Age play: Harmless Kink or Predator Safe Space?

[Lady Irony]

I find anything under 16 to be a No for me personally. I don't get into age play myself but I like some dark themes and art throughout history is full of dark themes.

As someone who is creative I think it is interesting to explore these topics. I am curious about Incest for example and have ideas around it but by no means do I want to really do it, it is rather sickening when I think about it! Likewise just because I kill a character it doesn't mean I want to kill anyone in reality.

I think PC is rather strangulating and kills creativity and humour. So it all needs to be viewed in a certain context and I don't think many people who write about extreme themes are really wanting to do it in reality. Just as most people who play Call of Duty for example aren't joining the military to experience combat or even picking up a gun to shoot at bottles.

I also think depending on the setting of the role play and what is being explored that age comes into play. The idea of the 21 year old virginal Princess in the 1400's is rather unlikely as by 21 most females back then would have already had a couple of children or be viewed as old maids if still single. Some stories just need a high school setting to be realistic Teacher x Student tends to lack the taboo if the student is 18 plus rather than 16 for example.

I think everything needs moderation rather than people freaking out.

 

[tsukasa]

To keep my response simple and get straight to the point, fictional characters (including anime and manga) are not real, they have no emotions, and the age is simply a thought attached to the character. By not allowing an outlet for people who would rather go after real life children, governments etc are forcing real pedophiles to go after real children. Japan allows loli hentai and also has one of, if not the lowest, child sex rates in the world.

The reason real pedophilia is illegal is the harm it can do both physically and psychologically, which is logical and sensical. Making fictional characters illegal is nothing short of a thought crime. I absolutely do not condone real life pedophilia, but I don't care about fictional characters because they only make the one thinking about them feel good without harming anyone else.

There is no difference between the loli fanatics and the furry fanatics in this aspect; furry is not real bestiality because animals are not being harmed. It is completely nonsensical to me as to why anyone would be against fictional characters and say it harms children (it doesn't) and promotes real life pedophilia (it doesn't, as proven by Japan's statistics, and I certainly have not wanted to expand my ageplay enjoyment into reality).

 

[Bastion]

I have a moral and ethical code that dictates my real life behaviour and attitudes. BMR is just a place where my imagination gets to be flexed.

I'm in the exact same boat. People across the internet enjoy vore, beast, snuff, extreme violence, rape fantasies, and more. With all this other stuff out there that proves that people don't act out what they role-play online, it's hard to take this kind of discussion seriously. I'm unbiased.

 

[Passion]

I personally will not do under 18. At least due to my morals, I feel like all smut should have characters 18+. I respectfully turn my head away towards those who RP under 18. I don't hold it against anyone as long as it is within the site rules, but I refuse to take part in it.

I also don't always get the desire around it. Idk about you guys, but I was really young and dumb at 16. I don't find that attractive at all compared to having a mind of a grown woman. Still, I know we all have different preferences, but I rather forget cringy teen life exists.

 

[Light-Fox]

I personally will not do under 18. At least due to my morals, I feel like all smut should have characters 18+. I respectfully turn my head away towards those who RP under 18. I don't hold it against anyone as long as it is within the site rules, but I refuse to take part in it.

I also don't always get the desire around it. Idk about you guys, but I was really young and dumb at 16. I don't find that attractive at all compared to having a mind of a grown woman. Still, I know we all have different preferences, but I rather forget cringy teen life exists.

I think that's because you're a sapiosexual, someone who is sexually attracted to intelligence. When I was 16, a 42 year old mother of a two year old, a friend of my mother's was coming over during the summer. Sometimes she would be waiting for my mom and I would take a break from my internet obsession to grab something to drink and we would end up chatting. After a number of nights in a row of having intelligent conversation that never veered anywhere near anything inappropriate for polite discussion, she admitted to being sexually attracted to me because of my intelligence. She had deflected passes being made at her from quite a few adult male friends of my mom's, even my mom's cousin who was living with us who was fit and muscular from his work as a roofer. She said, "A man has to fuck my mind before I will let him fuck my body."

