The question I always asked is: does the legalization of such material lead to a decrease in sexual abuse of children or an increase ? There will always be pedophiles, that we can’t avoid, what is important is to stop them acting upon their desires and abusing minors, to this end, would lolicon help by giving them materials that where created without harming children ? Or would it empower them to harm children ?
It’d seem that there isn’t really that much research in this area. This is the only article I could find directly related to child SA, with a helpful conclusion:
In this work, we have established how people with attractions to children are seeking sexual satisfaction using a range of different forms of FSM depicting children. We found no evidence that engaging with sexual fantasy and various forms of FSM was associated with variance in self-reported willingness to engage in sexual offences involving children, despite substantial numbers in our sample expressing a willingness to engage in these behaviours. Instead, we found that those who were more sexually satisfied reported a lower level of willingness to engage in such behaviours, while those who held offence-supportive beliefs reported a higher willingness. We urge researchers and clinicians to use our work as a springboard for further studies on the pursuit of sexual satisfaction, the addressing of sexual frustration. All of this should be conducted within the context of reducing potential risk, while encouraging a more evidence-informed social conversation about the importance of sexuality considerations in this area.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19419899.2026.2619511#d1e4039
Though I think that banning lolicon drawings would just make pedophiles go and consume actual child pornography, which is arguably worse.
Makes sense. As a clinical psychologist I am often frustrated by the lack of proper research done of pedophiles, I get it that is a very sensitive and disgusting matter for the population but we need data to identify and help this people before they commit crimes, just pretending they don’t exist and waiting for the crime to happen is not helping anyone.
There’s a lot of research being done about the president of the USA tho
They have an island-worth of resource to study!
I dont know if that will give you any usefull data though. His narcissism and dementia might make it hard to know what behaviours are due to pedophilia.
Though those symptoms might be related.
Obviously
Sadly there doesn’t seem to be any reputable studies in this field - probably because it’s super controversial to begin with.
On one hand you have people saying - rightfully so - that such media should be restricted, because even though some argue (without proof) that it reduces harm, it also enables the core behaviour of sexualising children to be socially acceptable because “oh it’s just a drawing”.
(mind you it’s important to distinguish a very similar argument from furries - furries are often claimed to be zoophiles, however an overwhelming majority of furries are against bestiality, and doesn’t even sexualise their characters, which are usually anthropic - human shaped with animal physical characteristics - and sapient, therefore able to consent. A child, regardless if they’re real or drawn, cannot consent).
On the other hand, some claim that it reduces harm by “disarming” paedos. Obviously those opposing then claim that no, it’s actually harmful, because just jerking off to drawings won’t be enough for most, and slippery slope fallacy ensue, they’ll be gone from jerking to drawings, to kidnapping and raping children.
Again the problem is we don’t have any data supporting either way. In my opinion, it could go either way, it heavily depends on the person, and without a thorough study, but that study wouldn’t be ethical to conduct because of the potential of endangering children one way or another…
And of course the moment one tries to debate for “on the other hand”, that person will be labelled a paedophile, rightfully so, as they’re literally campaigning for the legalisation of children’s sexualisation in their specific way… which, at the end of the day, is paedophilia.
I think help, because they would like the drawings more and more and the real deal less and less.
You see people who are obsessed with anime, be super attracted to anime characters and little to no attraction to real women.
Interesting take, but again, we need real empirical data wich unfortunately doesn’t exist on this subject.
And how would, everyone related to that is worried about their life…
I doubt anyone can effectively make studies on people without endagering them, recording them identifying them and as such making them extremely uncomfortable and scared shitless.
And even for lolicons its hard and illegal in some places including my country, the sexualization, lewdness as in many loli animes it is, not to mention loli hentai
Yes its true, but we as a society need to learn the distinction between a pedophile and a child abuser, they are often one and the same but sometimes not. Pedophiles are people who are mentally ill, child abusers are criminals. There are pedophiles who recognize their desires are monstrous and choose never to act upon them. I believe there is even a website to provide group community anonymous mental health help to this people, I think is called pedophiles with virtue if I am not mistaken.
I think its the same circular argument about guns in video games, does running around GTA shooting everyone give someone their “fix” or will it encourage them to go do it for real?
If the fake stuff gives people their “fix”, then so be it. Anyone that harms a real child can have their 2nd head publicly removed to discourage others. Not sure what to do if they don’t have that part, but a punishment like that will never happen so not gonna think to hard about it.
