The General Conversation Area

I wouldn't say that objecting to hardcore lolicon (which is what you seem to be talking about now) was a relic of a bygone age, but objecting to Otaku-san's incredibly tame (and nowhere near paedophilic) image most certainly is. By today's standards it's not even remotely provocative, you get more sexually provocative imagery of real young girls on television and in films than that.

I don't have a problem with your moral stance CG - indeed, I don't have a problem with anyone's ideas of morality (I think we should all make our own anyway) as long as it doesn't allow them to harm others, and as long as they don't try to force it on others and condemn them for having different morals, which is what I felt your earlier post was pretty close to doing.

Incedently, in the interests of promoting moral bankruptcy, my current favourite "provocative" image: http://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=519039

No nudity or anything, just a little sweat and latex. Might cheer people up a bit. :p
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ayase said:
Incedently, in the interests of promoting moral bankruptcy, my current favourite "provocative" image: http://gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=519039

No nudity or anything, just a little sweat and latex. Might cheer people up a bit. :p
Click to expand...

Gelbooru's a dodgy website, but great for Rei Ayanami pictures... nice image btw ;D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
the NSFW tag is there for a reason, it is not safe for work

you can moralise it all you want and if you fancy trying to justify the image to your collegues and boss, go ahead, the link is still there.

What you do at home is your own free will in the end, no one can or has the right to stop you from having the image.

NSFW is not safe for work, doesn't mean not safe for home viewing in your own private bedroom.
 
When I copied and pasted the link that Otaku-san posted I expected to find something really not work safe. I mean, there's no nudity and only the very mildest of sexual overtones. Now, that image of Kei is a little more risqué...

Having said that, it's up to chaos and the board moderators to decide what is and what isn't acceptable, so I don't have a particular issue with the decision to replace the image with a URL.

Zin5ki: I should think that the buyer would be responsible for paying VAT on PlayTrade items sent from outside the EU. Play's terms and conditions are oddly contradictory, though.
 
I'm probably gonna put oil onto the fire, but I'm just gonna post my view, cuz I dont think me debating the issue is gonna mount up to anything.

I can see the general view CG/Sy has. The way the animators have DRAWN the characters of L.Star makes them look more loli/child-like. Now, I would agree that if there was an actual full-blown and purposeful hentai image of Konata etc, my stomach would turn and I'd feel most uncomfortable. The background to the character would really be thrown out the window, as the image shows nothing but a sexual/pornagraphic image of what seems to be a "young girl" (not forgetting boys can be part of this equation too).

I think the image posted here is quite bold to balance itself on that line between sexual entertainment (I.e. Ecchi, not hentai) and a normal unsexual image. The whole Shirt-as-a-PJ set is a cliche in the anime thing, and is typical of an older person's habit rather than young. I see this as a young woman who is just leisurely holding a pillow in the morning/evening. But that really stops with Konata...
As for Akira, it does suggest a more perverted (but not hardcore) image of a young girl (forgetting the actual age). Hardcore or fantasized, it can come to many that the image of a girl wearing no pants on is acceptable as ecchi. Now that's too loli for my tastes, but it's generally a severe borderline issue. (More like nudging the line out so it can fit in with the acceptable lot.)

Overall, the image of Konata hugging a pillow where clearly she's just holding it in a shirt and underwear (look at the socks, she must be wearing some pants too) shouldn't be an issue, although it can cater to personal taste.
The image of Akira (as much as I like the character) is more distasteful, as it shows a more sexualised image of a youngster (even if the story behind her is that she's actually older). No pants, no sock, presumely no bra - nothing but a shirt. That wouldn't be a good example in real life of otherwise.
I could just-about accept this image for a nomal image with a hiccup on it. But I wouldn't want to know what other perversed people would do looking at the image (not relating that to anyone in the forums, just your paedos in their own homes).
 