Bottom line, I don't think that everyone is the same at a given age. Maybe you think you were dumb at that age, I can't say, but not everyone is and it's a logical fallacy to equate the two. It involves too much assumption about what someone finds attractive. I actually doubt most people who do underage age play could even tell what about it they enjoy or why. Or if they could, give you the same answer as each other.

 

[Passion]

I think that's because you're a sapiosexual, someone who is sexually attracted to intelligence. When I was 16, a 42 year old mother of a two year old, a friend of my mother's was coming over during the summer. Sometimes she would be waiting for my mom and I would take a break from my internet obsession to grab something to drink and we would end up chatting. After a number of nights in a row of having intelligent conversation that never veered anywhere near anything inappropriate for polite discussion, she admitted to being sexually attracted to me because of my intelligence. She had deflected passes being made at her from quite a few adult male friends of my mom's, even my mom's cousin who was living with us who was fit and muscular from his work as a roofer. She said, "A man has to fuck my mind before I will let him fuck my body."

Bottom line, I don't think that everyone is the same at a given age. Maybe you think you were dumb at that age, I can't say, but not everyone is and it's a logical fallacy to equate the two. It involves too much assumption about what someone finds attractive. I actually doubt most people who do underage age play could even tell what about it they enjoy or why. Or if they could, give you the same answer as each other.

There is a reason why there is an age of consent, drinking age, and etc. The brain doesn't fully developing until the age of 25, and sometimes even older. Yes, some 16 year olds are wise for their years, but their brains aren't even fully developed. This is where the young and dumb comes in.

I know too many teens taken advantage of for this "young and dumb" trait and it fills me with disgust to think about people RPing it, especially with only one teen. As I said, it is a moral thing for me.

 

[Light-Fox]

There is a reason why there is an age of consent, drinking age, and etc. The brain doesn't fully developing until the age of 25, and sometimes even older. Yes, some 16 year olds are wise for their years, but their brains aren't even fully developed. This is where the young and dumb comes in.

I know too many teens taken advantage of for this "young and dumb" trait and it fills me with disgust to think about people RPing it, especially with only one teen. As I said, it is a moral thing for me.

Yet people are considered adults legally before age 25, allowed to drink, smoke, fuck, drive, join the military, and start raising children of their own all before their brains are done developing. The reasoning behind it seems pretty flimsy given the ages at which people are allowed to engage in those activities are all well before the brain finishes developing and minors become legally responsible for themselves. Hell, in a lot of states minors can be tried for criminal actions as adults well before 18. That's some severe societal level cognitive dissonance.

 

[Passion]

Yet people are considered adults legally before age 25, allowed to drink, smoke, fuck, drive, join the military, and start raising children of their own all before their brains are done developing. The reasoning behind it seems pretty flimsy given the ages at which people are allowed to engage in those activities are all well before the brain finishes developing and minors become legally responsible for themselves. Hell, in a lot of states minors can be tried for criminal actions as adults well before 18. That's some severe societal level cognitive dissonance.

Even if it takes until 25, each year makes a big difference. I believe the age for consent, driving, drinking, grambling, military, and so on should be at least 21+.

I "consented" at 16 to an adult, and that was one of the biggest mistakes of my life. No thanks.

I'll drop this since this mixes with my RL views. I'm very sensitive about young age.

 

[Xanaphia]

When I was 16, a 42 year old mother of a two year old, a friend of my mother's was coming over during the summer. Sometimes she would be waiting for my mom and I would take a break from my internet obsession to grab something to drink and we would end up chatting. After a number of nights in a row of having intelligent conversation that never veered anywhere near anything inappropriate for polite discussion, she admitted to being sexually attracted to me because of my intelligence. She had deflected passes being made at her from quite a few adult male friends of my mom's, even my mom's cousin who was living with us who was fit and muscular from his work as a roofer. She said, "A man has to fuck my mind before I will let him fuck my body."

I hate to be the one to tell you this, my dude, but that lady was a predator. I'm sorry, but these are classic predator tactics, trying to make you feel special or smart for having attracted her attention. She wasn't interested in adult men because she couldn't manipulate them as easily as she could manipulate a teenager.

