I do not believe Prostasia are putting the spotlight on the CORRECT group of people when they talk about fanfiction and otaku. Talking about pedophiles before “normal people” in my opinion continues the lie that EVERYONE that enjoys “problematic art” has an actual attraction to the real life counterpart.
Fiction is much more than an outlet for pedophiles, and more discussion needs to be around that, not just about how pedophiles react to said content.
Thanks for taking the time to write down your thoughts. Sorry if we seem to be giving too much attention to the therapeutic side of the arguments in favor of fanfiction/art, rather than the artistic side.
This is because we considered that the argument that such art is harmful (or “is pedophilia”) is the most easily debunked argument in the whole debate. But we have also addressed the argument that because such fiction/art is (subjectively) “gross” it should be censored for that reason alone, which is also a bogus argument. We definitely don’t think that most shippers or otaku are minor-attracted, any more than most ageplayers are. If that hasn’t been clear enough in our writing, I apologize.
If you think that our coverage of this issue is unbalanced then we are planning to help redress that by adding a representative of the artistic community on our Advisory Council. If you have any suggestions for someone who might be a good representative, let us know!
I find it confusing that you would debunk the accusation that the art in question “is pedophilia” by talking about how pedophiles react to it. If you wanted to prove that “problematic fanfiction” wasnt “gross” wouldn’t you seek to validate the existence of a group of people that aren’t “gross” (and by gross I mean pedophiles) that enjoys said art from a desire that has nothing to do with real world minor attraction? Ms. Ingerman did that in her article; she was very quick to emphasize that ageplayers are not simulating real life csa, just like puppy players are not simulating real life bestiality. If your approach was consistent with your shipper article, she would’ve instead talked about how ageplay can be a coping outlet for pedophiles, but she barely talks about that and even dismisses it as trivial, which I can assume comes from a desire to keep her hobby separate from anything that might even slightly link it to real world CSA, even if it’s a reduction.
Like I mentioned about your review of “The Trouble With Being Born” you demonstrated that you can put filmmakers and educators before pedophiles. The article you quoted doesn’t even discuss how pedophiles might react to the movie, if their reactions would increase or decrease CSA, but dismisses it as almost irrelevant by saying that the literary value of the topic of the movie is infinitely more important.
Personally, the fact that this questionable content holds value to non-pedophiles is more than enough to justify its existence. Basing its validity mostly on therapeutic potential for pedophiles is like asking if lollipops are okay or not based on their therapeutic potential for recovering smokers. I’ve seen you mention in your tweets a few times that you support “scientific research into whether cartoons or dolls could be a harmless outlet for some people who might otherwise offend against real kids.” I’ve already explained why I don’t like this statement; it forgets about people who enjoy said cartoons because they’re cartoons, not as a substitute for a real desire. I definitely believe “2D complex” people exist, and they deserve to be highlighted as well, even more so than pedophiles.
My opinion is that the artistic side, or this-material-is-enjoyed-by-people-that-aren’t-pedophiles side is the side that deserves significantly more attention, as THEY will be hit the hardest by censorship, not people afflicted with minor attraction. I hope moving forward you feel similarly.
The view that some people have that “every lolicon is a pedophile” is a big misunderstanding as there are countless reasons why people like lolis (attraction to minors is just one of them). But the attempt by non-MAP lolicons to move away from pedophilia is not going to lead to anything, since pedophilia and lolicon art are things that are extremely linked because pedophiles are a huge part of the niche.
The cause of the whole problem is the stigma created on top of pedophilia, and this ends up dragging non-map lolicons on the “thinking about children” wave. Lolicons will only have peace on the day that the stigma stops being so great in our society. And I don’t think the attitude of pushing pedophiles away will do anything to reduce stigma.
There was a poll about this on ATF. About half were pedophiles. 25% of the pedophiles were polled to be exclusive.
A lot of the pedophiles amusingly could not fathom why someone would look at lolis if they were not also pedophiles. Pedophiles tend to like far younger (and more realistic) lolis than the others.
Correct.
Countries are banning it and it is being censored on that basis. To a lot of people even, it might look like a group of people going out of their way to do something they know is wrong and don’t have to do and which promotes crime.
It can only be defended (in polite society) in the context of absolute free speech, which protects things like Nazi speech, hate speech, and child nudity. But, the absolute free speech faction has been losing a lot of influence. Cloudflare was forced to drop 8chan despite them not having done anything objectively wrong.
A lot of people do not realise how horrifying this content is to the average person. There is extreme controversy even among long-time netizens (who are used to this sort of content existing on the Web) with half arguing for and the other half arguing it is evil. The ones who argue for it most strongly do it on grounds of freedom of speech and tend to stem from places like Asia. Others are deeply engrossed in anime culture.
People from Asia cannot even begin to comprehend how terrified the West is of pedophiles, the language barrier stops a lot of the fear from crossing over. They certainly don’t like child sex crimes. But, they don’t have that same absolute dread of monsters hiding around every corner. There is absolute terror and hysteria. For crimes which are a lot rarer than the media would depict.
“Progressive” outlets have not helped this as they see any publicity as “good publicity” and sit back as lynchings and witch hunts erupt.
P.S. It may be good to have multiple organisations catching lawmakers in a pincer. Prostasia gets a lot of mud slung at it. And some of their ideas end up being extremely disturbing to just about everyone involved, including pedophiles.
Thing is, that “terror and hysteria”. It’s no different from the superstitions of African tribes being afraid that witches cursing water is what causes drowning (see Shakespeare in the Bush). The feeling that I assume anthropologists feel whilst dealing with those primitive beliefs is the same feeling that I have when dealing with anti-loli “hysteria”. However, unlike those anthropologists, I have much less patience about turning the other cheek.
Certainly hysteria. But I see that a lot of people are willing to listen. Recently I started to get involved with pedophiles and I learned / discovered many things about them. Most of them are very pessimistic, but I like to think that someday this sexuality will be accepted.