This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
No, the primary question is whether this is behavior that we as a society want to see normalized. "loli" is just the thin edge of the wedge for those who want to add a 'P' to LGBTQ, and get their stripe on the pride flag.
I don't see any meaningful distinction between the pedos and anyone else on the LGBTQ flag except the potential exploitation and harm of actual children. They're weird sexual fetishes that make the individual happy if they can fulfill it, but strays from the biological purpose of actual reproduction, and disgusts 90%+ of the population who don't share that fetish.
My stance on non-offending pedos, ones who look at drawings of cartoon children but would never harm a child in real life, is basically the same as for anyone else with a weird fetish: keep it to yourself. Do whatever you want alone in your bedroom, but I don't want to hear about it or have you mainstream it. Stay out of public, don't go on parades about it. But this doesn't require banning them from all art websites, just have a strong tagging/filtering system so normal people don't have to see it unless they opt in.
But I think it very much matters when actual children are involved, because that is evil behavior with massive harm. So the distinction is incredibly important, and I think is the most important aspect of this whole issue. People's fetishes and pride flags matter a little, but they matter less than violent harm done to children. In so far as "normalizing" loli art will lead to a slippery slope to pedos getting accepted to LGBTQ and this later slipping into normalizing actual harm to children, this matters. But the second step in that process is the primary question I'm concerned with: does loli art actually gateway towards real CP or physical acts? Because if not then the question of loli-pedos getting into LGBTQ or not doesn't matter because they won't slip further.
More options
Context Copy link
Something can be legal without being normalised.
E.g. It's not criminal to be into scat but people really don't talk about how much they love shit.
In any case, making it easier for pedos to be addicted to porn seriously lowers the odds of them doing something harmful, just as porn use lowers RL sexual activity.
In addition, empirical data from Denmark and Czech Republic where CP was legal for a time make it look like this is true.
Yes, that would be the current status quo. While many (including myself, and the governing board at Mastercard it seems) find it sketchy as all get out and want nothing to do with it, it remains legal in the eyes of the government.
This the central question underlying this whole discussion is about whether it's fair to treat gore and loli/CP differently from more "vanilla" sorts of porn, ie whether it should be normalized.
Until we can fix the pedo issue at the root ( prevent the developmental disorder causing it), letting pedos watch porn is probably the best idea.
I mean, imagine how horny people would be if the only porn available was something they didn't care for at all.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link