 

[Lydia]

I think that's because you're a sapiosexual, someone who is sexually attracted to intelligence. When I was 16, a 42 year old mother of a two year old, a friend of my mother's was coming over during the summer. Sometimes she would be waiting for my mom and I would take a break from my internet obsession to grab something to drink and we would end up chatting. After a number of nights in a row of having intelligent conversation that never veered anywhere near anything inappropriate for polite discussion, she admitted to being sexually attracted to me because of my intelligence. She had deflected passes being made at her from quite a few adult male friends of my mom's, even my mom's cousin who was living with us who was fit and muscular from his work as a roofer. She said, "A man has to fuck my mind before I will let him fuck my body."

There’s an extremely good chance that woman was manipulating you, and because you were 16, you didn’t see it. The imbalance of experience, understanding, and social power is one of the main reasons why relationships between teenage minors and adults are prohibited. She told you she was attracted to your intelligence because she could tell that’s what you wanted to hear. She was either fucking with you or preying on you, both of which are awful.

This is super inappropriate behavior on that woman’s part and I hope you told someone about it.

Anyway, power dynamics are a big thing in a lot of role plays, and when age is a factor, it’s usually a trait that illustrates the character’s innate vulnerability/inexperience/powerlessness. This is also the potential problem with encouraging this type of fantasy, especially with prepubescent children - they are extremely vulnerable. Normalizing or encouraging these (always predatory) fantasies does nothing to alleviate them; there is NO legitimate treatment of pedophiles that involves indulging these feelings in fantasy. It’s all about shifting sexual feelings to more appropriate subjects.

I am opposed to these things, even in writing, as you can explore power dynamics easily without this element, it can perpetuate pedophilic inclinations in those who already have them, and it can introduce pedophilic fantasies to those who haven’t experienced them before. How many people on these boards have mentioned their kinks being introduced or influenced by their writing? That can also happen with these types of stories.

That’s enough for me to say fuck no.

 

[Light-Fox]

I hate to be the one to tell you this, my dude, but that lady was a predator. I'm sorry, but these are classic predator tactics, trying to make you feel special or smart for having attracted her attention. She wasn't interested in adult men because she couldn't manipulate them as easily as she could manipulate a teenager.

Interesting that you think so.

 

[Light-Fox]

There’s an extremely good chance that woman was manipulating you, and because you were 16, you didn’t see it. The imbalance of experience, understanding, and social power is one of the main reasons why relationships between teenage minors and adults are prohibited. She told you she was attracted to your intelligence because she could tell that’s what you wanted to hear. She was either fucking with you or preying on you, both of which are awful.

This is super inappropriate behavior on that woman’s part and I hope you told someone about it.

Anyway, power dynamics are a big thing in a lot of role plays, and when age is a factor, it’s usually a trait that illustrates the character’s innate vulnerability/inexperience/powerlessness. This is also the potential problem with encouraging this type of fantasy, especially with prepubescent children - they are extremely vulnerable. Normalizing or encouraging these (always predatory) fantasies does nothing to alleviate them; there is NO legitimate treatment of pedophiles that involves indulging these feelings in fantasy. It’s all about shifting sexual feelings to more appropriate subjects.

I am opposed to these things, even in writing, as you can explore power dynamics easily without this element, it can perpetuate pedophilic inclinations in those who already have them, and it can introduce pedophilic fantasies to those who haven’t experienced them before. How many people on these boards have mentioned their kinks being introduced or influenced by their writing? That can also happen with these types of stories.

That’s enough for me to say fuck no.

Actually, that was definitely not what I wanted to hear. I would have wanted to hear something about my body or how charming I was. I was told how intelligent I was by family members and teachers my entire life. I was sick of it. To this day, it makes me want to puke when people still mention it. I settle for smiling politely while resisting the urge to roll my eyes. No, the key to manipulating me would have been to tell me how strong I looked or how handsome I was.


