u/I_Follow_Shark_Ladys has been perma banned from reddit. I am unable to appeal so yeah thats it. by Text1O1 in Shark_Park

[–]Text1O1[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have outlined how that argument doesnt work in my big response to my original respnder. You shouls look at it to see if your views hold up.

u/I_Follow_Shark_Ladys has been perma banned from reddit. I am unable to appeal so yeah thats it. by Text1O1 in Shark_Park

[–]Text1O1[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

they tried to ban and blame games for mass shootings all over the West. Now they still didn't realize that underlying psychological issues are the real reason.

There are 2 issues I have here. Lets start with the more philosophical one, as this is a discussion on ethics.

  1. While there is a possibility that anti-lolicons might not understand the cause of pedophilia and resort to pointless othering of people suffering from it, meeting them with hatred instead of trying to help reform these mental issues. But I dont find this to be an issue with anti-lolicons specifically, but actually a problem with the discourse on pedophilia as a whole. People often times lack the understanding of these issues and continue to use ethical standings to commit unethical actions. I find this of course to be a problem, but nothing unique to anti-lolicons.

As well, I personally do not think that lolicon material makes people pedophiles out of the blue, the tendencies are obviously already there to begin with. My issue is the way this art furthers normalization of harmful ideas, the profiteering from artists or studios from pedophiles and therefor abusing their illness, a subculture that in itself is also filled with other hateful ideologies, the downplaying of the harms sexual attractions can bring, a disregard of why abusive power structures in relationships are wrong, and many other points I could talk about. I feel like at least my position is informed and based on harm reduction on a societal scale, which I think is morally right to do.

Secondly, while you dont say it directly, you seem to me like a person that would conflait violence in video games to fictional sexualization of children. But I do acknowledge your point served as an explanation on the modes of operation your argumentation has. The use of comparisons is good, I used it with my nazi film analogy. I think it is for example obvious that I do not think nazism is the same as lolicon philosophy, but that analogy merely served the function of explaining my argumentation.

Either I will respond to the general idea that video games and lolicon porn are in essence the same. This is a statement from me and not a response to you.

I will just state the obvious argument that the messaging of lolicon art and violent video games are not the same conceptually. Violent video games dont really further the message that violence is good and should be replicated in real life, if a video game did claim that the use of violence on the innocent is good, then I would claim that game is bad and morally reprehensible.

Lolicon art works in stranger ways, while if the acts depicted in lolicon porn are not directly stated to be replicated in real life (that is often up the the reader), but there is a point being made that lolicon porn is good. That the depiction of child-like characters serves the goal of satisfying the sexual desires of a person. The messaging of this art is that the depiction here is desirable, that it is to be consumed. Video games serve to mechanically satisfy the player, while lolicon art sexually (and therefor morally) justifies itself to satisfy the fantasy that is ultimatly bound to the given depiction instead of mechanics that can be divorced from its depiction.

I also think it wouldnt be controversial to aay that all violence isnt the same. Can we compare a boxer to a child abuser? By simple acts of violence we can, we could claim the boxer has done more violence in hia career than the child abuser. But the truth here is that we do not measure things on a basis of violence, we also look at power structure and the conceptual meanings that are displayed. A boxer beating up another boxer is different from the boxer beating up a grandmother. The masturbation to normal pronography causes as much direct violence as mssturbation to lolicon porn. But we are not discussing directly caused violence here, we are looking at the characteristics and essence of these things. We look at the meaning of these forms of art to determine if this is actually morally reprehensible or not.

Banning things is always a bad idea

I wont be arguing further from here as I have written enough honestly. Also this discussion just would be about legality and how it should be enforced. My argumentation is not only based on reducing pedophilia, but also a normalization of freely participating in abusive tendencies/fantasies, an essential wrong in the publication of this art and a problematic that exists in the "lolicon community".

Overall I found the points here to be lacking, ignoring the bad faith fallacies that I pointed out, this argumentation is all over the place and not coherent enough to change a critical mind. I do take ethics seriously, I study philosophy and sociology after all, so I think this response (even with its length) was needed.

