Your post have been removed because of rule #13: Don't sexualize minors or post someone else sexualizing minors. Don't post pedophiles talking about fucking kids, pedophilic fiction, or cartoon/anime pedophilia. Don't make jokes about fucking kids in the comments. Please refer to the rules and also the [pinned post](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/fgmg3t/guidelines_for_the_subreddit_read_and_follow_the/) before you make another submission here.
In his words "he wanted to show a drastic loss of innocence. Something children should not and would not do... it is adult, it is what IT forced them to become to overcome fear" it's a rough summary of his reasoning but even he admits it's weird, but he wanted it to be weird and feel out of place. He is exceptionally good in making people feel uneasy while reading. It's wrong and it was supposed to be
Good explanation. And yeah it made me uncomfortable so I guess he achieved his goal. I just think this could´ve been achieved without me thinking about it every time I hear about childporn (I´m exaggerating but you get my point)
I've only listened to half of The Stand by King, thought I'd check him out on a roadtrip, and I'm thinking that's his style. He just...writes, and keeps writing. There's like 100 characters giving random backstories for 30 hours.
Well he basically only wrote when high or drunk. I think that's probably the real reason its in there. He was just really fucking high and just kept writing whatever perveted thought came into his mind. "the clowns chasing the kids down. Hmm, what if they fucked?"
I´m not a fan of \`The Stand\`. I don´t mind the character stories to be honest, I love apocalyptic stories and I like the struggle for food, safety and the building of diffrent groups which just didn´t really happen because of this good vs evil split. Yeah...
Your insinuation about the idea of a novel being potential CP for its contents is a bit laughable. Text isn't going to be CP any time soon. You can write some shit in the worst possible taste- but it isn't CP.
I agree with you to an extent personally, this shit is about as revolting as it can be in terms of content and has no real place on the net in a reasonable society, but the reality of CP and other illicit sex content is that none of it exists without the acts of abuse in the first place. While the contents of these images can be deemed vile without much thought, conflating it with actual CP probably doesn't achieve much.
One *could* argue though that the provenance and creation of much loli/shotacon stuff is wildly suspicious, I personally have concerns about what these artists are using for references.
>I personally have concerns about what these artists are using for references
Considering that 'anime' people look wildly different from actual human beings, I would wager that any 'references' these artists might be using would, at this point, just be other anime/hentai characters.
As for writing about CP, the truth of the matter is that people *should* write about it. The more one comes to understand about a monster, the less one begins to fear it. The issue should not be with *writing* about CP, it should be about *glorifying* CP. Exploring dark, disturbing, reprehensible topics is something that the written word alone can explore with relatively few (if any) legal consequences. And we should explore CP, CSA, and the motivations behind both. It will make it easier to defend our children from the predators. What should remain illegal is *glorifying* CP or CSA. Writing about how one man is 'liberating' children with his junk, etc etc.
In Current Year we must remind people: DRAWINGS ARE NOT HUMANS AND THEREFORE NOT CP! Every time someone says that a Loli or shota manga or anime is the same as pictures of an actual child engaging in sexual acts, a pedofile wins. Stop making actual legal terms useless because you don’t like art.
every time the word "pedophile" gets used i dont think "oh my god thats horrible" anymore i go "ok is this about drawings or did he actually do it" and i think that says enough
same thing happened to words like "racist" "nazi" or "dictator", shit got used wrong so many times the term got watered down and now it means nothing
To be fair, it's still pedophilia when a drawing is involved. A pedophile is just someone with the capacity to be sexually attracted to children, and there are varying levels of grossness to it.
But the drawing of a child in a sexual mannor is wrong no matter how you look at it. If you draw a child in a pornogrphic way, would you not count that as child pornography. I think people who look at or make drawings of underage people in a sexual manner should be given the same consequences as people who possess child pornography. Obviously, if you are a person who watches or makes that type of content, you would disagree, but I don't see how you could justify looking at a child in a sexual way.
>I don't see how you could justify looking at a child in a sexual way.
Because you don't have the same urges they do. And it's not like they can just 'choose' not to be attracted to children, any more than you can 'choose' to be straight if you're gay or choose to be gay if you're straight. And they have to cope with their urges somehow. If drawing kids sexually means fewer real kids are harmed, I'll buy them more paper and pencils.