The same argument you just made against age play could be made for non-con encouraging people to go out and sexually assault others, and that kink is far more common on here. It's also basically the same as the 'violence in video games makes people violent' argument, that it encourages it. Or the 'marijuana is a gateway drug that will make you do other drugs'. It doesn't. None of these things do. Slippery slope logic fallacy: 'first you're roleplaying it, then you'll want to go out and do it for real'. Give me a break.

 

[Lydia]

Actually, that was definitely not what I wanted to hear. I would have wanted to hear something about my body or how charming I was. I was told how intelligent I was by family members and teachers my entire life. I was sick of it. To this day, it makes me want to puke when people still mention it. I settle for smiling politely while resisting the urge to roll my eyes. No, the key to manipulating me would have been to tell me how strong I looked or how handsome I was.


The same argument you just made against age play could be made for non-con encouraging people to go out and sexually assault others, and that kink is far more common on here. It's also basically the same as the 'violence in video games makes people violent' argument, that it encourages it. Or the 'marijuana is a gateway drug that will make you do other drugs'. It doesn't. None of these things do. Slippery slope logic fallacy: 'first you're roleplaying it, then you'll want to go out and do it for real'. Give me a break.

And yet, you still remember that interaction quite clearly - it stuck with you and made an impact. I’m pretty sure your teachers and family didn’t tell you that you’re smart the way this lady told you that you’re smart.

There are lots of adults who safely engage in consensual non-consent, which is essentially what you’re doing when you play NC. This does not translate to scenes involving children; you can never have a safe and healthy sexual encounter with a child, and there is no possibility of consent ever.

Unfortunately, there are lots of real-world examples of people who pursue child pornography/fantasy and harm real children (in the news recently: Josh Duggar). I never claimed that everyone who engages in this writing will harm children, but I certainly won’t participate in something that perpetuates these fantasies, nor would I be comfortable on a site where other people are playing them.

I have a right to my opinion and I have good reasons for my opinion. I find your attitude to be condescending, so I won’t be replying again on this topic. Have a good night.

 

[Light-Fox]

And yet, you still remember that interaction quite clearly - it stuck with you and made an impact. I’m pretty sure your teachers and family didn’t tell you that you’re smart the way this lady told you that you’re smart.

There are lots of adults who safely engage in consensual non-consent, which is essentially what you’re doing when you play NC. This does not translate to scenes involving children; you can never have a safe and healthy sexual encounter with a child, and there is no possibility of consent ever.

Unfortunately, there are lots of real-world examples of people who pursue child pornography/fantasy and harm real children (in the news recently: Josh Duggar). I never claimed that everyone who engages in this writing will harm children, but I certainly won’t participate in something that perpetuates these fantasies, nor would I be comfortable on a site where other people are playing them.

I have a right to my opinion and I have good reasons for my opinion. I find your attitude to be condescending, so I won’t be replying again on this topic. Have a good night.

And I have found yours to be condescending. I also have a right to my opinion and good reasons for it. Nice Strawman, by the way. No one asked you to participate in such.

 

[Mitsu]

You can't pretend everyone is the same.

Age play is both a harmless kink and a safe space for predators. The idea that it doesn't fit both of these descriptions is absurd to me. Ignoring the idea of sexual role-play and age play, consider the numerous other things we enjoy in our passive and interactive entertainment. We generally have a very specific view on sex and sexuality that places it apart from other aspects of humanity. One of the most blaring would be violence. Does the enjoyment of violence in our entertainment make us violent people? Does enjoying hours upon hours of killing people in Call of Duty make one have the very real desire to take a gun and start mowing down real people?

It certainly can, but it doesn't always.

When we look at themes like age play and incest and other such topics that are considered sexually taboo, we never apply this same standard. We are conditioned to be more sensitive to the realities of sexual abuse, sometimes for very good reasons, so we have trouble putting it into perspective. Does a person that enjoys playing an adult fucking a teenager mean that adult wants to fuck a teenager? There may be some aspect of their sexuality that finds the very idea arousing. However, does that mean that they will act on that impulse or that they would actually want to?

