/dis/ - Discussion

This is all pretty simple.
even if official explanation is diffrent, Attraction to any underage character is considered a crime by itself so it does not matter how old they are it is all about the fact that you like underage characters instead of mature women. the only reason why you are bot getting lynched is because there are some laws that prevent this just because of some side effect from other intentions.

also puberty is actually not underage. legally you can have sex with girls of age 16 (it is known as age of consent) or more at least on some countries, there is no need to wait for 18.

In the psychiatry pedophilia is attraction to the children below age of 13.

But in the moral terms this is actually not about underage characters but about characters that are subservient to you and do not have choice. as for example daughter cannot refuse her father or employee who dependents on that job cannot refuse boss.

>>9271

I want to put one thing very clear:
I am exclusively talking about the fictional
depiction of underage characters.
Not the real life thing.

You didn't really get what I meant with
puberty and underage.
While you are in puberty, you are below the legal
age of 18 and while in puberty you
condition/orient yourself sexually.
Therefore, my logical assumption would be, that
attraction towards the opposite sex is developed
during this period in time, where the opposite
sex itself is below legal age and therefore it
seems logical that the same attraction we
developed during that early phase of life
might persist into the future life.

smell, what I'm cooking?

>>9275
I exactly got it what you meant and I was precisely talking about fictional characters.
you asked
>>Clearly everything under the age of 18 is
>>considered illegal by LAW.
>>But what about PHYSIQUE?
and my reply is
In this situation, your attraction to underage fictional characters is a crime.

According to my observations, you develop a certain sexual attraction to the kind of role.
Appearance by itself is just a representation of the character which sets our expectations and their role.
So you cannot really develop an attraction to raw physique it will be always associated with some kind of character and some kind of role.

By that logic, I can tell your own character from your sexual preferences.
If by some reason you managed to develop an attraction to little girls even in your puberty it means that you either got some wrong idea about the role if a 16-year-old girl and see her as a woman or you are liking her as a girl that is inappropriate in principle regardless of your age. At that age, you should have developed an attraction to adult women where little girls are just temporary substitute at best.


Also should differentiate between omnisexuality where you are attracted to literally everything and pedophilia where you are only attracted to children and totally ignore grown-up women.

In my situation attraction to lolis is part of my omnisexuality and I like them not because of some sexual things but because I love that setting of "sex as a game". sex between adults is more like some kind of lust, prostitution, and generally, pretty Serious thing. Sex between children is a game. It has a totally different motivation and a different context.

Imagine is 2 grannies or serious businessman decided to climb a tree and piss down on the people giggling about that, it would look like some insanity but if children do same it is totally normal. As a child, you have absolute freedom to do anything without feeling awkward about that and you also can pretend to be dumb and clueless.

Another thing is pedophilia where you are attracted to children as an adult, with adult intentions.
Pedophiles will usually refer to children as cute and usually do not have any interest in any extreme abnormal things. They don't like slutty children. They seek innocence and purity.

Hmm… You're taking another 'route' than me.
But I appreciate that.

The reason behind this whole mind-game concerning
the depiction of Characters that are legally
under age (below 18) but above 15yr is an e-mail
I recieved yesterday.
This e-mail clearly represents some of the
'trends' I mentioned to observe within my
customer environment.
Usually I am not interested in that trend and
see it with scepticism.

But in that specific case and for the reason
I am on holiday (have time on my hands) I gave
that request a try and thought about it.

I developed an Idea and… to my surprise/shock.
I ACTUALLY liked it.
Not knowing If it's the sheer shock-value or the
truth my idea conveys is confusing.

It raises the question within myself on
where I should draw the line.

It's tricky.

Have to sleep over it.

——————————————–
Thank you for your Opinion.

>>9280
I think in this specific case, if you dont have that attraction, you are gifted an oppurtunity to avoid engaging in it, you could do so for your own mental health.

But thats a choice. I dont think you should feel any guilt over a curiosity, an interest, or a want. I dont think anyone should feel bad about any desire. A desire is just that, it can make you suffer, but you havent done anything wrong until youve hurt someone.

