Lolicon/Shotacon Defense Force - The people who jerk off to cartoon children and won't ever shut up about it

[stupid frog]

Someone's never heard of Black Butler

Fujoshi girls fuckin LOOOOOVE shota but only if it's presented in a way that girls find attractive. Ciel Phantomhive (11yo) dresses in beautiful ouji clothing that fujoshi love to wear and gob over. The man, a 5000+ yo demon, is drawn in an appealing way to the fujoshi.

Naturally, two people who so much as breathe in each others directions must be sexually attracted to each other and they must fuck. These fujoshi write fanfic up the wazoo of this child being fucked by this demon.

That being said, Ciel acts like an adult, so maybe there is a discrepency in the shota that females (fujoshis) prefer compared to the shit that males consume. I've never seen a man who's even interested in Black Butler despite the author/artist making it pretty sensual, but girls are. Likewise, I've never seen a girl interested in shota where the boys act like children.

Though I've seen fanfic writers (almost always female) age down characters and write the most heinous shit so there's that.

Providing images, will delete if already posted.



I will add another series I remember being popular.

LOVELESS

The most immediately noticeable aspect of the story is that many characters are kemonomimi—cat-like features (in this case, ears and tails) are universal from birth, so there are as many catboys, including the protagonist, as there are catgirls. People in the Loveless universe lose their animal features when they lose their virginity. Those who no longer have animal features are differentiated by society as "adults".

All these characters are male.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Here’s the video that Shotacons on Twitter got mad about, by the way:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=jKY2OUV2EQoView attachment 6375123
View attachment 6375124
View attachment 6375125
View attachment 6375126
View attachment 6375128
View attachment 6375129
View attachment 6375130

Shotacons will defend drawn CP long before they go to therapy. It’s also really funny watching them seethe about their tweets showing up in videos, like as if they don't share uncensored screenshots in their little circlejerks.

First reply says "anti"

Also "media that explores uncomfortable topics"? Like a young boy getting his anus resized by a grown ass man? Is that the uncomfortable topic we're discussing? Because I think that's what we should be discussing!

 

[Kari Kamiya]

I haven't watched/read Loveless so I don't know what it's truly about, though I do remember hearing that the adult main character had gotten raped and apparently got stigmatized given the cat ears allegory. So maybe it is true that the story is about the harshness of sexual abuse and that the anime, being a product of the 2000s where so many adaptations get changed around due to incomplete stories or the screenwriter/director thinking they could do better, handles it like shit. But if the anime's actually shit for reasons other than because it's about grooming, then either the YouTube didn't make it clear enough, or the fans are mad they're being told their favorite series is bad.

Kinda sounds like this show may be on the BL side of the same coin as Kodomo no Jikan but unlike that since it stayed relatively obscure until Zac Bertschy (whose whore-wife JesuOtaku trooned out and later ditched him so he drank himself to death, for non-Weeb Wars fags) of Anime News Network brought it to everyone's attention, no one dared to question Loveless because fujoshis don't like criticism.

 

[Butwhythough2]

That’s a bad equivalency to make, especially on the Kiwi Farms of all places. That’s the issue with making arguments that rely on an equivalent example: there really isn’t anything comparable. The most effective response is to say “ whatever, faggot” and go about your day.

That's a good point, it's best not even to engage in an argument, they'll throw out the usual cope tactics and try to wiggle their way out on technicalities. Just make fun of them and leave.

 

[Kiwisee]

Thread reader for the thread by Lolicon Defense Task Force from back when Elon Musk banned Loli/Shota content. The account itself has since been suspended, but it is as cringy as one can imagine.

 

[Friedchickenfan]

Y’all need Jesus.

 

[Sperglord666]

I fucking hate whataboutism.

Yes, technically speaking, cartoon kids are infinitely way better than IRL CP, but just because one thing is worse doesn't mean it absolves you of anything, YOU ARE STILL A PEDO STOP COPING

Pedophile
Definition:
-Sexual attraction to children

Lolicon/Shotacon
Definition:
-Sexual attraction to children

It's that simple, no amount of projection accusations and/or whataboutism will fix that.

Exactly, either way, I don't want you near any kids.

 

[LavenderMenace]

I dunno when I’ll be done with the next edit of the history portion because holy shit I dove into another rabbit hole involving the main writer/editor of “Hey Buddy” the most popular loli magazine in 1980. Thanks @miyuki for giving me this info because my god ITS BAD. WE TAKIN REAL CHILDREN AGE 7-14 IN AN EROTIC MAGAZINE BAD.

And the kicker is that I’ve got to search on Chinese and Japanese google search because English search engines wield zero results for Hey! Buddy! and Masaaki Aoyama (real name Masami Otsuka)

Do me a favor and look at both the Chinese and Japanese Wikipedia pages, translate them to your language and see if you can find something very significant.
Hint: It’s more proof that lolicon doesn’t help with pedophilic urges.

 

[Toothp!ck]

lol was it Loveless?
View attachment 6374789

Is this the one where virgins in this world keep their cat ears? Knew a fujo that watched it

Mitsukuni might actually be a dig at the shota crowd, honestly am not sure.