Ryo Chan said:
you can moralise it all you want and if you fancy trying to justify the image to your collegues and boss, go ahead, the link is still there.
Click to expand...
If it had just been covered up I wouldn't have had a problem (and I don't really have a problem with the moderation here - fair enough the morality police at work probably wouldn't like you looking at it either, they're a bunch of stuck up prudes too) it's the fact that not content with that, people are actually attacking the legitimacy of the image itself, which I don't think is any of their concern.

Like I say, I'm looking forward to daytime TV turning into pornography as the moralists gradually die out. It's only a matter of time. Part of me just really enjoys getting up other people's noses about "decency". I grin an evil Light Yagami grin whenever people are "offended" by things, because virtually nothing offends me anymore. I think I just love people seeing things they don't want to see, facing things they don't want to face about sexuality, about their fellow humans and about themselves (and thus would prefer they were hidden from sight).
 
ayase said:
I think I just love people seeing things they don't want to see, facing things they don't want to face about sexuality, about their fellow humans and about themselves (and thus would prefer they were hidden from sight).
Click to expand...

Sorry but, if people don't want to see people shagging and so on, and I don't think they should be forced to. You said people would prefer things were hidden from sight, but I don't want to see blowjobs and sex everywhere I go, or on a generic daytime TV channel.. Things that happen in the bedroom should stay in the bedroom and, if people seem to want to, on youporn (or one of the varying porn channels on sky. Anyway, you know what I mean.)

I don't think it's fair to say that people who would be offended by seeing indecency everywhere are denying things about themselves, or other humans. It's just a case of they don't want to see it.

I don't like to hear it when my friends go on about the sex they've been having, as far as i'm concerned, it's thier buisness. But by what your saying, it seems like you're saying I should be made to watch them just so I can "face things that I wish were hidden from sight".

All i'm saying is, just cause something doesn't offend you, doesn't mean it wont offend others.

Have I got you all wrong here, or is my post valid?
 
ayase, you're really starting to worry me here. You're really deriding people who object to sexualised images of minors? Are you actually for real? I mean, seriously, we are prudes for finding images of children with strong sexual overtones disturbing and distasteful? wtf?

I think a healthy sexuality is enormously important, but if you're really suggesting that pornography on daytime TV is "healthy" then you are delusional. It's not about "deceny" or any kind of puritanism, it's about being healthy and responsible when it comes to sex! Images of sexualised children, even if drawn, are still harmful because the people who look at them and get off on them see their unhealthy fetishes justified and even glorified in them.

If that particular image is so acceptable, just imagine an actual 10 year old wearing the exact same clothes in the exact same situation. Would it still get a NSFW tag and be allowed stay on the site? No, it would have been removed immediately and the person responsible for posting it would most likely be banned (although with the brazen incompetency of the admin around here, I'm sad to say I doubt even that would result in a banning!). If the image is not ok were it using human 'models' then what makes it more acceptable when it's drawn?

You're being incredibly irresponsible and seemingly wilfully naive with your silly tirade against sexual responsibility, ayase, and it's starting to grate. If you think it's just old prudes that would have a problem with daytime pornography then you're living in a reality I'm not at all familiar with.
 
Again with the "strong sexual overtones" CG - are we still talking about that image or have we moved on, because if it's the former then I've made my position clear - In no way do I find that image sexualised, and it isn't even of a minor. End of.

I didn't say that I think it's "healthy" or not for pornography or drawn lolicon to be on public display - but I couldn't care less if it is. We look at responsibility in different ways, IMO every individual should be responsible for themselves and make the decision to look away if they don't like something, not to say they don't think others should be looking at it either. It's the difference between not spending time looking at a picture you don't like in an art gallery and trying to throw your coat over it.