Its my opinion that attraction to minors is not wrong, only acting on that attraction. Its more over my opinion that art turns productive dedtructive desires. While it may not be healthy for the people who engage in it, pornography addicts or those fueling fantasy until they become dangerous, it is healthy as an outlet for the artist. You have to consider how much of your responsibility you think other peoples actions are.

Lastly: if we draw a line between fantasy children and fantasy adults, we are deciding art which is amoral in real life also has similar moral consequences as art. In that case, guro, rape, enslavement, these are all wrongs which should also not be allowed. I dont think this is a slippery slope, I cannot see the logical difference between a moral stance against pedophilic art (pedophilic acts are wrong in real life and children should not be sexualized) and guro or rape (guro and rape are wrong in real life and violence should not be sexualized)

There is a slight difference where in the nature of the character being objectified is the significant factor in pedophilia, rather than the nature of the actions taken against the character in guro, but Im not sure this changes my opinion that pedophilia and guro are similar enough in their amorality that if one should be extinguished, both should.

The key difference really being that pedophilia is troubling to see and think about for people, but theyre used to horror movies. Id describe seeing something that gives one pedophilic vibes as a full, physical rejection of those works. It's repulsive to people. I think thats more or less the reason for the shakey legal status of the artwork.

Basically, i dont care what happens in fantasy at all. I dont think there should be any limits to what someone day dreams about as long as theyre an alright person. I dont think any if the responsibility for the state of a culture or the actions of a person falls on the shoulders of artists expressing their desires or being paid to express others wants. And I think a drawing of a little girl is an object and can be treated as such. You can make it a sex craving little succubus that lures men with shaking hips and judgemental smirks. The problem comes when you start to think similar things about actual children.

If you think other peoples sexuality just happens to serve your fantasy, or you consider your own lust and indulging in it is literally more important than the well being of another person… Ive heard it all by now. People that think a little abuse builds character, that theyre teaching, that a child is an object belonging to their parents, that life is in general meaningless so one more being ruined is meaningless to… a lot of people arent even sexual about it, but just struggling for power over someone else because of their own problems.

These sorts of people are all dangerous, and would be better of having their brains donated to research. I think its okay to seperate ourselves, as artists, writers and community participants, from the types of people who would drown themselves in lust and insecurity and convince themselves its ok to hurt people if given the oppurtunity. We arent very much like thay if were considering the morals at all.

Keep thinking, keep second guessing. For me, there is no limit in art. For me, the line is drawn at justifying hurting inmocent, dependent people.

>>9282
>>Lastly: if we draw a line between fantasy children and fantasy adults, we are deciding art which is amoral in real life also has similar moral consequences as art. In that case, guro, rape, enslavement, these are all wrongs which should also not be allowed. I dont think this is a slippery slope, I cannot see the logical difference between a moral stance against pedophilic art (pedophilic acts are wrong in real life and children should not be sexualized) and guro or rape (guro and rape are wrong in real life and violence should not be sexualized)


The actual issue here is not some kind of slippery slope but the fact that you are changing moral beliefs. In essence, this is plain blasphemy, because with your art you are questioning certain dogmas.
Your idea that "in real life and children should not be sexualized" is nothing more than dogma which has no proof. you just believe it, because you were brainwashed with that idea by the society which did that to achieve certain results.
I can bet that your attitude towards fiction will also greatly affect your real life attitude.
If you were properly brainwashed seeing child porn must cause you the visceral reaction of hate and disgust. It must not come from your logical reasoning but from your emotions.
If you like fictional underage characters your attitude towards real porn will be also pretty tame, you may think yes this is wrong but "huh? my dick got hard for some reason."



Same is also valid for other acts like rape, because if in your art you will portray rape as something evil then yes society will support you but if you present it as something good you will likely get some outrage because you are reprogramming people's minds. (feminists are frequently complaining about that)
Imagine if someone posts school shooting video on the internet, this is kinda all fine. But now let's add this music to that video https://youtu.be/x2ldhxSy7tg?t=32.
and you will have outrage of haters.


