Get rid of Lolis and Lolicons

[Amaterasu]

I know that I'm opening a hell of a can of worms, I know that a lot of people are going to come out of the wood works and try to defend it and all. I know that I'm gonna get accused of being a closeted lolicon(I'm not, I don't even like kids in general). But it's something I've been feeling has been needed to be said for a long while.

Loli is an art style that took hold in Japan after a book known as the Lolita Complex, which was a book about someone wanting to [CENSORED] a child was released there. It became a viral hit and spawned the Lolita style, which in and of itself is just Victorian England dress turned up to 11. But... it also normalized the idea that it was okay for people to be attracted to kids. Yes, literal kids.

Japan didn't have laws against any sort of [CENSORED] until 2014, which it was finally made illegal and they gave people an entire ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ year to get rid of it. And even so, they still try to [CENSORED] children in animation and manga. Yes, really, this is a thing that still happens. Yes, that's what the entire art style of Loli is actually about. If it was supposed to be cute, it'd be Kawaii. If it was supposed to be childlike it'd be Chibi. If it was supposed to be a normal child, it'd just be a child. Yes, there are actual terms for every type of defense that people make.

Also the "800 year old Vampire" defense is just the "Legal" Loli defense. They're still coded to be a child. It's still wrong. And according to laws in the US at least having Loli material and being a Lolicon(Which derives from Lolita Complex, you know, that book which someone wanted to [CENSORED] a kid. Yeah, you can get an idea of what they're really about. It's not about cute things, it's about kids)... is illegal and falls under the definition of simulated [CENSORED].

And to counter the, "It's just a fantasy" defense... why specifically the childlike character? Why specifically them? There are plenty of adult coded people in anime, manga, and games. Plenty of them, such as Tae Takemi from Persona 5(Early 20s, looks it), Nami from One Piece(18 pre-time skip, 20 post. Looks it), wanna go with short and cute? Shiori Katase from My Tiny Senpai(In her 20s, looks it), want flat? Ms. Kobayashi from Ms. Kobayashi's Dragon Maid(At least 20s, looks it), Zebiantes from Chillin in my 30s after getting Fired from the Demon Lord's Army(Unknown, looks and acts like an adult), Hana Uzaki from Uzaki-chan wants to hang out(College student, looks it). Why not any of those examples or more? Because it's not about a petite woman. It's about the fact the character is coded as a child and it's being used in place of materials that more overtly known as being illegal, but as I said before, Loli material still counts in the same boat under US Law.

As such, I believe Steam should rid itself of these things. Give this kind of thing one less platform of legitimacy. And that it should very much be a ban on sight kind of thing.

P.S. Not relevant, but I don't watch One Piece, I have a dislike of Shounen Anime, especially Battle Shonen, I just know Nami because my little brother is a Shounenhead. SEINEN FOR LIFE! Also all the [CENSORED] was so that someone couldn't just report this to the mods and get it taken down.

Edit: Thanks for the points.

[Seraphita]

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

I mean, define sfw cuz iirc a series on Netflix recently got backlash for having kids dance about in leotards.

Keep in mind when I see loli I literally mean minors presented in a lewd fashion, as the actual term is meant to depict. Not just animated children.

Well, your definition is misguided then. Loli is ALWAYS about fictional characters. Loli have been around in anime or games for decades as well and they still are. So again, I'm not sure of what you're talking about. This is not a term you can use to define real people.

Also, I am sure I defined SFW before by naming like 10 lolis in anime, in one post.

[Amaterasu]

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

Escrito originalmente por Seraphita:

I mean, you can also say that it's unsurprising that people who dislike it doesn't... If someone wanted to ban whatever else and someone who had it on their profile debated against it, it would also be unsurprising. You have to think a bit before you say things.

There is also something else... The ones who want to see these things banned have no ground to stand on. When you go and think that even SFW material is a threat to real life children, this might tell us a lot about you. Again, it is the same usual virtue signaling.

I mean, define sfw cuz iirc a series on Netflix recently got backlash for having kids dance about in leotards.

Keep in mind when I see loli I literally mean minors presented in a lewd fashion, as the actual term is meant to depict. Not just animated children.

Wasn't that the movie, Cuties, which got backlash for basically being softcore child porn? I canceled my netflix subscription over that one. Shame too, because I really liked Cobra Kai.