The cast is full of digs and shoujo fans. Though many of them still enjoy it

 

[Kari Kamiya]

The cast is full of digs and shoujo fans. Though many of them still enjoy it

Well yeah, there was a time long ago where people used to be able to laugh at themselves. Think if Ouran came out nowadays, it'd be much more polarizing if not pozzed.

 

[Northern Blockhead]

Why the fuck is there an X account called Loli of the Day?

 

[Equal Rights for Androids]

And the kicker is that I’ve got to search on Chinese and Japanese google search because English search engines wield zero results for Hey! Buddy! and Masaaki Aoyama (real name Masami Otsuka)

Google has seemingly censored any image search terms related to loli and shota on the english-facing versions. They know it's problematic af lol.

Hint: It’s more proof that lolicon doesn’t help with pedophilic urges.

Yeah lolishota only reinforces pedophilic urges, makes them stronger. You become even more a pedophile for consuming it than when you started.

 

[Gimmighoul]

Why the fuck is there an X account called Loli of the Day?

View attachment 6375925

"admin is a minor"
oh no

 

[Northern Blockhead]

"admin is a minor"
oh no

I didn't even see that what the fuck

 

[Kiwisee]

"admin is a minor"
oh no

If they're telling the truth, they were 100% groomed by Discord anime fans

 

[Namekian George Floyd]

Is Black Butler that egregious with pedo shit? I remember a 40 year old cashier woman at Books-A-Million telling me how much she loved it like 10 years ago when I went in to buy Naruto or some other retarded shit I still love.

 

[Equal Rights for Androids]

Is Black Butler that egregious with pedo shit? I remember a 40 year old cashier woman at Books-A-Million telling me how much she loved it like 10 years ago when I went in to buy Naruto or some other retarded shit I still love.

Yes. Food especially in the show is a synonym for Sebastian devouring Ciel, both his soul and his body (sexually). Lot of food in the show. My fucking 40+yo English professor wrote a paper on Black Butler. She is a huge fan of BL and fanfiction so you know she be readin that child rape shit.

 

[Calamity]

Pretty sure Pawoo is the one that had issues with actual CP, not Baraag.

That said I don't think removing the archives is a good idea. You don't want to delete evidence. However the fact it is being investigated is good and makes a lot of sense.

I don't think there is any actual CSAM there, it's pretty well known and high profile site in the ecosystem of federated Mastodon sites and pretty much THE place for shota and loli. It is watched and kept under survailance because of that. If it had any I guarentee that both Kiwis and law enforcement would have seen already. But I am willing to bet putting it under watch will provide very good leads and evidence of where the material could be found.

My money is that this investigation will be providing a lot of good leads and evidence of actual CP outside of baraag. If I had to guess the main things to watch for would be the smaller and brand new federated instances which suddenly start mentioning and pulling posts from baraag, those are where the actual material would be found.

Your last point about finding content outside of baraag hits the nail. Baraag and other sites like it try their damndest to look good from the outside, but the actual users are for sure at times outed for trading irl stuff. I know baraag tries to say 'no irl or realistic 3d allowed!!!' - that's pretty much the bare minimum of trying to avoid the law coming down on them in some countries. It gets people off their ass, unless they bother to look deeper and see people casually asking each other for their telegrams/etc.

Inkbunny had to put out a site announcement a while ago about cracking down on new, empty accounts that only popped up asking for telegram/signal/wtc contacts to network with - it was very, very obvious what those accounts were after. They were not subtle at all, and knowing they were running loose for years was fucking with the sites failsafe of 'fantasy only'. The sites can be coy all they want, but they have cultivated a very particular community and can't really go back on that now.

Undernet IRC used to have an infamous number of pedo chats many years ago and a couple users known on places like furaffinity showed up on there. but because their whole galleries and public presence relies on the 'fantasy only' defense, some people really do take it at face value and don't look any deeper. but those irc channels were infamous for people posting 'fantasy rp' ads which were in reality just folk looking to trade real cp. Those channels are hopefully long gone now, but the fact they existed for so long in the first place is incredibly worrying. The sudden focus on internet privacy and other leaks like the Kero files and some telegram cub/shota/loli groups being taken over by rogue admins and having their memberlists leaked has led to a lot of these people becoming ultra secretive, hard to pin. The 'fantasy only wink wink nudge nudge' appeal is so frustrating when there's hints there's more going on.

 

[Nigga Bullshit]

Did I also mention that having lolicon/shotacon is ILLEGAL in USA and is considered child pornography in most countries.

I've tried my best to write up a summary on the legality of lolicon in the U.S. Not a lawyer so if I've said some retarded shit that isn't right, I'm sorry:

Spoiler

Pornography and the First Amendment​

The First Amendment protects pornography with two main exceptions: "obscenity" under Miller v. California and "child pornography" under New York v. Ferber.