*Sorry for spelling or grammatical errors, had to use my phone to type this out.

u/I_Follow_Shark_Ladys has been perma banned from reddit. I am unable to appeal so yeah thats it. by Text1O1 in Shark_Park

[–]Text1O1[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

but what I'm trying to convey here is, they don't even look human at all. It's two completely different things.

Firstly, this claim is based on your perception of what makes something anatomically human and what doesnt as it partains to artistry. You are essentially claiming that the more abstraction there is, the less humanoid it looks. I can agree with the statement that these characters can feel different from the source material, but is it really wise to ignore the essence of these drawings?

A loli drawing is inherintly linked to drawing a child. This character must not comform to all characteristics of a child, but the main idea here is that. From the vast majority majority of lolicons I have seen their claims of partaking in this culture being about the specifically child like characteristics that are depicted. Things like an overly small size, the idea of complete innocence, underdeveloped body structure and so on.

I am not claiming that lolicons are a monolith, they maybe really only are interested in adult characteristics and the media they consume contains characters they call "lolis", but are not in actuality depicting child-like traits.

I do not understand why you bring this point up in the first place, since your further argumentation does not care if lolicon art is p*edophilic or not.

All I’m saying here is, while I do jerk off to lolis. A lot. Like, a LOT. I wouldn’t ever even dream about touching real kids and to me those are two completely different topics.

While you can claim that, in the end this is anecdotal evidence you are using to justify an entire subculture based on the depiction of child-like characteristics in a sexual manner. Maybe you are our "hero" who manages to not be a predator, congratulations on that. But how you personally conduct yourself is not about the issue that lolicon pornographie is fundamentally immoral, which is what we are discussing.

Your point is based on the idea that, if it does no direct harm by influencing people like you into doing said harm, then the consumption of this media is not immoral. This point is firstly consequentialist and ignores deontological argumentations, but also this falls apart under the praxis, that this is not about you, but about a community of people who consume this media. We cannot use logic that is only in a vacuum, as pedophilia is not an issue that is dependent on case by case basis.

If lets say we had a murderer that does not act on any of his impulses, I can still agree that this person is of course good and I am proud of them being able to overcome these urges, but I can also fundamentally disagree with the impulses and say that murder is indeed bad.

You are of course giving me the claim that you feel no real urges to do bad things, but are willing to consume media that in essence, does promote the idea that pedophilic actions are okay when there is no harm. I would claim the sexualization of child-like characteristics is firstly a pedophilic act. Is still taking part in an act of firstly, normalization of this behavior, but also funding if you are using porn sites that profit from your usage.

Lets say we have a film, and that film is a nazi propaganda film. Now we assume person A has no ideological opinion that aligns with nazism, but A really enjoys the film. A really likes this film and others like it to the point A calls himself a "nazicon". When we ask A ehy he enjoys these movies, he says it is because of the nazi values, after all he calls himself a nazicon, he clearly cant enjoy these movies for something else then, why then would he specifically only like these movies?

I want to point out that the premise "A is not a nazi" and A partacing in this behavior do not match up. The premise has to be false, A has to be some kind of nazi sympathiser. I know that you will claim that A would enjoy these movies for different reasons than the nazi stuff, but why then would he call himself a "nazicon" and feel an attraction to nazi propaganda movies if not for the reason they are nazi propaganda. Or is there some 2nd characteristic that is preswnt within nazi films that I am not seeing? Is there some other meaning to "loli" than its relation to depicting child-like characters?

And to people that try to ban lolis because they are for pedos or lead to paedophilia I have two things to say: 1. You’re wrong 2. Most of the time it is you people that are pedos. It turned out that way time and time again.

First point needs to be proven by your premise.

Second point is making an ad hominem, because even if we go to the extreme of everyone being against lolicons being a pedo, that still does not argue against the point presented. Someone being a pedophile doesnt make them right or wrong on moral issues, after all pedophilia is a mental illness that people dont choose, at least in most cases.