[ุ]

Escrito originalmente por Seraphita:

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

I mean, define sfw cuz iirc a series on Netflix recently got backlash for having kids dance about in leotards.

Keep in mind when I see loli I literally mean minors presented in a lewd fashion, as the actual term is meant to depict. Not just animated children.

Well, your definition is misguided then. Loli is ALWAYS about fictional characters. Loli have been around in anime or games for decades as well and they still are. So again, I'm not sure of what you're talking about. This is not a term you can use to define real people.

Also, I am sure I defined SFW before by naming like 10 lolis in anime series.

You're aware when I refer to Loli I'm referring to Lolicon, which is what it's short for, yes?

Care to share with the class what Lolicon's definition is?

[ุ]

Escrito originalmente por sungoddess14:

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

I mean, define sfw cuz iirc a series on Netflix recently got backlash for having kids dance about in leotards.

Keep in mind when I see loli I literally mean minors presented in a lewd fashion, as the actual term is meant to depict. Not just animated children.

Wasn't that the movie, Cuties, which got backlash for basically being softcore child porn? I canceled my netflix subscription over that one. Shame too, because I really liked Cobra Kai.

Yup, youtube also cracked down on youtube comments for content like that because pedophile rings would post timestamps in comments to spots in videos where you could see up children's skirts, etc.

[Amaterasu]

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

Escrito originalmente por sungoddess14:

Wasn't that the movie, Cuties, which got backlash for basically being softcore child porn? I canceled my netflix subscription over that one. Shame too, because I really liked Cobra Kai.

Yup, youtube also cracked down on youtube comments for content like that because pedophile rings would post timestamps in comments to spots in videos where you could see up children's skirts, etc.

As a CSA survivor, unfortunately... this doesn't surprise me. The fact that this crap was allowed on Netflix and Youtube also doesn't surprise me. It disappoints me, but it doesn't surprise me. The fact that people defend it, horrifies me.

And to anyone claiming I don't care about real victims, I can describe some of the flashbacks I get in full detail. I can describe the sobbing mess I sometimes end up at the end of them. I can describe how even 30+ years later, I do not like it when anyone, but especially a man grabs me by the arm. I can describe every sensation that feels very real despite the fact that the logical part of my mind, which in that moment is trying to regain control, but can't.... tells me it's in the past and not happening again.

I could tell you that if you were to show me a picture of my grandmother who died over 20 years ago, I wouldn't be able to tell you who it was. But if you showed me a picture of the man who hurt me in that manner... I'd have a strong reaction.

[76561197963519852]

Escrito originalmente por sungoddess14:

Escrito originalmente por Leonardo Da Pinchi:

Yup, youtube also cracked down on youtube comments for content like that because pedophile rings would post timestamps in comments to spots in videos where you could see up children's skirts, etc.

As a CSA survivor, unfortunately... this doesn't surprise me. The fact that this crap was allowed on Netflix and Youtube also doesn't surprise me. It disappoints me, but it doesn't surprise me. The fact that people defend it, horrifies me.

And to anyone claiming I don't care about real victims, I can describe some of the flashbacks I get in full detail. I can describe the sobbing mess I sometimes end up at the end of them. I can describe how even 30+ years later, I do not like it when anyone, but especially a man grabs me by the arm. I can describe every sensation that feels very real despite the fact that the logical part of my mind, which in that moment is trying to regain control, but can't.... tells me it's in the past and not happening again.

I could tell you that if you were to show me a picture of my grandmother who died over 20 years ago, I wouldn't be able to tell you who it was. But if you showed me a picture of the man who hurt me in that manner... I'd have a strong reaction.

Thank you for sharing.

I'm sorry you went through that and I understand PTSD is something the mind will never fully erase no matter how much therapy.

These people here in support of loli content are flirting a dangerous line whether they want to admit to it or not.

