Over the years, within the Western anime community, there has been a growing number of discussions regarding the relationship between pedophilia and lolicon. But without proper definition and premises, the discourse often leads nowhere and creates confusion between parties arguing their positions. And with the increase of people using the Internet, the world becomes more interconnected and the idiosyncrasies of communities often clash with those outside of such groups, causing whiplash or shock for those that are not privy to what is typically the norm. A clear definition of loli art must be established so that people can understand why some people assume the label of lolicon and why loli art *must* be protected. In general terms, loli art is defined as an artistic illustration of a child. But while aesthetic drawings are typically that of a prepubescent child, in fiction, it is not limited by age. In a narrative, a character can be described as being over the legal age yet still look and act as a child. As such for the purposes of this video, a loli is synonymous with childlike body in an artistic setting. Therefore, a person that assumes the label lolicon implies that they enjoy artistic drawing of childlike characters, sexual or otherwise. However, the confusion begins when the accusation of being sexually aroused by such depictions implies intrinsic pedophilia. At face value, it is understandable to treat both as synonymous but… they are not the same. The word ‘lolicon’ originates from the book Lolita and is a Japanese contraction of Lolita complex. A person calling themselves a lolicon instead of a pedophile is an important distinction etymologically and epistemologically due to the connotations of pedophilia. In recent years, there has been a growing movement by certain groups to make it a pedophilia an accepted sexuality, to limited success… The failure can be attributed to how human beings rationalize everything in the world by their nature. Following the law of identity, it is assumed that a pedophile will eventually follow their nature and abuse children. While many may argue that there is an obvious difference between a pedophile, someone that has the potential to break the law in a particular way, and a child molester, someone that has already broken it by abusing a child, the general public considers a pedophile to be a potential future child molester, and thus, are a hazard, by their nature. However, so long as a pedophile has not broken the law, they should still be considered citizens with rights. Society should discriminate against child molesters that have abused children but… not pedophiles that have done nothing wrong. The problem is that it is hard not to treat a pedophile as though they are potential threat. No parent would want to have their child around the pedophile, for fear that they may do something. As such, the distinction between lolicon and pedophile *is* important because if those that consider themselves pedophiles were to live their lives without touching children and label themselves as lolicons, it would signal that they have no intention of abusing children. They recognize that their sexual desires are illegal and will only reside within their mind through art. And… lolicons that are not pedophiles can declare that they enjoy artistic drawings of children sexual or otherwise, and never had any intention of touching children in the first place. Simply put, a pedophile can be a lolicon but a lolicon may not be a pedophile and, equally, a child molester can be a lolicon or pedophile but a lolicon may not be a pedophile or child molester. The terms are not synonymous, so it is irresponsible to assume that a lolicon is a pedophile or child molester until proven otherwise. Of course, the desire to suppress pedophilia is a natural reaction within a liberal society. Under the view that children are unable to consent to sex, due to being young, it has given rise to the ideology that children must be protected. Abusing children is seen as a form of rape and… is treated as such by law. Although some pedophiles might argue that children have their own sexual desires at a young age, the use of coercion and manipulation are typically required to sexually assault children. Our currently liberal society ideologically commoditized children as pure and innocent and adults cannot infringe on that sexual innocence until children learn sex by themselves and have reached the age of consent. Because of this, by law, pedophiles must never ever be allowed to have sex with children. And nobody should think it is acceptable to altruistic sacrifice children to sate the urges of pedophiles simply because children may have sexual desires at a young age Therefore, as long as we live in a liberal society, child abuse will remain illegal… But at the same time, pedophiles are still human, regardless of how someone may see their sexuality as a perversion. They have the right to live, to find happiness and to be members of society. The problem, of course, is that indulging in their sexual desires would be impossible without breaking the law. This is a reason why loli art is important. Pornography is human imagination in theatrical action; it is the visual or textual representation of sexual acts, presented and enjoyed exclusively for their titillating characters. Since masturbation is nothing more than sexual self-sufficiency, pornography allows people to indulge themselves in the privacy of their own home. Loli art becomes a self-contained non-threatening outlet for pedophiles and those curious enough to look at such taboo content without acting on it in real life. A study done by Milton Diamond, Pet Weis and Eva Jozikova showed that in the Czech Republic, after decriminalizing all possible explicit sexual