this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
-4 points (40.9% liked)

People's Court

449 readers
39 users here now

This is a community for Lemmygrad users and admins to discuss administrative issues in a more transparent manner

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
-4
Should loli posting be allowed? (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
34 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Basically as title, I wanted to hear if posts such as below are acceptable, since as it stands, it doesn't break any of Lemmygrads rules. Frankly, the post is very weird to me, and the comments are bizarre. People talking about how they want to "dominated" by a 14 year old is imo not okay, especially not when it's on a post of a drawing of a child with clear undertones. Maybe I'm misunderstanding the post since I'm not an evangelion fan, but I thought it was noteworthy enough to bring up here.

https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5810839

EDIT: The post has been removed, so I guess that's a no?

top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Imo and from reading the comments the consensus seems to be that the post isn't quite loli but was still disliked. A co-admin already removed the post but the discussion is still good to continue. However, I think it's worth recentering the discussion on the post itself and expand to posts like it that may appear, because "loli" has by itself not really been a problem or something that's even come up on Lemmygrad. Like when I hear "loli" I think little kids with exaggerated childlike traits being treated like adults including potrayed sexually. I don't know personally if I would say this post is loli regardless of what else it may be.

Under rule 4 we already remove all sexually explicit content so there's no risk of explicit porn or loli being posted. To that end if you haven't already please check the original post (if still possible, I don't know if you can open removed posts as a user) before commenting.

edit: since you can't see post here's the picture that was in it. It's nothing visually explicit, you can open this link safely. https://lemmygrad.ml/pictrs/image/7d605124-e786-414f-a336-60927854c60c.jpeg?format=webp

[–] [email protected] 1 points 18 hours ago

You can't view the post as a user, unfortunately

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 day ago

Call me a fascist, but the very words "loli" and "lolicon" should be filtered/banned.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago

I am for not allowing this kind of stuff. This is not the right place for getting "cute" with a fictional early teen cartoon character. Whether this is loli or not is orthogonal to this particular point.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 day ago

What's disgusting, cringe, or weird is irrelevant to me. Acting horny in a public forum not dedicated to that kind of stuff runs the risk of causing discomfort and harm to those sensitive to it, particularly victims of sexual abuse.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago)

No, only 9 feet tall vampires are allowed for that.

That shit was making fun of Evangelion fans who are also for some fucking reason nazis in like 70%-80% cases.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago

Pedo degeneracy better stay away from grad

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 day ago

In a word, no; in two words, fuck no.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago

Lemmygrad being a remote corner of the internet and not one that many people are friendly to, I think it's in out best interests to avoid hosting this kind of stuff full stop. The rest of the internet is a giant goon cave; we don't need to be too.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

We are not Vaush and I’m 100% sure 🔞 posts aren’t allowed here and we even defederated lemmynsfw and we still federated instances like https://sh.itjust.works https://lemmy.world and https://lemmy.ca before https://lemmy.world defederated us

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 day ago

Um no. Don't post porn, especially that kind here please.

That said I don't think posting pictures of anime characters who aren't 18 is on the face of it problematic. It depends on context and tone. It's fine to discuss and have pictures of minor aged characters, it's not okay to be creepy about them (where that line is, I'm not going to try and hash out here, might be best for mods to exercise discretion and remove or lock things that in their estimation go too far). Evangelion is a very mainstream anime not some niche hentai thing so it's not the same as posting characters from certain places/franchises where the original context is a lot less clean.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago

Isn't the point of a shit post to make a stupid not serious post? I thought that post was making fun of Eva fans or something. Maybe I was taking it the wrong way.

I mean from the loli standpoint.... Sexualizing/porn stuff isn't allowed and shouldn't be on the site in general, and definitely not loli shit. I feel like mods and admins are pretty on the ball about removing that stuff already.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm surprised this hasn't come up before already. I'm generally on the boat of 'no loli posting' outright. It's a messy moralistic debate that I haven't seen sufficiently settled yet, but most people don't want to chance across sexualized underage girls/discussions of it and no one wants to get into a debate about it. One side is inevitably called pedophiles for engaging in it and the other side can justifiably become extremely heated.

Most well adjusted communities with cultures you want to spend time in outright ban the discussion. Avoid the mess all together. There's not many ways to slice 'sexualizing underage girls' without pulling up a rotten slice.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even calling it "loli" is problematic and if anything the creepier thing, but IMO

(A) in the genchat we talked about the age of those two posters (my comment on the other hand was "sure kill me" but less explicit as it's the grad)

(B) the line drawn is iffy with age (not an Evangelion fan so didn't know she's 14) but even then at some point, considering the artstyle and that we're literally gunning for "undertones" at this point I think we need to touch grass.

(C) I agree the grad is really not the place for this sorts of things though

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Hm, it's not problematic calling it Loli and definitely not creepy. Lolicon isn't just porn, but attraction towards children in general, is it not?

There's no gunning for undertones. If you replace the cartoon image with an actual photograph of a child it should be obvious.

