Hello, English major here doing research on anti censorship. You can feel uncomfortable with the content of this story. You're supposed to! But we shouldn't ban media based off of morals because its a slipper slope. It can lead to LGBT+ media getting banned because its against someone else's morals. We've seen this decline before with conservatism with Nazis and how they censored based on blasphemy and Obscenity. Which are all subjective. Besides proof that taboo fiction is used as therapeutic, just because it is romanticizing in fiction does not mean it is being endorsed. I beg you to read the material itself and try to find other aspects that could be the "appeal" of such stories. It's more than just "oh i like kids".
Yes, it is about shota and lolicon. Point is that it is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable. And that the content can have deeper themes and meanings beyond surface level content. I've read several different manga and taboo novels on these topics and the tone and other story elements vary widely on how the tackle such subject manner. For example, My Dark Vanessa is a good read but can be graphic. But most importantly we shouldn't censor media based on morality since that differs from person to person. If someone think gay love stories are obscene and pornographic then they'll censor that too. Laws are based off of real life harm on real people. Cartoon drawings don't exploit children but AI and Photoshop can. If you're worried it'll cause someone to want to hurt a person then there's no real way to measure that, its just speculation.
Yes, it is about shota and lolicon. Point is that it is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable. And that the content can have deeper themes and meanings beyond surface level content. I've read several differen... Allan_beez
there is no deeper meaning to this as far as I can tell. it’s a “romance” and one of the love interests is a child. what sort of meaning do you derive from that? what exactly is the appeal of this that cannot be found in nonpedophilic love stories? this isn’t some meta commentary on the state of society. it’s just shota lol
there is no deeper meaning to this as far as I can tell. it’s a “romance” and one of the love interests is a child. what sort of meaning do you derive from that? what exactly is the appeal of this that ca... lilithespark
Shota Oni is still an on going story so we can't see the story as a whole yet and all of themes that could be implemented. Furthermore just because the characters expirence romantic and sexual attraction to each other does not mean the story itself is a romance. It is packaged that way. Think Romeo and Juliet, a story often mistaken as a romance.
Pay attention to the characters dynamics more. Both characters are going through changes and growing up at different paces. This also lead to miscommunication because through each character we are learning their perspective on growing up and what that means to them. They obviously display trust in one another but a lot of the pressure and responsibility fall on the older of the two. Boundaries are not talked about explicitly but is a constant struggle between the two as well.
This isn't the best example because the story isn't finished but one lolicon i read where the mc is a man that can transform into a loli sort of touches on the concept of "male loneliness" by through how he was socialized and treated as a man versus and a little girl. It also felt like it had gender/ body horror element making me feel like mc may have had gender identity issues and wanted to experience girlhood.
Theres also another one of a teacher and each student had a variety of mental health issues or tough lives at home that can be hinted at through their behaviors. Which would be hard to tackle as a male teacher with multiple troubles students with needs. And yes these stories are definitely not serious 100% of the time. You get funny, awkward moments slipped in with fan service which is ever prevalent in anime as a whole.
Shota Oni is still an on going story so we can't see the story as a whole yet and all of themes that could be implemented. Furthermore just because the characters expirence romantic and sexual attraction to eac... Allan_beez
You provide good examples of such stories that explain your point, and I understand that! Often stories will have hidden themes, but what I’m saying is this story isn’t special. Plenty of other age gap romance explore the struggles of two love interests going through different stages of life without including grooming. So I ask again, what makes THIS story unique in its underlying messages? Not some other story you’ve read.
One of the main conflicts of this story is how the two leads grapple with their romantic feelings for the other, so I personally say this is a romance. This story is ongoing and it may have potential (?), but judging from the author, I think this only serves to satisfy their own desires for certain tropes.
At its core, fiction is mainly meant to be entertainment (that I agree with), but I have yet to see this story even breach the deeper themes you mention.
Conflating shotacon with LGBT media is definitely a take Cosmic Gaything
Im not saying that its the same thing. But when it comes to media censorship and banning stuff based off of morality conservative Christians have conflated them as the same thing. Saying gay books dont belong in schools because its "grooming kids" and calling gay people pedos.
Thats why morality should not being making laws, they are subjective.
Yes, it is about shota and lolicon. Point is that it is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable. And that the content can have deeper themes and meanings beyond surface level content. I've read several differen... Allan_beez
yes we shouldn't censor fiction (and its not where i live), and yes sometimes fiction with taboo or uncomfortable or graphic themes have a deeper meaning, but most of the time thats not the case.
shota and loli are a niche aimed at people who enjoy that content, so the goal isnt to make the reader feel uncomfortable, its not about some greater social message, it is generally frowned upon because its about the sex appeal.
Garth Ennis for example kind of threads the line between having a deeper message and just straight up fucked up shit for the sake of it, but i like his work because i find it intriguing.
its a necessary freedom, but it also creates a lot of space for degeneracy, a double edged sword if you will.