content, including child pornography, there was a rapid decline in the number of reported cases of child abuse. The study also showed similar results in Denmark and Japan. The belief that more pornography will lead to widespread moral degeneracy and social upheaval is possibly wrong. However… those results should not be taken as justification to legalize all types of pornography. Loli art should be legal while child pornography should remain illegal… A common misconception is that child pornography and loli art are similar since they may have similar audiences. However… it is important to distinguish the differences between sexualized loli art and child pornography. The central focus is the creation of art and child abuse. Art is defined as a recreation of reality to convey values and potentially evoke emotional responses. Video pornography, on the other hand, in its purest form and by its nature, is not intrinsically art because it is simply a documentation of sex. It lacks transformation or recreation, even if it evokes sexual responses. However, art can be of a pornographic nature. Loli art differs from child pornography because its creation is not simply a depiction of reality but requires to be created by an artist. Art has intrinsic value because it could not exist without the skill and mind of an artist. Child pornography is the visual depiction of a crime, without any recreation. It is correctly outlawed because it is an accessory to crime; abusing children and storing it for further viewing and the pleasure of others. No matter what, child pornography requires an abused and abuser, loli art does not… Japan has had a long history of debating the correlation between fiction and reality. As Patrick Galbraith comments in the book The End of Cool Japan: However… this sort of artistic sexual liberation comes at a cost. Since the 1970s, Japan implemented a general obscenity law against genitals being depicted. So long as private parts are covered up or not directly shown, almost any form of pornography and art is allowed to be published. This is generally known as the weird black censorship bar that can be found when looking at Japanese pornography As Mark McLelland notes: In the United States, there are similar measures of obscenity but greater emphasis and protection is given regarding free speech. The protect Act of 2003 is a US law with the stated intent of preventing child abuse as well as investigating and prosecuting violent crimes against children. Illustrations, sculptures and pictures depicting minors in actions are required to pass the Miller test of obscenity in order to become illegal. The Miller test is straightforward: speech or expression must fit one of these three criterias to not be considered obscene and protected under the First Amendment. The first Clause is based upon the reaction of an undefined collective, effectively, as to whether they feel offended. The definition of a community can refer to a house a street a city a state or the entire country. This complicates matter even more when applied to the Internet where one Internet community may accept obscene material but another may not. Even more confusing, the average person required to judge art is impossible to define. If anything, an average person is defined as having no unique qualities. The second Clause regards anything that can be deemed too sexual in nature, again, defined by an undefinable collective. The third Clause is a most important. If a work has any literary, artistic, political or scientific value, it is protected under free speech. Loli art may be deemed to have prurient interest by community standards… It may be overly sexual in nature… Butt… by being an artistic drawing, requiring a recreation of reality, it is protected under the third Clause. Because of this, in the United States, loli art is not illegal. While each individual state may regulate what is imported, the creation and consumption of loli art is legally allowed. Other countries, however, are not as lenient In Canada, between 1992 and 2001, after the R v Butler case, pornography was judged under its own laws of obscenity by the standards of undue explicit sex with violence within a narrative context and artistic intent. Child pornography was only prosecuted if it depicted actual children. During that time period, loli art was permitted. However, the laws regarding child pornography have become draconian ever since the R v Sharp 2001 case. The proceeding judge found that ‘person’ included both actual and imaginary beings on the ground that pornography was deemed to be of ”so little value”, in terms of free speech, that protecting children from sexual exploitation was more important. Slippery slope arguments were presented as a justification for banning loli art. It did not claim that women and children were directly exploited by pornography but… that audiences viewing obscene materials may be influenced and act differently in the future. Understanding the ruling of the Butler and Sharp cases gives us an insight to the central conflict at hand. Quoting the butler case: And with the Sharpe’s case: The central fear being echoed is whether we can be sure that obscene material will not potentially cause harm from its very existence. How can we know that loli art will not be used as a way to potentially coerce a child into sex? Or, what if people experiencing loli art develop an urge to abuse children? These two questions can be answered in a court case involving child pornography in the United States. In 2012 the Child pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) was successfully challenged in Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition for its overly broad definition of a minor. The Free Speech Coalition feared that Congress’ expanded