Petition to ban lolicon and shotacon Sims 4 mods

News
1

There is a petition to ban mods for Sims 4 that allow characters that appear underage to be assigned “lolicon” or “shotacon” traits that allow them to be used in sexual animations with adults. This reminds me of the controversy with ageplayers in Second Life, which Linden Labs eventually banned. Although real life ageplay is legal, representing it with pixels on a screen does fall foul of child pornography laws in some countries, despite no real children being involved.

Here’s the petition (presented without endorsement):

https://www.change.org/p/ea-games-pedophelia-in-the-sims-4-modding-community-needs-to-end

2 Likes
2

My favorite part about it all right here. What I love about these arguments is that they’re almost completely identical to the words shouted by conservatives, protesters, and detractors regarding LGBTQ rights.

Child pornography is defined as, and limited to, depictions of ACTUAL children being subject to sexual exploitation and abuse. This is because child pornography depicts an actual person, and would not exist, by definition, if that person were not exploited or abused in some manner.

It does NOT include depictions of fictionalized, or otherwise nonexistent ‘persons’.

Nobody deserves to be put in jail over a fantasy, be it a drawing, the written word, or computer-generated image.

image

The same arguments being made over and over!
The idea that pedophilia could become normalized by media which presents it in a positive light shows exactly how weak-willed, emotional, and irrational these types are. They’re not liberals. They’re behaving just like their grandfathers during the Civil Rights era by demonizing and villainizing something that is harmless and not at all likely to cause harm and does not contribute to any harm!!
It reflects a lack of faith and confidence in society to know the difference between real life and fiction, both in the context of action and desire.
“But it’s pedophilia! They want to harm children! They fantasize about it!”
So what? They’re fantasies. There are plenty of people who fantasize about worse things than this who do NOT go on to act on their desires, namely those with rape fetishism, exhibitionism, etc.
There’s a reason why the DSM-5 made a delineation between pedophilia and pedophilic disorder.
The research, although complicated, does not show a causal relationship between having these types of fantasies and actual CSA, nor is there any evidence that it could progress to real-life harm or harmful acts.

This is not the liberal way. These are emotionally-charged arguments with absolutely no empirical ground to stand on.
This… pedo-populistic hysteria, this literal moral panic witch-hunt mentality we’ve seen come about more frequently against cultural icons or antecedents just goes to show how regressive this mentality is.

We’ve got our work cut out here with this… I’m almost tempted to sign just so I can comment how stupid these people are being, but I know for a fact that it won’t do much. I can see other users commenting that it’s harmless, that it isn’t CP, and that it’s legal. But for everyone saying things like that, there’s another stack of irrational messages and posts.

6 Likes
3

Literally all of these arguments could be rebutted with the simple fact that:

1.) Pedophilia and child sex abuse are NOT the same thing

2.) Blurring the line between reality and fantasy by declaring harmless/victimless speech as akin to the real thing is regressive and problematic because it undermines the very serious and grotesque nature of CSA by making it more about how its existence affects YOU, not the trauma of the children involved.

3.) There is no causal relationship between pornography consumption and sexual aggression or the commission of sex crimes, this includes ‘violent pornography’ and virtual child pornography.

image
image786×207 15.7 KB

EDIT

It’s safe to say that these people offer no real arguments than “it’s disgusting” or “this shouldn’t be allowed” followed by others claiming it normalizes pedophilia and causes harm to real kids. These arguments are so without substance it’s unreal.

This is what true evil looks like. The act of censoring or causing harm to others or their rights, under the guise that you’re helping people.
Morality of this type, the arbitrary and superficial type, truly is poisonous.

6 Likes
4

Anyone else getting a sense of wretched self-entitlement from these posts??

Why do they automatically assume that media which depicts it in a non-negative light is trying to “normalize” things??
They’re not trying to normalize anything, they’re not even asking for your acceptance or approval!

