No.13319[Reply]
Attraction to "lolis" while alike pedophilia, isn't pedophilia- not semantically, not physically, not otherwise.
"Lolicon" as we know it means sexual attraction to anime children... which aren't real children. The clinical definition for pedophilia, however, is defined as the persistent attraction to children, usually under 13. Anime "lolis" draw from real children but aren't, so you can't clump them together. The definition of pedophile doesn't secretly include lolis or include things like children, it only encompasses children REAL children. So as for the definition not matching- that's objective.
As for lolicon and pedophilia being equate-able and in the same sphere, consider this:
Oh, and to boot, anime girls are stylized and are thus hyper-attractive and have a physical allure elevated over their real counterparts. I'm being generous here as sexual allure isn't relegated to a physical appearance and "lolis" often have crafted non-physical allure that real children do not. Let's say you have a photo of an 11-year-old in a provocative pose, converting her by way of "anime-ification" increases her neotony, removes all flaws, elevates her face to a 10/10, gives her a perfectly symmetrical face, and greatly increases her sexual appeal. If the definition and consensus were changed to encompass anime "lolis" the bar would almost certainly be lowered from 13.
3 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view. No.13323
>>13321lol I look like this no cap
No.13651
While the definition is true, it doesn't matter wether it's a "real" child, or an "anime" child, it's still a child which makes a you a pedo. Pedo.