/siberia/ - Off-topic

>>691252
>yet to see this great sum of pedophiles that like loli
lol. lmao.
Have you never used lolicon forums? ATF for example? I mean on ATF its pretty open that its a place for pedophiles.

>>691256

>mentions ATFBooru
the glowie is a closeted lolicon confirmed

>>691256
>Have you never used lolicon forums
no, don't like social media and only use for the bare minimun
>ATF for example? I mean on ATF its pretty open that its a place for pedophiles.
not really actual, how many of these fucks are actually atracted to minors ?, all, 50%, 5% ?, it all it just shows is that there are places where they are comfortable with this ilk, at least formally, that's bad but not a torch against everyones that likes lolicon.
just like furries have places where they like actual animals, E621 mods aparently are these, this doesn't make every furry a lover of zoophilia irl, it just a hyperbole against shit you don't like.

>>691268
>don't like social media and only use for the bare minimun
Might be worth finding a better instance if you're not having fun with the one you're using.

>>691268
>not really actual, how many of these fucks are actually atracted to minors ?
Visit the Grey Zone section sometime.
>that's bad but not a torch against everyones
Why is it bad? Its just honest. I think its ok to be a lolicon but you should just be honest if you have pedophilia. ComicLO is another example, its pretty much the main magazine for loli doujins and they have all sorts of illustrations about how pedophile readers should keep it 2D. The whole crusade about how loli content is unrelated to pedophilia is, as far as I know, alien to its birthplace of Japan. Japanese loli content having bigger eyes and snot-free noses and all.
Sure, perhaps not every single lolicon will qualify as a pedophile. So you shouldn't take this as an assault on your person. But this revulsion to the idea of pedophilia having direct relevance to lolicon in general is crazed. That's not some inherent evil. You don't need to pray it away like the devil.
>E621 mods aparently are these, this doesn't make every furry a lover of zoophilia irl
People who become attached to furry pornography as an identity really should ask themselves if they are attracted to animals methinks. I'm not trying to condemn them as some evil by saying that.

It's zoophilia to be attracted to humans since they're cellularly animals.

>>690726
The right-hand side is quite funny, but each of the left side's points summarized are:
>Its not abuse material
Unrelated to if the consumers are pedophiles or not. Pedophiles can consume content that fulfills their desires without it being abuse material.
>Readers desire the sexual contact with the fictionalized character, not real children
Unrelated to if the reason they desire sexual contact with the fictional character is because of pedophilia. Most pedophiles are probably intelligent enough to not want sex with real children, but are fine indulging in sexual art. It being fictionalized means they can feel even better when consuming it because they are not being pleasured off of abuse, but doesn't mean they don't have pedophilia.
>its not illegal
Of course, because its not abuse material. Unless youre some Canadian fruitcake its obvious that its harmless and falls under freedom of expression, regardless of if the people expressing themselves are pedophilic. This isn't saying lolicon isn't related to pedophilia, its saying lolicon isn't CP.
>readers are interested in the act in some abstract imagined world, but not in the real world
I'm sure many pedophiles are interested in sex in their fantasies but are not willing to push it in the real world because of the trauma it would cause, fearing moral guilt, or fear of legal/social consequences. This doesn't mean they aren't pedophiles. And the paragraph about POCD is just completely unrelated. I have no idea why its even there.

>>691270
>>691270
>Might be worth finding a better instance if you're not having fun with the one you're using.
what other instance, i'm talking all social midia, nor forums, i come to leftypol some times but that's it and all forum subscriptions are for shit like f95zone to get porn but that's it, never liked "social medias" that much.
>>691272
>Visit the Grey Zone section sometime.
no thanks, just by the name i can see what type of person will join and make duscussions there.
>Why is it bad? Its just honest. I think its ok to be a lolicon but you should just be honest if you have pedophilia.
the problem is the labeling of anyone as a possible criminal in the eyes of the people over fiction anon, not that there are these types on the comunity AND that they engage on the fiction, but are actually all possible child molester IRL.
>People who become attached to furry pornography as an identity really should ask themselves if they are attracted to animals methinks.
and what if they say no, that's disgusting ?, will you say they are lying and they must be attracted to real animals and call them zoophiles ?, this is my problem with this shit.

>>691277
>the problem is the labeling of anyone as a possible criminal in the eyes of the people over fiction
Pedophilia isn't a crime, child molestation is. If you have an attraction to children you can use your decision making abilities and moral faculties to navigate life in the correct way regardless.
Pedophiles have a higher likelihood of being child molesters, but they aren't synonymous. Pedophiles can not be criminals by, again, using good decision-making abilities and moral sense.
>and what if they say no, that's disgusting ?, will you say they are lying and they must be attracted to real animals and call them zoophiles ?
As I said in my previous post, you shouldn't take it as me dictating YOU as an INDIVIDUAL. Individual motivations are infinitely complicated and of course I can't read your or anyone else's mind. But, say a widespread survey of people interested in furry porn is conducted. If in this survey, it comes that most do not report being a zoophile, I would indeed suspect denialism, or a misunderstanding in how just having zoophilia doesn't mean you think actually having real-world sex with animals is moral or acceptable.
I can't read YOUR mind as to decipher YOUR intentions or YOUR motivations. But wider collective groups will have trends consistently popping up again and again that can form a sort of collective motivation.