definition of child pornography would endanger their legitimate activities and filed a lawsuit seeking to enjoin enforcement of the CPPA in the United States District Court for Northern District of California. There were two provisions that were contested and found to be over brought in restricting speech. The first was the proposition that virtual child pornography, such as loli art, could be used to entice children into sex. The courts found this to be an overreach because anything, such as candy, could be used as solicitation. It would be irrational to ban everything in an attempt to protect children since all items are neutrally commoditized. The second proposition is that virtual child pornography could ”whet the appetite” and eventually lead people to engage in sexual abuse with a minor. The court argued that the harm to children is very indirect and the effect on free speech would be too great. Because of this, the law was deemed to be too broad as it would ban other speech while not doing an effective job to directly prevent the abuse of children. The Child Pornography Prevention Act was later changed with the protect Act of 2003, allowing loli art to exist if it passed the Miller test… Comparing Canadian cases on child pornography with those of the United States shows the heart of the issue. Canada values free speech but not as much as the United States. For Canada, pornography is seen as having so little value that any artistic expression involving children is deemed irrelevant by conveying the message that children must not be seen as potential sex partners and… may cause harm in some undefined and indirect way. In comparison, the United States protects all art as speech unless someone is directly harmed in the making of the art. Therefore, two central premises are at odds: the value that free speech must be protected absolutely unless it infringes on the rights of others, and the ideology that children must be protected at all cost. To unravel this contradiction, it is important to understand the essence of free speech and ideology… At its core, an ideology is a system that shapes how you see the world. They are religions, philosophies, scientific systems, social norms, laws and regulations, commands of others etc. They can be conscious or unconscious, and are often both. Ideology is the spontaneous relationship we have towards society. It has a positive core that becomes mystified and made an absolute. Following an ideology to its core shows not only what it values but also the repulsive elements that it attempts to hide and tame. Building on the topic of loli art, the general ideology that children must be protected, even at the cost of low value speech, such as artistic pornography, stems from the belief that children must not be thought of in a sexual manner because… it is repulsive. A good example of this ideology from the Western anime community can be found in a video from the popular anime youtuber DouchebagChocolat. The concern presented in that video is not that people are indulging in their fantasies in real life… No… it is the idea that individuals should be allowed to have those desires, be proud of it and spread that idea. THAT… is what is seen as repulsive. And the language being used is not random. Importance is placed that the ‘idea’ and… ‘ideology’ being transmitted as… ‘viable’ is sickening… (I honestly would not have used Demo in the video, but I’ve seen a lot of people use him as a reference, so he had to be addressed) Although Demolition D has publicly retracted his statements regarding lolicon, the opinion in his video is still enlightening. The implications are self-evident: as a label, lolicon is too dangerous of an idea to be accepted as normal because desires can corrupt people. This general mentality is closely echoed by the whole of society. The ideology that children can be thought of in a sexual manner is too disgusting and cannot be allowed to exist, so it must be shamed, suppressed and even censored. It is not simply that only pedophiles are sexually attracted to children but anyone that feels that way *must* be a pedophile or a deviant. They are people that are a danger to society and their communities. This sort of mentality and ideology creates an unspoken fear that cannot be discussed. The ultimate truth being suppressed is this: anyone… can be sexually attracted to children… even though… they do not possess… any defining sexual attributes… To even say such a thing maybe audacious however… ideology is the unspoken but crucial set of assumptions that underline social behavior. It is something you would never express as your belief but… it would catastrophically undermine your ability to function, as it would disturb the official ideology through the mere exposure of its source. Recognizing the core of an ideology can be painful, it can shatter many personal illusions that were taken for granted but… it is a paradox that must be accepted and overcome to obtain freedom, both for yourself and those around you. It is only by accepting this truth that we become self-aware of our own actions within the frameworks of social structures. So it must be said again: anyone could be attracted to children, including people that may not be pedophiles, regardless of defining sexual attributes. And… there’s nothing wrong with having perverse fantasies so long as they remain a fantasy. But society is not ready for the sort of acceptance or realization. And shaming people for their desires or fetishes simply leads to widespread discrimination. This is why the label of lolicon is important and must be recognized. It openly declares sexual desires and recognizes its limitations. What needs to be recognized is not that sex or desires are bad– although some people do argue this– but that human