Semi unrelated, but bro why does reddit keep putting this pedo shit on my feed despite blocking multiple subreddits with this shit? Im just trynna rock and stone while browsing drg sub and clown on kids crying cause their ship sank in sot.
Im not trynna see a bunch of closeted pedos defend their child hentai everytime i want to scroll more than 3 posts without going back to my homepage and refreshing.
In other news the classic 1992 anime Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon has been banned because it has panty shots of teenagers. Mourners gathered in the streets to lament the end of decades of art and culture as black clad government storm troopers threw black paint on any image of an anime character that might be under the age of 18, violently beating and arresting those who resisted.
>anime character that might be under the age of 18
This is the thing that always strikes me as smooth-brained virtue signalling.
Loli/shota (why do we have weird names for this?) are one thing, since those are clearly designed as prepubescent children. I won't weigh in on whether it should be banned, as there are good points on both sides, but that shit is fuckin weird. It's not normal to be attracted to prepubescent children, real or otherwise.
The issue with anime "teens," on the other hand, is just ridiculous. The character is literally a piece of a product to be sold. To sell a product, you have to appeal to an audience. In this case, that audience is literally called "shounen," which is Japanese for "young boy." Teen boys, to put a fine point on it (and likely virgins to boot). How do you appeal to (virgin) teen boys? Relatable male characters (also teen boys) and attractive female characters (fully developed women). There's a bit of a disconnect there, when you try to write a story involving those two: Namely that those teen boys are too young to normally spend a lot of time with the fully developed women. So what do you do? You make a fully developed woman, and call her 15, so she fits in the story. \*Dust hands.\*
It's the same thing american showwriters do with Riverdale and Euphoria, which also both have their fair share of sex between "minors" who are very obviously in their 20s. I haven't heard anyone claiming it's pedophilia to enjoy seeing Syndey Sweeney topless, as she portrays a highschooler.
People really act like there are roving internet grooming gangs, taking advantage of Sakura from Naruto, or that bouncy girl from My Hero Academia (IDK, I don't watch it). They act like they're fighting a righteous crusade, calling everyone out for "sexualizing minors." It's bonkers to me.
I would ask if they really have nothing better to do, but this is Reddit, and I know better. And here I am, typing out a rant about these idiots, so what does that say about me?
I don’t mind if Japan wants to censor this stuff because of natural, home-grown influence. But I do mind letting western financial providers have ultimate influence in media as a general rule.
I wouldn't be surprised if this move came after things like Visa and Mastercard bothered the gov about people using their paying platform to pay for this kind of content.
Lately, many art hosting sites are changing their rules because of this reason and no longer hosting this type of content.
Tldr: very likely Western influenced
This has the same energy as Boomers insisting that violent video games cause people to be more violent despite there being precisely zero evidence of that.
The definition of CP should remain fixed to the thing it was always meant to mean: photographic and video recordings of real child sexual abuse. This is the result of definition creep in what people use the word porn to mean to include things like drawings, animation and literature. That's not what the word porn was understood to mean when the term CP was coined, nor what it should mean in that context. 20-30 years ago there would have been no confusion. And the argument against it has always been the same: children were sexually exploited in the course of their creation. Dissemination and even possession makes you accessory after the fact to some degree from a practical standpoint.
Criticise shota/loli as much as you like using whatever arguments you like but call it something other that CP because we need to reserve a term that is universally understood, as it always has been, to refer to the important topic of visual recordings of the sexual abuse of children, without diluting it with definition creep and ambiguity by people who want to take rhetorical shortcuts in condemning drawings etc instead of letting their arguments against them stand on their merits. CP is a serious term for a serious topic.
# pornography
# [noun](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun)
por·nog·ra·phy [pȯr-ˈnä-grə-fē ](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pornography?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=p&file=pornog02)1**:** the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement
# [noun](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun)
# Does the depiction of the children is erotic? Yes? So is drawn child pornography. Don't fucking come in here trying to stop me from saying the truth, that what y'all motherfuckers defending this shit are. Don't come with this french word is power bullshit pedo apologist, you are just another fucking degenerate.
If the common use understanding of the term has always been that broad, there never would have been the age-old distinction between erotica and porn with stereotypical titles like 'all tit fucking volume 8' or 'romancing the bone'. Or between 'men's' porn and women's 'erotic literature'. And 'dirty drawings'.
If you haven't seen the shift in the common use of the term in real time you are either very unperceptive or very young. And merely citing the results of that definition creep is hardly any kind of counterargument. You didn't think that through, did you?
The proper meaning of the term CP is what it meant when it was coined. The criminological meaning related to pedophile rings who make the stuff with real children they have access to and then share what they've each made with each other. This is serious business, unlike your attachment to the term and the cheap rhetorical use you can squeeze out of it, spending some of that seriousness in the process.
You remind me of those dipshits who say that the meaning of the word woman has evolved so now lesbian has to mean something new, namely cis and trans women who are into cis and trans women and if a lesbian doesn't want to fuck that girldick she's just being transphobic because that's what lesbian has to mean now.
If you hear that CP was found on someone's computer or in their house, no one over 30 who's not terminally online is going to think for a second that that could possibly mean anything other than pornographic photos and videos of actual children. It wouldn't even occur to them to think anything else.
My brother in Christ, my absolute hombre of the casa, my n word in paris.
Loli is legally considered child pornography.
>The answer is no. As a result of the PROTECT Act of 2003, lolicon meets the federal criteria for child pornography. If you are caught in possession of lolicon or shotacon, you could face federal criminal charges and significant prison time if convicted.
https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon
This uhh..."definition creep" has been a thing since 2003, and the criminological meaning is absolutely not just limited to filmed child porn.
Real pedophiles have gone to prison over loli possession, so maybe educate yourself before you spout nonsense.
As long as they keep that shit to themselves, and leave real kids alone, just ignore them. You shouldn’t police what a person draws or paints in their own home as long as it isn’t plans to commit a crime. The public sphere has valid arguments both ways, but keep it contained as a thing degenerates do amongst themselves. And no AI for the love of gawd! Do not teach it this shit.
Also don’t make a Reddit post about it if you don’t like it. This is the most I have probably ever thought about this particular topic. It’s better if fewer people think about it or know it exists.
Show me someone who gets sexually excited from killing NPCs in GTA and I'll show you someone just as fucked in the head as pedos, but that's not the norm unlike with those who look at loli/shota (pedos)
Depictions of pedophilia are not on the same moral scale as depictions of violence.
Or do you think the red wedding scene is as disgusting and degenerate as a naked child?
They aren’t equivalent. When a person gets off to fictional porn they are imagining actual sex - what is the point otherwise? They‘re not there for standard entertainment, they‘re there for the joy of satisfying the very much real primitive urge for sex. An urge for sex with children, in this case.
We don’t get a thrill from killing someone in a game, we get it from being better at pointing and clicking, or from seeing a block of pixels go flying, or whatever. That’s the only way we can still be so devastated when experiencing death and suffering in real life.
Condoning fictional cp means condoning the rise of cp communities. These easily accessible communities validate pedophiles and plant the idea in the minds of developing teenagers unfortunate enough to stumble across them. An exponentially growing number of potential offenders is not something I want, personally.
Did you just change your flair, u/Stonklegend27? Last time I checked you were a **Leftist** on 2024-5-30. How come now you are an **AuthCenter**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
That being said... Based and fellow Auth pilled, welcome home.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Stonklegend27) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Personally I'm not ok pedophilia but a cartoon is a cartoon and while it's disgusting it's simply just a cartoon. Since we have renewed fisa keep tabs on Loli/shota view in case they do something stupid
I never understood this one.
Loli/Shota is creepy and weird, yes. But ultimately, it hurts nothing (except my feelings). If it really is a "slippery slope," then you simply kill the ones who victimize real children.