Taboo fiction can exist without needing a deeper meaning or without artistic value. Art can exist just to be gross, disturbing, and ugly. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or shouldn't be enjoyed.
Some people read this stuff for catharsis, psychological relief. And that should be good enough of a reason to be enjoyed.
I am sure that some people do read this for the sex appeal but it is harmful to generalize a whole audience/ fandom over a piece of media based on a small percentage of bad apples. It's like saying all furries are zoophiles. When it is known that not everyone who likes furry NSFW want to harm animals.
For me I like to project onto the shota or victim. I like to be seen as cute and I enjoy it when the older tries to kind and caring to the younger one, even if they are still harming them. Because its fiction and I can engage with the media at will from a safe distance. At any time i can clase the book or tab unlike in real life. That's catharsis. That's why psychiatrists suggest using art as treatment for trauma.
I am 23 and I hookup with men older than me, 33-52. But I'm a grown, consenting adult. I can voice discomfort with a partner and protect myself. No real minors are hurt.
I find the term "degeneracy" used by religion. Typically to control people more than just to be a good person. To someone else YOU would be the generate for consuming porn at all. Yaoi, straight shoji, etc. Because degeneracy is subjective.
Taboo fiction can exist without needing a deeper meaning or without artistic value. Art can exist just to be gross, disturbing, and ugly. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or shouldn't be enjoyed. Some peopl... Allan_beez
1. sounds more like youre going for a think peace than research which is fine in itself, but im just confused lol. are you doing actual research or are you just trying to justify why you like shota/loli? what is your goal here? taboo fiction DOES exist without a deeper meaning, that was my point because you made it sound like there usually is meaning. but i would argue that art always has artistic value even if its just to be gross.
idc about anyones reason for why they consume and enjoy any fiction, you are free to make your own decisions, if it effects your real life than its problematic.
however, unless you can bring research that proves otherwise, i find it hard to believe that the loli/shota consumers who enjoy it for the sex appeal are the minority, the genre is not mainly based on a phycological relief appeal as far as im aware
Taboo fiction can exist without needing a deeper meaning or without artistic value. Art can exist just to be gross, disturbing, and ugly. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or shouldn't be enjoyed. Some peopl... Allan_beez
and yeah everything is subjective, but for example you can analyze degeneracy of a porn addict through objective relativism, not that i feel like getting into a philosophical discussion rn. (and im assuming you would say the same about the term depravity)
also media influences the way we think and perceive even if its just subconsciously which i think is something to consider if you are doing any sociological research, but ultimately thats another conversation.
Taboo fiction can exist without needing a deeper meaning or without artistic value. Art can exist just to be gross, disturbing, and ugly. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or shouldn't be enjoyed. Some peopl... Allan_beez
and for your furry comparison- anthropomorphic characters have been in media for ages, the furry community is an extension of that in the form of self expression. zoophilia is fundamentally different in intention. its the nsfw art that stereotyped and associated furrys with sex/porn to begin with- but the difference between zoophilia and anthropomorphism is still very obvious.
They aren't the same but yall gotta realize that censorship NEVER stops at fictionConservatives literally see us as dangerous predators, it WILL affect the queer community and other marginalized groups seen as ... Beyond
I don't think shotacon should be conflated with queer media precisely BECAUSE doing so is equating normal, healthy relationships with inherently predatory ones. I am against censorship regardless but that doesn't mean we should be grouping pedophilic media into the same category as queer media just because they are both being targeted. Why not bring up zoophilic media instead? Snuff? Gore? Why are we choosing to argue specifically about QUEER media in the context of pedophilic media as if they have anything to do with each other? It is just one type of media and I'm not saying shotacon should be censored (I'm not saying it shouldn't either, such as when the drawings are tracings of actual children's bodies, but that's another story), I'm just saying that it's weird to then bring up queer media in the context of pedophilic media when they have nothing to do with each other. Makes it come across as if they do have a link, which is very dangerous. Shotacon is about inherently predatory relationships between adults and children. It has nothing to do with relationships between two adults who just happen to be the same sex. Do you agree that we shouldn't censor ANY type of media? If so, talk about media in general rather than singling out queer media.
I don't think shotacon should be conflated with queer media precisely BECAUSE doing so is equating normal, healthy relationships with inherently predatory ones. I am against censorship regardless but that doesn... Cosmic Gaything
Nobody is singling out queer media did u read my reply
No media should be censored unless it involves hyperrealism or real people, it always snowballs back into reality
Nobody can agree when to stop at censorship, and conservatives love using the phrase 'think of the kids' or accusations of pedophilia
Im not conflating shotacon to queer media its SEEN that way
Also i added marginalized groups for a reason cuz.... they will ultimately be affected... fictional snuff, gore, bestiality cant be placed on the same pedestal
I don't think shotacon should be conflated with queer media precisely BECAUSE doing so is equating normal, healthy relationships with inherently predatory ones. I am against censorship regardless but that doesn... Cosmic Gaything
I'm not conflating the two. CONSERVATIVES do. Conservatives benefit from censorship. They lack creativity, critical thinking, and media literacy. Look at how they interpret the Bible. They're either very literal or cherry-pick.
