fantasy without fleshing it out into reality, more specifically, with the topic of porn we're discussing and you still believe that it's a catalyst?