I know I'm late to the party here but I want to give me 2 cents about this.
I think it's a shame since absolute fictional content is always going to be 2 layers:
1. Is going to be that fact that it doesn't reference anything within reason that can be tied to real life
2. Is going to be fact that there's clear indications that you aren't meant to take something literal.
It's why for instance we can enjoy the works of say H.P Lovecraft (as much as I personally think he's overrated), despite the fact that certain works of his is with racists undertones at best.
Because when it's fiction we the reader choose the interpretation.
With that said, loli/shota-con is always an asinine online conversation as it'll always amount to the same 2 groups:
* Those who are to an unhealthy degree defending/obsessing over loli/shota-con
* Those who have no real interest in protecting children or minors but love to give out descriptive solutions
Now the issue there is that it's just a ping-pong debate, the anti-side will never admit that they just hate loli/shota-con art and stand on that hill but instead pretend to care about kids, they will say loli/shota-con= minors the pro-side will then point out how these traits exists in adult people and then we move over to how it's implied, etc. etc.
To be fair then the pro-side will equally never admit that of course this kind of content will have an infinitely higher likelihood of attracting genuine pedophiles to their community.
When the truth is, as long as there's 0 studies to show that jacking it to loli/shota-con is inherently making you pedo, there's no real argument to be had, even what MarxistLeopardist said is completely illogical, if loli/shota-con creates a "safe-space" for pedos... then ban those pedos who express this creepy behavior (in fact lets ban all people who goes around images and comment with really creepy "mmmm I would love to eat that ass")?
Since I think personally I just don't care if you jack off to raltz or Gardevoir ass, it's very clearly fiction.
And the real prescriptive solution beyond studies is to specifically understand what it actually entails and form safety nets to ensure we don't see an actual normalization of actual minors being sexually exploited, so far I think it's then better to "allow it" and have very strict communication standards, along with very clear gates to limit exposure and explicitly warn users about the content they are about to watch can be disturbing.
Since as long as loli/shota-con is in the grey-zone, there's going to be little incentives from admins of said communities to work with authorities on nabbing actual predators, the more we legitimize it in terms of ensure it's regulated but legal the better it'll be for everyone and ultimately if it turns out that indeed this kind of content just spurs on the idea of wanting to fuck real kids, then I'm totally fine with nuking all of it.
I know I'm late to the party here but I want to give me 2 cents about this.
I think it's a shame since absolute fictional content is always going to be 2 layers:
1. Is going to be that fact that it doesn't reference anything within reason that can be tied to real life
2. Is going to be fact that there's clear indications that you aren't meant to take something literal.
It's why for instance we can enjoy the works of say H.P Lovecraft (as much as I personally think he's overrated), despite the fact that certain works of his is with racists undertones at best.
Because when it's fiction we the reader choose the interpretation.
With that said, loli/shota-con is always an asinine online conversation as it'll always amount to the same 2 groups:
* Those who are to an unhealthy degree defending/obsessing over loli/shota-con
* Those who have no real interest in protecting children or minors but love to give out descriptive solutions
Now the issue there is that it's just a ping-pong debate, the anti-side will never admit that they just hate loli/shota-con art and stand on that hill but instead pretend to care about kids, they will say loli/shota-con= minors the pro-side will then point out how these traits exists in adult people and then we move over to how it's implied, etc. etc.
To be fair then the pro-side will equally never admit that of course this kind of content will have an infinitely higher likelihood of attracting genuine pedophiles to their community.
When the truth is, as long as there's 0 studies to show that jacking it to loli/shota-con is inherently making you pedo, there's no real argument to be had, even what MarxistLeopardist said is completely illogical, if loli/shota-con creates a "safe-space" for pedos... then ban those pedos who express this creepy behavior (in fact lets ban all people who goes around images and comment with really creepy "mmmm I would love to eat that ass")?
Since I think personally I just don't care if you jack off to raltz or Gardevoir ass, it's very clearly fiction.
And the real prescriptive solution beyond studies is to specifically understand what it actually entails and form safety nets to ensure we don't see an actual normalization of actual minors being sexually exploited, so far I think it's then better to "allow it" and have very strict communication standards, along with very clear gates to limit exposure and explicitly warn users about the content they are about to watch can be disturbing.
Since as long as loli/shota-con is in the grey-zone, there's going to be little incentives from admins of said communities to work with authorities on nabbing actual predators, the more we legitimize it in terms of ensure it's regulated but legal the better it'll be for everyone and ultimately if it turns out that indeed this kind of content just spurs on the idea of wanting to fuck real kids, then I'm totally fine with nuking all of it.