>>691205
And my point still stands. That most porn is idealized figures. Especially the MILF category.
Real life children aren't all that ugly nor misshapen.
And most loli and shots are ridiculously cartoonishly exaggerated due to people not liking realism in children.

If you look at cartoon porn and compare it to live action there are alot of things that are more perfect in cartoon than live action.

The big eyes and round head and colorful hair they do for anime characters looks awful when done live action style.

>>691185
I asked them with this post >>691176 , and they didn't answer.
They didn't really even answer my previous posts that well, but I didn't challenge them.

Also which hemisphere is this: >>691215
Like yeah I know pedophilia isn't illegal, you can intuit I meant pedophilic material, such as cp.

muh moral society
muh degeneracy
muh thought police

>>690990
it's a response to the constant calls for every single one of them to be flayed alive and killed in public and sodomized with branding irons and whatnot
if you like that scribble you're going to jail forever

>>691135
where is your evidence
>dismissed
curiously not huh
>>691139
what are you referring to? and what is the logic you are trying to employ here? read what I wrote and try again
>>691146
what do you suppose are the implications of this idea of yours?
>>691150
you may as well be samefagging as has been apparent from your posting habits since you first used this namefag nom de guirre
>>691151
interesting idea
>because there are far far more important things going on in the world than pixels on my computer
I mean you could say that about a lot of things. cia propaganda, snuff, CSAM
>>691164
you clearly do as you can't stop going on about it for years
>>691172
good point
>>691205
I disagree personally although I think that both adults and lolicon/shotacon in drawn erotica are depicted in a way drastically different from real life, and yes in some ways the difference between these drawn adults or children/lolicon/shotacon is different, such as there is no abuse of real children present, (nor of adults). so I think that the criminal and abusive element is not present. and the inherent antisocial nature of CSAM I think is not necessarily present for lolicon/shotacon

>>691252
I was not strawmanning OP, I was mocking him and the totality of what he had posted. I think the tone is not only sarcastic and humourous but also relevant to the tone of the OP if you will read it again
and I did lay out my arguments in detail in the next post
>>691314
Understandable. I think a dialectical and class conscious conversation is in order

>It's not child porn, the characters just happen to look like elementary schoolers!
>Just because I goon to it doesn't mean I'm going to groom or rape real life children! Now let me show porn to kids, there should not be any restrictions or bans on porn and if kids don't grow up watching 2 Girls 1 Cup they'll be infantile and immature!
>Not every lolishotacon is a pedo. But everyone who thinks lolisho is CP is a moralfag Evangelical chudcel Twittertard.
>Gooning to lolisho is gay and BIPOC culture, so all the antis are queerphobic and racist.
Where's the good ol' "Actually all these characters are 5 trillion years old half-dragons"?

>>691395
Pee pee poo poo

>>691370
>curiously not huh
what?
>going on about it for years
what? i made this thread 4 days ago, and only replied sparingly since i already made any arguments i could care to make.
>>691395
you can just back read the thread instead of making up things nobody said.

>>691433
I found your pride flag faggot
https://lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Harmful_Terminology#/media/File:Rapesexual.jpg

>>691435
damn that site is insane, everytime i think i made up a sexuality as a joke someone beat me to it.

>>691395
>I'M GONNA START A BLOOD CRUSADE AGAINST PEOPLE THAT LIKE DRAWINGS I THINK ARE GROSS
and then these people curiously never go after irl pedos
and then nearly every time, we learn the antis were the pedos all along
isn't that strange?

Rapeuyghur

>>691564
yes?
>>691565
do you think vladimir nabokov was a paedophile?

>>691567
don't know who that is and don't really care s8nce it's not relevant to the post you're quoting

>>691568
the author of the novel lolita, the origin of the term "loli" what i assume you mean by "paedophile in japanese." ("lolicon" is not the japanese word for paedophile, btw.)

>>691567
You are rapeuyghur

>>690106
Ugh, this is about fictional pedophilia again?
Can you at least approach this conversation with a different angle next time, i.e. "Should Disney's Pocahontas be banned after a successful revolution in America for grossly misrepresenting real historical events and people to the point of libel, and promoting "noble savage" racism?"