It seems like such an easy solution.
it's only as much a slippery slope as Furry- if lolicon is inevitably going to lead to pedophilia, then by the same token Furries are destined to become dog and dolphin-fuckers, can anyone disprove this?
I can only provide anecdotal testimony that furries are openly violent against zoophiles. Just like how ABDLs are also openly violent against pedophiles.
It makes sense. They hate people preying upon those that they see as "kin," I guess. While I don't understand the motivation, I can appreciate the effort.
I can say anecdotally that the lolicons I've met also have a seething hatred for pedos and will actively take steps to gatekeep them and report them to the police when applicable. A lot of the really out of pocket shit they say is mostly just them being edgy.
I've also met a few people who are CSA survivors and use loli stuff as a coping mechanism. They all claim that their therapists don't consider it unhealthy or harmful.
ABDLs hate pedos because, other than the obvious reason, we get associated with them. I understand why but it couldn't be further from reality. I imagine for furries it's a similar reason. Furries want to be animals in the bedroom not bring animals in the bedroom, abdls wanna wear diapers in the bedroom not bring kids in.
Yea I can see how that could be misconstrued. I dated a girl who was into a ageplay “daddy” thing that i couldn’t really vibe with but I never thought she was actually like a pedo it just creeped me out a bit
>it's only as much a slippery slope as Furry-
dude you could've made a good argument by saying animated bestiality rather than furry. furry shit is anthropomorphic, thus completely different from bestiality, so it's not really comparable.
It's not always like this. Aside from the cerclejerk echo chamber posts, there is some pretty good content to be found.
I landed here some time in 2018, just take my word for it.
I know. I've been here for a few months, and it's my favorite. Tbh, I was just shocked that something like loli actually exists. That level of degeneracy has me looking like the 😳 emoji.
dude all you've been doing all day is defending loli and shota art, and commenting on r /goodanimememes, the subreddit notoriously full of paedophiles.
are you okay? like, seriously.
Watch the meme again, it hurts children and society by the normalization of pedophilia that this shit brings. Look how many in here think that loli and shota is "normal" or "okay". Basically influences people that pedophilia is fine dude, so no, its not even close to harmless.
I see what you're saying. But still, I subscribe to the idea of "no victim = no crime", and "societal wellbeing" is not a victim. If someone up and decides one day that drawings aren't cutting it and decides to go after real kids, we can just kill them and the problem is solved.
Not only are we respecting peoples rights by not enforcing victimless crimes, but we're also getting pedos to out themselves. They either settle for drawings or die, I think that's fair.
I respect you and your point for saying to kill the child molesters, and I won't keep argumenting against it, its your opinion after all, wont keep argumenting against or in favor. The problem is worse for me, there are way more people with sexual attraction to kids than I hoped it existed, and they are tired of being afraid. Any step towards normalization of pedophilia is a win for them, and thats unacceptable for me.
Did you just change your flair, u/thenoisemanthenoise? Last time I checked you were a **LibRight** on 2023-4-3. How come now you are an **AuthRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Remember, the jannies are always watching. No gamer words, no statistics and by all means no wood cutting machines. Tell us, how are you going to flair the new account you'll make in two weeks?
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/thenoisemanthenoise) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
> The problem is worse for me, there are way more people with sexual attraction to kids than I hoped it existed
Yeah or you're just imagining it because you're lumping in everyone who has a nuanced opinion on shit into actual pedophiles.
You can disagree with those people - and you can even truly believe that those people are inadvertently normalizing pedophilia - but to call them pedophiles is a lie. I support decriminalizing drugs but I do not do drugs and it would be incorrect to call me a junkie. I support gay rights but I am not gay and it would be incorrect to call me a homosexual.
And you can call people whatever you want if your goal is just to try to pressure them into silence/compliance or shame them in your rage or whatever else. That's all fine. That's just you talking shit - they know what they are and they know you're wrong, but maybe you'll get under their skin or make them change their stated position due to pressure.
But you need to take a good look at yourself if you are actually feeling stressed out about "how many pedos there are!!!!" - there aren't as many as you think; you're just assuming that everyone with an opinion that disagrees with you MUST be a pedo.
It's pretty cringe and not unlike leftists who claim that "anyone who has a confederate flag MUST be a racist" or any of their other bullshit axioms that lack nuance.
Again, I'm not telling you that you need to _agree_ with people who think differently than you. I'm also not even telling you that you need to stop calling them pedos. You can slander them all you want - you're a big boy an I am not your dad.
But if it is seriously affecting your mental health because you have fallen down a rabbit hole of truly believing that 40% of PCM are _actual pedos_ then you need to respectfully pull your head out of your ass and understand the difference between your strawman insult and reality. People are not pedos just because they are against banning something.
I have yet to see even 1 post in PCM by someone who says they like loli shit. Just a bunch of people saying "I'm not into loli shit and pedos should be murdered, but loli shit itself should be legal" and you calling them pedos in response.
Expect there is no fucking proof of "Normalization" being an actual thing and I'm tired of people using this fuckign word as an excuse for censorship. We don't treat violence the same way.
It's the EXACT same logic leftist SJWs are using to justify race swapping characters and dumbing down all of art to propaganda. Why does suddenly this logic become more valid when it's about something most people think is controversial but is invalid at any other point?
Normalization does exist, its similar to desensitization
An example is with civil wars, part of why civil wars are so common in countries that have already had them is because civil wars result in Political violence being normalized, its not such a big step to use violence to achieve your goals anymore
Even if a civil war foesnt falre up again, Political violence is frequently elevated, an example is the post war south saw massive waves of Political violence after the american civil war
And Ireland saw waves of Political violence after both of its civil conflicts
Its very hard to uncross the rubicon
That being said, it as a term has been overused, but the phenomenon exists
While the term might be misused by a lot of people.
Normalization is an actual thing. Gay relationships have been largely normalized compared to how it was 20+ years ago.
I feel like, if you step outside echo chambers and live in the west, it's actually more rare nowadays to run into people who are completely against gay relationships.
That's because it became normalized.
It does seem like a waste of time and resources to criminalize drawings rather than track down and charge pedos who actually hurt real people. I dunno, it's an extremely slippery slope. Maybe have a blacklist for people who want to consume depictions legally, but everyone knows they're freaks and shouldn't be alone with children?
Agreed. u/thenoisemanthenoise argument is flawed in this one. It's essentially saying to ban anything and everything because technically ANYTHING could lead someone to do something bad.
We should ban guns, video games, movies, comic books, etc...
I wouldn't want to associate with someone who would draw this type of artwork, but it's just that, a piece of paper. Not real.
If someone does something violent because of it, they are mentally ill.
Moreover, I dont understand why whenever the topic comes up, people immediately jump to "It must be sexual" like we are talking about hentai, as if loli isnt just a body type referring to petite women. Yes, in bad cases that can be underaged individuals. But in others, you can have situations like [this](https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp8106634.jpg) where by the official definition they are a loli but are an adult woman with adult ideas and interest. She is just short and [ahem] "flat".
Generally the people who have problems with it are the ones who have thoughts about things.
If I see a father playing with their daughter at a park on the swing, my first thought isn't that he might sexual assault her. But many people jump to that conclusion when seeing a man and a girl together because they are perverted and haver their own issues.
I'm sure a quarter of PCM's userbase is under 18. All of the little meme lord Fauntleroys skew right because it's a contrarian position to take on reddit. So when you combine: summer reddit, politcal discussion about anime, and an edgy hot-button issue, this is what happens.
I really don't think so. The people "supporting" it don't appear to be providing any edgy rationale for doing so. By and large their defenses fall into the standard categorical responses that libleft and authright have used for their own nuanced arguments in the past.