From personal experience, I've written both age play and incest, and neither are things I have any real desire to partake in. I find my family members sexually repulsive, to the point where it's a topic I avoid with them entirely. I have no interest in having sex with some fifteen-year-old, because I don't feel like it's a person I could make a real connection with-- I am not on the same journey as them. Similarly, I love writing intense, gore-filled action and playing games where I mow down human beings by the dozen, and yet the idea of hurting another person physically is not something that sits well with me. Yet, in some context, these things can be entertaining, interesting, fun, or arousing.

Fiction has a way of presenting us with ideas and themes that we might not like in reality, but can find tantalizing in fantasy. Nobody should like Dexter, Hannibal Lecter, Darth Vader, the Joker, Patrick Batman, and any other host of terribly amoral and evil characters in fiction. Their actions alone should repulse us, but we enjoy watching them on the screen. We love these characters, typically, because they interest us and touch upon dark impulses that are forbidden. Those forbidden things are often engrossing and presented in an attractive package that conditions us to have a positive response to it.

Where the wrinkle comes in is the separation of the author and the work. Some people find it very difficult to separate the author from the fiction, and this is even more difficult in role-playing. Many people on this website dislike first-person role-playing, because it blurs the lines between fiction and non-fiction for them. I find this to be a silly and personal hang up that ignores countless novels and stories told in that perspective. That's the key word here, because how people feel about role-playing tends to depend on their perspective on it.

Is adult role-playing an exercise in collaborative, creative writing, or is it the personal outlet of sexual desires and frustrations?

Anyone that has spent enough time on this website, or in chatroom role-playing, will find that many of us tend to lean towards the latter. Many a role-player uses this medium as an outlet for their sexual desires, the things they cannot do in real life. Spend time as a woman on a website like this, and you will find plenty a man that approaches you for more than just a creative writing exercise. They want a sexual partner, where the role-play serves merely as a proxy for their true intent. The perception that role-plays are only a proxy for a more intimate and personal expression of virtual actions is very real and common. He might be writing about fucking your character, but he's likely very much touching himself to the idea of fucking you or the idea that you're engaging in a sexual act with him.

The people that view role-playing in this manner are very likely the same people that would use age play as a safe place to explore their actual desires.

What about the people that don't? What about the people that write all sorts of subject matter without actually endorsing it? Do you automatically endorse and desire the things you write about? If I decide to write a white skin-head, as a racially mixed man, does that mean I'm actually a person that holds racist views? Does the exploration of an idea or concept damn us to be labeled as party to that idea or concept?

Personally I do not think it necessarily does. I don't think any of this is so simple as to make blanket statements. We are all as different as we are the same. You must take these things on an individual basis.

 

[RedRose]

To me, depends on the age and the treatment of it
Some dude re-living his teens with two teen characters? A sicko rping a kid? Is it consensual? As in, old enough to BE consensual?

 

[Strange Days]

Definitely think it can be both, there's a difference between writing a dynamic because it's been consensually discussed and acting on harmful fantasies that affect other people. It's similar to the age-old question : "Does writing a racist/discriminating character make me x?" I don't think it does if the person has healthy bases to work off, they can determine that their writing does not, in fact, reflect their IRL beliefs, but they want to explore those themes in a controlled environment.

On the other hand, it also offers people who hold these beliefs a chance to strumentalize them. Though, based on experience, they tend to out themselves sooner or later when they can't restrain themselves behind the pretenses of fiction. The community is full of horror stories about these writers that would probably be better of never even having access to a phone/PC to spread their views online or even in public for the greater good.

It's sort of why 'age boundaries' exist on forums like this...some may allow younger characters to be portrayed, others will outright veto them, and I don't blame them, the more lenient you get, more and more of these things start slipping through the cracks and building up unless taken care of.

I think I rambled like usual.

 

[Sekah]

I want to speak up as someone in the ageplaying community. I find the idea that I would ever harm a child or want to harm a child because I write underage or infantilization as daft as saying I'm clearly a rapist because I like writing non-con. Absolutely not; ageplaying in real life and online is a consensual act between consenting adults, always. Otherwise, it's child abuse. But, in my view, what could be more consensual than written fantasies with another adult?

