Society, go fuck yourself.

I've been sitting here for a good hour reading some of the threads about Loli being illegal, and I've also been looking around at some of the ridiculous shit that's been outlawed lately, and something comes to mind:

IT'S ALL FUCKING OPINION.

Example: Man goes to court for Loli. There are 2 judges to decide his fate.

Judge 1 is also into Hentai, and feels for his fallen brother.

Judge 2 is raised to believe that everything he thinks is 100% right and anyone who is into anything else is disgusting and mentally disturbed.

Who's gonna find the man guilty and send his ass to jail? Judge 2, because most of society agrees with him. Ew, you like looking at something I don't, something's wrong with you!

Now, I totally understand if you read that and thought "What the hell are you talking about?" Because I did too as I typed this all out. I've been lost in thought over this whole situation, and I finally realized it - It's all opinion.

If someone thinks you're sick for liking (thing) and they can get a 2nd person to back them up, who CARES what you say - You're sick now. Just because more people agree with them instead of you. It's an unfair society.

I REALLY hope that made some form of sense.

Its totally true but thats just the way its always been and always will be.

I think this whole crusade against animated pr0n/loli/whatever is just sick. In my country it's not that serious problem, the police and government goes against serious child pornography but lets animated loli go. And that's a way to go, imho.
How could anyone seriously think that an imaginary character from a game, manga or series could be somehow humilated or mentally damaged after being displayed topless, for example.
And it's still better if a pedophile watches some loli than if he went out and made his moves to some kids.
I don't have a grasp of a situation in the US, but from what I've heard, those orthodox christians and some shits they pull out result in some really sick rules. This is probably one of them.

I have to agree. I love lolicon myself, and I don't try to keep that a secret. However, I know society's view (by-in-large) is very poor so I only tell my closest friends. The way I've always seen it is I'm not hurting anyone (arguably myself depending on your moral stance) so what is the harm in it? No child is being either physically or emotionally harmed by the depiction of children in lewd positions or acts and there is no study that has linked fans of lolicon to an increase attention to pedophilia. In terms of the government they have nothing that constitutes lolicon being illegal from a purely legal standpoint, but morals play a big role in how laws are created and upheld. *shrugs*

To play devil's advocate here, there isn't really any research (at least that I've found) done on the link between loli or fictional pedophilia and real pedophilia. In addition to the societal norms that make it out to be a bad thing, a rational judge or lawmaker still has to think: "Ok, this is a drawing, no one's being hurt. However, suppose someone looking at these drawings starts to become attracted to real underage girls? Should these things be allowed if they put children at risk, even indirectly?"

We're allowed to drink alcohol once we hit the age decided on by our government. They then trust us to drink it and be responsible, and not drive while drunk and run someone down. Sadly, at least in the U.S., that trust is wasted, drunk driving kills people all the time. So if people can't be trusted with something as common as alcohol, the government's going to wonder how people can be trusted with loli hentai or anything similar.

Back to the drunk driving example, the solution would seem to be ban alcohol right? That however, isn't going to happen. Too many people like alcohol for them to just accept a ban. Loli on the other hand doesn't even have a fraction of the fan base booze does. If they want to ban it, it's going to get banned.

Personally, I think it should remain legal, but I have to admit I don't have high hopes.

If worse does come to worse Net Neutrality will virtually protect any site (theoretically even those based in the United States) from being prosecuted for transferring lolicon materials. It would end up something like piracy. Something illegal, but virtually impossible for the U.S. government to enforce.

There are too many variables for us to conclude that a depiction of a little girl in a drawing made the guy into a pedophile. Even if it did, loli should not be banned because it's the guy's problem since he's obviously the one with the problem. Plenty of people see loli without wanting to bone a real little girl, and loli doesn't even look like real girls.


(assuming this is in america) Which would be go against the first amendment, which prohibits laws from being made against it. Alcohol isn't expression, it's simply a drug.

Eh? How so?



First Amendment rights are not without limit. Obscene material that fails to pass the Miller test does not enjoy First Amendment protection and can thus be banned.
The Miller Test is tripartite; the following questions are applied to any work under scrutiny:

Loli, I would assume, would not pass that test: The average person question it would never pass, the second question neither, and in the third it would require extreme benevolence to pass the third. And given the enormous political interest in the matter, this extreme benevolence isn't likely to happen. Wham, bam, Miller Test failed, thus obscene, thus bannable.

Sites could fight the U.S. government who would attempt to shut them down for link/transferring lolicon material on their website (even though the government would likely win if they forced the issue.) Plus they have the right to refuse to give the government their IP lists of users and trafficers.