I'm not responsible for other people and have no desire to be, nor do I want others putting themselves in the position where they feel they are responsible for the rest of society. I just think we should get on with our own lives and leave other people alone. Retreading the same ground again here (if the tactic was to simply tire me out then it worked) but a drawn image is different because no-one was harmed in the making of it, just like those disclaimers on the end of fictional films. And saying "it could be modelled on real people / events" means we'd better ban all fiction containing rape / murder / child abuse because someone could liken it to real events and claim to be offended by it.

I get what you're saying Spyro, but if you undersand what I mean I'm saying that your friends have the right to talk about sex, but you also have the right not to listen. No-one should force anyone to do things they don't want to, but nor should they have to go out of their way to hide it because others might take offence. My point about sexuality being out in the open is a little OTT, but I just use it as an example of how individual morality differs. ie: It wouldn't matter to me but others would be up in arms.

WRT the other points about my personal moral stance, perhaps it's just that I "get off" on other people being offended? :D
 
That particular image is different because it has no artistic merit at all. It is essentially pornographic in that the only reason it exists is to excite certain kinds of people that really shouldn't be getting excited about it. That's why it's different to the "fiction" comparisons you are making. Also, drop the "Konota is 17!!" argument because it's ********. She obviously resembles a pre-pubescent little girl.

As for your idea about completely destroying any kind of collectivity that goes with human society, I'm pretty sure you're being absurd. We regulate things that we believe are in the best interest of our societies. There's no hardcore pornography on television at all (never mind on daytime TV as you advocate) because we accept that porn is considered not to be fit for consumption by children and that granting children such easy access to it would be harmful to their development. Likewise, it's accepted that pornography is obscene and that most people don't want it forced on them on their TVs. It's not just a handful of ancient "moralists" stopping porn on daytime TV, there's NO demand for that whatsoever from anyone. So if you've still got your fingers crossed, waiting for these imaginary "moralists" to die, then I assure you, you'll be waiting. Likewise, I don't want sexualised images of children on a forum that purports to be for users of all ages because I find such images repugnant in the extreme. But I guess we're all just prudes, right?

My problem is not with sex or porn or anything like that. It's strictly to do with the sexualisation of minors and how disturbing and tasteless and harmful that is.

And just because no one was harmed in the making of it doesn't mean it isn't harmful. Of course it is. Child pornography/Lolicon/shotacon/anything similiar to them is harmful to the minds of the people that consume it because it corrupts and blurs moral boundaries, promotes potentially horrific behaviour and in a more trivial sense it's just not sexually healthy.
 
Right final line here here to stop this fight, anything ecchi is allowed link wise aslong as you post only the link, not the image on the forum

anything that's actual hentai is not allowed and will be removed with a verbal warning for 1st time offence followed by a official warning if repeated

for terms of reference, said picture involved in this arguement is classed as ecchi and therefore is allowed via a link only.

Also note, as far that even if you do dislike the kind of pics, they are NOT against the law at this moment in time and so any further requests to get them removed completly will not taken into consideration unless you can prove they are officially law breaking.




now then enough of this topic please guys, lets kiss, make up and get on with our lives and back on track in here. ;)



___________________________________________________________

this is the line, anyone else found crossing it about the topic may find their posts removed. Feel free to continue the arguement via pm and if you have any other complaints about it, you know where the mods are
 
I thought the whole point of this thread was free flowing conversation? I've seen arguements in here that have been far more inane and much more insulting and the admin hasn't stepped in to do anything about it. Seriously, are you guys trying to be this unfair and hypocritical, or does it just come naturally?

We were having a good conversation, and YET AGAIN, the admins have to come in and destroy it. Geez, can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE have Paul back already? I mean, ffs, it's not often a good debate gets going on here since you lot took over and starting acting like egotistical, control freaks, making people afraid to express opinions, why ruin it?

/sigh
 
CitizenGeek said:
I thought the whole point of this thread was free flowing conversation? I've seen arguements in here that have been far more inane and much more insulting and the admin hasn't stepped in to do anything about it. Seriously, are you guys trying to be this unfair and hypocritical, or does it just come naturally?