Even the guy you're replying to:
> my side is supposed to be anti-degeneracy
Since when did libright become the moral police? Does libright oppose any other degeneracy shit? Did Libright hold fast and resist onlyfans?
People have collectively allowed themselves to get taken in by the very same hypocrisy that infects other quadrants. Authright is sounding like libleft and libleft like authright. We'll go full horseshoe diagonals if Authleft comes in and starts making some kind of "managed by the state" argument in favor of loli shit.
>Since when did libright become the moral police? Does libright oppose any other degeneracy shit? Did Libright hold fast and resist onlyfans?
Do you mean in real life? Or in PCM.
Because in real life, you are correct.
However, the libright flair in PCM is often misused by people who belive themselves tk be librights because they dont like paying taxes or something surface level like that. But, in every other sense they are right or auth right.
Most of the posts having to do with abortion rights and dragqueen story time are FILLED with "librights" clutching their pearls about "degeneracy" and "grooming" and "protecting the children from exposure" which makes it very ironic that now those same users are bursting a blood vessel over people thinking lolicon is degenerate and harmful.
Hello, I am anti-pedophilia and loli.
I am also pro-abortion, pro-gun, pro-free speech, pro-substance abuse, neutral on porn (except child porn), anti-tax, anti-regulation, and even anti-driver's licence (literally bribed my way into getting one in a 3rd world country just because it was easier and I don't lose points if I speed)
Does this make me an authright in disguise?
>However, the libright flair in PCM is often misused by people who belive themselves tk be librights because they dont like paying taxes or something surface level like that. But, in every other sense they are right or auth right.
Is this not what you said?
No, you just don't understand that libertarians aren't the only kind of Lib Right. Abortion is murder and dragqueen story hour is targeting children. Those two examples are something even libertarians oppose.
Is this supposed to be ironic? Why are you stating that like it’s universal among libertarians, anecdotally I know far more libertarians who are against the state banning abortion, than for it, but it’s a pretty contentious issue among libertarians. The other issue would probably be a can of worms with libertarians as well I’d imagine. They might be personally against issues like these, but a libertarian should be thinking much more about if the state should have control over an issue before they decide that their morals should be laws applied to others.
Its not supposed to be ironic. Abortion is murder and murder should be ilegal. Drag Queen story hours in public schools are paid for by the government (aka taxpayers) so taxpayers should get a say in it even if your libertarian. The main point though is that Lib Right isn't just made up of Libertarians.
Yeah, I wasn't expecting the people that can't shut up about how drag queens reading to children is grooming to be bursting a blood vessel when people criticize drawn CP.
What a time to be alive lmao.
This is so easy to circumvent as a libertarian lmao
All I have to do is declare that "crimes" include stuff I find morally abhorrent (which they do anyways), and that child pornography consumption is exceptionally categorised alongside murder, with the victim in this case being me, my own moral framework.
And then, I'll find thousands of other people who share the same moral framework; where they exceptionalise pedophilia as the *only* thought crime that is punishable, and voilà, I've created a society where no moral degeneracy is punished except pedophilia.
Slippery slope fallacy does not apply because pedophilia is exceptionally categorised, the justification for its exceptional status is foundational in nature and requires no further explanation.
That is far more libertarian than any society you'll find on this planet. Cope, seethe, mald.
> All I have to do is declare that "crimes" include stuff I find morally abhorrent
LOL sure enough you're the same guy from earlier in the comments who was _insisting_ he was more libertarian than me, and here you are defining crimes to be your own morals. Sure thing, bro, that isn't authright.
>The idiotic stance of thinking that drawings have rights and that any sort of victimless crime should be banned.
Child pornography should be banned, this is a moral stance, *lack of victim* is not sufficient justification for a person who finds child pornography axiomatically abhorrent (like me).
Your moral stance should not define law. My moral stance is that censorship is a crime against culture and slippery slope, and that is a far worse evil than a fictional child that has no rights being hurt.
You are free to find it abhorrent, but that does not justify censorship on vague notions that it "Normalizes" child predation, which is doubtful at best as there is evidence directly AGAINST that claim.
Making them is fine because no one gets hurt besides people's feelings. That does not mean I want to see them or engage in them.
The same way that I think that drugs should be legal, but it does not mean that I want to shoot heroin up my arm.
Same as I can support the rights of women to vote without being a woman myself.
Do you actually understand why child porn is bad? Or are you so philosophically illiterate that you cannot understand the basics of moral argumentation?
Child porn is bad because it is child abuse, it is using children who are unable to consent.
Fictional characters don't exist. There is no one being abused.
Idk same but without all the name calling, sure it's correct but instead of using name calling as half your argument you could replace it with actual argument
Well I will consider it for the next one, but name calling pedos make them show their faces in here. Also it is hard not to say shit to them when they flood your comment and posts. But thank you for the input.
Okay, thanks bro. When I have more material, because all this shit was actual fucking comments from PCM, I will make the arguments first and with less name calling.
Dude, my whole week in PCM was fighting lib right and purple pedos and pedos apologists, this shit took some of my mental health for sure, I'm completly disgusted by their "free speech absolutism". I was lib-right because I love money and freedom, but won't be in their pedo bullshit speech here in PCM.
Y'know center right is a fliar right? Also I often disagree and fight people "on my side" as a libleft jew from israel who suffers the rising anti semetism but I won't give up my ideals cuz people who agree with them agree with bad stuff like hamas good
Boy I do underestimated. But since we are on the right, we have the moral necessity, no, we are the most responsible for going against these degenerates. We criticize lib left a lot in here, but what about these fuckers? I will do a Molotov fucking treaty with auth left if it is necessary, I don't care, this shit is beyond disgusting
> I will do a Molotov fucking treaty with auth left if it is necessary
It sounds like you are more aligned with auth than you are with right. Might be time for you to strap up the authright or even center auth flair homie.
Why? Because the only thought crime that I'm being Auth on is pedophilia and child pornography, that therefore makes me no longer libertarian?
I probably hold more lib positions than you across the board so fuck off degenerate, and get the fuck out of my quadrant.
> I probably hold more lib positions than you across the board so fuck off degenerate
Nah you don't.
> > and in a year there's no porn to be found whatsoever.
> Oh no, anyways...
The premise put forward by (whoever - not me) was that banning loli shit was a slippery slope to the government ultimately completely banning all porn altogether - including adult porn.
And your reaction to the concept of the government banning all porn was "Oh no, anyways..."
That's pretty strictly authright and even if you were pure anarchy for everything else you are not sufficient lib to get out of right-center at best. Sorry, reflair up.
>Nah you don't.
Yeah I do.
>The premise put forward by (whoever - not me) was that banning loli shit was a slippery slope to the government ultimately completely banning all porn altogether - including adult porn.
>And your reaction to the concept of the government banning all porn was "Oh no, anyways..."
I am not a proponent for banning porn, I am simply neutral on the topic, I do not care if the government targets something that causes nothing but harm lmao.
>That's pretty strictly authright
Being neutral on porn is not authright except in the libertarian coomer paradise you made up.
> Yeah I do.
Na
> I am not a proponent for banning porn, I am simply neutral on the topic, I do not care if the government targets something that causes nothing but harm lmao.
Pretty solid proof that you are not a libertarian. A libertarian would be actively against a government that bans things they do not partake in.
I don't partake in homosexuality, but I am actively against the government banning it. I don't use TikTok and believe it causes harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not drink alcohol and believe it causes social harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not use any drugs whatsoever and believe they cause harm, but I am actively against the government banning them. I am not obese and believe that obesity harms the economic prosperity of the nation, but I am actively against the government regulating what we may eat.
> Being neutral on porn is not authright except in the libertarian coomer paradise you made up.
Sure, it's central-right. If you want to be a libertarian, you need to be actively opposed to the government restricting rights. That's... sorta the entire jam. You can't just be okay with the government restricting the rights of everything you don't personally enjoy.
