1
56

[–] G4 1 point 56 points (+57|-1) ago 

There's no victim. Nobody is harmed. What's the crime?

2
18

[–] HamsterSlayer 2 points 18 points (+20|-2) ago 

I agree. It lets the people who have those interests get what they need/want without actually harming anyone. In my opinion, it's a win-win middle ground.

0
5

[–] Bioreactor 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

YOU! Why are you everywhere? WHO ARE YOU!?!?

0
10

[–] G4 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Some guy who gets bored at work

0
0

[–] hypercat ago 

THOUGHT CRIME!!!! just kidding.

I mean some people get off on rape and incest pron. Look at VC Andrews, she made a living writing trash like that.

2
0

[–] jxfaith 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

So long as it is a work of fiction, you're perfectly right. It's an important distinction, as creating an illustrated reproduction of illegal sexual materials might enable a path for white washing illegal content.

0
29

[–] SlothropAnAbreaction 0 points 29 points (+29|-0) ago 

Calling it "drawn child pornography" is silly in the first place, it's not child porn, it's a drawing. A character in a drawing has no real age, it's a fictional representation. Lolicon/shotacon shouldn't be illegal, it's harmless.

0
14

[–] hypercat 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

And if we ban drawings, do we ban books as well? I mean Nabokov's Lolita is a literary staple, should we ban that? What about news paper articles about child rape? Should we ban that? I think once you start banning something, it becomes a doorway to ban everything that offends you.

0
10

[–] Surfing_Wookiee 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

And this is how censorship begins.

0
18

[–] pingas-9000 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

I think that if it does no harm it should not be banned.
Banning a person from artistically depicting anything is disgusting to me.
Hell I think Lolicon is disgusting but banning is even more so.

0
16

[–] DanielTaylor 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

A victimless crime is not a crime.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
7

[–] hypercat 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

And anyone with the argument of, those drawing will inspire them to act out what they see, is total bullshit. That is like seeing a drawing of pizza made you fat. A drawing cannot make you do anything that you were not going to do already. I guess unless it's an instructional drawing on how to make a bomb or something.

0
0

[–] kokytus [S] ago 

In my country anything (drawing, photos, etc.) depicting the sexualisation of children, even if the children in the photos are of legal age, is considered child porn.

0
7

[–] profanion 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

What do you think of a writing of otherwise illegal murder?

1
4

[–] granmasboi 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

I think that if it keeps people from committing sexual crimes, then it should be viewed as a good alternative. It would be tricky though, because usually artists base their drawings off of real people, and would you want someone to be jerking off to images that are of the likeness of your daughter? I wouldn't. Very tricky question.

0
1

[–] amio 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

usually artists base their drawings off of real people

I don't think that's usually the case, no. Lolicon is a sub-genre of manga, which doesn't typically borrow all that much inspiration from real life.

2
1

[–] jxfaith 2 points 1 point (+3|-2) ago  (edited ago)

Technically speaking, I don't think the human brain is capable of "creating" an image from nothing-- it will always be subtly or heavily influenced by some past experience.

That said, I feel that illustrated works of illegal sexual activities should be legal if and only if they are works of fiction. An artist caught reproducing illegal materials in illustrated media should be prosecuted as harshly as anyone caught reproducing the original media. Such illustrated reproductions would be an obvious subversion of the law.

0
1

[–] granmasboi 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I thought about your first point as I was writing. Reminds me of the terracotta warriors all being unique. Of course the workers did this by making terracotta replicas of each other....

As to your second point, I have a question. So let's say some under 18 person receives some sort of attention from the internet/media. Then there comes all of the fictional artwork depicting activities that would be illegal if really done. This can still cause quite a bit of damage to the young individual, no?

0
3

[–] ColaEuphoria 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

A lot of people are pointing out how it gives pedophiles a safe outlet to express their harmful desires, but I would also like to point out that a lot of lolicon/shotacon is drawn in a way that is very different to how actual children look and act, and being into loli/shota doesn't mean you're into real children; in fact, most people into loli/shota are disgusted by real children.

load more comments ▼ (10 remaining)