The General Conversation Area
- Thread starter Tachi
- Start date
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
I, too, find it exceptionally creepy. And I hate how anime fans just pretend like it's normal to have these kinds of images everywhere.
Funny that the admins lock threads for "fighting" but allow this garbage to be posted without anyone even questioning it's extremely poor taste.
Funny that the admins lock threads for "fighting" but allow this garbage to be posted without anyone even questioning it's extremely poor taste.
MaxonTreik
Chuunibyou
That was pretty tame.
MaxonTreik
Chuunibyou
I'm not complaining. I just think you have to be pretty weak of heart to find that creepy.Ryo Chan said:oh quit complaining, u can still see it if you want, it's not that hard to copy + paste
Zin5ki
Railgun
Quick legal query. The Playtrade User Agreement says this:
Does this mean a buyer would have to pay VAT on top of an imported item's price, like usual R1 shopping?
2.2.7 seems to imply customs fees are included in the price, whereas 2.2.8 says its the buyer's job to pay them, and yet the seller's job to 'collect and remit' them.
Does this mean a buyer would have to pay VAT on top of an imported item's price, like usual R1 shopping?
MaxonTreik
Chuunibyou
Ryo Chan said:
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
ayase said:
A girl with no pants on? In an image that's clearly engineered to be sexualised? Both half-naked girls appearing to be pre-pubescent? Yes, of course that's in bad taste! You cannot design something that looks like a 9-year-old girl and just say she's 17 and that makes sexualising the image ok. No, it isn't, and the people who get off on that have a serious problem and it shouldn't be glorified and normalised in anime and on anime boards the way it is. If you want to gawk at half-naked infants, then go to 4chan. I'm pretty sure that's not what AUKN is for.
ayase
State Alchemist
I could attempt to debate this in a mature manner, but I'm pretty sure I've said everything I wanted to say on the subject in the various lolicon hysteria threads over the past year. So instead...
Get back to the 1890's you two. What next; "Ooh, she's showing her ankles! How positively awful!" Like anyone cares about a bit of tame semi-nudity these days. You're on the losing side of history, the Internet will be the tool which finally lays to rest the idea of "public morality". It's time to make way for the morality of the individual where everyone gets to decide for themselves, and f*ck society.
I don't see anything wrong with the image. You do. Fine. But why should you think you have some kind of moral authority over me, or anyone else for that matter? I'd let hardcore porn play on billboards if I was in charge, I just don't care. I don't consider myself responsible for the rest of society, only myself.
Get back to the 1890's you two. What next; "Ooh, she's showing her ankles! How positively awful!" Like anyone cares about a bit of tame semi-nudity these days. You're on the losing side of history, the Internet will be the tool which finally lays to rest the idea of "public morality". It's time to make way for the morality of the individual where everyone gets to decide for themselves, and f*ck society.
I don't see anything wrong with the image. You do. Fine. But why should you think you have some kind of moral authority over me, or anyone else for that matter? I'd let hardcore porn play on billboards if I was in charge, I just don't care. I don't consider myself responsible for the rest of society, only myself.
ayase: Judging by your reply I think you miss the point of why we find images like that so creepy. It's not based on the fact that there is some 'tame semi-nudity' but more on the implications of the image of an underage child in provocative or sexualised situations. Drawn or not.
ayase
State Alchemist
What I'm saying is I really don't care why you find it creepy, I just don't like the kind of moralistic, self-righteous overtones that CG's post has. I think people should refrain from imposing their moral values on others, and complaining about images on a public forum does just that.
I happen to not think that image is sexualising children - Hugging a pillow with a picture of a character on, itself within a drawing is hardly provocative, and while Konata is supposed to be 17 the character designs of Lucky Star are so far from real human anatomy I'd be amazed if anyone could convincingly prove either that she looks 17 or "pre-pubescent" as CG claims. Er, Japanese women tend to be shorter and less curvy in real life anyway, don't they?
But even if it was an image sexualising children, I wouldn't care about that either because it's not real. There is a massive difference between "drawn or not" - It's going over old ground, I know, but as far as I'm concerned if no real person is actually being harmed, then we should let people look at / draw / write whatever they like.
I happen to not think that image is sexualising children - Hugging a pillow with a picture of a character on, itself within a drawing is hardly provocative, and while Konata is supposed to be 17 the character designs of Lucky Star are so far from real human anatomy I'd be amazed if anyone could convincingly prove either that she looks 17 or "pre-pubescent" as CG claims. Er, Japanese women tend to be shorter and less curvy in real life anyway, don't they?
But even if it was an image sexualising children, I wouldn't care about that either because it's not real. There is a massive difference between "drawn or not" - It's going over old ground, I know, but as far as I'm concerned if no real person is actually being harmed, then we should let people look at / draw / write whatever they like.
CitizenGeek
Guild Member
If you think objecting to images of children that are clearly sexual is a anachronism from the 1890s, then I'll ask on what planet are you living? No society says that such imagery is acceptable, whether real or drawn, anatomically correct or not. If you are so morally bankrupt that you don't even see a problem with sexualising children then I'm pretty sure you're the one with moral problems, not I. You think rejecting as obscene and disturbing sexual depictions of minors is indicative of some kind of puritanism or moral pontification? Are you serious?
Just because you see these images all the time in anime and particularly in fan art does not make it ok. If you do get off on this stuff, then you probably need help of some kind because it is entirely unhealthy. I agree that people should be able to draw or look at whatever they want as long as no one is being harmed but it ought not be glorified and it doesn't belong on AUKN. It's really quite appalling how many people are being positive about such an image.
Just because you see these images all the time in anime and particularly in fan art does not make it ok. If you do get off on this stuff, then you probably need help of some kind because it is entirely unhealthy. I agree that people should be able to draw or look at whatever they want as long as no one is being harmed but it ought not be glorified and it doesn't belong on AUKN. It's really quite appalling how many people are being positive about such an image.