Is it Pedophilia When someone is attracted to an Anime Character?

[Marquis of Granby]

EDIT: Come to think of it, if a cotholic priests watches child porn but never acts on it(besides the children going through that) he's technically not doing anything wrong. That is, going by this logic--if I can call it that.

no. we already know thats wrong because the law tells us this.

remember?

to possess child porn would mean you were condoning/funding the abuse of children.

to possess naked anime girls would mean you were condoning/funding the use of an artists leet skills.

 

[Six]

Nah... I personally don't think it is... I mean someone can fantasize all they want... That's up to them... If they aren't harassing someone with it, who are we to judge someone else's thoughts? Just because it's wrong to us, doesn't mean it's in fact wrong... Our wrong might be their right, unless you know, they're actually acting out their thoughts. Which isn't the case.

I still stand by what I said about people who do watch young girls in anime, aren't automatically attracted to real life children. That's something you just can't know for sure, and every pervert will always be different, some might actually like watching small kids, yes, this is wrong, but they aren't harming them. Though if they do THAT, you can say something about it.

But if it's just some nerd in his bedroom getting excited watching girls on anime, it's just a fetish... It's nothing more than that.

People that are in to that shouldn't be shoved in to the "You are a paedophile because you like Anime, therefor you like watching real children" catagory. That's called assuming. And assuming is judging, which... is something I'm not a fan of. =/

 

[VinnieJones]

Anime characters don't look like real people. Real people don't have eyes that are half the size of their face nor do people have natural blue/green hair etc. Maybe that was being too specific, but the point is they're not drawn to realistic specifications and do not resemble a real life human. A 13 year old girl in anime is not a 13 year old girl on the street.

Also their age is just a setting created by the script-writer. They're not actually 12/13/14 etc, let alone being real. So will it be Ok if that character was set as 18 or something, without changing their appearance? It's something that can be arranged in a flash, unlike in real life. It's like putting Scarlett Johansson in a film and setting her age as 13. Will we be pedophiles if we don't know her age in real life, but are sexually attracted to her in that film?

EDIT: sorry about bringing it back to the main topic, the posts above just appeared out of nowhere while typing.

 

[GalaxyFlare]

46&2.........you go girl!

Controlling peoples thoughts? I dont thinks thats her intention at all.
She is just pointing out the fact that regardless of the media the fact is they are children
and that is all there is to it.

Dont be confusing the difference because they are not real, and acted upon or not the intention is still there, this is something that is not tolerable at any rate, I applaud you guys and the liberties you seem willing to offer the depraved members of society.

But the this topic has no degrees of right or wrong IMO.......there for for its not good or evil, it just simply should not be, but that is an absolute and people bound by absolutes are usually looked upon as being crazy,unable to bend to outside ideas.

Regarding this dark aspect of humanity.......So be it.

 

[Gingerbread Lesbian]

At the end of the day, everyone has their own definition of what is "wrong", some people won't think it's wrong, some people will, some people will think it's paedophilia, some won't. It's just a debate that in reality, will keep going in circles.

In terms of whether it's technically wrong, no. The law dictates to be convicted you need to have both the actus reus and the mens rea, hence paedophiles can't be convicted unless they've actually "done" something. In this case they won't have "done" anything, as Ewan pointed out, you can't be persecuted or prosecuted for simply thinking about something.

 

[The Witch]

I think the majority of folk would be locked up right now for thinking murderous thoughts, myself included

what a silly argument

Then the same should be said for those fantasizing about Children sexually. If thinking about murder is good enough to lock someone up, watching cartoon children sexually is as good as a reason to say they are pedophiles, in a matter of fact, pedophilia for cartoon children has more evidence to condemn someone than thinking about murder does.

Dont be confusing the difference because they are not real, and acted upon or not the intention is still there, this is something that is not tolerable at any rate,

Yes, the intention is what I'm talking about. Thank you.

 

[Marquis of Granby]

you can't be persecuted for simply thinking about something.

yes you can. we must control the people.

pepsi is better than coke.

bananas are better than apples.

homosexuality is disgusting and evil.

christianity is better than muslim.

as an islam i practice muslim.

 

[Bambi]

i never said it WAS good enough to lock someone up, im saying going of your logic, it would be.... which, is absurd

 

[The Witch]

hence paedophiles can't be convicted unless they've actually "done" something. In this case they won't have "done" anything, as Ewan pointed out, you can't be persecuted or prosecuted for simply thinking about something.

That still doesn't mean they AREN'T pedophiles--and that's all I'm saying. Even if they don't act on it, they're still thinking of children sexually--which makes them pedophiles.

 

[Marquis of Granby]

That still doesn't mean they AREN'T pedophiles--and that's all I'm saying. Even if they don't act on it, they're still thinking of children sexually--which makes them pedophiles.

if they happen to be sexually attracted to children, then yes.

otherwise they just have a cartoon fetish.

cocks do not discriminate.

 

[The Witch]

Oh, my God, Jim. *head desk*

It's not a cartoon that is their fetish it's the children in it they're attracted to.

 

[moogling]

which are cartoons themselves.

 

[Marquis of Granby]

there are no children in the cartoons.

bart simpson is voiced by a 40+ year old woman. if a man wants to bum him that doesnt make the bam a paedo.

which begs the question, if these anime paedos are paedos why dont they just watch hardcore kiddie porn?

 

[GalaxyFlare]

So rather than have a real opinion your going to quote legal binding?
And have the Law as your proxy opinion?