Conservatives are just as uncomfortable with queer media as with taboo in media. To them incest, murder, beastiality, lying, stealing, and yes, being gay or trans would all be considered equally sinful. Imagine if murder was jest as immoral as being gay.
Please, I can recommend some good books about the ramifications of censorship. "Not Infront of the Children" by Marjorie Heinz goes into detail on the rise of censorship, legal cases, and social influence.
The only type of censorship I believe in is between a parent and child ( like not letting little Jimmy watch zombie movies to avoid nightmares) or what teachers and librarians decide is appropriate for the kids they teach.
Media made by and for adults is a different story because we should have fully developed brains that can distinguish between fiction and reality. Just because we enjoy it in fiction does not mean we condone it in real life. I've read books on necrophilia, incest, pedophilia, cannibalism, etc. Does not mean I, or anyone else is going to re-enact what we see.
Censorship kills creativity. It kills critical thinking. If it makes you uncomfortable GOOD. IT'S SUPPOSED TO. The book/movie Johnny Got His Gun isn't to make you feel comfortable. It's supposed to be gut wretching. So is shotacon, no matter how cute the art style is. Whatever happened to Don't judge a book by its cover?
Nobody is singling out queer media did u read my replyNo media should be censored unless it involves hyperrealism or real people, it always snowballs back into realityNobody can agree when to stop at censorship... Beyond
I think we are focusing on different things. I am also against censorship and said as much. My point was that I don't see why LGBT+ media is specifically being cited by the OP as something that could be under threat if something like this is censored. The line in question was, "It can lead to LGBT+ media getting banned because its against someone else's morals." Bringing up LGBT+ media out of the blue implies that there is some kind of connection. I don't think they should be brought up in the same conversation, period. If they are seen as similar, than that is all the more reason to make the distinction as clear as possible. Respectfully, I don't disagree with their claim, but I do disagree with their and your reasoning.
I'm not conflating the two. CONSERVATIVES do. Conservatives benefit from censorship. They lack creativity, critical thinking, and media literacy. Look at how they interpret the Bible. They're either very litera... Allan_beez
We disagree on the reason this piece of media and others like it exists. The point is not to make others uncomfortable - that is just a not unexpected consequence. The point is that the author enjoys these relationship dynamics and is catering to others who also like them. Whatever, that's fine. Let's ignore that aspect, though, because it's not important.
Like I said to the other person, I don't disagree with the claim that "we shouldn't ban media based off morals," I disagree with your slippery slope argument or bringing up LGBT+ media to support your claim. An argument is a claim + the evidence you present, and if the evidence is unsound than that puts the overarching claim into question. Might come across as overly pedantic, but I think it's a legitimate concern to harp on important distinctions when it comes to social issues and marginalized groups. Let's say, hypothetically, that banning shotacon alone would have no unintended effects whatsoever. LGBT+ media does not come under any more threat than it was before along with other controversial media. Is it fine, then, to ban it? If not, then your argument does not rest of solid ground. I'd call it fallacious at best, unless there's legitimate evidence that banning shota has led to the banning of LGBT+ media in the past.
I'd love to respond to the rest (e.g., your thoughts on distinguishing between fiction and reality and why that's not quite correct) but I have to go to class.
We are probably mostly on the same page, though, ignoring our differences in taste.
We disagree on the reason this piece of media and others like it exists. The point is not to make others uncomfortable - that is just a not unexpected consequence. The point is that the author enjoys these rela... Cosmic Gaything
The evidence i used to support my claim is literally history. Nazis used Christian morality to justify destroying the transgender clinic because it was "obscene" and to this day Australia has strict laws on media that make it impossible for SA victims to talk about their trauma. Books like My Dark Vanessa is banned even though its a perfect book to analyze how predators groom their victims. A book like that could help someone be able to talk about their own trauma or realize it or help them feel seen. When you ban that type of media who do you think benefits from the silence of victims? How do you think those laws started?