Pedophilia is far more dangerous because it is relatively self-evident why murdering people is wrong, but pedophilia does not really hurt anyone or even provides big benefits in some cases. (I met one person on the internet who actually told me that all his (or her?) success was the result of some pedophile who took care of her until she grew up)

If by some miracle it was declared that child porn is OK as long as it does not involve real children within 5 or 10 years everyone will change their minds that it is totally fine even if it is real.

Ok… had some rest.
Was a little bit over due.

If I analyze my specific situation a bit more
rationally, the major problem was that several
ideas clashed together into one big picture.
I will go and dissect which aspects of given
'big picture' were the ones that fascinated
me and try to reproduce the same fascination
under a different context.
Explore the meta of the sensation so to speak.
————————————————Regarding age:

I agree with onix in the point, shifting
the focus back to depiction of underage
characters, It really is the ROLE the character
is presenting and not the PHYSIQUE alone.

EXAMPLE:
The role a small child, let's say 5-14yrs,
represents (innocent, purely naive, no/limited
sexual consciousness, dependend etc.) is
VERY different from the role a 16-19yr teenie
represents.
The first role (child) is a big NO-GO for me,
not because of the law or the influence of
society but because it simply does not ring
my bell.
For me, personally this role is boring, monotone
and lame.
Maybe the reason I'm not big into cutsie-manga.
The characters are representing a similar role.

Puberty changes us.
During a very short period of time, there is
a hard-shift in character, behaviour, the role
that the very same person as just a few month
before represents.
Some teenies (16-`19yr) experience an
'outburst', overly sexualizing themselves,
curiosity, the drive for the attention of
the opposite sex, adventurousness and some
form of unpredictable crazyness, leading to
decisions that… … well fuck logic and reason.
I see that role as disgusting and sexy at the
same time.
For me, that mixture is a big turn-on.

Yes, onix, you are right.
It is not physique,
it is the Role.
Age under this perspective is only a logical
epiphenomenon, due to human biology.
———————————————-

Regarding Art:

I am absolutely on Reg's side on that one.
His opinions about art are the most honest,
reasonable and well-formed I have heard for
a long time.

Fiction and Reality are two distinct fields.
As a human being it is our job to draw and
cross
the line in between those two fields,
defining ourselves in the process.

The art's job is, in my opinion, to delight
us with the emotions, sensations, reality
denies us.
Both, the delight and the deny are right and
necessary.

Fiction may present us with great, bright
visions about travelling among the stars,
challenging our fears or evolving ourselves.
Crossing that line, making fiction become
reality in this case might be the best
thing we can do.

Fiction may present us with dark, horrible,
and lustful fantasies.
Crossing that line, might be the worst thing
we, as humans can do.

Our decisions about crossing and not crossing
define us.
———————————————
Regarding Morals in art:

TO HELL WITH THEM.
———————————————
Thank you both.
Honestly.

>>9284
>If by some miracle it was declared that child porn is OK as long as it does not involve real children within 5 or 10 years everyone will change their minds that it is totally fine even if it is real.

Doubtful. Child porn has only intrinsic value and no instrumental value, which means that for people who do not see the intrinsic value there is no hope of ever explaining it. With instrumental value one can have an answer for why it is good, since it yields some desired outcome, but if anyone asks why child porn is good, there can be no answer. One either sees it as good or not, and the vast majority of people don't see it.

That means there is nothing on the positive side to balance the scales against the negative side of child porn with real children. Children are dependent and helpless, so children can be easily pressured into performing in porn. We may not be able to remember what it was like to be a child, but anyone can appreciate how nightmarish it would be to be coerced into performing in porn against our will, so we want to protect children from that. Even in the case where a child is fully willing, that's bound to be seen as part of the foolishness of youth. Children are not mature enough to make carefully considered decisions, so people want to protect them from making mistakes.

In order for real child porn to be seen as fine, it would need to establish a positive value to outweigh the negative. For example, perhaps the children could be lavishly paid, so participating in a little child porn sets a child up for college. On top of that it would be best to mitigate the negatives by making child porn into a well-established industry with a very powerful union to keep the children protected in every way possible. No one ever trusts shady underground operations.