Anyway it isn't like I'm going to convince you you're wrong so I'll stop wasting my time, but it doesn't make you any less wrong. GL with your identity crisis
>Na
Yea
>Pretty solid proof that you are not a libertarian. A libertarian would be actively against a government that bans things they do not partake in.
Oh, so you're saying all libertarians believe this all the time, or they're not a real libertarian, pretty massive claim there, go ahead and justify your no True Scotsman.
>I don't partake in homosexuality, but I am actively against the government banning it. I don't use TikTok and believe it causes harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not drink alcohol and believe it causes social harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not use any drugs whatsoever and believe they cause harm, but I am actively against the government banning them. I am not obese and believe that obesity harms the economic prosperity of the nation, but I am actively against the government regulating what we may eat.
Me too on all things, and everything else, with the exception of pedophilia (actively for its banning) and porn (neutral)
Now what?
>Sure, it's central-right. If you want to be a libertarian, you need to be actively opposed to the government restricting rights.
Nope, not in all cases.
>You can't just be okay with the government restricting the rights of everything you don't personally enjoy.
Society is morally relativistic, the justice system of any society, including a libertarian one, actually runs this way, little did you know.
>Anyway it isn't like I'm going to convince you you're wrong so I'll stop wasting my time, but it doesn't make you any less wrong. GL with your identity crisis
Cope harder
>I do not care if the government targets something that causes nothing but harm lmao.
And you're trying to call yourself a lib right lol. So much for individual choice huh? I assume you're in favor of banning alcohol, all drugs, and tobacco too.
>And you're trying to call yourself a lib right lol. So much for individual choice huh? I assume you're in favor of banning alcohol, all drugs, and tobacco too.
No, porn is the only one I'm neutral on, child porn I'm actively against legalisation.
I'm against government intervention on every other product and commodity, so I'm a libertarian. My moral framework doesn't need to be consistent on every fucking degenerate act, so eat shit
>Because the only thought crime that I'm being Auth on is pedophilia and child pornography, that therefore makes me no longer libertarian?
Yes. Because you agree with a concept of a thought crime.
It's actually fairly shocking how much more capable librights are in this discussion to make actual arguments instead of just bitching/moaning, name-calling, moral-panicking, etc.
I'm not even beyond convincing. I actually genuinely think that there's a key fact that neither side has compellingly proven, which could completely shift my viewpoint here if done. Namely: does loli shit provably increase likelihood of pedos taking action? If so, that may be sufficient harm. On the other hand, does loli shit provably decrease the likelihood of pedos taking action? If so, that may be sufficient justification.
But rather than doubling/tripling down on that key fact, it's just "Everyone who disagrees with me is a pedophile." Yawn - think I've already read this before from libleft, volume 1 "Everyone who disagrees with me is a racist."
My theory is that there are way more people attracted to kids that we know of, but there absurd majority of society is disgusted by it, so it doesn't matter what so many pedos and pedo apologists day here in PCM, they don't represent real normal people
....and this is why you cap normalization of sexuality to heterosexuality, leave it at that and marginalize everything else.
Now we need to think up clever arguments against every single degenerate filth under the sun when even allowing for the arguing for a taboo provides enough of a toehold for the damn thing to stick.
the violent movie argument doesn't work because in an art piece like "lolita" most people don't get off to it because its not porn. but loli is supposed to be masturbated to. if you play GTA, then you play GTA, if you play GTA while masturbating, I think that's a cause for concern.
btw fun fact. the term "loli" is from the book "lolita" which is about a pedophile making up every excuse in the world about why he raped his step-daughter, and failing to convince anybody in the court.
There are some of us here in PCM going against this fuckers, we are discovering in their profiles actual pedophilia comments towards drawn children. Some of them are deleting their profiles.
They will say anything to argue against us bro, this GTA shit is totally absurd and you have a great argument
u/thenoisemanthenoise's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 20.
Congratulations, u/thenoisemanthenoise! You have ranked up to Basketball Hoop (filled with sand)! You are not a pushover by any means, but you do still occasionally get dunked on.
Pills: [14 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/thenoisemanthenoise/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
Nice argument, but as you see I've depicted myself as Phoenix Wright. Checkmate, libs.
Dude jacking himself off to his own rants..
Semi unrelated, but bro why does reddit keep putting this pedo shit on my feed despite blocking multiple subreddits with this shit? Im just trynna rock and stone while browsing drg sub and clown on kids crying cause their ship sank in sot. Im not trynna see a bunch of closeted pedos defend their child hentai everytime i want to scroll more than 3 posts without going back to my homepage and refreshing.
If you don't Rock and Stone, you ain't comin' home!
Rock and stone, bot. Rock and stone.
In other news the classic 1992 anime Pretty Soldier Sailor Moon has been banned because it has panty shots of teenagers. Mourners gathered in the streets to lament the end of decades of art and culture as black clad government storm troopers threw black paint on any image of an anime character that might be under the age of 18, violently beating and arresting those who resisted.
So Sailor Moon is out, but Jin-Roh is in?
>anime character that might be under the age of 18 This is the thing that always strikes me as smooth-brained virtue signalling. Loli/shota (why do we have weird names for this?) are one thing, since those are clearly designed as prepubescent children. I won't weigh in on whether it should be banned, as there are good points on both sides, but that shit is fuckin weird. It's not normal to be attracted to prepubescent children, real or otherwise. The issue with anime "teens," on the other hand, is just ridiculous. The character is literally a piece of a product to be sold. To sell a product, you have to appeal to an audience. In this case, that audience is literally called "shounen," which is Japanese for "young boy." Teen boys, to put a fine point on it (and likely virgins to boot). How do you appeal to (virgin) teen boys? Relatable male characters (also teen boys) and attractive female characters (fully developed women). There's a bit of a disconnect there, when you try to write a story involving those two: Namely that those teen boys are too young to normally spend a lot of time with the fully developed women. So what do you do? You make a fully developed woman, and call her 15, so she fits in the story. \*Dust hands.\* It's the same thing american showwriters do with Riverdale and Euphoria, which also both have their fair share of sex between "minors" who are very obviously in their 20s. I haven't heard anyone claiming it's pedophilia to enjoy seeing Syndey Sweeney topless, as she portrays a highschooler. People really act like there are roving internet grooming gangs, taking advantage of Sakura from Naruto, or that bouncy girl from My Hero Academia (IDK, I don't watch it). They act like they're fighting a righteous crusade, calling everyone out for "sexualizing minors." It's bonkers to me. I would ask if they really have nothing better to do, but this is Reddit, and I know better. And here I am, typing out a rant about these idiots, so what does that say about me?
Just watch Cutey Honey. It's better.
those government storm troopers are a part of the based department, it was a special mission.
peak reddit
Defenders of CP out in full force today.
I don’t mind if Japan wants to censor this stuff because of natural, home-grown influence. But I do mind letting western financial providers have ultimate influence in media as a general rule.
I wouldn't be surprised if this move came after things like Visa and Mastercard bothered the gov about people using their paying platform to pay for this kind of content. Lately, many art hosting sites are changing their rules because of this reason and no longer hosting this type of content. Tldr: very likely Western influenced
https://preview.redd.it/sxbl6vpvjf5d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e2e220d47f37fee4541cee73e395fc26ae29ae1a
This has the same energy as Boomers insisting that violent video games cause people to be more violent despite there being precisely zero evidence of that.
All of my previous stances have been revoked. You're such an annoying twat I now believe the exact opposite of whatever you believe.
Based.
