Current Systemic Issues in the Anime Industry and Community

[Mister Mumbler]

Read your words again. Carefully.

"That It's immoral for adults to be attracted to underage people."

Here you say that the person must be underage.

" It's wrong to be sexually attracted to people who look like children."

Here you say that the person needs to only APPEAR underage.

So which is it? Is it about age or appearance?

Again, if the entire reason that you are attracted to someone is if they look like a child is because they look like a child, you are a pedophile. Like, I gave you guys an out when I posted that video with the musician in it, as a way of saying that you can be attracted to a person for things not related to physical appearances (case in point me actually, I find the ability to play an musical instrument rather sexy myself), yet all you guys keep circling back to purely physical traits (like little people not being able to find love, which touching on that briefly yes they deserve love too but if you only love them because of your ability to be able to pick them up during sex, people are rightfully gonna think it's a little weird, ya' know?).

 

[fOx]

Read your words again. Carefully.

"That It's immoral for adults to be attracted to underage people."

Here you say that the person must be underage.

" It's wrong to be sexually attracted to people who look like children."

Here you say that the person needs to only APPEAR underage.

So which is it? Is it about age or appearance?

Both. Those two phrases aren't mutually exclusive. There's no contradiction.

You're really digging for just, any foot hold, and gray area you can find.

Actually, let me break this down a little more.

"Here you say that the person must be underage."
That isn't what I said. I said it's wrong to be attracted to underage people. I never said that was the only qualifier.

"Here you say that the person needs to only APPEAR underage."
Also not what I said. I said it's wrong to be sexually attracted to people who look exactly like a child. Again, I never said that appearance was the only qualifier.

I can easily say that "It's wrong to be attracted to underage people, and it's wrong to be sexually attracted to people who look like children."

Which answers my question about reading comprehension.

 

[Mister Mumbler]

Both. Those two phrases aren't mutually exclusive. There's no contradiction.

You're really digging for just, any foot hold, and gray area you can find.

Yeah, it's pretty much a 1) then 1a) type thing going on with the two statements.

EDIT:My point;
1) being attracted to someone underage makes you a pedophile
1a) if you are attracted to an adult ONLY because they look like a child, you are a pedophile.

 

[Houseman]

Again, if the entire reason that you are attracted to someone is if they look like a child is because they look like a child

I covered this in post #199 already.

yet all you guys keep circling back to purely physical traits

Blame that on shallow people who say it's all about physical appearance, like FOx.

Both. Those two phrases aren't mutually exclusive. There's no contradiction.

So your stance is that you can't be underage, nor can you appear underage.

So you're an eugenicist.

 

[fOx]

So your stance is that you can't be underage, nor can you appear underage.

So you're an eugenicist.

That isn't what that word means, lol. That answers my question about reading comprehension, I suppose.

 

[Houseman]

1a) if you are attracted to an adult ONLY because they look like a child, you are a pedophile.

What I was getting at with post #199, was "what if you're attracted to an adult because they look attractive?"

That isn't what that word means, lol.

Tell me what you think it means.

 

[fOx]

What I was getting at with post #199, was "what if you're attracted to an adult because they look attractive?"



Tell me what you think it means.

Well, according to the oxford language dictionary, it means

"The study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable. Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race."

Though, if you want to post a definition from that porn site that contradicts it, you're welcome to do so

 

[Mister Mumbler]

Okay, thought experiment: I don't fuck pigs, but I will only have sex with you if you wear a pig costume, roll around in mud and make oink noises. Do I like to fuck pigs?

What I was getting at with post #199, was "what if you're attracted to an adult because they look attractive?"

And here's the answer: if your idea of attractive is looks like a kid, guess what, you my need to take a seat right over there.



EDIT: inb4 "Mumbler is now advocating for pig fuckery"

 

[BrawlMan]

This thread has yet agained turned in to simpletons squabbling over nothing. This is why I don't bother with anime threads like this. It's also why I go fuck what everyone else "thinks" and watch I want to watch.

 

[Houseman]

Okay, thought experiment: I don't fuck pigs, but I will only have sex with you if you wear a pig costume, roll around in mud and make oink noises. Do I like to fuck pigs?

No, you like men in pig costumes.

And here's the answer: if your idea of attractive is looks like a kid, guess what, you my need to take a seat right over there.

If you point at an adult and say "that looks like a kid", aren't you wrong by definition?

It's like this:


What a child "looks like" and what an adult "looks like" is defined by whether or not the person is a child or is an adult, right?

What does the POTUS look like? Trump, right? Because Trump is the POTUS.
What color is blue?