>>9286
If you develop that topic further, then keep, in mind that soft core child porn is a pretty mainstream thing there are plenty of children shows that run on TV. who is practically softcore porn so all that matters here is how far you can push that.


On the other hand, child porn can be compared to other forms of child exploitation, as for example, the most common one is sports competitions cheerleader clubs and any other kind of events where children are used as some kind of freaks to amuse adults and make money. But for some reason, that kind of child exploitation (which is also very damaging to children) is a pretty normal thing.

So if instead of sending your daughter to cheerleader club where she will likely be crippled for life you rather dress her in sexy bikini and make her shake her but on camera or jerk off big dicks, that may be preferable in terms of her future well being.

>>Even in the case where a child is fully willing, that's bound to be seen as part of the foolishness of youth. Children are not mature enough to make carefully considered decisions, so people want to protect them from making mistakes.


This is actually the main issue here, as to why it should be considered foolish and why sex is considered some important decision? pregnancy is no longer an issue today.
If we treat sex just as a fun game with pleasant ending it is no different from any other game.

If children can play basketball on TV, why they cant, for example, compete in who will make more guys cum is a row? this is in fact way safer and more pleasant than basketball where you are in the grave danger all the time.

Obviously, if you make child porn OK there will be no longer any adult entertainment or age verification anymore as well. Porn will become just like any other form of entertainment and it will be included even in the children's cartoons. It would be fun to see Tom and Jerry version where Jerry cuts Tom's dick and stuff it in his butt LOL
And that is going to be pretty extreme social change. Sex itself may be desexualized.

But the reason why it is still considered foolish and wrong is that society does not want to turn sex into the game. It wants to maintain sex as a form of male validation and expression of love.

>>9287
There are a few key issues.

For one, I want to say that the path between our society and one in which child pornography is legal probably doesn't exist. There's just not a way to broach the conversation that's comfortable enough for people, people have a desire to protect their own kids from the very idea of it.

Second, safety is probably not possible to maintain for children in a world with legal child porn. Children are so impressionable and most people so ill informed about maintaining the sexual well being of a child that probably nothing can be produced that doesn't have a great deal of inherent emotional and physical risk. Weather the benefit from that risk will outweigh the good… hmmm…

In child pornography the key component of the product would be the child and their body, so it's reasonable to say that you risk an industry which is predatory towards innocent children, with various studios doing whatever is within their ability to attain "actors" before they leave some age window, and then discarding the actors after that time has passed. The studios would do well, but the childrens money would have to be left with parents, and that incentivizes parents to entrap children in a career which is easy money regardless of talent level or will.

There would be no way to discern consent, manipulation, or force when speaking to a child brainwashed, gas lit, or simply asked to lie. There would also be no way to ensure the well being of a child that leaves a studio.

The legal exchange of money relating to products centered around children– not a child, like a child actor or a basketball star, but opening up a new industry centered on, in general, children, is rough. You start seeing incentive to engage in things like kidnapping, child trafficking, imagine children being legally taken from orphanages by studios only to be returned after leaving a beneficial age group. I don't believe an agency or union can protect against all these problems…

Sorry I'm rambling, I'm only just thinking this all out for the first time. But I think I can compress it down to a few sentences:

The problem with child porn isn't the literal product itself, it's the life of the child post product first, and second, the incentives monetizing children creates.

You say children are made to play basketball and do cheerleading, and you talk about the danger of those industries, and say child porn would be less dangerous. Well I think for one you make a mistake about the effects of porn on someones personal safety– being seen as and used as an object presents an emotional danger that's difficult to mitigate and a literal danger because of stalkers, entitled and abusive fans, abuse from owners, etc.

Second if child porn and children playing basketball present the same amount of danger, I'd say that instead of advocating for child porn I'd be against child basketball and cheerleading stars. All in all, child porn probably can't be an industry which is largely empathetic towards children.

Children as CHEERLEADERS??
In RL??
This MUST be a joke.

I always thought that cheerleaders
are AT LEAST college-grade material.