nature can be violent irrational or perverse and is expressed as such in art. Human imagination cannot and should not be suppressed. Pornography shows us our deepest desires at our core. They are eternal forces at work beneath and beyond social convention and can be expressed openly in art. Pornography cannot be separated from art; they intertwine with each other, more than anyone can dare to admit. This is why people attempt to tame and suppress artistic pornography: it is voyeuristic of our desires. It makes many well-meaning people uncomfortable because it makes them complicit of the act itself. A person has the right to feel disgusted about another person’s sexuality and desires but… that disgust should not be considered a valid justification to debase a person of their humanity. The will and moral view of a collective are unimportant compared to the rights of all individuals. Obscenity laws exist to protect the moral integrity of a society but they are blatantly anti-free speech. Unjust laws, such as those in Canada, were loli art is considered to be the same as child pornography, were placed by the means of an ideology and can only be fought ideologically with the defense of free speech. A subjectively based undefine and unjust law can lead to human enslavement and its victims become its enforcers and enslaved themselves. Even the possibility of censorship can lead to irrational fear… In the book The End of Cool Japan, Patrick Galbraith notes: Loli art cannot be simply defended on the grounds that it does not hurt anyone but… on the principles and values of free speech. At its core, the right to free speech is an aspect of the right to liberty. Individuals must have the right to think for themselves and use their minds as they so choose. They must have the right to express their thoughts, desires and beliefs in material form, whether orally or in writing without fear of losing their lives to a mob or facing government’s suppression. Freedom of speech is important because it protects the rights of unpopular minorities that the majority may wish did not exist. In essence, the right to free speech is the right to use your body and property to express ideas to anyone who chooses to listen. However… freedom of speech means freedom from interference, suppression or punitive action by the government AND NOTHING ELSE. For example, in 2017, the website patreon made additional steps to remove bestiality, incest, sexual depiction of minors and fetish content that is hard to distinguish from non-consensual sex. This applied both to live-action media and illustrations. People were displeased by the act and called it censorship but… it is not strictly the case. Censorship is a term pertaining only to governmental action. No action on the part of private entities is capable of censorship. The right to sell or spread your speech or ideas is given permission by the owners of the property. No private individual or agency can silence a person or suppress a publication. Only the government can do that. As such, Patreon can do as it pleases on its platform. However… a freer marketplace attracts the greatest potential of both artists and consumers, creating more money. Between ideology and money, Patreon chose to follow the belief that certain sexual depictions were too taboo to be allowed on their platform. Despite widespread condemnation, people were unable to make Patron change her policies. The only way to challenge an ideology is for its opposite view to become more popular and to defend free speech as an absolute, even if it makes you feel uncomfortable. Ultimately, the right of those that seek pornography and art should not be infringed by unjust laws that protect the sensibilities of those that find desires offensive. What a community deems to be disgusting should never be an acceptable justification for censorship by the government or any form of personal discrimination. If a person does not want to see explicit content, then they are free to avoid it. Warning signs may be presented within private spaces and websites to telegraph that they contain sexual content, should they be open to the public. But all manner of artistic pornography should be allowed to exist in a society that holds value in liberty, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression. If a person is repulsed by any form of artistic expression, all they can do is look away, refuse to listen or refuse to finance or support it in any way. It is ultimately the right to do so and only such is the extent of their rights. A person’s discussed for loli art, as well as all other violent and taboo art, becomes a good test to see their loyalty of the principles of free speech. The Western anime audience, following the general trends of the Japanese artistic scene, is culturally impacted by their tastes and state of sexual liberation. It is a part of our identity, and it should be something that is celebrated, not shamed. Although this video is about loli art and lolicon, it can easily apply to all forms of artistic pornography that is deemed taboo by the public. Sexuality and desires are part of the human condition they are too important to be ignored and suppressed. This might be the most political I’ll be on this channel. Too often, I’ve seen people tackle the topic of pornography, but to be able to properly talk about it, you must be knowledgeable of all the branches of philosophy, from aesthetics, to epistemology, to politics and ethics. Loli art and pedophilia are wildly considered to be one of the most taboo topics to defend, so I felt this would be a good life or death challenge. Considering no one has been able to provide any general contradictions of the premises given in this video, I declare the matter of pornography to be eternally closed.