I'm not making the comparison because LGBT media and taboo fiction are the same but because historically it has threatened LGBT media and it is now happening again with Project 2025 and Mom's for Liberty groups.
youre missing the mark here by tenfold, this manga is not even trying to educate you against pdf, grooming or weird age gap, its not educating you with the taboo topic and making u want to think critically, it does not f cki ng do that, it is BOLDLY PRESENTING ITSELF VERY SHAMELESSLY AS LITERALLY A ROMANCE BL BETWEEN A PREPUBESCENT AND AN OLDER GUY who atp should have world views and awareness about the boundaries they shouldn't cross when interacting with a kid who is infatuated with them. Also who gives a fuck if youre an english major.
youre missing the mark here by tenfold, this manga is not even trying to educate you against pdf, grooming or weird age gap, its not educating you with the taboo topic and making u want to think critically, it ... toji cock sucker
people thinks a well articulated sentence is also correct and sound is wild to me. Sure don't ban media that is borderline and questionable, isn't that why murder in fiction don't get called out for inciting violence cause it just doesn't. But good fuck all this yap fest just to say "don't ban this its lgbtq representation and its harmful to fhe community" is so fckinf stupid, i tell u, if somebody i know irl have this kind of relations with a kid and is a member of the community, which mind u i also belong with, i will fcking fck with them so so bad they wont hear the end of it degeneracy is just degeneracy, its not something poetic
people thinks a well articulated sentence is also correct and sound is wild to me. Sure don't ban media that is borderline and questionable, isn't that why murder in fiction don't get called out for inciting vi... toji cock sucker
YOU HAVE USAGI DROP AND SUPER LOVERS AND A BUNCH OF PORN MANGAS IN YOUR WANTING TO READ, idc if u have not read them yet u fuck, you are in no way fit to say any of this excuses bullcrap youre spewinf rn qnd your pfp is LITERALLY INCEST OF MARIBEL WHO IS LITERALLY 15 YEARS OLD AND HER FUCKINF UNCLE WHOS 50. Incest, pdf and a possible proshipper, or youre probably js dump which makes you both unfit to give out any "virtous" opinion
you should sht th fck up u are sick and there is nothing noble, critically challenging and therapeutic about what you consume, your opinion does not matter at all you are a very disturbed individual
As an artist and a writer I started studying media ethics because personally I do not believe anyone should be arrested based on the art they make or enjoy. This all started when I made a post that was supposed to be platonic but people mistook for a romantic ship. I didn't even like the ship but because of so much hate for something so minuscule I delved deeper into the discourse between anti and pro shippers. I do side with proshippers. In my personal experience they're a lot more chill and actually nice.
I've seen antis bully and dox a sixteen year old for drawing a fictional minor shirtless. For a group of people who say they're protecting children harassing and doxxing minors is the opposite of what you're supposed to be doing.
Yeah, if Im going to be studying media ethics I'm gonna have to get out of my own comfort zone and read taboo subjects and analyze them. Not just the material itself but the people who enjoy them. So far I don't see significant enough evidence that taboo content will make people harm others. I don't doubt that pedos would be drawn to this type of stuff but I don't think we should generalize. Most shotacons and lolicons i know are afab and on the ace spectrum not the basement dweller mods I first assumed. But then again that could be because of the certain fandoms I've been immersed with.
You have every right to be disturbed, upset, and disgusted by taboo content. It just shouldn't be met with "you should be put in jail for writing this". That is fascist ideology.
YOU HAVE USAGI DROP AND SUPER LOVERS AND A BUNCH OF PORN MANGAS IN YOUR WANTING TO READ, idc if u have not read them yet u fuck, you are in no way fit to say any of this excuses bullcrap youre spewinf rn qnd yo... toji cock sucker
You're really immature. It's not an 'opinion', licensed professionals have confirmed time and time again you quite literally cannot develop paraphilic disorders through fiction alone unless there's an underlying issue.
If we banned icky fiction, predators won't suddenly decrease.
Also shame, regardless of ur intent, is harmful. Why? Because predators will simply learn to hide it better. Because they do not wait for Kindle Unlimited to drop, but to stumble across a vulnerable person. You are not a good person for spreading moral panic, blurring the lines between fiction and reality so heavily is concerning
Saying 'you're opinion doesn't matter, you're clearly a disturbed individual,' won't make you right
You're really immature. It's not an 'opinion', licensed professionals have confirmed time and time again you quite literally cannot develop paraphilic disorders through fiction alone unless there's an underlyin... Beyond
i dont give a fuck about ur supposed " licensed professionals" backing ur arguement on why i should be ok with you liking shotacon, and the other bitchass liking the ship between mirabel and bruno enough that they felt comfortable using their kissing art for pfp, you can yap all you want i do not give a fuck, degenerates are degenerates, all this essay is not making you a "deep learned" individual, its literally js fucking excuses
You're really immature. It's not an 'opinion', licensed professionals have confirmed time and time again you quite literally cannot develop paraphilic disorders through fiction alone unless there's an underlyin... Beyond
i dont give a fuck about ur supposed " licensed professionals" backing ur arguement on why i should be ok with you liking shotacon, and the other bitchass liking the ship between mirabel and bruno enough that they felt comfortable using their kissing art for pfp, you can yap all you want i do not give a fuck, degenerates are degenerates, all this essay is not making you a "deep learned" individual, its literally js fucking excuses
Your paragraphs are long, your words are big, and your citations of “licensed professionals” are very impressive. But let me be extremely clear: I do not give a single fuck.