We were having a good conversation, and YET AGAIN, the admins have to come in and destroy it. Geez, can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE have Paul back already? I mean, ffs, it's not often a good debate gets going on here since you lot took over and starting acting like egotistical, control freaks, why ruin it?

/sigh
Click to expand...

I never stepped in, primarily because i never had a problem with it, it was a decent flowing debate and as such i have no problem with it continuing so long as you don't just blantantly insult one another, which i don't think will happen anyway. I think Ryo was just being a tad over-cautious there, which is, in some ways, fair enough.
 
Arbalest said:
CitizenGeek said:
I thought the whole point of this thread was free flowing conversation? I've seen arguements in here that have been far more inane and much more insulting and the admin hasn't stepped in to do anything about it. Seriously, are you guys trying to be this unfair and hypocritical, or does it just come naturally?

We were having a good conversation, and YET AGAIN, the admins have to come in and destroy it. Geez, can we PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE have Paul back already? I mean, ffs, it's not often a good debate gets going on here since you lot took over and starting acting like egotistical, control freaks, why ruin it?

/sigh
Click to expand...

I never stepped in, primarily because i never had a problem with it, it was a decent flowing debate and as such i have no problem with it continuing so long as you don't just blantantly insult one another, which i don't think will happen anyway. I think Ryo was just being a tad over-cautious there, which is, in some ways, fair enough.
Click to expand...
So... Is he in line, or was he overstepping?... Seems like a light-hearted verdict, but I wont complain any further.

Personally, I'd be glad for the convo to end here. Not 1's gonna let-up it seems, so it's just a throw of random words saying smidgidly different to their opinions pointed before and repeating similar phrases... My review, King Kong + Monthra both died with and whilst fighting Godzilla.

But go ahead... I wont/cant stop it... Who wants Nachos?!!!
 
aye maybe i did go over the top, had a 2nd read, but you were both trying to push for a mod call on the situation and i gave you one,

but yeah, feel free to keep the arguement going, but keep it civilised, and tone down the language a bit ;)

but yes, as chaz said, i just felt like this arguement could go on for pages, so i thought i'd try nip it in the bud while i could
 
See, i did think it was fine, neither where over the top, or anything, only really holding their own. But for a topic such as that, its one that never really has a final verdict, since there will always be arguments for either side, so it could essentially go on for a good while yet. Not that i'm complaining, i don't have much else to do, so reading it as it was going on was a way to pass the time ;p
 
ayase said:
I get what you're saying Spyro, but if you undersand what I mean I'm saying that your friends have the right to talk about sex, but you also have the right not to listen. No-one should force anyone to do things they don't want to, but nor should they have to go out of their way to hide it because others might take offence. My point about sexuality being out in the open is a little OTT, but I just use it as an example of how individual morality differs. ie: It wouldn't matter to me but others would be up in arms.
Click to expand...

Yes but there is far more to consider than that. I mean, say for example one of my friends was bragging about he's been having sex, it's hard for me not to hear. I'm not saying he shouldn't be allowed to talk about it, but he should bear in mind other peoples feelings. Also, what if his partner doesn't want what they've done shouted about so everyone else can hear?

I also agree with CG in that putting porn on daytime TV is a ridiculous idea i'm sorry.
 
Just got home from work - I left this yesterday since Ryo had changed it to a link (which seemed like an agreeable compromise) and things seemed to have settled, but it started again when I was away today. Apologies for the delay.

I appreciate that this has is something of a no win situation and I'm going to enjoy losing some popularity no matter what I say; still, that never stopped me in the past!

CG (or anyone): If you find an image strongly distasteful and want it to have more attention, please do drop one or more of the mods a note so we can see it quickly. Especially if you think it's really bad and will cause harm. People have done this in the past and the matters have been dealt with with no fuss. I work quite intensively during the day and couldn't possibly have seen that in time so Ryo kindly took care of it in a logical way, but in general if you PM me so that I can know I will come in specially on a break and sort a problem out. Particularly in the case of illegal/obviously offensive content where swift action is preferable. I'm happy to err on the side of caution with borderline offensive things if that is needed, especially if they're in an unexpected place and might shock people.

