2011-04-29, 03:00 PM
Moonlapse Wrote:Sarah does have a point, though. If you are trying to get sexual gratification from images with childlike features, you are getting aroused by by the same things pedophiles get a kick out of. So I do have a problem with artists that INTEND to portray children in a sexual way in their drawings. However I don't think that was Nexon's original intent in making this video.
No, like was quoted earlier, pedophiles have an attraction to the mental instability of younger people.
Lolicon's simply like the younger looking body, as it avoids adding uneccessary(but natural) fat to the body, among a few other things. Saying this is sexist is like me going to a twilight forunm and saying that women are sexist because they expect all men to be muscley, handsome, and depressed to the extent to where their actions are solely based on catering to the female. That is an unfair argument, everyone can fantasize about things they want.
Need I remind you all that a large majority of Loli's are capable of easily destroying the world in storylines? A good reference that you should all get, would be ETNA from Disgaea, there is nothing ''frail'' or ''weak'' about her, in fact she's arguably more badass than Laharl.
Sarah's argument changes. First it was the oversexualized children, then it was purely for the fact that they had the ''body'' of a child, then suddenly society makes the rules and sees it as wrong so it is wrong, then went completely subversive into other subjects, such as the fact that cultural difference are bullcrap, and that no matter what it is, if it's a nude childs body(which, I can understand it being a real childs body), is not okay to look at. It was my fault I got dragged into the 16 vs 18 argument, so I am not referencing that too far.
Loli's are specifically for the Fantasy Genre, they are not to be confused with actual children in every case. This only happens when actual pedohpiles mix in with the Genre, and the other Lolicons are not to blame. Sarah was clearly referencing, that under all circumstances, if it's a young looking body, it is wrong in every scenario, drawn or not. When there is more complexity to the style than that, and she was insulting a lot of peoples taste.
Sarah's argument seems to be to force this all into submission, it's like when your body finds a virus, and instantly hits the puke button to vomit ALL the insides and nuitritions that was consumed, in favor of destroying a virus that can be destroyed if the damn immune system was doing it's job in the first place. Laws shouldn't be made to force people to think certain ways, or to tell us what's right or wrong, they should be to ''protect''. This is not ''protecting'' anything, it's destroying the freedoms of many people, while in the process POSSIBLY destroying any and all reasons to protect what it was trying to protect in the first place.
Pardon me if I missed a few points of it. I can understand the need to stop actual children from being sexualized, but anime loli's need to be left out of it.