Is it not? The definition is the sexualization of a minor or prepubescent girl in anime/manga. Sounds like pedophilia to me.
especially in the context of an in-universe character saying it, yeah
It has a wider variety of usage in Japanese than “pedophile” does in English, so no, it’s not always the most accurate translation. For example, “lolicon” (ロリコン) is used self-referentially, sometimes as a joke and sometimes not, in Japan while “pedophile” is basically never used like this in English. It’s also not too uncommon to use it of another person as a relatively lighthearted jab in Japanese, when in English calling someone else a pedophile (or even the more casual pedo) is a grave accusation.
But isn’t it used about people who are into sexualized (cartoon) children?
Yes, and it’s also used about actual child predator pedophiles. It’s a word with multiple senses/connotations, and one of those senses corresponds closely with the English word “pedophile” while the others do not. That’s why “pedophile” is not always the correct translation for it – though whether it’s correct in this case I can’t say, as I haven’t watched the anime in question.
That is so weird to me that a society with much more Shame basis for stuff does not shame attraction to and relationships with minors.
On the other hand I’ve always wondered when is shame effective as a social motivator to prevent misdeeds, and when does it push people to hide their problems instead of seeking help and solutions?
Yeah, it is.
Hence it wouldn’t be “censorship” as the article seems to use the term. Though that doesn’t really apply at all because to “censor” it would be to not include the scene at all or rewrite it to say something else entirely. Saying “you like lolicon” or even just “you’re a pervert” might be considered euphemistic but it’s not censorship.
Well no. Pedophilia is the attraction to real children and lolicon is the attraction to illustrations of prepubertal girl like characters that doesn’t even need to be sexual. There is a big difference between these too.
The translation is also wrong because in Japanese there exist the loanword pedophilia and it was not used in the original so translating it as another existing word is pretty bad.
If you’re into these depictions because they’re depicted as children…
There is a big difference between these too.
🤣🤡
this isn’t some baudrillard level type of simulacra shit, it’s literally people using cartoons as analogs to their real attractions, so yes, they are pedos.
I’m confused, are you pro- or anti policing? 🤔
lol. anti cop. ha. good catch. forgot my parens!
Well, no, that’s not what it is. It’s young and young-looking characters, not “minor or prepubescent”.
Mind you, plenty lolicon stuff is extremely pedophilic, namely by sexualising prepubescent characters! But lots of it is adult women that just look young and are explicitly not children in any way.
It’s more complicated than “pedophilia”, though the overlap is… Let’s say… Conspicuous.
Edit: The character likely did mean to imply pedophilia there, by the way.
But lots of it is adult women that just look young and are explicitly not children in any way.
Often mocked with the “9000 year old vampire dragon who just happens to look like a young child”
If those anime fans could read they would be very upset
Look, there’s a lot to criticize anime fans about including media literacy and the aforementioned pedophilia. However if there’s something they famously care about it’s the words that they have to read to understand their shows, they can definitely read
Well, they’re not wrong…
True
Sankaku is funny for all the wrong reasons. I remember when Free! came out and they were absolutely seething that KyoAni was catering to women for once instead of them.
Lolicons are not really pedophiles.
Even with anime fans, you usually see them prefer anime characters increasingly the more they consome anime (or hentai)
I think the same applies here
Of course I predict that people will agree with me until 1 idiot pedophile who is an anime and lolicon fan actually does something to a real kid, and then everyone will generalize lolicons and say like “we knew it all along, all lolicons are pedophiles!!!”
You can see such generalizing cases and behavior everywhere.
“oh, I only jerk off to fictional underage children, not real ones! I’d never touch an actual child!”
yeah, fuck off paedo. get help. there’s plenty of psychotherapy options to curb these urges.
you need a reality check
Imagine calling anyone who slightly disagrees with you bad names
Why wait?
we knew it all along, all lolicons are pedophiles!!!
I think lolicon animes and … things related to that help everyone a lot, because they would like the drawings more and more and the real deal less and less.
You see people who are obsessed with anime, be super attracted to anime characters and little to no attraction to real women.
Now tell me thats not the case
EDIT: meant it would be better to be attracted to loli anime characters than to real kids
Help “everyone”??? Lol.
In what way would it help people to be more attracted to drawings than to real people? What’s wrong with being attracted to “women”. Women being by definition, adults.
I meant loli anime characters*