The age of the commenters is irrelevant.

a) Their age is unverified

b) Readers don't know their age

c) The OC was likely created by an adult

I don't know if the character depicted is said to be 14, I was referencing u/commiespammer's comment

[–] [email protected] 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I think the term you're looking for is pedophilia.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

amemorablename commented with an etymology of the term which agrees with how I used it. So no, the term I'm looking for is not pedophilia.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Being attracted to children is pedophilia, doesn't matter if it's animated/drawn or not.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Lolicon is a subset of pedophilia

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Yea but still pedophilia that's the point.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 22 hours ago

Ok, well, we're in agreement then I guess

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

You're not into evangelion so it's understandable you wouldn't get this reference, basically it's a common joke that despite EVA being created to tell you to touch grass and not drown your depression in fantasies many do exactly what Anno warned against. Comments of similarly sarcastic tone are often used by evangelion fans who tell fellow fans to 'stop simping for children and go outside'.

edit: (image for explanation)

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Lolicon isn’t just porn, but attraction towards children in general, is it not?

Yes and no, "loli" is the.. genre if you will. The terminally online/creepy/anime way of calling it. Calling people or kids it in general is just plain wrong honestly IMO. The "attraction towards children" is pedophilia

There’s no gunning for undertones. If you replace the cartoon image with an actual photograph of a child it should be obvious.

Once again, cartoon. Not to say that makes "everything ok" but at some point you need to touch grass

The age of the commenters is irrelevant.

As for this... seriously? They were cringe but this is equally cringe. Basically at some point... you get my gist

c) The OC was likely created by an adult

I don't see how this has anything to do with the subject matter?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Loli is shorthand for Lolita, which specifically implies sexual abuse of children and usually(?) refers to cartoons. Sexualizing a cartoon 14 year old is definitely that.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sexualizing children definitely shouldn't be allowed, but I was under the impression this was supposed to make fun of evangelion fans. I don't think very many people are attracted to the characters in seriousness, that would be creepy. Misato fans though are a different story, but she's an adult so it doesn't count.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Didn't NGE have a feature-length porn sequel that was probably animated by the same studio? Having met a few IRL I'm not going to stick my neck out for weebs that make memes of sexually suggestive anime characters.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Are you referring to Human Salvation Project? I don't think it was officially related to Gainax in any way and somebody said the frames were traced from the original. Besides, it can't be considered feature-length since afaik it's like 10 minutes long. The fanbase is pretty weird, admittedly, but in my opinion the characters themselves aren't sexualized very much in the actual show. Assuming you haven't watched it the actual show is very dark in a freudian way (Anno literally had depression as he was making NGE and it was his way of coping), and the goofiness of everything related to it is as much a reaction to the contents itself than anything.

Again I do agree that this kind of post probably should be discouraged, but it's not necessarily a sign of perversion festering in lemmygrad either.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Once again, cartoon. Not to say that makes “everything ok” but at some point you need to touch grass

At what point do you need to touch grass and at what point does it make "everything ok"?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 day ago

So, I mainly wanted to chime in on the phrasing and my comment grew into something longer. I remember reading vague things in passing that loli is a little more complicated of a term than it seems at first glance. This is one article I could find that goes into it: https://medium.com/thisvthattv/so-what-makes-or-doesnt-make-a-character-a-loli-85761716b152

This article also only vaguely brushes on the fashion/artstyle aspect of it too, called lolita, which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with sexualizing a person. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lolita_fashion

The origin of the term, if the etymology analysis is correct, is certainly a big oof for connotation to say the least, but the branching off uses of it in practice are more complicated.

It's probably simpler to just say that if people are openly pining after someone underage, that's not something that should be allowed on here and not make it any deeper than that, or we start getting into the weeds of anime and its art style. 😓 Though it's sounding like it's some kind of fandom in-joke in this case, from what commiespammer said. Not that that makes the look of it any better on the surface. In terms of the image itself, sans context, I could have believed it was an adult character and the caption was about the character being a vampire or something... anime style is cartoony enough with age like that. In this sense, if there is any underlying problem in the image itself, all I can see is the caption because of some interpretations of it. The image itself without caption is just an anime face in portrait. That said, if someone were to make a rule that said "no loli posting," based on the most extreme of what people seem to associate with the term, my mind would go to a place I'd rather it not go in terms of what I'd expect to be prohibited and viewed as the thing to stomp out, I'll put it that way; one that is many degrees more overt than the image in question and impossible to interpret as anything innocent. This is why I'm doing a "well ackshully" on the terminology. To disallow something you have to first be clear on what exactly it is that is being disallowed. Is the problem how the image was discussed? The image itself? The image with caption? At what point does it cross over from average anime girl into being a problem. I'm sure you can agree it would be a bit absurd to just say images of anime girls can't ever be posted. And "loli posting" seems far too vague to create a general rule out of, if this instance is the basis of it. "Don't post images of characters that are canonically underage with captions or comments that imply sexual interest, even if as an ironic fan in-joke" may be more actionable, albeit wordy as hell.