especially in the context of an in-universe character saying it, yeah
Comment on "Censorship" ☠️
kboos1@lemmy.world 5 hours ago
Is it not? The definition is the sexualization of a minor or prepubescent girl in anime/manga. Sounds like pedophilia to me.
lime@feddit.nu 5 hours ago
dreamy@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 hours ago
Yeah, it is.
turdas@suppo.fi 3 hours ago
It has a wider variety of usage in Japanese than “pedophile” does in English, so no, it’s not always the most accurate translation. For example, “lolicon” (ロリコン) is used self-referentially, sometimes as a joke and sometimes not, in Japan while “pedophile” is basically never used like this in English. It’s also not too uncommon to use it of another person as a relatively lighthearted jab in Japanese, when in English calling someone else a pedophile (or even the more casual pedo) is a grave accusation.
Saapas@piefed.zip 3 hours ago
But isn’t it used about people who are into sexualized (cartoon) children?
turdas@suppo.fi 3 hours ago
Yes, and it’s also used about actual pedophiles. It’s a word with multiple senses/connotations, and one of those senses corresponds closely with the English word “pedophile” while the others do not. That’s why “pedophile” is not always the correct translation for it – though whether it’s correct in this case I can’t say, as I haven’t watched the anime in question.
Saapas@piefed.zip 2 hours ago
If you’re into sexualized (cartoon) children you’re a pedophile, so the translation would be factually correct. That sort of pedophilia just has much less cultural acceptance in English speaking world
Klear@piefed.world 2 hours ago
That just sounds to me that pedophilia is not frowned upon in Japan, not that the translation is inaccurate.
sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 hours ago
That is so weird to me that a society with much more Shame basis for stuff does not shame attraction to and relationships with minors.
On the other hand I’ve always wondered when is shame effective as a social motivator to prevent misdeeds, and when does it push people to hide their problems instead of seeking help and solutions?
emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 43 minutes ago
Well if the powers that be shamed attraction to and relationships with minors, they would have to accept that forcing themselves on people who aren’t in a position to refuse consent is shameful, and then they would have to answer some very uncomfortable questions about what some of their heroes did in Korea and China …
FishFace@piefed.social 2 hours ago
That is so weird to me that a society with much more Shame basis for stuff does not shame attraction to and relationships with minors.
Because what a culture considers immoral is not the same as whether they use shame to police immorality.
sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 52 minutes ago
Important distinction. I don’t understand why they wouldn’t consider it immoral when in the west it seems intrinsically immoral to most people.
Whirling_Ashandarei@lemmy.world 2 hours ago
Ah, yes, Japan - famously not a shame policing place. Maybe I should commit seppuku for this dishonor.
Lumidaub@feddit.org 5 hours ago
Hence it wouldn’t be “censorship” as the article seems to use the term. Though that doesn’t really apply at all because to “censor” it would be to not include the scene at all or rewrite it to say something else entirely. Saying “you like lolicon” or even just “you’re a pervert” might be considered euphemistic but it’s not censorship.
DeadDigger@lemmy.zip 5 hours ago
Well no. Pedophilia is the attraction to real children and lolicon is the attraction to illustrations of child like characters that doesn’t even need to be sexual. The translation is also wrong because in Japanese there exist the loanword pedophilia and it was not used in the original so the translation is also wrong.
flandish@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
this isn’t some baudrillard level type of simulacra shit, it’s literally people using cartoons as analogs to their real attractions, so yes, they are pedos. much in the same way police are pretending to be heros. they all deserve prison. the former and the latter.
Hazel@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 hours ago
I’m confused, are you pro- or anti policing? 🤔
flandish@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
lol. anti cop.
Saapas@piefed.zip 3 hours ago
If you’re into these depictions because they’re depicted as children…
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 1 hour ago
Is it because they depict children or because they depict child like features?
By the first, technically adult characters in a child like body (lucky star) wouldn’t count.
By the second, catgirl cosplay counts as bestiality.
Saapas@piefed.zip 1 hour ago
If someone is specifically into child like features and akshually they’re a 9000 year old dragon, yeah they’re a pedo
Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.ca 4 hours ago
There is a big difference between these too.
🤣🤡
nitroemdash@lemmy.wtf 1 hour ago
Per ICD-11, pedophilia can’t be diagnosed if attraction is not acted upon or is distressing the patient. Also it doesn’t count cases where attraction is not primary.
LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 48 minutes ago
Colloquially accurate, though. Weird to use such a restricted definition of a word that has MUCH more common understanding…
gon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 hours ago
Well, no, that’s not what it is. It’s young and young-looking characters, not “minor or prepubescent”.
Mind you, plenty lolicon stuff is extremely pedophilic, namely by sexualising prepubescent characters! But lots of it is adult women that just look young and are explicitly not children in any way.
It’s more complicated than “pedophilia”, though the overlap is… Let’s say… Conspicuous.
Saapas@piefed.zip 3 hours ago
But lots of it is adult women that just look young and are explicitly not children in any way.
Often mocked with the “9000 year old vampire dragon who just happens to look like a young child”
VitoRobles@lemmy.today 35 minutes ago
Every month I learn about a new manga/anime artist who was caught with CP and they got a slap on the wrist.