I say virtually, but like anything else that deals with these morally outstanding issues, if the government presses hard enough they will take any site down.

So in that sense it would turn into something similar to the fight against piracy in the United States. Illegal, but difficult for the U.S. government to go after individuals. The government would probably succeed in shutting sites down, but it would be nearly impossible to go after individuals who download material only on the internet.

As for the Miller test that is the big loophole, which protects the lolicon under the First Amendment. It was upheld as protected by the First Amendment, but that doesn't apply to obscenity, which would encompass 90% of all lolicon material. Really it ends up coming down to if your judge personally takes issue against it. Heh.

Never heard of this test before. Seems pretty arbitrary and fucked up to me.

Exactly. It has it's own share of loopholes and irregularities. There is just nothing concrete on either side of the issue. Just pray the judge likes you. :P

The test is named after the first case where it became relevant, Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). It is arbitrary, and some argue it violates the "void for vagueness" doctrine - but nonetheless, it is the U.S. legal standard in obscenity cases. "Obscenity" in itself is vague and arbitrary, because it is legislated taste.

U.S. Supreme Court rulings on the matter are complex, and somewhat inconsistent. The USSC struck down the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 on the grounds of being overly broad in its applying to virtual depictions of child pornography; yet it upheld the PROTECT Act of 2003, on the grounds of which a man has been charged solely for the import and possession of lolicon manga.

I should like to note that yes, I am STRONGLY AGAINST child pornography, and no, I don't even like lolicon; but I am also strongly against legislation of taste (as in the case of lolicon) and censorship (as in the case of lolicon).




I have never heard of that before, but I would be interested in learning more about this. Got a link handy?
I always thought that content providers were obligated to cooperate with criminal investigations as mandated by a judge.

They do, but it's the fact that it's not a matter that they can just go in and say "hand over the IP list" because of the nature of the legality (or illegality) of the matter. Users IP addresses are protected by net neutrality and it's a crazy mess of loopholes if those user addresses are pending a federal investigation. I think it was Torrentspy? Anyway, they refused to hand over their IP records for the longest time and for a while they weren't forced because they couldn't link Torrentspy as being particularly responsible for pirating because it is not the site that is in direct control over the content, but the users. So it created, for lack of a better term, a legal mess that the government had to wade through. I don't remember the circumstances, but they eventually handed over their entire list to the U.S. government.

Anyway, it's just one of thoes examples that there are as many legal loopholes to avoid getting yourself into trouble as there is those to be prosecuted with. As for an article I don't have anything specific. Just random documentation you find about net neutrality and cases similar to this like what happened with Torrentspy.

this reminds me of the whole video game thing and everyone's favorite lawyer, Jack Thompson.

People are always going to fight against things they aren't comfortable with: even when the facts go against them, they'll just pay some scientist to "make" the facts go with them. The whole world can start to hate them, but they'll keep on trucking, thinking in their twisted little minds they're right.

Now, Loli is different from the video game thing. While there is a sizable amount of people against video games and anything fun, Loli is a much darker grey. No matter how you look at it, your masturbating to little girls, and society do not want. I indulge in loli from time to time, and I think its much better than... well, masturbating to REAL little girls, or worse.

But many people dont see the fine line between fiction and reality, so...

Ultimately, though, what your dealing with is a group of people who either: A) in reply to a fact or study, will throw a irrelevant bible quote in your face and assume they won, or B) Simply make something up or say something that declassifies your argument, such as: "no link between loli and pedophilia? Then clearly the girls being abused haven't reported it yet!". And if your a honest, good-natured hentai-lover, then there's not much you can do about that argument because its working on a hypothetical situation, and you cant exactly prove it right or wrong.

...well, you cant tell it right or wrong easily.

Thanks!

Your post is exactly what I mean, and it's nothing against you personally at all - You think Loli is creepy, which is what most people think. Get one more person to back you up, and then all us Lolicons are terrible people because others think so, and to hell with whatever the defending Lolicons think.

Unless his opinion was that lolicons are terrible people because they like loli, then you can say that. Some people are just told/ conditioned to follow the "norm", so their views on loli was just molded.

Which is exactly why that guy who was arrested for Loli (WITHOUT anything else) got arrested at all.

it's just the way society works they see one person diffrent and they gang up on them. now me persoanl not a fan of looli but hell to each his own I mean you shouldn't judge people based on what they like you should judge them based on fact's that you retrive from talking to them

If I ever end up getting in trouble from Loli, you guys all need to be in the jury. >_> That's the only way I'd have a fair fight.