Why should something only be allowed to exist at the arbitrary behest of the cries and whims of the people??? This is NOT the liberal ideal and these disgusting, horrible people ought to take note of any criticism they come across.
This is the exact reason why I stopped browsing Twitter.

image
image763×157 9.53 KB

5 Likes
5

Wait, is Sims an online game or not? Yes, it is harder to mod online games, such as Black Desert, due to ever renewing patches. However, for offline, regardless of any statements from official or snowflake sources, they actually can’t do anything about it, right? All those sweet, sweet loli mods for Elder Scrolls games. Heck, you can practically smack their faces with it, and they can’t really stop you.

2 Likes
6

I think it does have online functionality, but only a workshop that’s not mod-enabled.

This would be like going on Nexus mods and complaining about how female body replacement mods “dehumanize and objectify” women, or how rape fetish mods might have the same effect in “whetting the appetites” of would-be rapists. It’s the same fallacious logic with no conclusive empirical evidence to back it up.

I can see this picking up steam, in that they may withhold this fact.

1 Like
7

Wait, if the online version doesn’t have mods, what’s the issue? In terms of modding the offline content, again, one should flaunt it to trigger ones’ enemies. As I always say, take pride in things that your enemies demand you feel shame for.

1 Like
8

Why the fuck do you guys care so much about this crap? It’s a private business, they have the right to ban whoever they’d like.

9

Because we want to play the game the way that we want to?

2 Likes
10

It’s nothing to do with a private business, it’s end users trying to dictate how others can enjoy the game they own, on their own device, in a way that doesn’t impact anyone else.

Even in the case of a private business, people should be able to modify and enjoy a game that they own however they choose.

Not sure how they think they’re going to ban these mods.

3 Likes
11

Well I care because I actually use that mod, after all I’m a lolicon. And I have ZERO shame of that, since I’m not harming anyone by consuming it.

Also, your idea that EA can ban whatever they want is absolutely correct. I 100% agree with you on that… BUT… Well, too bad that we are talking about EA here, and most people simple don’t care about pirating their games, because, EA simply don’t deserve or money. And if they actually broke because of it, that in fact will be a good news for the vast majority of gamers. Gamers which are sick of this company buying smaller developers and ruining their franchises. Is not a exaggeration to say that EA destroy everything they touch.

1 Like
12

You’re… missing the point completely.

The reason why this is concerning is because it’s angry, upset fans trying to ban/censor a community-made add-on to a video game because they’re upset by it.
No respect for disagreeing parties, no adherence to the free speech principle under the liberal ideal. Just censor/ban/suppress/punish that which they don’t like, rather than dissect it and understand that it’s legal, harmless, victimless content.

And it’s both depressing and disheartening…

2 Likes
13

This can’t be enforced. People can always download the cracked version of the game, and install whatever mods you want.

The downfall is that you can’t play multiplayer with the cracked version.

I saw @Chie 's photos of the comments of the people who are against the animations. What I can say, is that the people who made the comments, have not idea what “pedophilia” is. They also think that “pedophilia” and “child abuse” are the same thing, which is not true.

These people are minority, and should not be allowed to influence decisions of governments or companies, because what they support, is not supported by the majority.

2 Likes
14

Prostasia does the very things you are criticizing. The Prostasia Instagram account blocks and tries to silence users who criticize pedophilia. They block users who tell them that pedophiles are not/should not be welcome on Twitter, while also typing hearts in response to self-proclaimed pedophiles’ comments. The Prostasia Twitter account is also guilty of blocking anyone they disagree with or don’t like. It seems pedophiles don’t care about anyone’s free speech but their own.

They’re upset by it because it’s virtual pedophilia, and most people understandably find that abhorrent. Not just “gross”, but disgusting morally. You guys act like people aren’t allowed to be disgusted by pedophilia.

I do understand that going after those mods doesn’t actually protect real children. But complaining about this petition also does nothing to protect real children. How exactly is this considered news-worthy on a forum for a “child protection” organization? How does drawing attention to this petition in any way protect kids? Since Prostasia advertises itself as a child protection organization, it makes no sense for them to dedicate their time to protecting loli lewds from anti-lolis. I suspect there are ulterior motives going on here.

Something’s not right when users on a “child protection” organization’s forum are getting depressed over…people being disgusted by pedophilia.

