Current Systemic Issues in the Anime Industry and Community
- Thread starter Izanagi009
- Start date
- Status
The problem arises when people try to stretch this very reasonable opinion to include things like merely being immature mentally, or short and flat, or when they apply this to drawings of fictional characters and so on.
I don't think anyone here is advocating being attracted to people who look like children.
We're talking about anime, these are not people, these are drawings of anime characters. Their looks are fictional and so are their ages, and they can shift, you can have someone appear old and be young, some one be old and appear old and become young, there's tons of things that are possible so this absolutist analysis doesn't work. And as was established in this thread, chars who look like Uzaki-chan are also beloved, so there's really no particular fixation with the smaller chars.
If she's an adult, and looks like an adult, then jerk it to your hearts content.
yup
Well then you and @lil devils x need to hash things out.
And you have something in common with Hitler regarding the eugenics thing.
Why? I don't necessarily think you should jerk it to adult anime girls, I just don't care enough to argue the point. But that's wildly different from arguing with you about whether it's ethical to be attracted to people who look like they are 8 years old. Especially when the examples you gave were from the real world. By the way, the answer is "no, it's not."
Also, lol at you acquitting eugenics with me saying that it's wrong to be sexually attracted to children.
Because, as Dreiko says, there are people who say "no, it's the mind that matters, not the body!" and there are people who say "No, the body is what matters, not the mind. You are the latter. Lil devils is the former.
I think you mean "equating" not "acquitting". And yes, it is eugenics. You think that certain people should not be allowed to breed.
Then take it up with her.
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.
You really are defensive about the right to be sexually attracted to people who have underage bodies. I don't have issues with people who have certain conditions. I have an issue with people who are sexually attracted to minors. You're the one who always seemed to think that the whole age of consent thing was bullshit anyway.
You really are adamant that certain adults with certain disorders, outside of their control, should never know the touch of a lover, just because of how they look.
Look at yourself. Look at how far you're willing to go to 'stick it to the weebs'. You're saying that two consenting adults can never be together, based on body type.
Last edited:
nah, the person with the disorder can do whatever they want. they're blameless. what i'm saying is, if you're sexually attracted to underage bodies, you're a fucking awful person. the lowest.
Why do you keep trying to throw mumbler and lil devil quotes at me? Are you so bad at debate that you're having to turn to your enemies for arguments?
For the record, I like both of them, but we're not some ideological block just because we disagree with you. I'm sure the three of us disagree about all sorts of things. And that's fine, because neither of them seem like a danger to children.
For the record, I like both of them, but we're not some ideological block just because we disagree with you. I'm sure the three of us disagree about all sorts of things. And that's fine, because neither of them seem like a danger to children.
[/QUOTE]
Ok, I was having a good time, watching my movie and getting nice and drunk, when I find this shit. For some context, that was my "being chartiable" statement, but if you're going to use it against others than let me translate it for you:
If the only reason you are attracted to someone (adult, cartoon, fuck if I care) is because they look like a child, you are a fucking pedophile. I can not fucking believe I actually have to type this shit out.
More like my enemies are fighting amongst themselves now, all I have to do is sit back and watch.
Like Dreiko said, you remain silent when somebody says "the mind is important, not the body", and they remain silent when somebody says "the body is important, not the mind", and both of you care more about sticking it to the weebs than you do having a consistent position that you stand behind, which is indicative of bad faith.
So I guess I need to just actually state that there's a huge difference between someone who looks like a child and an adult who has a physical condition that makes them physically smaller than other people, because Houseman seems to be under the impression that the two are visually identical. Well, now you know they're not, and you can stop embarressing yourself.
But that was never an issue. The detractors said "this child was made to look attractive"
Casual Shinji said " because she's specifically designed to look like a sexy 10-year old "
It's not "because they look like a child", it's because "they're drawn to be attractive".
If it was an issue of just "because they look like a child", then we wouldn't be arguing over alleged "10-year-olds" in skin-tight dresses, we'd be arguing over this:
( Alluka Zoldyck from Hunter x Hunter, age 11)
But we're not, we're arguing over this:
I'm just going to point this out: Characters don't just spring from the ether fully formed with histories, body types, and personalities without intervention. Characters are made by human hands for a purpose or reason.
In the case of stuff like Tatsumaki, there was an intent behind the design being that of a kids body. In the case of Uzaki, there's an intent behind giving a college age student an overly childish personality.
I think the issue is that some of use see malice or at least ignorance behind the intent of Tatsumaki and Uzaki, an intent to appeal to the anime fandom regardless of possible social consequences.
While I will admit that i view malice in the intent at times, to go the other direction and assume that they aren't manmade for a purpose is bizarre to me.
Edit: I will say that personally, using developmental disabilities as a defense isn't a good look. in almost every case, there is a distinct difference between "an adult with a developmental issue" and "a child character with oversized breasts stuck on" or "a child looking character said to be of a certain age".
In the case of stuff like Tatsumaki, there was an intent behind the design being that of a kids body. In the case of Uzaki, there's an intent behind giving a college age student an overly childish personality.
I think the issue is that some of use see malice or at least ignorance behind the intent of Tatsumaki and Uzaki, an intent to appeal to the anime fandom regardless of possible social consequences.
While I will admit that i view malice in the intent at times, to go the other direction and assume that they aren't manmade for a purpose is bizarre to me.
Edit: I will say that personally, using developmental disabilities as a defense isn't a good look. in almost every case, there is a distinct difference between "an adult with a developmental issue" and "a child character with oversized breasts stuck on" or "a child looking character said to be of a certain age".
Last edited:
- Status