>>691576
thats not my name~

>>691579
You responded

>>691578
no, actually. this is about people strawmanning me for asking them to provide evidence for their claims. (the screencap in op is a reply to me telling them they are retarded for saying that raping a child is the same as drawing a picture of a child being raped.) the thread is spent now, everyone is just arguing pointless semantics.
>>691580
you replied to my post, you could've called me anything and i'd still know you were referring to me. besides, its not like i can't tell you have a crush on me~ <3

>>691581
You replied to this >>691564 post. You responded. You are rapeuyghur now

>>691565
show me your hard drive bitch

media moralizing is fucking cringe and spending all your time hunting down and killing people who draw pictures is bourgeois excess

>>691606
Thermotrvklear post

>>690555
Freedom of arts is when you make arts and no one fucks with your ability to do so. If someone fucks with your ability to do so you car bomb their friends and family until you have that "freedom" (being unfucked with in one's capacity) again.

>>691773
Yeah, perhaps u worded the moral judgement differently.

>>691780
> People may retailate when you do something they dislike, so you shouldn't do it!!

The antidote for this ain't giving those petite bourgeouis urges a free space, should the bolsheviks had given the white army freedom to have their autonomous zone with their beloved king, fearing a retailation?
Send in the Cheka, fill the gulags with the reaction-aries, and see how they react when they are not the ones in power

>>691786
>People may retailate when you do something they dislike, so you shouldn't do it!!
Are you drunk or something or did I make some critical grammatical error that made you get the opposite takeaway from my post? I'm saying the tyrants cracking down on art should be sabataged or killed for being tyrants. "You need to be lucky every time, we only need to be lucky once" and that jazz.

>>691786
false equivalence

>>691789
>I'm saying the tyrants cracking down on art should be sabataged or killed for being tyrants.

Ain't it a moralism that you try justifying with some holy reason ( in this case, it may be the inherent evilness of tyranny ) I thought you 'freedom people' were against it? If we all have such moral outlooks, I don't see why one can't burn the 'immoral' arts.

>>691791
retard, false equivalence.

>>691792
Oh, I'm sorry if my statements sounded untrue, but I'd have preferred if you actually tried to explain why it's a false equivalence besides just claiming it

>>691791
People will make art, people will never stop trying to make art, and if someone tries to impede that they will be destroyed by those wanting to make art. If somehow you think that's moralism then you should read Max Stirner.

>>691791
you are indeed free to do so! other people are also free to push back against it, pick your side and you can cry about morals later when you get put against the wall for being a reactoid

>>691796
I agree, and if somehow that happens, I'd not make that situation any more awkward and just accept my fate tbh.

But those monsters would probably not be satiated by my death and, and… tie me to an advanced machine which drills most neurally sensitive areas of my feet over again and again while also regenerating it until my death… like, ughh.. maybe we should be thankful that moralfolks are around? 🥺

>>691801
>tie me to an advanced machine which drills most neurally sensitive areas of my feet over again and again while also regenerating it
damn, that sounds hawt…

>>690759
>>690751

it really is not. nor is it linked to zoophilia. perchance drawing animal privates in art is but definitely not buff furry men unless they also stay stuff like “i wish i had a big buff wolf boyfriend UwU”. otherwise go back to twitter or instagram

>>690524

>uses degenerate and believes in restriction of children

and you are hitler but communist wallahi

>>690380
>And now we are told that shielding our dear, pure proletarian souls from foreign, bourgeouis art with counter-revolutionary undertones is WRONG?!?!?

i mean i guess i can understand why people think loli is bourgeois in modern times where ageism is rampant. but most of the time it boils down to “muh pedophila is evil we must censor it” which even isn’t, censorship does no good, and is just recycled queerphobia all over again instead of discussing that it CAN and WILL have ageist and misopedic undertones because most people who are into it ARE or WILL BE ageists and misopedists and not people who view kids as human beings that deserve liberation and believe that they deserve the same rights as adults too

>>690527

china is a misogynistic free market nation and it’s easy to bypass porn in countries that have it banned. yeah it was probably better under mao’s regime but idk how true that is since mao is a fake communist glazed by radlib american westerners. who are otherwise also posers that didn’t forget all the puritan, liberal (under the disguise it’s “left” and progressive), brainwashing propaganda and misinformation they were given to as a kid and also never read theory before

>>690757

this is true but most lolicons aren’t attracted to real kids nor are they interested in them. also most child sexual abusers aren’t attracted to drawings at all in general

>>691435

that site is cringe since they keep falling for made up sexualities and genders invented by trolls on 4chan, twitter, and tumblr. and also because they included paraphiles too. might as well also include flags created by the mentally ill due to MAD pride and showing prides in their disorders in general

>>691146

based

>>691151
>>691205

i honestly dont understand this “fear of kids” stuff. oftentimes it resort back to bigotry just like every other forms of oppression. i also think kids are beautiful, cute and funny beings, but im socially inept so i will have a hard time interacting with them or anyone else really

>>691668

based

>>691606

also true and based

>>690962
JESUS CHRIST WHAT THE FUCK

>>691147
The Moffin' derangement syndrome is real LMFAO