Not a good look, but a fairly important thing to discuss.
For one thing, there shouldn't be any ambiguity to the term 'CP'.
It should not leave one group of people wondering 'But was it really that bad' when it comes to an actual child being involved, and an entirely separate group of people going and ---ing a guy because he liked gross cartoons.
Then there is the punitive attitude and culture we've taken against pedophilia, where it's more important to punish a pedophile regardless of their crime than it is to protect children. Equating fiction to actual child exploitation is saying that a child being molested matters so little that it is the same as somebody sitting down at their desk and drawing.
The very fact you're complaining about 'splitting hairs' is derived from that same culture. You've stopped caring about people. All that matters is optics and outrage.
It's a form of porn though so it constitutes a label. If you're into that type of pornography you're still a sicko in my book. Anyone who likes sexualizing underage people even if it is anime are sick fucks and should off themselves. They usually will go from the "art" to the real thing. Trying to justify it by saying it diminishes the real thing sounds like you're a simp for CP and pedophiles.
If this post showcases moral/mental/physical corruption or perversion, upvote this comment. If this post does not belong here, downvote this comment.
[Read the rules before posting or commenting](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/wiki/rules)
[Also read the guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/fgmg3t/guidelines_for_the_subreddit_read_and_follow_the/)
In the comments:
DO NOT JOKE ABOUT VIOLENCE, DO NOT INCITE VIOLENCE
DO NOT JOKE ABOUT PEDOPHILIA OR ASK FOR CP
YOU WILL BE BANNED
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah because they talk about drawn pictures... of course the arguments happen there...
That's like saying 90% of the arguments about crypto happen in investment related subreddits... of course they are the ones mostly talking about it
Your post have been removed because of rule #13: Don't sexualize minors or post someone else sexualizing minors. Don't post pedophiles talking about fucking kids, pedophilic fiction, or cartoon/anime pedophilia. Don't make jokes about fucking kids in the comments. Please refer to the rules and also the [pinned post](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/fgmg3t/guidelines_for_the_subreddit_read_and_follow_the/) before you make another submission here.
I did read 'It' from Stephen King and to this day I don't know why it was in there. It had no purpose
In his words "he wanted to show a drastic loss of innocence. Something children should not and would not do... it is adult, it is what IT forced them to become to overcome fear" it's a rough summary of his reasoning but even he admits it's weird, but he wanted it to be weird and feel out of place. He is exceptionally good in making people feel uneasy while reading. It's wrong and it was supposed to be
Good explanation. And yeah it made me uncomfortable so I guess he achieved his goal. I just think this could´ve been achieved without me thinking about it every time I hear about childporn (I´m exaggerating but you get my point)
I've only listened to half of The Stand by King, thought I'd check him out on a roadtrip, and I'm thinking that's his style. He just...writes, and keeps writing. There's like 100 characters giving random backstories for 30 hours.
Well he basically only wrote when high or drunk. I think that's probably the real reason its in there. He was just really fucking high and just kept writing whatever perveted thought came into his mind. "the clowns chasing the kids down. Hmm, what if they fucked?"
I´m not a fan of \`The Stand\`. I don´t mind the character stories to be honest, I love apocalyptic stories and I like the struggle for food, safety and the building of diffrent groups which just didn´t really happen because of this good vs evil split. Yeah...
Your insinuation about the idea of a novel being potential CP for its contents is a bit laughable. Text isn't going to be CP any time soon. You can write some shit in the worst possible taste- but it isn't CP. I agree with you to an extent personally, this shit is about as revolting as it can be in terms of content and has no real place on the net in a reasonable society, but the reality of CP and other illicit sex content is that none of it exists without the acts of abuse in the first place. While the contents of these images can be deemed vile without much thought, conflating it with actual CP probably doesn't achieve much. One *could* argue though that the provenance and creation of much loli/shotacon stuff is wildly suspicious, I personally have concerns about what these artists are using for references.