15

I couldn’t care less, it’s fiction

It’s perfectly fine to dislike, hate and be disgusted by this stuff, I begin to take issue when people start saying it should be banned and criminalized.

Please do tell what you think is going on here.

5 Likes
16

There is free speech, and there is abuse and harrasment. The people being blocked are not criticising, they are being abusive and harassing.

They are, but that doesn’t justify abusing others, or banning harmless content.

2 Likes
17

I take it that you are someone that we blocked on Instagram. As you would know, we don’t do this lightly. If you used a slur or made a false allegation about our objectives, then yes you would have been quickly blocked. This applies on both Instagram and Twitter. But we don’t simply block people for disagreeing with us respectfully. When we were training a new social media manager last month, that person (without instructions or authorization from us) did reply to everyone’s comments with a heart—that person is no longer with us.

I’m not speaking for anyone else on this forum, because I know that some members do interact with that mindset. But it’s not my mindset and it’s not Prostasia’s. We have made it clear, even in our very first blog article, that people can have whatever moral opinion they like about people with pedophilia:

The idea that people who are attracted to children can even exist is disgusting to most people on a visceral level. So it’s important to realize that helping pedophiles avoid offending doesn’t mean accepting that pedophilia is OK, or “normalizing” the attraction. You can still believe that it is innately evil to think about children sexually, even if those thoughts are never acted upon. That’s not a scientific question, it’s a moral one.

But we’ve also made it clear that morality policing is simply not part of our approach, because of its harmful side-effects on innocent people such as LGBTQ+ people, artists and fans, etc. who are commonly falsely smeared as “pedophiles” although they are nothing of the sort. Treating pedophilia as the problem also obscures the fact that most child sexual abuse has nothing to do with that condition. In other words, being an anti-pedophilia organization is not the same as being a child protection organization. If that’s the approach that you want to follow, there are plenty of anti-porn and anti-sex work groups that you can support instead of us.

We make no apologies in trying to shift the conversation away from a fixation on pedophilia as the one and only cause of CSA, when that simply isn’t the case. At the same time, by taking a scientific approach to pedophilia, we do take it more seriously than other groups, and are one of the only organizations with the courage to provide direct interventions aimed at reducing risk factors for offending within that stigmatized community.

Anyone is free to post fo this forum. Even you. Simply because someone posts to this forum doesn’t mean that we endorse what they say.

7 Likes
18

So what? They’re fantasies. There are plenty of people who fantasize about worse things than this who do NOT go on to act on their desires, namely those with rape fetishism, exhibitionism, etc.

facts! I occasionally have fantasies (intrusive thoughts) of swerving into oncoming traffic when I’m driving. That doesn’t mean I’m actually going to do it though.

2 Likes
19

The Sims is not a multiplayer game

2 Likes
20

To attack or destroy artistic content that’s reserved to hypothetical fantasy space is strange, because there are misconceptions that are being believed, that art negatively impacts reality. But I get the initiative behind it: protect children at all costs, even if it means reducing the freedom of adults and burning works of harmless fiction and art.

The problem I have with this is the fact that the problem is still not solved even after burning lolicon and dolls out of existence. Doing this won’t save a single child, while reducing adult freedoms and creating imaginary crimes. A win-loss becomes a loss-loss. One could say the same thing about a child not being saved if people only collect CSAM rather than partake in it, but the difference here remains that there is a child who is abused, whereas in the works of fiction, there is no actual child who is abused.

Unfortunately, yes, there is a problem of proven abuse being a requirement before accusations can be made against a person, because it presupposes abuse has already occurred, which means we are already too late to save a child. Maybe we should look more into mental health, and to stop requiring law officials to be contacted whenever people decide to go seek help from a licensed professional. Less public slander, stigma, and humiliation would be a good thing too, to encourage people who may be mentally struggling with themselves to seek help.

Forcing any part of fantasy to become illegal world-wide is anti-creation, anti-freedom, and anti-helpful. It is destruction for no good benefit, even if the intent or purpose means well.

5 Likes