If I would see a little girl, in RL,
dressed as a cheerleader, dancing like
a cheerleader… I would really like to
have a talk with her parents.

Keep in mind I am not talking about whether we should legalize it, bit just discussing reasons why it is illegal.



>>Children are so impressionable and most people so ill informed about maintaining the sexual well being of a child that probably nothing can be produced that doesn't have a great deal of inherent emotional and physical risk. Weather the benefit from that risk will outweigh the good… hmmm…


Here you are merely presenting a dogma: it is wrong because it is wrong. But can anyone explain why sex is any different from other types of activity? This is the main issue here.

>>9288
>Second if child porn and children playing basketball present the same amount of danger, I'd say that instead of advocating for child porn I'd be against child basketball and cheerleading stars. All in all, child porn probably can't be an industry which is largely empathetic towards children.


The reason I mentioned that is not as an argument for legalizing something bu to explain the basic principle.
Our society has no problems with exploiting children and causing then serious physical and emotional damage.

I compare the sex industry with the sports industry, where the sports industry has very detrimental effects on the health of its participants up to the severely reduced lifespan. People are literally selling their bodies. But unlike sex industry, it is considered highly respectable.

Also speaking about child actors in general, typically they all end their lives very badly. Most of them end their carriers with a drug overdose, and the rest are left all forgotten working in some low-quality jobs.
The entertainment industry is extremely brutal for everyone. I would say it is way more brutal than porns simply because porn does not bring that much of money so there is way less pressure.

We can also mention child gymnastic, which is known to cause anorexia because coaches are pressuring children to stay on a strict diet and lose weight.

From this fact, we can make an obvious conclusion that society does not give a shit about well being of the safety of anyone as it claims to do. Because if that was an issue here, all those other forms of exploitation would be forbidden as well. But they are encouraged and even funded by the government.

So the argument about exploitation and safety does not apply here.

>>9289
No it is not a joke
Cheerleaders start their carriers pretty early in life.
take this as example
https://detroitpal.org/programs/sports/cheer/
they start from 5 years

and here
https://www.kidsfirsttoo.com/programs/storm-cheerleading
they start from 4 years.

Those girls barely can speak, and they are already breaking their bones LOL

>>9290

Some valid points have been presented here,
I have to admit.
Especially entertainment and sports,
including dancing are very tough industries.

I doubt that the amount of abuse and
physical/psychical damage a child is
endangered to sustain is as potential as
CP might cause.
But I believe it is not that far away
from that.

>>9291
GOD DAMN…
I saw it.
I understand, that you have to start sports
at a young age If you want to become a
professional, especially because the
time-span where you can actively *be*
and earn professional is limited.

I understand that children need and
enjoy physical education/sports.

I started muay thai at the age of 6.
I really get the point,

BUT CHEERLEADING??
This is such an overly sexualized field
and clearly meant to be sexy/provocative
in the first place.

What's next? POOL-DANCING???
Welcome to 'Merica.

>>9292
Oh no, cheer leading is pretty innocent in terms of sexualization. It just just causes physical and emotional damage because cheerleaders are most abused people of all entertainment industry. If sports players at least get some insurance and medical care cheerleaders are just thrown away like trash if they get injured during their performances and they do not even get paid.


If you want to see real sexualization check this
https://youtu.be/l5H0lZVA4Gg?t=153

Parents turned her into 2 year old superslut and she is not very pleased.
But hey, be careful or your dick may get hard when you see her on the stage because this is not an innocent toddler anymore this is 2 years old hooker.

of course, there is much more.
https://youtu.be/Yxjxwk1Wh-w?t=289

Of course we have preteen pole dancing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFFiFuQCNIA

and even something even better
https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/drag-kids-are-slaying-runway-one-fierce-look-time-n918211
or 11 year boy striptease
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFFiFuQCNIA
I wonder if sexualization can go any further than that.

>>9294
Well that was sad.. and I'm a morbid guy.

>>9294
holy shit…

We should really return to slaughtering
innocent ppl. …
I realize, that I am not tough enough for
this topic.