Listless........to say the least.

How thin do you think the barrier is between reality is imaginary is?
its not that great a leap to make when talking about this topic, because if said people can justify such "harmless" actions........they sure as hall can justify it in reality!!!

 

[Abstract Debauchery]

No, it's the tits, and the fact that they want to fap. They could care less who's in it, unless they're gunning for this sort of thing. You're implying that everyone who looks at it is a pedo. When in all reality, it's not the case. The majority just want to fap, they see some tits, they're not asking for age, and they don't care. They want to make their chicken happy.

So, put someone in this situation. A man goes out on a nice date with someone who has told them that they're 18 years old. They go home, have sex, and then afterwards, she tells him that she's 16.

Is that man a pedo? No. But I can guarantee you he enjoyed the sex as it was happening. His penor made the pee pee dance, he's happy, and it isn't his fault.

 

[Marquis of Granby]

So rather than have a real opinion your going to quote legal binding?
And have the Law as your proxy opinion?

Listless........to say the least.

How thin do you think the barrier is between reality is imaginary is?
its not that great a leap to make when talking about this topic, because if said people can justify such "harmless" actions........they sure as hall can justify it in reality!!!

sure as hall.

in my dreams i run about the streets with a gun and kill old ladies.

sometimes when i sit on the bus i think of running about the streets with a gun and killing old ladies and raping their dogs.

i've never once done this. ive never had the urge to do it. simply a thought

 

[Valvalis]

Well I'll probably sound like an echo here, but I can't possibly see how fantasy and reality have equal weight in the scheme of things.

Really, like a lot of people have said, I think you have to examine who's getting harmed in situations of pedophilia. In real life, if children are being abused in this way, they're the ones getting harmed and obviously that's wrong. In fantasy situations, emotionless drawings are the subjects, and will never feel disturbed by it because they can't feel anything at all. The only real-life people who could possibly be harmed in the latter situation are those who are unaccepting of others' ideals that they themselves think are perverse, and that's their fault for allowing themselves to be bothered by it. And in a world full of however many billion people it is now, it's kind of selfish to expect everyone to like and dislike the same things. I for one think it's wrong for people to kill animals for food, but I'm not going to sit there and call other people nasty names for doing it (even though that, unlike the thread topic, is something that harms living beings in real life). What makes someone a nasty person in the case of pedophilia is if he or she lacks restraint and decides to act on it in real life, and if the concern here is that anime encourages such things, then I have to disagree, because that's a view that removes all responsibility from an individual and places it in the hands of the media. Which is downright absurd.

 

[GalaxyFlare]

Yeah Jim thats different son...........your scottish lol

I killed plenty off people in my dreams too........I dont find that disturbing.
but there has to be a limit to what is acceptable and the laws on every country dont control this shit tightly enough IMO

Raping dogs.....I never would have guessed ??

 

[Marquis of Granby]

its not different at all. its fantasy. no one is harmed, not a single old lady, not a single dog. i think its an insane concept that a fantasy should be more tightly controlled. these are drawings. you cant make it illegal to draw a balloon headed...thing thats meant to be an 8 year old. you cant make it illegal to then slap tits on this drawing. thats the sort of thing adolf hitler wouldve done. its just not what the western world is about im afraid. you dont like it, dont watch it, dont look at it, dont think about it. dont let it bother you.

the pencils and/or software used to create these monsterous beasties dont feel anything. poor abbi dabbi with the bright green hair and 2mm legs doesnt care either. in fact she probly wants you to cum.

 

[Davey Gaga]

In terms of whether it's technically wrong, no. The law dictates to be convicted you need to have both the actus reus and the mens rea, hence paedophiles can't be convicted unless they've actually "done" something. In this case they won't have "done" anything, as Ewan pointed out, you can't be persecuted or prosecuted for simply thinking about something.

While this is true, the topic in hand suggests condemning those who have gone beyond "thinking" about something and have "done" something --that is to say that they have pleased themselves with their chosen pornography-- as opposed to those who simply "think" about doing things.

Thinking about abusing a child is not illegal; possessing material of, or participating in, child abuse is punishable by law. Where the lines blur is when we ask if fictional child pornography is equal to, less or greater than real child pornography? Society has not addressed this core question, so we cannot yet decide this.

Oh, my God, Jim. *head desk*

It's not a cartoon that is their fetish it's the children in it they're attracted to.

But the children in pornography are cartoons. Neither of these subjects are technically more important than the other. It's unfair to suggest that the fact it's a child is more relevant than the fact that it's a cartoon.

i've never once done this. ive never had the urge to do it. simply a thought

Again, this is different, because we're not talking about "thinking" about anime pornography, we're discussing actually being part of it. So, again, we have to ask: does a cartoon child have the same rights as a human child?

Though my posts seems conflicted, I'm only playing devil's advocate. I don't like the idea of a child being used in a cartoon; the "instrument" is "wrong" (as deemed by popular opinion of society) but, at the same time, why should someone's personal preference become an issue for anyone else when no living being (excluding the individual) is harming themselves (presuming the individual cannot discriminate between reality and fantasy)?

If I became addicted to over-the-counter narcotics, e.g. paracetamol/tylanol, and only harmed my own body, should I be treated like someone who murders or mugs for class A drugs (again only illegal due to popular dictation)? No, not really.

However "wrong" or "immoral" it is, is probably directly correlated with how involved you are with other people's lives. If it bothers you...well, fuck off, really.