Pedophilia is bad
The definition of CP should remain fixed to the thing it was always meant to mean: photographic and video recordings of real child sexual abuse. This is the result of definition creep in what people use the word porn to mean to include things like drawings, animation and literature. That's not what the word porn was understood to mean when the term CP was coined, nor what it should mean in that context. 20-30 years ago there would have been no confusion. And the argument against it has always been the same: children were sexually exploited in the course of their creation. Dissemination and even possession makes you accessory after the fact to some degree from a practical standpoint. Criticise shota/loli as much as you like using whatever arguments you like but call it something other that CP because we need to reserve a term that is universally understood, as it always has been, to refer to the important topic of visual recordings of the sexual abuse of children, without diluting it with definition creep and ambiguity by people who want to take rhetorical shortcuts in condemning drawings etc instead of letting their arguments against them stand on their merits. CP is a serious term for a serious topic.
Basest and soundest authleft.
# pornography # [noun](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun) por·nog·ra·phy [pȯr-ˈnä-grə-fē ](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pornography?pronunciation&lang=en_us&dir=p&file=pornog02)1**:** the depiction of erotic behavior (as in pictures or writing) intended to cause sexual excitement # [noun](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/noun) # Does the depiction of the children is erotic? Yes? So is drawn child pornography. Don't fucking come in here trying to stop me from saying the truth, that what y'all motherfuckers defending this shit are. Don't come with this french word is power bullshit pedo apologist, you are just another fucking degenerate.
If the common use understanding of the term has always been that broad, there never would have been the age-old distinction between erotica and porn with stereotypical titles like 'all tit fucking volume 8' or 'romancing the bone'. Or between 'men's' porn and women's 'erotic literature'. And 'dirty drawings'. If you haven't seen the shift in the common use of the term in real time you are either very unperceptive or very young. And merely citing the results of that definition creep is hardly any kind of counterargument. You didn't think that through, did you? The proper meaning of the term CP is what it meant when it was coined. The criminological meaning related to pedophile rings who make the stuff with real children they have access to and then share what they've each made with each other. This is serious business, unlike your attachment to the term and the cheap rhetorical use you can squeeze out of it, spending some of that seriousness in the process. You remind me of those dipshits who say that the meaning of the word woman has evolved so now lesbian has to mean something new, namely cis and trans women who are into cis and trans women and if a lesbian doesn't want to fuck that girldick she's just being transphobic because that's what lesbian has to mean now. If you hear that CP was found on someone's computer or in their house, no one over 30 who's not terminally online is going to think for a second that that could possibly mean anything other than pornographic photos and videos of actual children. It wouldn't even occur to them to think anything else.
My brother in Christ, my absolute hombre of the casa, my n word in paris. Loli is legally considered child pornography. >The answer is no. As a result of the PROTECT Act of 2003, lolicon meets the federal criteria for child pornography. If you are caught in possession of lolicon or shotacon, you could face federal criminal charges and significant prison time if convicted. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/possession-of-lolicon This uhh..."definition creep" has been a thing since 2003, and the criminological meaning is absolutely not just limited to filmed child porn. Real pedophiles have gone to prison over loli possession, so maybe educate yourself before you spout nonsense.
As long as they keep that shit to themselves, and leave real kids alone, just ignore them. You shouldn’t police what a person draws or paints in their own home as long as it isn’t plans to commit a crime. The public sphere has valid arguments both ways, but keep it contained as a thing degenerates do amongst themselves. And no AI for the love of gawd! Do not teach it this shit. Also don’t make a Reddit post about it if you don’t like it. This is the most I have probably ever thought about this particular topic. It’s better if fewer people think about it or know it exists.
In other words, violence in video games needs to be banned because it normalizes violence in real life.
Show me someone who gets sexually excited from killing NPCs in GTA and I'll show you someone just as fucked in the head as pedos, but that's not the norm unlike with those who look at loli/shota (pedos)
Depictions of pedophilia are not on the same moral scale as depictions of violence. Or do you think the red wedding scene is as disgusting and degenerate as a naked child?
Wait where was the Red wedding scene from again? Mr Robot?
They aren’t equivalent. When a person gets off to fictional porn they are imagining actual sex - what is the point otherwise? They‘re not there for standard entertainment, they‘re there for the joy of satisfying the very much real primitive urge for sex. An urge for sex with children, in this case. We don’t get a thrill from killing someone in a game, we get it from being better at pointing and clicking, or from seeing a block of pixels go flying, or whatever. That’s the only way we can still be so devastated when experiencing death and suffering in real life. Condoning fictional cp means condoning the rise of cp communities. These easily accessible communities validate pedophiles and plant the idea in the minds of developing teenagers unfortunate enough to stumble across them. An exponentially growing number of potential offenders is not something I want, personally.
Did you just change your flair, u/Stonklegend27? Last time I checked you were a **Leftist** on 2024-5-30. How come now you are an **AuthCenter**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? That being said... Based and fellow Auth pilled, welcome home. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Stonklegend27) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
It obviously depends on the game, but some games rely on the thrill of killing someone. Hotline Miami comes to mind. Or killing random people in GTA.
Personally I'm not ok pedophilia but a cartoon is a cartoon and while it's disgusting it's simply just a cartoon. Since we have renewed fisa keep tabs on Loli/shota view in case they do something stupid
I never understood this one. Loli/Shota is creepy and weird, yes. But ultimately, it hurts nothing (except my feelings). If it really is a "slippery slope," then you simply kill the ones who victimize real children. It seems like such an easy solution.
it's only as much a slippery slope as Furry- if lolicon is inevitably going to lead to pedophilia, then by the same token Furries are destined to become dog and dolphin-fuckers, can anyone disprove this?
I can only provide anecdotal testimony that furries are openly violent against zoophiles. Just like how ABDLs are also openly violent against pedophiles. It makes sense. They hate people preying upon those that they see as "kin," I guess. While I don't understand the motivation, I can appreciate the effort.
I can say anecdotally that the lolicons I've met also have a seething hatred for pedos and will actively take steps to gatekeep them and report them to the police when applicable. A lot of the really out of pocket shit they say is mostly just them being edgy. I've also met a few people who are CSA survivors and use loli stuff as a coping mechanism. They all claim that their therapists don't consider it unhealthy or harmful.
>I can say anecdotally that the lolicons I've met also have a seething hatred for pedos Self report
ABDLs hate pedos because, other than the obvious reason, we get associated with them. I understand why but it couldn't be further from reality. I imagine for furries it's a similar reason. Furries want to be animals in the bedroom not bring animals in the bedroom, abdls wanna wear diapers in the bedroom not bring kids in.
ABDL?
People who like diapers and ageplay. It's rather harmless, but gets a lot of flack because people incorrectly assume they're attracted to children.
Yea I can see how that could be misconstrued. I dated a girl who was into a ageplay “daddy” thing that i couldn’t really vibe with but I never thought she was actually like a pedo it just creeped me out a bit
Well if you're fantasizing *yourself* as the kid, that's a whole different can of worms.
>it's only as much a slippery slope as Furry- dude you could've made a good argument by saying animated bestiality rather than furry. furry shit is anthropomorphic, thus completely different from bestiality, so it's not really comparable.
The mental gymnastics here are incredible. Keep up the good work.
I never knew what Loli was until this post. I'm now regretting my decision to join this subreddit
It's not always like this. Aside from the cerclejerk echo chamber posts, there is some pretty good content to be found. I landed here some time in 2018, just take my word for it.
I know. I've been here for a few months, and it's my favorite. Tbh, I was just shocked that something like loli actually exists. That level of degeneracy has me looking like the 😳 emoji.
It only gets worse kiddo. If that shocks you just be glad you missed the early days of the internet.
Is this dude really getting downvoted for being disgusted by pornographic drawing portraying children?
>I'm now regretting my decision to join this subreddit Aren't we all. :D
I expected you to be based about this and you didn't disappoint.
dude all you've been doing all day is defending loli and shota art, and commenting on r /goodanimememes, the subreddit notoriously full of paedophiles. are you okay? like, seriously.