Everyone: So long as something isn't illegal or in any other way disallowed by the rules (or common sense), a link and a noticeable content warning is usually cool. To use the example of that Kei picture I'd consider that kind of thing fine, though it should be linked with a warning rather than posted directly as an inline image in this kind of thread so people browsing with friends or family present don't get an awkward surprise.

Personally, as a woman who doesn't like lolicon/shota stuff at all I didn't think that particular image was greatly offensive or sexual, though I do agree with CG's comment that the L*S characters are a dodgy area in that they are often portrayed as being younger than they are supposed to be (the classic "Sasami from Tenchi Muyou is centuries old!" situation) which can be unpleasant when they are involved in adult activities. Had it been more eroticised I would have found it quickly entering my discomfort zone, whereas the Dirty Pair image ayase produced didn't have that awkward level to it at all despite being overtly sexualised. We all have different levels of sensitivity for such things especially given the wide variations in ages and fandoms around on boards like this so as long as people respect other peoples' expectations and keep to common sense guidelines about how to present that kind of thing (or not present it, in the case of stuff that would obviously cause grave offense; we do have some young members) it should be possible to coexist.

R
 
::turns volume down a couple of notches to appease Ryo:: ;)

CitizenGeek said:
My problem is not with sex or porn or anything like that. It's strictly to do with the sexualisation of minors and how disturbing and tasteless and harmful that is.
Click to expand...
Okay, that's helpful. So let's primarily address this then.

We have different views of how society should behave in terms of morality - I think it should be left to the individual as far as possible bar causing actual harm to others, and you think that the community has a role to play in shaping that individual morality. You're a beliver in the idea of a "public morality" and I'm not. I don't find that particullarly absurd, indeed several prominent philosophers (among them Nietzsche, Rand) have argued that there exists no higher authority than the will of the individual. However, neither of us are likely to change our beliefs on this matter, so it's probably not worth us spending any more time on.

On the subject of sexualisation of minors (again, our opposing views on that specific picture aren't likely to change) I can only re-iterate what I said in another thread: We'd all probably prefer that no-one was attracted to children. It is abnormal - however, so are many non-illegal sexual fetishes and indeed, sexual orientations (to refer to the litteral meaning of the word here, not the norm, I'm not trying to insult you personally). I don't presume therefore that paedophiles can help being paedophiles, if you're attracted to something then there's not much you can do about that bar some kind of (eqaully unappealing) shock therapy to disincentivise behaviour. Therefore I think that it's better to allow fictional representations of the sexualisation of children than to ban them because of the very fact that there are no victims. Of course real child abuse and child pornography is harmful, but wouldn't it be better if (regardless of how distasteful you or I might find it) paedophiles had a way of gratifying their desires which did not result in the abuse of children? Well at the moment they do, and it's lolicon/shotacon. The minute we decide to ban it we will be criminalising many otherwise law abiding people on the basis that their desires and not their actions are wrong. And I think that's encroaching too far into the realm of the individual's rights.

@Spyro - Like I said above, the "porn on TV" thing was just an example I was using to show how people's ideas of morality differ (I got a little carried away which I have a tendancy to do when people are being conservative about things - I tend to use the most liberal things I can think of as a counter-argument, not always to my own benefit...). And presumably your friend doesn't tie you to a chair and force you to listen to him brag about his antics, so I'd still argue that you have a choice whether to listen to him or not. You have the choice not to socialise with him if you don't like it, which presumably you balance out with the things you like about spending time with him, and decide that the good outweigh the bad. Which is perfectly understandable and your decision to make. As for how his partner feels, that's between the two of them and not really anyone else's concern.
 
Back
Top