You can craft the most pristine essay defending your comfort with shotacon, or the fact that you’re repping incest ship art like Mirabel x Bruno as your profile picture. You can call it “coping,” “fictional,” or “nuanced.” You can even drop names of psychologists or theories to pretend this makes you some kind of thoughtful media critic. But it doesn’t.
At the end of the day, all your eloquence boils down to one thing: an attempt to intellectualize degeneracy.
You’re not misunderstood. You’re not deep. You’re not operating on some higher level of media literacy. You’re just very loudly trying to justify something that most people find disturbing — and no, writing it in MLA format doesn’t change that.
So keep yapping in your little essays if you want. Just know that not everyone’s going to clap politely and nod along while you try to sanitize the unsanitary. Some of us are going to call it what it is — because no amount of “but it’s fiction!” is going to make it not weird. You can try to dress it up, but rot is rot.
Giving a damn only when the fucked up media is actually fuckinf done by the one consuming it in real life is police behaviour. You nip it in the bud.
You're really immature. It's not an 'opinion', licensed professionals have confirmed time and time again you quite literally cannot develop paraphilic disorders through fiction alone unless there's an underlyin... Beyond
Saying their opinion doesn't matter and they're a clearly disturbed individual is subjectively right, "Saying im not right won't make you right" either
Saying their opinion doesn't matter and they're a clearly disturbed individual is subjectively right, "Saying im not right won't make you right" either toji cock sucker
Obviously but logically you're wrong. You do not care for victims, you do not care about survivors unless they fit the 'perfect victim' mold, you just want to look morally superior
'Subjective' is more objective. You don't know them personally and they had points based on facts and psychological research, you can't declare them as 'disturbed' when you know you're in the wrong
Hello, English major here doing research on anti censorship. You can feel uncomfortable with the content of this story. You're supposed to! But we shouldn't ban media based off of morals because its a slipper slope. It can lead to LGBT+ media getting banned because its against someone else's morals. We've seen this decline before with conservatism with Nazis and how they censored based on blasphemy and Obscenity. Which are all subjective. Besides proof that taboo fiction is used as therapeutic, just because it is romanticizing in fiction does not mean it is being endorsed.
I beg you to read the material itself and try to find other aspects that could be the "appeal" of such stories. It's more than just "oh i like kids".
im assuming this is some shouta stuff, but whats your point
Yes, it is about shota and lolicon. Point is that it is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable. And that the content can have deeper themes and meanings beyond surface level content. I've read several different manga and taboo novels on these topics and the tone and other story elements vary widely on how the tackle such subject manner. For example, My Dark Vanessa is a good read but can be graphic.
But most importantly we shouldn't censor media based on morality since that differs from person to person. If someone think gay love stories are obscene and pornographic then they'll censor that too. Laws are based off of real life harm on real people. Cartoon drawings don't exploit children but AI and Photoshop can. If you're worried it'll cause someone to want to hurt a person then there's no real way to measure that, its just speculation.
Sorry i forgot to tag you
there is no deeper meaning to this as far as I can tell. it’s a “romance” and one of the love interests is a child. what sort of meaning do you derive from that? what exactly is the appeal of this that cannot be found in nonpedophilic love stories? this isn’t some meta commentary on the state of society. it’s just shota lol
Shota Oni is still an on going story so we can't see the story as a whole yet and all of themes that could be implemented. Furthermore just because the characters expirence romantic and sexual attraction to each other does not mean the story itself is a romance. It is packaged that way. Think Romeo and Juliet, a story often mistaken as a romance.
Pay attention to the characters dynamics more. Both characters are going through changes and growing up at different paces. This also lead to miscommunication because through each character we are learning their perspective on growing up and what that means to them. They obviously display trust in one another but a lot of the pressure and responsibility fall on the older of the two. Boundaries are not talked about explicitly but is a constant struggle between the two as well.
This isn't the best example because the story isn't finished but one lolicon i read where the mc is a man that can transform into a loli sort of touches on the concept of "male loneliness" by through how he was socialized and treated as a man versus and a little girl. It also felt like it had gender/ body horror element making me feel like mc may have had gender identity issues and wanted to experience girlhood.
Theres also another one of a teacher and each student had a variety of mental health issues or tough lives at home that can be hinted at through their behaviors. Which would be hard to tackle as a male teacher with multiple troubles students with needs. And yes these stories are definitely not serious 100% of the time. You get funny, awkward moments slipped in with fan service which is ever prevalent in anime as a whole.
You provide good examples of such stories that explain your point, and I understand that! Often stories will have hidden themes, but what I’m saying is this story isn’t special. Plenty of other age gap romance explore the struggles of two love interests going through different stages of life without including grooming. So I ask again, what makes THIS story unique in its underlying messages? Not some other story you’ve read.
One of the main conflicts of this story is how the two leads grapple with their romantic feelings for the other, so I personally say this is a romance. This story is ongoing and it may have potential (?), but judging from the author, I think this only serves to satisfy their own desires for certain tropes.