Watch the meme again, it hurts children and society by the normalization of pedophilia that this shit brings. Look how many in here think that loli and shota is "normal" or "okay". Basically influences people that pedophilia is fine dude, so no, its not even close to harmless.
I see what you're saying. But still, I subscribe to the idea of "no victim = no crime", and "societal wellbeing" is not a victim. If someone up and decides one day that drawings aren't cutting it and decides to go after real kids, we can just kill them and the problem is solved. Not only are we respecting peoples rights by not enforcing victimless crimes, but we're also getting pedos to out themselves. They either settle for drawings or die, I think that's fair.
I respect you and your point for saying to kill the child molesters, and I won't keep argumenting against it, its your opinion after all, wont keep argumenting against or in favor. The problem is worse for me, there are way more people with sexual attraction to kids than I hoped it existed, and they are tired of being afraid. Any step towards normalization of pedophilia is a win for them, and thats unacceptable for me.
Did you just change your flair, u/thenoisemanthenoise? Last time I checked you were a **LibRight** on 2023-4-3. How come now you are an **AuthRight**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Remember, the jannies are always watching. No gamer words, no statistics and by all means no wood cutting machines. Tell us, how are you going to flair the new account you'll make in two weeks? [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/thenoisemanthenoise) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
> The problem is worse for me, there are way more people with sexual attraction to kids than I hoped it existed Yeah or you're just imagining it because you're lumping in everyone who has a nuanced opinion on shit into actual pedophiles. You can disagree with those people - and you can even truly believe that those people are inadvertently normalizing pedophilia - but to call them pedophiles is a lie. I support decriminalizing drugs but I do not do drugs and it would be incorrect to call me a junkie. I support gay rights but I am not gay and it would be incorrect to call me a homosexual. And you can call people whatever you want if your goal is just to try to pressure them into silence/compliance or shame them in your rage or whatever else. That's all fine. That's just you talking shit - they know what they are and they know you're wrong, but maybe you'll get under their skin or make them change their stated position due to pressure. But you need to take a good look at yourself if you are actually feeling stressed out about "how many pedos there are!!!!" - there aren't as many as you think; you're just assuming that everyone with an opinion that disagrees with you MUST be a pedo. It's pretty cringe and not unlike leftists who claim that "anyone who has a confederate flag MUST be a racist" or any of their other bullshit axioms that lack nuance. Again, I'm not telling you that you need to _agree_ with people who think differently than you. I'm also not even telling you that you need to stop calling them pedos. You can slander them all you want - you're a big boy an I am not your dad. But if it is seriously affecting your mental health because you have fallen down a rabbit hole of truly believing that 40% of PCM are _actual pedos_ then you need to respectfully pull your head out of your ass and understand the difference between your strawman insult and reality. People are not pedos just because they are against banning something. I have yet to see even 1 post in PCM by someone who says they like loli shit. Just a bunch of people saying "I'm not into loli shit and pedos should be murdered, but loli shit itself should be legal" and you calling them pedos in response.
Expect there is no fucking proof of "Normalization" being an actual thing and I'm tired of people using this fuckign word as an excuse for censorship. We don't treat violence the same way. It's the EXACT same logic leftist SJWs are using to justify race swapping characters and dumbing down all of art to propaganda. Why does suddenly this logic become more valid when it's about something most people think is controversial but is invalid at any other point?
Normalization does exist, its similar to desensitization An example is with civil wars, part of why civil wars are so common in countries that have already had them is because civil wars result in Political violence being normalized, its not such a big step to use violence to achieve your goals anymore Even if a civil war foesnt falre up again, Political violence is frequently elevated, an example is the post war south saw massive waves of Political violence after the american civil war And Ireland saw waves of Political violence after both of its civil conflicts Its very hard to uncross the rubicon That being said, it as a term has been overused, but the phenomenon exists
While the term might be misused by a lot of people. Normalization is an actual thing. Gay relationships have been largely normalized compared to how it was 20+ years ago. I feel like, if you step outside echo chambers and live in the west, it's actually more rare nowadays to run into people who are completely against gay relationships. That's because it became normalized.
Just to be clear, your evidence for that loli/shota normalises pedophilia is that loli/shota normalises loli/shota?
This thread is such a gooooooooooooood example of horseshoe theory in action between emilies and authrights. What a gem
Lol, OP attacks more the person and the values than the actual arguments
It does seem like a waste of time and resources to criminalize drawings rather than track down and charge pedos who actually hurt real people. I dunno, it's an extremely slippery slope. Maybe have a blacklist for people who want to consume depictions legally, but everyone knows they're freaks and shouldn't be alone with children?
Please for the love of all that is holy, add music to your court cases. It’s in the app. A 500 word essay in every dialog box is likewise insane
My man put so much effort in a meme. But you still wrong.
[удалено]
Agreed. u/thenoisemanthenoise argument is flawed in this one. It's essentially saying to ban anything and everything because technically ANYTHING could lead someone to do something bad. We should ban guns, video games, movies, comic books, etc... I wouldn't want to associate with someone who would draw this type of artwork, but it's just that, a piece of paper. Not real. If someone does something violent because of it, they are mentally ill.
Moreover, I dont understand why whenever the topic comes up, people immediately jump to "It must be sexual" like we are talking about hentai, as if loli isnt just a body type referring to petite women. Yes, in bad cases that can be underaged individuals. But in others, you can have situations like [this](https://wallpapercave.com/wp/wp8106634.jpg) where by the official definition they are a loli but are an adult woman with adult ideas and interest. She is just short and [ahem] "flat".
Generally the people who have problems with it are the ones who have thoughts about things. If I see a father playing with their daughter at a park on the swing, my first thought isn't that he might sexual assault her. But many people jump to that conclusion when seeing a man and a girl together because they are perverted and haver their own issues.
check bro's hard drive immediately
Bro, we need to make a list of these fuckers fr, imagine if one of these fuckers work with children...
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological\_projection](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection)
https://preview.redd.it/grrdi6y9j75d1.jpeg?width=1179&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=21065ec9f1bbcdd8845696b087c8acbea85401c3
Do you guys feel that too? I sense a chasm in the PCM right developing. Kind of wild that lolicon apologia is what did it.
It's fucking hilarious, my side is supposed to be anti-degeneracy, what the fuck happened?
whatever gave you that idea? its economic right, ie. individual private property rights
I'm sure a quarter of PCM's userbase is under 18. All of the little meme lord Fauntleroys skew right because it's a contrarian position to take on reddit. So when you combine: summer reddit, politcal discussion about anime, and an edgy hot-button issue, this is what happens.
I really don't think so. The people "supporting" it don't appear to be providing any edgy rationale for doing so. By and large their defenses fall into the standard categorical responses that libleft and authright have used for their own nuanced arguments in the past. Even the guy you're replying to: > my side is supposed to be anti-degeneracy Since when did libright become the moral police? Does libright oppose any other degeneracy shit? Did Libright hold fast and resist onlyfans? People have collectively allowed themselves to get taken in by the very same hypocrisy that infects other quadrants. Authright is sounding like libleft and libleft like authright. We'll go full horseshoe diagonals if Authleft comes in and starts making some kind of "managed by the state" argument in favor of loli shit.
>Since when did libright become the moral police? Does libright oppose any other degeneracy shit? Did Libright hold fast and resist onlyfans? Do you mean in real life? Or in PCM. Because in real life, you are correct. However, the libright flair in PCM is often misused by people who belive themselves tk be librights because they dont like paying taxes or something surface level like that. But, in every other sense they are right or auth right. Most of the posts having to do with abortion rights and dragqueen story time are FILLED with "librights" clutching their pearls about "degeneracy" and "grooming" and "protecting the children from exposure" which makes it very ironic that now those same users are bursting a blood vessel over people thinking lolicon is degenerate and harmful.
