dt0.jpeg
(275.6KB, 985x1400) dt1.jpeg
(140.3KB, 820x1247) rates.png
(128.1KB, 1024x1169) IS LOLICON PEDOPHILIA?
Are you ready for some hardcore banter, faggots? Today I ask the ultimate question. Is lolicon pedophilia/hebephilia? And no, I don't mean does loli=CP, or does loli=the medical paraphilia in its entirety which requires the obsession to interfere with your regular judgement and daily life. I mean, does sexual attraction to cartoon representations of little girls=sexual attraction to children, the laymen's definition and most common usage of the word pedophilia.
I will make this argument, as a devil's advocate, that lolicon is almost definitely pedophilia. It is jacking off to the concept of fucking children. You won't find many sane people arguing that a man that primarily consumes regular straight hentai without deviations to faggotry isn't heterosexual just because he thinks 3D is PD. The same can be said of a man who jacks off to hard gay muscle yaoi almost definitely being homosexual. Japan doesn't see the difference. When they say lolicon, it can mean fiction, reality, or both. Here are some translated pages of Comic LO, a prime and popular lolicon magazine that is arguably representative of the voices of lolicons in Japan. It clearly uses lolicon to refer to attraction to real children. LO is published with an audience of pedophiles in mind, by the mangaka themselves.
Now don't mistake my argument. The idea of lolicon being pedophilia is not antithetical to being pro-lolicon. Assuming it is pedophilia, it thus reasons that loli serves as a safe outlet for pedophiles that is harm free since it requires no children for its creation. Japan proves it doesn't increase child sexual abuse cases unless you want to make up some unverifiable bull about unreported cases being staggeringly high. It's also a matter of freedom of speech & expression that lolicon material should be able to freely exist. These are both principle and practical justifications to be pro-lolicon, even if it is pedophilia.
Yes, I am a lolicon as I consume a large amount of it relative to other hentai. No, I have no attraction to real children, but I can't prove to myself or others that what is true of me is true of the majority of lolicons. It also can't be argued that since most lolicons claim to not like real kids, that they don't like real kids, since they would obsviously almost always lie about it if true and want to distance it from pedophilia. There's a small amount of verifiable information suggesting lolicon isn't pedophila, like the rate of convicted pedos with loli since its introduction to the west, but it's not much and is easily explained by loli being safer and more easily found than CP. Lots of lolicon is fairly anatomically correct in all aspects but the face, so it stands to reason lolicons are attracted to the bodies of children and not the faces, and would easily get a stiffy to nudes of a real girl featuring a bag on her head given that they have any attraction to 3D at all still. And all of this is to say nothing of how the lines are blurred when you get into text only fiction.
>Inb4 it's a body type not an age, so it has nothing to do with children, she's 4000 years old bigot!
Loli is a body type with proportions generally corresponding to children of the ages 7-14 according to the way the word is generally used both in the west and Japan. While 12-14 clearly enters hebe territory, I am of course talking about lolis in the body proportions range of appearing roughly 7-12 when arguing that lolicon is pedohphila, since loli also covers that small upper range of petite body types beyond what would be considered prepubescent. If the character doesn't look mostly representative of the proportions of those ages, it is not loli. You cannot divorce it from the appearance of age, no matter what you claim is canon, except in non-standard styles like chibi. Here is an editor of Comic LO clearly stating that the lolis should look like a certain age. http://archive.is/IB8Sf
>When I was making arrangements with my boss:
<"These characters look a little young for 9."
>When I suggested making them 8 instead:
<"LO's readers want 9-year-olds, 8 is too young. Change the picture instead!"