[76561199559798421]

what is troubling is the more i read this thread the more i am exposed to who really knows what about this situation to the point it looks more like they engage with it then they are against it.

its just a absurd topic about something that doesn't belong on steam, however steam has several profile back grounds an avatars that are for steam award purchase that insinuate such content.

and i have seen numerous steam profiles that promote it. its time for steam to crack down on it as well.

remember when people use to have adult images of semi Nude women in profile avatars, and steam started to ban that an crack down on it. well the exploitation and insinuation of children in such forms is something steam needs to now start acknowledging and stopping its presence upon the platform.

from what i just read it looks like some of steams biggest posters are more in tune with what goes on with this topic on places like netflix and face book which raises even more questions on to why they consider it appropriate to seek it out on other platforms and defend it on steam.

[76561197963519852]

Escrito originalmente por Everyone is Invited:

what is troubling is the more i read this thread the more i am exposed to who really knows what about this situation to the point it looks more like they engage with it then they are against it.

its just a absurd topic about something that doesn't belong on steam, however steam has several profile back grounds an avatars that are for steam award purchase that insinuate such content.

and i have seen numerous steam profiles that promote it. its time for steam to crack down on it as well.

remember when people use to have adult images of semi Nude women in profile avatars, and steam started to ban that an crack down on it. well the exploitation and insinuation of children in such forms is something steam needs to now start acknowledging and stopping its presence upon the platform.

from what i just read it looks like some of steams biggest posters are more in tune with what goes on with this topic on places like netflix and face book which raises even more questions on to why they consider it appropriate to seek it out on other platforms and defend it on steam.

I have zero doubt some of the people in here playing the role "it's only a cartoon" would go to jail for some of the "content" they have on their computers.

Zero doubt.

[76561199559798421]

the real speculation is whats on steams computers that would send everyone at steam to jail.

[76561197963519852]

Escrito originalmente por Everyone is Invited:

the real speculation is whats on steams computers that would send everyone at steam to jail.

They have absolute power when it comes to their "NFT" market, so who really knows. They have the keys to the kingdom and can literally print money in the form of their IP'd pixels.

They have total control over accounts and I've long speculated all the "bought" accounts from "farms" are just part of Valves market-strategy to keep up player engagement.

It's gone on too long for it to not be fully understood by the powers that be. They're no longer able to play dumb. They know exactly what this platform is and if I was a low level programmer at Valve, you bet your ass I would be using every access they gave me to run side hustles on VPNs overseas.

[Knee]

Escrito originalmente por Everyone is Invited:

real

Escrito originalmente por Everyone is Invited:

speculation

pick one, please

[76561199559798421]

the side hussle is real

[lilcoffeebean]

Escrito originalmente por SlowMango:

They do. You can see this by denying multiple VNs that they feel sexualize minors.

The issue is, this topic isn't about that. It's about a term making someone uncomfortable an wanting it removed. Regardless of if it is being used in a sexual way or not.

Yes, they do, but there is content that in my opinion that still persists on the platform that is clearly sexualizing minors. For example, Under the Sky World is a game that I reported when it launched. In many anime style games the line between minor and young adult is one that can be debated because the design is ambiguous enough that people will have differing opinions on where the character falls on an age spectrum.

In the case of one of the characters in this game it's not a debate. She is a pre-pubescent child by design and canon. They removed the nude images of her, but kept the sexually suggestive one's that were in various states of clothing. Perhaps whomever read the report disagreed and felt it's not suggestive or obscene enough, though I'd personally find such a determination very odd as it's meant to be sexual by design.

I also have some thoughts on Valve's responsibility towards games that have sexual content of children, but hide the more explicit content behind official R18 patches off the platform. To me it's inexcusable to continue to host a product as soon as they are made aware of the patches existence.

For your last sentence, I am in agreeance with you that as a term or even the badge that was specifically mentioned do not need to be acted upon. Given as I said earlier how the term is used colloquially is not necessarily the same as its origination anymore.

I suppose to expound upon my own feelings for the hell of it for the current line of conversation (not aimed at you specifically just in general), I would say that I don't think conflating it with pedophilia when it is sexual is right or even helpful. To put it plainly I find fictional children being sexualized disgusting (anime or otherwise), but when it comes to fantasy there have always been instances of delving into the taboo that don't necessarily translate to a real life desire. I don't believe this is different just because of my distaste for it. While I question whether it's a healthy fantasy as far as I'm aware there is still no empirical evidence connecting it with pedophilia or the consumption of child pornography featuring real children.

Yet...Would I allow someone who I know to consume R18 lolicon material babysit my child? Not a chance in hell. A bit of cognitive dissonance there.