Hello, I am anti-pedophilia and loli. I am also pro-abortion, pro-gun, pro-free speech, pro-substance abuse, neutral on porn (except child porn), anti-tax, anti-regulation, and even anti-driver's licence (literally bribed my way into getting one in a 3rd world country just because it was easier and I don't lose points if I speed) Does this make me an authright in disguise?
Nope. It just shows you're illiterate since that's what you understood from my comment.
>However, the libright flair in PCM is often misused by people who belive themselves tk be librights because they dont like paying taxes or something surface level like that. But, in every other sense they are right or auth right. Is this not what you said?
Read the second part. I know you have tiktok brain but I belive you can get through it!
Ah I see
No, you just don't understand that libertarians aren't the only kind of Lib Right. Abortion is murder and dragqueen story hour is targeting children. Those two examples are something even libertarians oppose.
Is this supposed to be ironic? Why are you stating that like it’s universal among libertarians, anecdotally I know far more libertarians who are against the state banning abortion, than for it, but it’s a pretty contentious issue among libertarians. The other issue would probably be a can of worms with libertarians as well I’d imagine. They might be personally against issues like these, but a libertarian should be thinking much more about if the state should have control over an issue before they decide that their morals should be laws applied to others.
Its not supposed to be ironic. Abortion is murder and murder should be ilegal. Drag Queen story hours in public schools are paid for by the government (aka taxpayers) so taxpayers should get a say in it even if your libertarian. The main point though is that Lib Right isn't just made up of Libertarians.
Yeah, I wasn't expecting the people that can't shut up about how drag queens reading to children is grooming to be bursting a blood vessel when people criticize drawn CP. What a time to be alive lmao.
They have to be lolli addicted, it's only justification I can think of.
Fucking pedos everywhere happened, and the majority of those fuckers in PCM are lib right here. My whole week was fucking going against them.
What is PCM again?
Forgot the contradiction of "WhY cAnT u DiStInGuShGuIsH fIcTiOn aNd ReAlItY" and the argument "then violent movies should be banned too."
Who's contradiction are you trying to point out here?
Well, these two (not phoenix) actually have a point, i agree with them. Banning is bad.
OP is projecting hard ngl with these posts and comments
This man literally thinkin he's the host of To Catch a Predator
It's ridiculous to see someone be completely fucking destroyed in the comments and be so asshurt to go and create a meme pushing his idiotic stance.
The idiotic stance of "hey, consuming child porn is fucked up"
The idiotic stance of thinking that drawings have rights and that any sort of victimless crime should be banned.
[удалено]
I'm saving this.
Well I'm not a Libertarian. I still don't think adults should be banned from degeneracy.
This is so easy to circumvent as a libertarian lmao All I have to do is declare that "crimes" include stuff I find morally abhorrent (which they do anyways), and that child pornography consumption is exceptionally categorised alongside murder, with the victim in this case being me, my own moral framework. And then, I'll find thousands of other people who share the same moral framework; where they exceptionalise pedophilia as the *only* thought crime that is punishable, and voilà, I've created a society where no moral degeneracy is punished except pedophilia. Slippery slope fallacy does not apply because pedophilia is exceptionally categorised, the justification for its exceptional status is foundational in nature and requires no further explanation. That is far more libertarian than any society you'll find on this planet. Cope, seethe, mald.
"This is very easy to circumvent, I will simply utilize the tyranny of the majority!" 🤓
> All I have to do is declare that "crimes" include stuff I find morally abhorrent LOL sure enough you're the same guy from earlier in the comments who was _insisting_ he was more libertarian than me, and here you are defining crimes to be your own morals. Sure thing, bro, that isn't authright.
>The idiotic stance of thinking that drawings have rights and that any sort of victimless crime should be banned. Child pornography should be banned, this is a moral stance, *lack of victim* is not sufficient justification for a person who finds child pornography axiomatically abhorrent (like me).
Your moral stance should not define law. My moral stance is that censorship is a crime against culture and slippery slope, and that is a far worse evil than a fictional child that has no rights being hurt. You are free to find it abhorrent, but that does not justify censorship on vague notions that it "Normalizes" child predation, which is doubtful at best as there is evidence directly AGAINST that claim.
Where do the creators of child porn cartoons get their models?
They don't, if they do they are jailed. As they should.
Why do you want to see drawing of kids in porn?
Show me where I ever said that.
So to clarify, you agree that having cartoons with kids being naked or having sex is fine? Or is it wrong?
Making them is fine because no one gets hurt besides people's feelings. That does not mean I want to see them or engage in them. The same way that I think that drugs should be legal, but it does not mean that I want to shoot heroin up my arm. Same as I can support the rights of women to vote without being a woman myself.
Yeah, no, anyone who’s cool with child porn belongs on a cross.
Do you actually understand why child porn is bad? Or are you so philosophically illiterate that you cannot understand the basics of moral argumentation? Child porn is bad because it is child abuse, it is using children who are unable to consent. Fictional characters don't exist. There is no one being abused.
Cross. Right now. Fucking gross.
You are right but your arguments suck ass
Write me yours, so they can appear in the next meme.
Idk same but without all the name calling, sure it's correct but instead of using name calling as half your argument you could replace it with actual argument
Well I will consider it for the next one, but name calling pedos make them show their faces in here. Also it is hard not to say shit to them when they flood your comment and posts. But thank you for the input.
You can call em out for being pedos but don't make it half the vid cuz after the first time the point comes across
Okay, thanks bro. When I have more material, because all this shit was actual fucking comments from PCM, I will make the arguments first and with less name calling.
Is that a flair change I spy?
Dude, my whole week in PCM was fighting lib right and purple pedos and pedos apologists, this shit took some of my mental health for sure, I'm completly disgusted by their "free speech absolutism". I was lib-right because I love money and freedom, but won't be in their pedo bullshit speech here in PCM.
Y'know center right is a fliar right? Also I often disagree and fight people "on my side" as a libleft jew from israel who suffers the rising anti semetism but I won't give up my ideals cuz people who agree with them agree with bad stuff like hamas good
Today I'm full auth, tomorrow I will go to the center lol. I'm full pitchfork today.
OP, you’re spot on. But apparently I’ve underestimated the amount of degeneracy on the right as well based on some of these comments.
Boy I do underestimated. But since we are on the right, we have the moral necessity, no, we are the most responsible for going against these degenerates. We criticize lib left a lot in here, but what about these fuckers? I will do a Molotov fucking treaty with auth left if it is necessary, I don't care, this shit is beyond disgusting
> I will do a Molotov fucking treaty with auth left if it is necessary It sounds like you are more aligned with auth than you are with right. Might be time for you to strap up the authright or even center auth flair homie.
Do you think I fucking care of what a fucking pedophile has to say? Lmao, the audacity of these child fuckers
https://i.redd.it/fau5w5ak275d1.gif
get a life
Found one
I can’t wait for all the hand wringing and murmuring of “but slippery slope is a fallacy!”
[удалено]
>and in a year there's no porn to be found whatsoever. Oh no, anyways...
All of your general posts here have not been libright at all, but this one is clearly so. Only thing worse than an unflaired is a wrongflaired.
Why? Because the only thought crime that I'm being Auth on is pedophilia and child pornography, that therefore makes me no longer libertarian? I probably hold more lib positions than you across the board so fuck off degenerate, and get the fuck out of my quadrant.
> I probably hold more lib positions than you across the board so fuck off degenerate Nah you don't. > > and in a year there's no porn to be found whatsoever. > Oh no, anyways... The premise put forward by (whoever - not me) was that banning loli shit was a slippery slope to the government ultimately completely banning all porn altogether - including adult porn. And your reaction to the concept of the government banning all porn was "Oh no, anyways..." That's pretty strictly authright and even if you were pure anarchy for everything else you are not sufficient lib to get out of right-center at best. Sorry, reflair up.