At its core, fiction is mainly meant to be entertainment (that I agree with), but I have yet to see this story even breach the deeper themes you mention.
Conflating shotacon with LGBT media is definitely a take
Im not saying that its the same thing. But when it comes to media censorship and banning stuff based off of morality conservative Christians have conflated them as the same thing. Saying gay books dont belong in schools because its "grooming kids" and calling gay people pedos.
Thats why morality should not being making laws, they are subjective.
yes we shouldn't censor fiction (and its not where i live), and yes sometimes fiction with taboo or uncomfortable or graphic themes have a deeper meaning, but most of the time thats not the case.
shota and loli are a niche aimed at people who enjoy that content, so the goal isnt to make the reader feel uncomfortable, its not about some greater social message, it is generally frowned upon because its about the sex appeal.
Garth Ennis for example kind of threads the line between having a deeper message and just straight up fucked up shit for the sake of it, but i like his work because i find it intriguing.
its a necessary freedom, but it also creates a lot of space for degeneracy, a double edged sword if you will.
Taboo fiction can exist without needing a deeper meaning or without artistic value. Art can exist just to be gross, disturbing, and ugly. That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist or shouldn't be enjoyed.
Some people read this stuff for catharsis, psychological relief. And that should be good enough of a reason to be enjoyed.
I am sure that some people do read this for the sex appeal but it is harmful to generalize a whole audience/ fandom over a piece of media based on a small percentage of bad apples. It's like saying all furries are zoophiles. When it is known that not everyone who likes furry NSFW want to harm animals.
For me I like to project onto the shota or victim. I like to be seen as cute and I enjoy it when the older tries to kind and caring to the younger one, even if they are still harming them. Because its fiction and I can engage with the media at will from a safe distance. At any time i can clase the book or tab unlike in real life. That's catharsis. That's why psychiatrists suggest using art as treatment for trauma.
I am 23 and I hookup with men older than me, 33-52. But I'm a grown, consenting adult. I can voice discomfort with a partner and protect myself. No real minors are hurt.
I find the term "degeneracy" used by religion. Typically to control people more than just to be a good person. To someone else YOU would be the generate for consuming porn at all. Yaoi, straight shoji, etc. Because degeneracy is subjective.
1.
sounds more like youre going for a think peace than research which is fine in itself, but im just confused lol. are you doing actual research or are you just trying to justify why you like shota/loli? what is your goal here?
taboo fiction DOES exist without a deeper meaning, that was my point because you made it sound like there usually is meaning. but i would argue that art always has artistic value even if its just to be gross.
idc about anyones reason for why they consume and enjoy any fiction, you are free to make your own decisions, if it effects your real life than its problematic.
however, unless you can bring research that proves otherwise, i find it hard to believe that the loli/shota consumers who enjoy it for the sex appeal are the minority, the genre is not mainly based on a phycological relief appeal as far as im aware
and yeah everything is subjective, but for example you can analyze degeneracy of a porn addict through objective relativism, not that i feel like getting into a philosophical discussion rn. (and im assuming you would say the same about the term depravity)
also media influences the way we think and perceive even if its just subconsciously which i think is something to consider if you are doing any sociological research, but ultimately thats another conversation.
and for your furry comparison- anthropomorphic characters have been in media for ages, the furry community is an extension of that in the form of self expression. zoophilia is fundamentally different in intention. its the nsfw art that stereotyped and associated furrys with sex/porn to begin with- but the difference between zoophilia and anthropomorphism is still very obvious.
They aren't the same but yall gotta realize that censorship NEVER stops at fiction
Conservatives literally see us as dangerous predators, it WILL affect the queer community and other marginalized groups seen as unsafe
I don't think shotacon should be conflated with queer media precisely BECAUSE doing so is equating normal, healthy relationships with inherently predatory ones. I am against censorship regardless but that doesn't mean we should be grouping pedophilic media into the same category as queer media just because they are both being targeted. Why not bring up zoophilic media instead? Snuff? Gore? Why are we choosing to argue specifically about QUEER media in the context of pedophilic media as if they have anything to do with each other? It is just one type of media and I'm not saying shotacon should be censored (I'm not saying it shouldn't either, such as when the drawings are tracings of actual children's bodies, but that's another story), I'm just saying that it's weird to then bring up queer media in the context of pedophilic media when they have nothing to do with each other. Makes it come across as if they do have a link, which is very dangerous. Shotacon is about inherently predatory relationships between adults and children. It has nothing to do with relationships between two adults who just happen to be the same sex. Do you agree that we shouldn't censor ANY type of media? If so, talk about media in general rather than singling out queer media.