[76561197963519852]

Escrito originalmente por lilcoffeebean:

Escrito originalmente por SlowMango:

They do. You can see this by denying multiple VNs that they feel sexualize minors.

The issue is, this topic isn't about that. It's about a term making someone uncomfortable an wanting it removed. Regardless of if it is being used in a sexual way or not.

Yes, they do, but there is content that in my opinion that still persists on the platform that is clearly sexualizing minors. For example, Under the Sky World is a game that I reported when it launched. In many anime style games the line between minor and young adult is one that can be debated because the design is ambiguous enough that people will have differing opinions on where the character falls on an age spectrum.

In the case of one of the characters in this game it's not a debate. She is a pre-pubescent child by design and canon. They removed the nude images of her, but kept the sexually suggestive one's that were in various states of clothing. Perhaps they disagree and feel it's not suggestive or obscene enough, though I'd personally find such a determination very odd as it's meant to be sexual by design.

I also have some thoughts on Valve's responsibility towards games that have sexual content of children, but hide the more explicit content behind official R18 patches off the platform. To me it's inexcusable to continue to host a product as soon as they are made aware of the patches existence.

For your last sentence, I am in agreeance with you that as a term or even the badge that was specifically mentioned do not need to be acted upon. Given as I said earlier how the term is used colloquially is not necessarily the same as its origination anymore.

I suppose to expound upon my own feelings for the hell of it for the current line of conversation (not aimed at you specifically just in general), I would say that I don't think conflating it with pedophilia when it is sexual is right or even helpful. To put it plainly I find fictional children being sexualized disgusting (anime or otherwise), but when it comes to fantasy there have always been instances of delving into the taboo that don't necessarily translate to a real life desire. I don't believe this is different just because of my distaste for it. While I question whether it's a healthy fantasy as far as I'm aware there is still no empirical evidence connecting it with pedophilia or the consumption of child pornography featuring real children.

Yet...Would I allow someone who I know to consume R18 lolicon material babysit my child? Not a chance in hell. A bit of cognitive dissonance there.

Awarded for a well laid out argument.

I can't say I disagree with you on any points, especially the last.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Escrito originalmente por lilcoffeebean:

Escrito originalmente por SlowMango:

They do. You can see this by denying multiple VNs that they feel sexualize minors.

The issue is, this topic isn't about that. It's about a term making someone uncomfortable an wanting it removed. Regardless of if it is being used in a sexual way or not.

Yes, they do, but there is content that in my opinion that still persists on the platform that is clearly sexualizing minors. For example, Under the Sky World is a game that I reported when it launched. In many anime style games the line between minor and young adult is one that can be debated because the design is ambiguous enough that people will have differing opinions on where the character falls on an age spectrum.

In the case of one of the characters in this game it's not a debate. She is a pre-pubescent child by design and canon. They removed the nude images of her, but kept the sexually suggestive one's that were in various states of clothing. Perhaps whomever read the report disagreed and felt it's not suggestive or obscene enough, though I'd personally find such a determination very odd as it's meant to be sexual by design.

I also have some thoughts on Valve's responsibility towards games that have sexual content of children, but hide the more explicit content behind official R18 patches off the platform. To me it's inexcusable to continue to host a product as soon as they are made aware of the patches existence.

For your last sentence, I am in agreeance with you that as a term or even the badge that was specifically mentioned do not need to be acted upon. Given as I said earlier how the term is used colloquially is not necessarily the same as its origination anymore.

I suppose to expound upon my own feelings for the hell of it for the current line of conversation (not aimed at you specifically just in general), I would say that I don't think conflating it with pedophilia when it is sexual is right or even helpful. To put it plainly I find fictional children being sexualized disgusting (anime or otherwise), but when it comes to fantasy there have always been instances of delving into the taboo that don't necessarily translate to a real life desire. I don't believe this is different just because of my distaste for it. While I question whether it's a healthy fantasy as far as I'm aware there is still no empirical evidence connecting it with pedophilia or the consumption of child pornography featuring real children.

Yet...Would I allow someone who I know to consume R18 lolicon material babysit my child? Not a chance in hell. A bit of cognitive dissonance there.

Well, your personal interpretation is irrelevant.