>> |
Anonymous
>>1052066 I agree, though in the case of cp, a child was directly victimized or at the very least exploited. Supporting an industry of that nature is to be a participant (even if only to encourage the pornographer by viewing and distributing their work) and therefore an unquestionable criminal. On a lighter side, I feel that 'lolicon' steals customers from those who might otherwise be involved in the exploitation of actual kids, which with great irony would make those involved with 'virtual depictions' defenders of children everywhere. I'm mostly kidding, but as video games do not create violent people, so then must 'lolicon (the westernized version of the term which refers specifically to virtual content, as opposed to the Japanese who do not make the distinction)' not create pedophiles.
In fact, in my experience, lolicons tend to avoid association with the idea of 'lolicon' as a form of cp, oddly enough.
As far as libel... I feel that it can be abused. Character defamation of a political leader, for instance, could be considered libel so long as the accusations could not be proved. It just seems too convenient a loophole.
|