I don't think liking Hannibal Lector means you're a potential serial killer. Mitsu is right, though, that some people who've liked Hannibal Lector have gone on to murder. Similarly, some people who write ageplay are predators. But just like you wouldn't automatically think someone is a murderer because they like Hannibal, you shouldn't automatically assume someone is some card-carrying NAMBLA pedophile because they like ageplay, even extreme ageplay.

Let me put it this way. In the non-con community, there are sexually abusive predators in the community, especially straight men. But the vast majority of the community is just as horrified about real predators as the average person—frequently more horrified, since the non-con community is unusually full of survivors of sexual trauma. Meanwhile, in the ageplay community, most of the people I know in it (and I've been a long-time member on some massive discords and forums for it) are actually victims of child abuse themselves, and are horrified at the idea of someone actually hurting children. I know for me, writing this kind of thing can be incredibly cathartic for what I've gone through in my own life as a survivor of child abuse. Does that mean I should stop writing it? Why? It's not hurting a real child, I don't write with anyone who would hurt a real child, and it's actually helping me, a victim of child abuse, process my experiences.

I'll leave you with one quick fact that cinches the deal for me. When ageplay-type resources like loli and shota are banned by a country, according to studies done in the aftermath of that legislative decision, rate of child molestation goes up precipitously, it doesn't go down. In the real world, allowing ageplay and allowing it to be legal saves real children from being victimized. I don't think you can claim some ethical, moral position when the position leads to an increase in the very thing you claim to be ethically against.

A cartoon or a sketch of a character in a written work cannot possibly be a real child. It's a victimless crime. If you have other evidence a person is sexually abusive, then act on that. Report all suspected victimization of children to the police. Be vigilant that the person isn't interacting inappropriately with underage persons. By all means, protect children. But banning violent video games won't end school shootings, banning non-con won't end sexual assault, and banning ageplay? Yeah, it won't end child molestation.

In the end, I think this moral crusade against anything consenting adults who are being SSC do is just toxic puritanism that makes zero attempt to actually help anyone or end child abuse, sexual predation, or anything like it. It's lazy faux-activism that actually causes more harm than good. It's easy to harass people on the internet because they like some kink you don't; it's a lot harder to put in work to help abused kids, by opening your home to fostering, for example, or helping man a hotline for victims of domestic violence or sexual assault, or donating to a women's shelter or other NGO, or being there for someone when you find out they've suffered or are still suffering sexual, physical or emotional abuse, or any of the other real-world things you could do to help victims and help protect victims. Those types of things are much, much harder to do, and have a lot more lasting impact.

Thanks for listening.

 

[Shiver]

I'll leave you with one quick fact that cinches the deal for me. When ageplay-type resources like loli and shota are banned by a country, according to studies done in the aftermath of that legislative decision, rate of child molestation goes up precipitously, it doesn't go down.

Really? Do you happen to have a link handy? Not that I think you're lying, but if that's true it seems... pretty important.

End of the day, I'd happily ban "loli" and any other smut lit featuring underage characters... but I'd feel like a bit of a hypocrite, as a writer and consumer of rape smut lit. I absolutely understand the difference between fantasy and reality. I can't really say why, then, I think one harmful violent taboo is fine to write about and one isn't.

 

[Sekah]

Really? Do you happen to have a link handy? Not that I think you're lying, but if that's true it seems... pretty important.

End of the day, I'd happily ban "loli" and any other smut lit featuring underage characters... but I'd feel like a bit of a hypocrite, as a writer and consumer of rape smut lit. I absolutely understand the difference between fantasy and reality. I can't really say why, then, I think one harmful violent taboo is fine to write about and one isn't.