Obscenity is not protected by the First Amendment. The test for obscenity is given in Miller v. California:

1. The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest in sex.
2. The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way.
3. A reasonable person would find that the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Child pornography is not protected by the First Amendment, even if it isn't obscene under Miller v. California. The test for child pornography was given in New York v. Ferber:

There are, of course, limits on the category of child pornography which, like obscenity, is unprotected by the First Amendment. As with all legislation in this sensitive area, the conduct to be prohibited must be adequately defined by the applicable state law, as written or authoritatively construed. Here the nature of the harm to be combated requires that the state offense be limited to works that visually depict sexual conduct by children below a specified age. The category of "sexual conduct" proscribed must also be suitably limited and described.

Virtual Child Pornography and The CPPA​

The first law to prohibit virtual child pornography was the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996. This changed the child pornography laws to include any visual depiction which "appears to be" of a minor or is "advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression" it depicts "a minor".

Importantly, there was no requirement for the depiction to be obscene.

CPPA Struck Down​

The ban on virtual CP in the CPPA was struck down in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.

The reason was that the CPPA banned depictions which weren't obscene under Miller v. California or "child pornography" under New York v. Ferber:

In sum, § 2256(8)(B) covers materials beyond the categories recognized in Ferber and Miller, and the reasons the Government offers in support of limiting the freedom of speech have no justification in our precedents or in the law of the First Amendment. The provision abridges the freedom to engage in a substantial amount of lawful speech. For this reason, it is overbroad and unconstitutional.

The PROTECT Act​

In response to the ruling in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, Congress passed the PROTECT Act of 2003. (Some people think that Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition struck down the PROTECT Act for some reason. They are getting confused with the CPPA)

The PROTECT Act added 18 U.S.C. § 1466A which bans:

a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that—
(1)

(A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and​

(B) is obscene; or​

(2)

(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and​

(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;​

The PROTECT Act avoids the problems the CPPA had, since it requires the depiction to be obscene under the Miller test before it becomes illegal (except for (2)(A) and (B) above which are discussed next).

PROTECT ACT Partially Struck Down​

Parts of the PROTECT Act were struck down in United States v. Handley, specifically this part:

(2)

(A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and​

(B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value;​

This is because there is no obscenity requirement in that section. Since it bans material which isn't illegal under Miller or Ferber, it was struck down.

The rest of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is still in effect. It pretty much reads like this now:


So lolicons can be found guilty under 18 U.S.C. § 1466A as long as the depiction is obscene under the Miller test.

Possession​

One difference between "obscenity" under Miller v. California and "child pornography" under New York v. Ferber is that the government can ban possession of "child pornography" (under Osborne v. Ohio):

Given the gravity of the State's interests in this context, we find that Ohio may constitutionally proscribe the possession and viewing of child pornography.

Possession of "obscenity" in the home can't be banned (under Stanley v. Georgia):

We hold that the First and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit making mere private possession of obscene material a crime. Roth and the cases following that decision are not impaired by today's holding. As we have said, the States retain broad power to regulate obscenity; that power simply does not extend to mere possession by the individual in the privacy of his own home.

Since lolicon is only "obscenity" (and not child pornography under New York v. Ferber), the government cannot ban possession of lolicon.

However, the government can ban receipt of lolicon through interstate commerce (United States v. Orito). This includes things like the Internet and mail:

Congress has the power to prevent obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment, from entering the stream of commerce. The zone of privacy that Stanley protected does not extend beyond the home.

Since most lolicons probably get their loli porn off the Internet, they could be charged.

TLDR: Lolicon/shotacon is illegal under 1466A if it is obscene (which it usually is). Just possessing lolicon/shotacon isn't illegal but receiving it through interstate commerce is (such as through the Internet or postal service). I'm guessing most lolicon viewers get their lolishit off the Internet so they are breaking the law.

Of course, just because it's illegal doesn't mean they will be charged. They probably won't unless they also have real CSAM or a criminal record for real CSAM. The feds already have limited resources so they usually won't bother going after lolifags.

 

[WelperHelper99]

TLDR: Lolicon/shotacon is illegal under 1466A if it is obscene (which it usually is). Just possessing lolicon/shotacon isn't illegal but receiving it through interstate commerce is (such as through the Internet or postal service). I'm guessing most lolicon viewers get their lolishit off the Internet so they are breaking the law.

Of course, just because it's illegal doesn't mean they will be charged. They probably won't unless they also have real CSAM or a criminal record for real CSAM. The feds already have limited resources so they usually won't bother going after lolifags

This is always how I understood it. It's a crime, but it's one they tack on when they already bust you for harder shit like actual CSAM, to really make sure you get locked up.

Part of the issue is that the cops need access to your computer first. For that to happen, you have to get on their radar. If you're a NEET staying in mom's basement all day, are not violent, and you use the most rudimentary of VPN's, the chance of you committing a crime that would require them busting down your door is low. Which is what most lolishits are, NEETS.

That and obscenity is a tricky charge in of itself. Use it too much, get fast and loose with it, and SCOTUS could get mad that you are infringing on lawful speech, and it goes away entirely. That is part of the reason the obscenity charge is rarely used, it's kinda a nuke.