Nobody is singling out queer media did u read my reply
No media should be censored unless it involves hyperrealism or real people, it always snowballs back into reality
Nobody can agree when to stop at censorship, and conservatives love using the phrase 'think of the kids' or accusations of pedophilia
Im not conflating shotacon to queer media its SEEN that way
Also i added marginalized groups for a reason cuz.... they will ultimately be affected... fictional snuff, gore, bestiality cant be placed on the same pedestal
I'm not conflating the two. CONSERVATIVES do. Conservatives benefit from censorship. They lack creativity, critical thinking, and media literacy. Look at how they interpret the Bible. They're either very literal or cherry-pick.
Conservatives are just as uncomfortable with queer media as with taboo in media. To them incest, murder, beastiality, lying, stealing, and yes, being gay or trans would all be considered equally sinful. Imagine if murder was jest as immoral as being gay.
Please, I can recommend some good books about the ramifications of censorship. "Not Infront of the Children" by Marjorie Heinz goes into detail on the rise of censorship, legal cases, and social influence.
The only type of censorship I believe in is between a parent and child ( like not letting little Jimmy watch zombie movies to avoid nightmares) or what teachers and librarians decide is appropriate for the kids they teach.
Media made by and for adults is a different story because we should have fully developed brains that can distinguish between fiction and reality. Just because we enjoy it in fiction does not mean we condone it in real life. I've read books on necrophilia, incest, pedophilia, cannibalism, etc. Does not mean I, or anyone else is going to re-enact what we see.
Censorship kills creativity. It kills critical thinking. If it makes you uncomfortable GOOD. IT'S SUPPOSED TO. The book/movie Johnny Got His Gun isn't to make you feel comfortable. It's supposed to be gut wretching. So is shotacon, no matter how cute the art style is. Whatever happened to Don't judge a book by its cover?
I think we are focusing on different things. I am also against censorship and said as much. My point was that I don't see why LGBT+ media is specifically being cited by the OP as something that could be under threat if something like this is censored. The line in question was, "It can lead to LGBT+ media getting banned because its against someone else's morals." Bringing up LGBT+ media out of the blue implies that there is some kind of connection. I don't think they should be brought up in the same conversation, period. If they are seen as similar, than that is all the more reason to make the distinction as clear as possible. Respectfully, I don't disagree with their claim, but I do disagree with their and your reasoning.
We disagree on the reason this piece of media and others like it exists. The point is not to make others uncomfortable - that is just a not unexpected consequence. The point is that the author enjoys these relationship dynamics and is catering to others who also like them. Whatever, that's fine. Let's ignore that aspect, though, because it's not important.
Like I said to the other person, I don't disagree with the claim that "we shouldn't ban media based off morals," I disagree with your slippery slope argument or bringing up LGBT+ media to support your claim. An argument is a claim + the evidence you present, and if the evidence is unsound than that puts the overarching claim into question. Might come across as overly pedantic, but I think it's a legitimate concern to harp on important distinctions when it comes to social issues and marginalized groups. Let's say, hypothetically, that banning shotacon alone would have no unintended effects whatsoever. LGBT+ media does not come under any more threat than it was before along with other controversial media. Is it fine, then, to ban it? If not, then your argument does not rest of solid ground. I'd call it fallacious at best, unless there's legitimate evidence that banning shota has led to the banning of LGBT+ media in the past.
I'd love to respond to the rest (e.g., your thoughts on distinguishing between fiction and reality and why that's not quite correct) but I have to go to class.
We are probably mostly on the same page, though, ignoring our differences in taste.
The evidence i used to support my claim is literally history. Nazis used Christian morality to justify destroying the transgender clinic because it was "obscene" and to this day Australia has strict laws on media that make it impossible for SA victims to talk about their trauma. Books like My Dark Vanessa is banned even though its a perfect book to analyze how predators groom their victims. A book like that could help someone be able to talk about their own trauma or realize it or help them feel seen. When you ban that type of media who do you think benefits from the silence of victims? How do you think those laws started?
I'm not making the comparison because LGBT media and taboo fiction are the same but because historically it has threatened LGBT media and it is now happening again with Project 2025 and Mom's for Liberty groups.
youre missing the mark here by tenfold, this manga is not even trying to educate you against pdf, grooming or weird age gap, its not educating you with the taboo topic and making u want to think critically, it does not f cki ng do that, it is BOLDLY PRESENTING ITSELF VERY SHAMELESSLY AS LITERALLY A ROMANCE BL BETWEEN A PREPUBESCENT AND AN OLDER GUY who atp should have world views and awareness about the boundaries they shouldn't cross when interacting with a kid who is infatuated with them. Also who gives a fuck if youre an english major.