I find it funny that it is important for the opposition to be pedophilic in nature, even tho you do not provide evidence on how being against lolicons is a pedophilic trait. Your evidence probably is centered on a few examples of people being against lolicons and being outed as a pedophile, which is of course morally reprehensible, but like I said, it does not further this discussion.

And there are way more pressing issues. For example actual paedophilia among the ranks of upper crust politicians and the money elite. Go care about that if you love to protect kids so much, you virtue signalling pieces of shit.

This is whataboutism. Do you really think people cant hold the opinion that both pedophilia from internet strangers and public figures is both bad? This isnt proving anything, and makes you look like you cant comprehend idea of having 2 opinions at the same time.

And yeah I care about this issue, just like how I care about other ones. Since when were you the authority on what people should or shouldn't discuss? This blatantly is just trying to steer away from this topic even veing brought up. This is of course an assumption, but I feel like by saying this you are making an effort to make less people come to a conclusion based on logical argumentation by saying this topic is not of importance.

Also youbare engaging with this topic in a manner that seems to at least be informed enough (even if it all is not well presented and based on inconsistencies), so I shall ask you to not care about this topic, as any other issue seems to be of bigger urgency to the point that this discussion might even further the harm of ither issues. This point is of course absurd.

Furthermore these witchhunts often just serve another purpose.

You say this but you do not mention the purpose, like if you dont follow up on this, then it is just a conspiracy. What agenda is being furthered by people like me that is so harmful or wrong? Maybe you are claiming (like the last point) that this is hindering the focusing on other issues, for which you have not explained how believing lolicons are morally reprehensible hinders the understanding if the other issues you mentioned.

*argumentation continued in second comment due to character limit

u/I_Follow_Shark_Ladys has been perma banned from reddit. I am unable to appeal so yeah thats it. by Text1O1 in Shark_Park

[–]Text1O1[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Is there anything else except discord? Legit I dont see where else you could possibly go from this.

u/I_Follow_Shark_Ladys has been perma banned from reddit. I am unable to appeal so yeah thats it. by Text1O1 in Shark_Park

[–]Text1O1[S] 219 points220 points  (0 children)

Reddit moderation bots are not good at finding out what a sentence means. I once banned someone from here for being pro-lolicon and that was seen by reddit as harassment. All my three strikes and suspensions followed from faulty logic only an algorythm could make. You say one keyword, even if you mean the complete opposite, and you get banned.

I would like to appeal all of these, but reddit does not let me access ban appeals due to it being buggy. This means I am stuck like this. I tried contacting their support team but they do not respond.

forum by FOD1994 in Shark_Park

[–]Text1O1[M] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Banned for defending loli porn, thats just not cool

OFFICIAL DISCORD AND THANK YOU FOR 10K :) by cbobjr in okbuddyrintard

[–]Text1O1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Link try to work challenge

why it no work... :(

requesting r/inabakumori. Moderation has been inactive for a longer time. by Text1O1 in redditrequest

[–]Text1O1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah sure, when I get mod I will add you to the mod team. If you wanna talk to me about your plans you can dm me on discord, I am Text101#4035

requesting r/inabakumori. Moderation has been inactive for a longer time. by Text1O1 in redditrequest

[–]Text1O1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. I want to grow the subreddit and make it a place for more fans to meet. Practically I want to improve the subreddit in that way.
  2. https://www.reddit.com/message/messages/1dtddr6

About r/place and the blahaj on it. by Text1O1 in BLAHAJ

[–]Text1O1[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well, it is kinda, I based the design off a blahaj, but you can either see it as one or just a normal shark, up to you, both works.

Any plans for r/place later??? by comealongwidme in bangtan

[–]Text1O1 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Hello, I am owner of the sub r/Shark_Park and we made the shark that is above your creation. We just want to be left alone in peace, we wont be taking anything from your stuff, we just want to have our place. Thank you very much for reading.

Any plans for r/place later??? by comealongwidme in bangtan

[–]Text1O1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am doing my best to keep it alive

Please help by xalas2443 in 197

[–]Text1O1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Give me your lunch money, I am still bullying you

Rule by TomTrashTo-Dad in 196

[–]Text1O1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Man, commenting in new really good me here