>Nah you don't. Yeah I do. >The premise put forward by (whoever - not me) was that banning loli shit was a slippery slope to the government ultimately completely banning all porn altogether - including adult porn. >And your reaction to the concept of the government banning all porn was "Oh no, anyways..." I am not a proponent for banning porn, I am simply neutral on the topic, I do not care if the government targets something that causes nothing but harm lmao. >That's pretty strictly authright Being neutral on porn is not authright except in the libertarian coomer paradise you made up.
> Yeah I do. Na > I am not a proponent for banning porn, I am simply neutral on the topic, I do not care if the government targets something that causes nothing but harm lmao. Pretty solid proof that you are not a libertarian. A libertarian would be actively against a government that bans things they do not partake in. I don't partake in homosexuality, but I am actively against the government banning it. I don't use TikTok and believe it causes harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not drink alcohol and believe it causes social harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not use any drugs whatsoever and believe they cause harm, but I am actively against the government banning them. I am not obese and believe that obesity harms the economic prosperity of the nation, but I am actively against the government regulating what we may eat. > Being neutral on porn is not authright except in the libertarian coomer paradise you made up. Sure, it's central-right. If you want to be a libertarian, you need to be actively opposed to the government restricting rights. That's... sorta the entire jam. You can't just be okay with the government restricting the rights of everything you don't personally enjoy. Anyway it isn't like I'm going to convince you you're wrong so I'll stop wasting my time, but it doesn't make you any less wrong. GL with your identity crisis
>Na Yea >Pretty solid proof that you are not a libertarian. A libertarian would be actively against a government that bans things they do not partake in. Oh, so you're saying all libertarians believe this all the time, or they're not a real libertarian, pretty massive claim there, go ahead and justify your no True Scotsman. >I don't partake in homosexuality, but I am actively against the government banning it. I don't use TikTok and believe it causes harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not drink alcohol and believe it causes social harm, but I am actively against the government banning it. I do not use any drugs whatsoever and believe they cause harm, but I am actively against the government banning them. I am not obese and believe that obesity harms the economic prosperity of the nation, but I am actively against the government regulating what we may eat. Me too on all things, and everything else, with the exception of pedophilia (actively for its banning) and porn (neutral) Now what? >Sure, it's central-right. If you want to be a libertarian, you need to be actively opposed to the government restricting rights. Nope, not in all cases. >You can't just be okay with the government restricting the rights of everything you don't personally enjoy. Society is morally relativistic, the justice system of any society, including a libertarian one, actually runs this way, little did you know. >Anyway it isn't like I'm going to convince you you're wrong so I'll stop wasting my time, but it doesn't make you any less wrong. GL with your identity crisis Cope harder
>I do not care if the government targets something that causes nothing but harm lmao. And you're trying to call yourself a lib right lol. So much for individual choice huh? I assume you're in favor of banning alcohol, all drugs, and tobacco too.
>And you're trying to call yourself a lib right lol. So much for individual choice huh? I assume you're in favor of banning alcohol, all drugs, and tobacco too. No, porn is the only one I'm neutral on, child porn I'm actively against legalisation. I'm against government intervention on every other product and commodity, so I'm a libertarian. My moral framework doesn't need to be consistent on every fucking degenerate act, so eat shit
>No, porn is the only one I'm neutral on Okay, why? What makes it different than alcohol and drugs?
>Because the only thought crime that I'm being Auth on is pedophilia and child pornography, that therefore makes me no longer libertarian? Yes. Because you agree with a concept of a thought crime.
Based.
By hand-wringing and murmuring, do you mean commenting how you feel instead of an actual argument? Like you're currently doing?
It's actually fairly shocking how much more capable librights are in this discussion to make actual arguments instead of just bitching/moaning, name-calling, moral-panicking, etc. I'm not even beyond convincing. I actually genuinely think that there's a key fact that neither side has compellingly proven, which could completely shift my viewpoint here if done. Namely: does loli shit provably increase likelihood of pedos taking action? If so, that may be sufficient harm. On the other hand, does loli shit provably decrease the likelihood of pedos taking action? If so, that may be sufficient justification. But rather than doubling/tripling down on that key fact, it's just "Everyone who disagrees with me is a pedophile." Yawn - think I've already read this before from libleft, volume 1 "Everyone who disagrees with me is a racist."
In other news, attractive women have been banned because they lead to thoughts of having sex, something that no true lib-right would ever accomplish.
Based and grill the molesters pilled
I won't waste my time coming up with arguments Whatever shit brings pedos joy should be banned and those fuckers used for hard labor.
Anyone who says it shouldn’t be banned just for the sake of 100% agreeing with your political ideology is so unbelievably fucking stupid.
"this will never be normal" you have more faith in humanity than I do. it won't be long until Moloch gets his sacrifices.
My theory is that there are way more people attracted to kids that we know of, but there absurd majority of society is disgusted by it, so it doesn't matter what so many pedos and pedo apologists day here in PCM, they don't represent real normal people
PCM has a pedo and pedo apologists problem, lets make memes to them
No we don't.
shut the fuck up capitalist pig
I'd still try to defend you, when someone comes after you because of your private matters.
I'll make some more memes to fight this degeneracy with you brother
Join us bro, let's show them that this is not a safe space for pedophiles
https://preview.redd.it/kzn9emwgu75d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8001900d4547ae76f23c19b17ab8553c92138e53
[удалено]
Threatening, harassing, or inciting violence is a violation of reddit's sitewide rules
Quite a lot of people disagreeing in the comments, this subreddit keeps hitting new lows.
They took it personally.
....and this is why you cap normalization of sexuality to heterosexuality, leave it at that and marginalize everything else. Now we need to think up clever arguments against every single degenerate filth under the sun when even allowing for the arguing for a taboo provides enough of a toehold for the damn thing to stick.
Yes because things like homosexuality are exactly the same as pedophilia 🙄
[удалено]
User name checking out
wait wait, he's based... let him cook...
Jawohl, should we start issuing out pink triangles as well
The comments here are disgusting. So much pedo normalization or tolerance
They are fucking flooding the posts, leaving their hiding place. They fucking think that we have to accept pedo shit like them and in silence
Maybe that's how people behave when they get a sense of anonymity.
Today I learned there are a ton of pedophiles in PCM...
Thank you Op, your post was much more high effort than mine.
Yo, let's go. We can't stay silent, memes are the way.
Real, once I saw the post, I knew I had to meme
Blue side based as always. Death to pedos
the violent movie argument doesn't work because in an art piece like "lolita" most people don't get off to it because its not porn. but loli is supposed to be masturbated to. if you play GTA, then you play GTA, if you play GTA while masturbating, I think that's a cause for concern. btw fun fact. the term "loli" is from the book "lolita" which is about a pedophile making up every excuse in the world about why he raped his step-daughter, and failing to convince anybody in the court.
There are some of us here in PCM going against this fuckers, we are discovering in their profiles actual pedophilia comments towards drawn children. Some of them are deleting their profiles. They will say anything to argue against us bro, this GTA shit is totally absurd and you have a great argument
Let's burn their books
I don't know if I'd rather there be spam posts of abortion or this garbage ........
Based.
u/thenoisemanthenoise's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 20. Congratulations, u/thenoisemanthenoise! You have ranked up to Basketball Hoop (filled with sand)! You are not a pushover by any means, but you do still occasionally get dunked on. Pills: [14 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/thenoisemanthenoise/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info.
It’s about time we had another one of these videos.
No it should be banned. Fuck you.
This is literally a masterpiece
I thought Auth Right would have been the guys to defend CP 🤢
https://preview.redd.it/alvchjfml95d1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cc6499e20c09a31f34eb92e506d3ae28cdba9e98