Debate

Explaining the exclusion of lolicon from the 2014 amendment to Japan's child pornography laws, an LDP lawmaker stated that "Manga, anime, and CG child pornography don't directly violate the rights of girls or boys. It has not been scientifically validated that it even indirectly causes damage. Since it hasn't been validated, punishing people who view it would go too far;"[130]​ his statement echoes activist arguments.[131]​ Statistically, sexual abuse of minors in Japan has declined since the 1960s and 1970s while the prevalence of fictional lolicon has increased;[132]​ Patrick W. Galbraith interprets this as evidence that lolicon imagery does not necessarily influence crimes,[73]​ while Steven Smet suggests that lolicon is an "exorcism of fantasies" that contributes to Japan's low crime rates.[133]​ Galbraith further argues that otaku culture collectively promotes a media literacy and ethical position of separating fiction and reality, especially when the conflation of the two would be dangerous.[134]​ Drawing on his fieldwork as an anthropologist, he writes that the sexual imagination of otaku, including lolicon, "did not lead to 'immoral acts', but rather ethical activity".[135]​ A 2012 report by the Sexologisk Klinik for the Danish government found no evidence that cartoons and drawings depicting fictive child sexual abuse encourage real abuse.[136]​ Academic Sharalyn Orbaugh argues that manga depicting underage sexuality can help victims of child sexual abuse to work through their own trauma, and that there is greater harm in regulating sexual expression than potential harm caused by such manga.[137]​

 

[Sekah]

I honestly should keep a copy of the studies I've read on what happens when Loli and Shota and similar fantasy material are banned country-wide, but I don't have a copy handy. The LDP politician is indirectly referencing the findings of those studies. I'm busy tonight but if you'd like me to go and try to re-find those studies, I absolutely welcome diving into the literature.

 

[Shiver]

So based on that, there have been studies exploring whether consuming that content leads to harmful acts - and apparently, there's no evidence that it does.

If you find studies suggesting that it actually reduces perpetration in real life, please share.

 

[Sekah]

Really? Do you happen to have a link handy? Not that I think you're lying, but if that's true it seems... pretty important.

End of the day, I'd happily ban "loli" and any other smut lit featuring underage characters... but I'd feel like a bit of a hypocrite, as a writer and consumer of rape smut lit. I absolutely understand the difference between fantasy and reality. I can't really say why, then, I think one harmful violent taboo is fine to write about and one isn't.

Also, the reason why it "feels different" is because pedophilia, especially in America, is essentially considered the worst crime you can commit, even over murder of children and rape of other persons. It's a More, which is a sociological term for a taboo that's fundamental to the society. People hate child molesters so much that they celebrate when they're raped in prison. I don't think there's any crime so bad that you should be raped for it, that that should be an appropriate punishment. And I absolutely despise child molesters. Because pedophilia is essentially considered the ultimate crime/ultimate taboo, when faced with anything that to some people smacks of it, they lose their heads a little. Even if they fully understand that people who write non-con aren't rapists and aren't promoting rape, they think there's something essentially different with a child character.

The thing is, there's nothing different. There's no evidence that sexual attraction to lolicon or shotacon actually correlates to sexual attraction to real children, let alone the next step that it's encouraging the abuse. It's a taboo, and it's fun to explore taboos in fiction, and for the vast majority of people into shotacon and lolicon, it ends there: as fiction.

The truth is you're several thousand times more likely to view a real sexual assault on Pornhub or on the old Tumblr porn blogs than you are when reading lolicon or shotacon. Does that mean we ban all porn? I don't think that regulating sexuality that harms no one is going down a good path in general. I'm extremely anti-censorship, though.

 

[Sekah]

So based on that, there have been studies exploring whether consuming that content leads to harmful acts - and apparently, there's no evidence that it does.

If you find studies suggesting that it actually reduces perpetration in real life, please share.

Absolutely will, I know for a fact the studies exist, since I read them, I just need to poke around and figure out where I can find some copies.

 

[Sekah]

So based on that, there have been studies exploring whether consuming that content leads to harmful acts - and apparently, there's no evidence that it does.

If you find studies suggesting that it actually reduces perpetration in real life, please share.

Pacific Center for Sex and Society - Pornography, Rape and Sex Crimes in Japan

www.hawaii.edu

Here you go!