 

[Houseman]

Well, according to the oxford language dictionary, it means

"The study of how to arrange reproduction within a human population to increase the occurrence of heritable characteristics regarded as desirable. Developed largely by Francis Galton as a method of improving the human race."

Though, if you want to post a definition from that porn site that contradicts it, you're welcome to do so

Exactly. You don't want adults with certain body types to reproduce. You are trying to arrange reproduction within a human population because you don't think that certain body types should be regarded as desirable.

You are in favor of eugenics. You are a eugenicist.

 

[fOx]

Exactly. You don't want adults with certain body types to reproduce. You are trying to arrange reproduction within a human population because you don't think that certain body types should be regarded as desirable.

You are in favor of eugenics. You are a eugenicist.

No, I don't think you should be attracted to people who look like children. If those people can adopt, or be artificially inseminated, and safely have kids, then they can do so.

Oh dear. I don't think he read any of my earlier comments.

 

[Houseman]

Oh dear. I don't think he read any of my earlier comments.

If you only allow for artificial insemination, then you are a eutelegeneisist.

With the caveat that you don't want "superior offspring", you just want to deny people sex because you find the idea of certain body types to be icky.
Kind of like how people don't want homosexuals to have sex because they find the idea icky.

 

[fOx]

If you only allow for artificial insemination, then you are a eutelegeneisist.

With the caveat that you don't want "superior offspring", you just want to deny people sex because you find the idea of certain body types to be icky.

No, because again, you don't seem to know what these words mean.

"Artificial insemination by semen from a donor selected because of certain desirable characteristics for the development of superior offspring."

I don't believe in "superior genes," or "selective breeding to improve humanity," or "desirable characteristics," or the idea of "superior offspring."

Again, the only thing I've said is that you are bad if you are sexually attracted to children, or people who look like children. In other words, if you are a pedophile.

 

[Mister Mumbler]

So, I've said everything I feel I need to say here, so I shall withdraw the same way I came in: shitposting in the style of my people (the judgey ninja clan)

Eh, may as well go for a twofer:

 

[fOx]

You've really tried to turn this into a debate over every single issue imaginable, except the single issue that's actually been argued. You shouldn't be attracted to children, or people who look like children. Your writhing around in agony, trying to find some possible gray area in those words, that will make it okay.

 

[Houseman]

Yeah, like I said " with the caveat that you don't want "superior offspring" "

I don't believe in "superior genes," or "selective breeding to improve humanity," or "desirable characteristics," or the idea of "superior offspring."

You're right. You just don't want certain consenting adults to have sex because you find it icky, which is almost certainly some kind of human rights violation.
Sounds pretty similar to the whole "men shouldn't be attracted to men" thing.

 

[Dreiko]

the weirdest part of that is that he actually handled the subject really well with guts. you get to see how is impacted his interactions with other people, his ability to have romantic relationships, his need to feel safe, his ptsd... it's superbly written. and yet, we then get some oafish depiction of rape as drama device five seconds later. It was always there to some extent, but I noticed it got much, much worse after golden age ended.

I mean, Caska is way more traumatized than Guts ever was after golden age so I again dunno what you're on about. It took like 30 volumes of manga to fix her.

Hmm, true. The scene where casks get her clothes ripped off by a giant penis monster, and spends the entire battle buck ass naked, except for her boots and gloves, was actually a delicate social commentary on the treatment of women in the middle ages.

And then he promptly gets his giant penis chopped off, yes. That is actually kinda how rapists would be punished in the middle ages in England. Anyone caught would be mutilated and cauterized and be left to suffer.

 

[fOx]

Yeah, like I said " with the caveat that you don't want "superior offspring" "

So, a completely different word entirely?

You're right. You just don't want certain consenting adults to have sex because you find it icky, which is almost certainly some kind of human rights violation.

I mean, legally they can do whatever they want. If they are both consenting adults. What I'm saying is, if you are attracted to children, or people who look exactly like children, you are a pedophile scumbag.

But houseman, enough, we both know you aren't arguing about this because your passionate about people with rare genetic disorder being able to get laid or have children.

 

[Houseman]

So, a completely different word entirely?

There's no word for "people who don't want certain consenting adults to have sex because they find it icky".
But I suppose similar words have been "homophobia".

But you're right that it's not about breeding or offspring, you just don't want certain people to ever have sex, not even recreationally.

It's okay, we don't need a catchy word to describe such a horrible desire to police the bedroom of two consenting adults. We just need to be content with the knowledge that people who want to do such a thing have lost, and human rights have won.

You hear that Miranda Cosgrove (Pictured, 20)? You go ahead and have sex with any consenting adult that you want, and don't let fOx try to tell you that you can't.

What? Did someone say something about rare genetic disorders?