people thinks a well articulated sentence is also correct and sound is wild to me. Sure don't ban media that is borderline and questionable, isn't that why murder in fiction don't get called out for inciting violence cause it just doesn't. But good fuck all this yap fest just to say "don't ban this its lgbtq representation and its harmful to fhe community" is so fckinf stupid, i tell u, if somebody i know irl have this kind of relations with a kid and is a member of the community, which mind u i also belong with, i will fcking fck with them so so bad they wont hear the end of it degeneracy is just degeneracy, its not something poetic
YOU HAVE USAGI DROP AND SUPER LOVERS AND A BUNCH OF PORN MANGAS IN YOUR WANTING TO READ, idc if u have not read them yet u fuck, you are in no way fit to say any of this excuses bullcrap youre spewinf rn qnd your pfp is LITERALLY INCEST OF MARIBEL WHO IS LITERALLY 15 YEARS OLD AND HER FUCKINF UNCLE WHOS 50. Incest, pdf and a possible proshipper, or youre probably js dump which makes you both unfit to give out any "virtous" opinion
you should sht th fck up u are sick and there is nothing noble, critically challenging and therapeutic about what you consume, your opinion does not matter at all you are a very disturbed individual
As an artist and a writer I started studying media ethics because personally I do not believe anyone should be arrested based on the art they make or enjoy. This all started when I made a post that was supposed to be platonic but people mistook for a romantic ship. I didn't even like the ship but because of so much hate for something so minuscule I delved deeper into the discourse between anti and pro shippers. I do side with proshippers. In my personal experience they're a lot more chill and actually nice.
I've seen antis bully and dox a sixteen year old for drawing a fictional minor shirtless. For a group of people who say they're protecting children harassing and doxxing minors is the opposite of what you're supposed to be doing.
Yeah, if Im going to be studying media ethics I'm gonna have to get out of my own comfort zone and read taboo subjects and analyze them. Not just the material itself but the people who enjoy them. So far I don't see significant enough evidence that taboo content will make people harm others. I don't doubt that pedos would be drawn to this type of stuff but I don't think we should generalize. Most shotacons and lolicons i know are afab and on the ace spectrum not the basement dweller mods I first assumed. But then again that could be because of the certain fandoms I've been immersed with.
You have every right to be disturbed, upset, and disgusted by taboo content. It just shouldn't be met with "you should be put in jail for writing this". That is fascist ideology.
You're really immature. It's not an 'opinion', licensed professionals have confirmed time and time again you quite literally cannot develop paraphilic disorders through fiction alone unless there's an underlying issue.
If we banned icky fiction, predators won't suddenly decrease.
Also shame, regardless of ur intent, is harmful. Why? Because predators will simply learn to hide it better. Because they do not wait for Kindle Unlimited to drop, but to stumble across a vulnerable person. You are not a good person for spreading moral panic, blurring the lines between fiction and reality so heavily is concerning
Saying 'you're opinion doesn't matter, you're clearly a disturbed individual,' won't make you right
i dont give a fuck about ur supposed " licensed professionals" backing ur arguement on why i should be ok with you liking shotacon, and the other bitchass liking the ship between mirabel and bruno enough that they felt comfortable using their kissing art for pfp, you can yap all you want i do not give a fuck, degenerates are degenerates, all this essay is not making you a "deep learned" individual, its literally js fucking excuses
i dont give a fuck about ur supposed " licensed professionals" backing ur arguement on why i should be ok with you liking shotacon, and the other bitchass liking the ship between mirabel and bruno enough that they felt comfortable using their kissing art for pfp, you can yap all you want i do not give a fuck, degenerates are degenerates, all this essay is not making you a "deep learned" individual, its literally js fucking excuses
ah wait, since u all like the word essays here
Your paragraphs are long, your words are big, and your citations of “licensed professionals” are very impressive. But let me be extremely clear: I do not give a single fuck.
You can craft the most pristine essay defending your comfort with shotacon, or the fact that you’re repping incest ship art like Mirabel x Bruno as your profile picture. You can call it “coping,” “fictional,” or “nuanced.” You can even drop names of psychologists or theories to pretend this makes you some kind of thoughtful media critic. But it doesn’t.
At the end of the day, all your eloquence boils down to one thing: an attempt to intellectualize degeneracy.
You’re not misunderstood. You’re not deep. You’re not operating on some higher level of media literacy. You’re just very loudly trying to justify something that most people find disturbing — and no, writing it in MLA format doesn’t change that.
So keep yapping in your little essays if you want. Just know that not everyone’s going to clap politely and nod along while you try to sanitize the unsanitary. Some of us are going to call it what it is — because no amount of “but it’s fiction!” is going to make it not weird. You can try to dress it up, but rot is rot.
Giving a damn only when the fucked up media is actually fuckinf done by the one consuming it in real life is police behaviour. You nip it in the bud.
Saying their opinion doesn't matter and they're a clearly disturbed individual is subjectively right, "Saying im not right won't make you right" either
Obviously but logically you're wrong. You do not care for victims, you do not care about survivors unless they fit the 'perfect victim' mold, you just want to look morally superior
'Subjective' is more objective. You don't know them personally and they had points based on facts and psychological research, you can't declare them as 'disturbed' when you know you're in the wrong