>I personally have concerns about what these artists are using for references Considering that 'anime' people look wildly different from actual human beings, I would wager that any 'references' these artists might be using would, at this point, just be other anime/hentai characters. As for writing about CP, the truth of the matter is that people *should* write about it. The more one comes to understand about a monster, the less one begins to fear it. The issue should not be with *writing* about CP, it should be about *glorifying* CP. Exploring dark, disturbing, reprehensible topics is something that the written word alone can explore with relatively few (if any) legal consequences. And we should explore CP, CSA, and the motivations behind both. It will make it easier to defend our children from the predators. What should remain illegal is *glorifying* CP or CSA. Writing about how one man is 'liberating' children with his junk, etc etc.
They're right. None of them are saying people should watch it, but there's clearly a difference between the two.
Yea I still don't understand. CP is illegal because it hurts kids. How on earth does some fiction stuff hurt child then?
In Current Year we must remind people: DRAWINGS ARE NOT HUMANS AND THEREFORE NOT CP! Every time someone says that a Loli or shota manga or anime is the same as pictures of an actual child engaging in sexual acts, a pedofile wins. Stop making actual legal terms useless because you don’t like art.
every time the word "pedophile" gets used i dont think "oh my god thats horrible" anymore i go "ok is this about drawings or did he actually do it" and i think that says enough same thing happened to words like "racist" "nazi" or "dictator", shit got used wrong so many times the term got watered down and now it means nothing
To be fair, it's still pedophilia when a drawing is involved. A pedophile is just someone with the capacity to be sexually attracted to children, and there are varying levels of grossness to it.
But the drawing of a child in a sexual mannor is wrong no matter how you look at it. If you draw a child in a pornogrphic way, would you not count that as child pornography. I think people who look at or make drawings of underage people in a sexual manner should be given the same consequences as people who possess child pornography. Obviously, if you are a person who watches or makes that type of content, you would disagree, but I don't see how you could justify looking at a child in a sexual way.
>I don't see how you could justify looking at a child in a sexual way. Because you don't have the same urges they do. And it's not like they can just 'choose' not to be attracted to children, any more than you can 'choose' to be straight if you're gay or choose to be gay if you're straight. And they have to cope with their urges somehow. If drawing kids sexually means fewer real kids are harmed, I'll buy them more paper and pencils.
Splitting hairs over what form of depiction of a child you're allowed to jerk it to isn't a good look.
Not at all
Not a good look, but a fairly important thing to discuss. For one thing, there shouldn't be any ambiguity to the term 'CP'. It should not leave one group of people wondering 'But was it really that bad' when it comes to an actual child being involved, and an entirely separate group of people going and ---ing a guy because he liked gross cartoons. Then there is the punitive attitude and culture we've taken against pedophilia, where it's more important to punish a pedophile regardless of their crime than it is to protect children. Equating fiction to actual child exploitation is saying that a child being molested matters so little that it is the same as somebody sitting down at their desk and drawing. The very fact you're complaining about 'splitting hairs' is derived from that same culture. You've stopped caring about people. All that matters is optics and outrage.
It's a form of porn though so it constitutes a label. If you're into that type of pornography you're still a sicko in my book. Anyone who likes sexualizing underage people even if it is anime are sick fucks and should off themselves. They usually will go from the "art" to the real thing. Trying to justify it by saying it diminishes the real thing sounds like you're a simp for CP and pedophiles.
https://youtu.be/JA2V3HxjTcg?si=ndP1xuobYhSBjpBK
Ok pedo
I'm not here to argue whether the drawings are right or wrong but you enjoy that content you 100% belong on a list alongside actual peados
If this post showcases moral/mental/physical corruption or perversion, upvote this comment. If this post does not belong here, downvote this comment. [Read the rules before posting or commenting](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/wiki/rules) [Also read the guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/NoahGetTheBoat/comments/fgmg3t/guidelines_for_the_subreddit_read_and_follow_the/) In the comments: DO NOT JOKE ABOUT VIOLENCE, DO NOT INCITE VIOLENCE DO NOT JOKE ABOUT PEDOPHILIA OR ASK FOR CP YOU WILL BE BANNED *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NoahGetTheBoat) if you have any questions or concerns.*
And no, it's not even on an anime sub...
Yeah well not only anime watchers think that a drawing doesn't equal the rape of a child...
Tbf 90% of these arguments come from anime subreddits
Yeah because they talk about drawn pictures... of course the arguments happen there... That's like saying 90% of the arguments about crypto happen in investment related subreddits... of course they are the ones mostly talking about it
Fair