You don’t get a pass because your 13 year olds of choice are japanese and drawn characters. It’s creepy as fuck and I am judging you for it.
You don’t get a pass because your 13 year olds of choice are japanese and drawn characters. It’s creepy as fuck and I am judging you for it.
Drawings ≠ Reality
Stop conflating them, that was the exact argument that people who hated videogames used: “if you do X/watch X/play X, then you turn into X/Y/Z”. That’s monocausalism, and an oversimplification of really complex systems and processes.
If your arguments were true, most of GTA players were mass shooters, because the same exact mechanism happens there.
When you pay a shop to print out a 6-ft vinyl of said anime drawings, and then voluntarily apply it to the side of your clapped out Honda Civic, such that the fuel nozzle goes into the underage anime girls butt, it becomes reality.
It’s still fictional if they buy a 1:1 scale model of the character with an onahole shoved inside it.
Lol no, they’re still just drawings, not real children.
So the defining trait that makes it ok is that it’s not “real life”? If you get an artwork commissioned of an amine girl that is based on/inspired by someone you know irl, is that fine?
I guess to take it to an extreme do you think cartoons of CSAM is acceptable since it’s “not real”? I guess it technically doesn’t hurt anyone irl, and gives pedos a way to… yeah.
For the record I do not agree but am interested in the reasoning behind why you consider it OK.
Because only can be considered bad what causes real, verifiable harm. But this not only doesn’t cause harm, but it can even avoid it because it will redirect these impulses to something safer
The “verifiable harm” is the normalising and disseminating sexualised images of minors under the guise of “But it’s just a drawing.”
Thanks to ol’ muskrat and his recent lobbying to make it legal for his pet clanker to turn real images of underage women into deepfakes, most people are VERY aware that something doesn’t have to have a physical impact to cause harm.
Just like the creepy anime shit;
They are depictions of children intentionally drawn that way, for a target market.
The artist intentionally drew them like that.
Nobody is forcing the artist to draw pictures of children or characters that look like children, they do it by choice.
It is not far of a stretch to say that the people drawing that type of thing enjoy it, as do the people consuming it.
So why are you defending it so vehemently?
You’ve posted multiple times in this thread arguing with whoever you can find, so I’m curious; what do you think you’re defending?
Yeah, but in that case there is still a real, verifiable harm: they’re damaging the reputation of one or more people, and they’re enabling abusers and stalkets to harass people like never before, causing these victims huge trauma, and the worst part: they’re trained with real children pictures.
An anime drawing almost never represents a real child, and what’s more, they’re just fucking obviously fictional and unmistakably unreal; someone as Shadman that draws real people in a cartoon-ish way is gross? Yeah, but as long as they’re harassing real people in the process.
Moreover, a drawing or a fictional being hasn’t even an age, because they’re just that, fictional beings, they don’t have any real biologic story or an inner world or a mind or any kind of psychologic or mental state, they’re just lines or pixels on a canvas, and their only age, if anything, is the time passed since they were first drawn. There’s just a big of an ontological gap between them and the real world that the harm never is in themselves or their nature or contents, but on the intentions and actions of their creators.
Yeah, they do enjoy it. But they don’t enjoy actual CSAM (or, that is, real childrens being abused, because no, lolicon IS not CSAM as there is not simply a real victim).
Because I’m a Free Speech Extremist, and an art-autonomist. That’s it. Period. Recommended lecture if you’re so genuinely curious about that.
Where are the kids you are allowed to murder in GTA?
Or is it another game? What is the game where you graphically murder children?
You murder people nevertheless.
That’s the problem, and you’re just making a straw man out of it with something irrelevant to the point.
No, you’re just refusing to see the point. I’m sticking closer to the topic than you are.
I mean it’s “the same” right? If ‘enjoying stories about fucking kids is like killing an NPC in GTA’? Where are all the games about graphically murdering children? If it’s the same, if your analogy holds, there should be plenty of games that let you murder kids in the street, just not fuck them.
And actually, there are games where you’re allowed to kill children.
Anyway, the point is, in GTA you can be a mass murderer of women and men alike, even pregnant women, and you then don’t see that reflected in reality.