Will ask again here.
Does anyone have that image of that little girl sitting in front of the computer saying "Wow.. That's perverted.. 10 points" or something?
>not enough loli
3v1? Looks like you're a little outta your league tonight bros.
Here's an added bonus: The artist.
Edit 5v1? You guys are still short a few.
yes, yes, i actually have some heh, enjoy
Tomoko isn't a loli. She's in High School
there's 25 distinct IPs here
anyone have the one where there's like these Vikingesque type warrior/conquerors (might actually just be one) and the girls are all around him? The animation is more 3d and not anime looking and the whole pic is a bit of a darker shade
how kind of you to continue the series, i'm posting from a 3k+ folder, wouldn't have found it it time
love you together etc
read the reply
tomoko, from http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WataMote
you're just here for the loli
this artist right?
I'm completely clueless of what exactly does the set contain, but I'll post pics related to that.
here you go fag
that isnt a wiki article, nor am i trying to act like i know the laws, if I did i wouldnt come here asking.
you seem pretty fucking ass mad, all I want to know is what the legal status is on it and someone that doesn't actually know shouldn't answer.
seriously bro chill the fuck out, also if you dont care why would you respond?
there are quite a few cases where loli has been considered obscene on top of which it has to be obscene
(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;
finally someone that actually has looked into it before commenting.
Thats the same problem I have come up with, most accounts for it end up in plea bargins or have cp included so I cant really find an answer.
Other than 1 case where they were like oh its just loli no cp, our B we out.
To put things in perspective:
Owning a slave: immoral
Using slave labor to produce shoes: immoral
Buying shoes from that slave-driver: indirectly immoral because you're directly funding his immoral activity
Buying shoes from a mate who bought shoes from that slave driver: who gives a shit, probably immoral
Making your own shoes: totally legit
Owning a photograph of a shoe produced by slave labor: gray area, might be immoral, probably not
Owning a cartoon drawing of a shoe whose storyline involves having been bade by slave labor: not immoral, no slave labor actually involved in the drawing
Raping children: immoral
Consensual sex with a child: immoral because it's defined as "rape" by the law... but in all likelyhood not immoral since it's possible to do this without hurting a child and it can be a positive experience, but not many blue-pillers will ever believe this so whatever
Making CP: immoral because it requires "rape" as defined by the law
Fapping to CP: indirectly immoral because you're supplementing the demand or some shit
Take the case of a pedophile fapping to loli: No children harmed, no laws broken if you don't live in a shithole country. What's immoral about this action to begin with?
The case of a normie who isn't a pedophile fapping to loli: Still nothing immoral to the action
Spiderman fapping to loli: Still not immoral
cap says something along the lines
It's good to be a britan
use clover app dude
ants in pants tomoko
All that I could find. Apologies if I missed any out of the set, >>597819615
I disagree with some of the things you wrote there as immoral.
Morals are relative. Just because something is against the law does not make it immoral. Unless you're speaking explicitly about societal morals as opposed to individual morals.
that's the image I was looking for. If that's not it, I don't have it.
the legality of lolicon in the united states.
I know it isn't protected under freedom of speech if it has no value and displays sex.
However there arent many cases where someone is arrested for only drawn images, and the few cases there are, they enter into plea bargins.
16 isn't loli. You think Spidey knows what he's doing?
oh god dont even get me started on morals.
incidentally there has to be some moral truths.
though a lot is relative.
fucking took a morals and ethics class one time and literally did a proof on why moral truths have to exist or everything in the world gets really fucked.
fuck proofs mang
What have you done?!?!!
I'm out, been fun,
good night everyone
Don't warn him, I've already tried and as you see it's taking some time.
Here's a handy dandy graphic.
You are only partially correct.
Loli is protected under freedom of speech on the federal level.
On the state level however it depends on the state.
The "if it displays obscenity/sex to the point where it has no artistic value, it is not protected" statement is a common misconception due to wikipedia articles that fail to register on the same page some reforms which no longer made that the case.
Loli was made federally illegal under the Bush administration where it was considered to be obscene and therefore not protected under the constitution. However, this was challenged by pissed off civilians and a supreme court ruling made the statute in which this was written unconstitutional and therefore void.
The misconception arises from the fact that not that entire bill was made unconstitutional. Just the statute and some other parts which I don't care to remember since they're not relevant to my interests.
not even correct graphic, debunked, etc
I dont think moral truths exist. We simply invented "moral truths" long ago and they have been a cultural part of our society to the point where they are now a standard.
Kinda like how communities that were Christian for centuries believe in God as if he walks the Earth with them every day.
And I guess this works for the conclusion to loli honey from me
get off your phone
I remember seeing this image before, and i was actually trying to find it.
Problem I have its not very official so I was trying to find something more verified than an image on 4chan.
As far as I can see the act hasn't been challenged to make lolicon legal.
I dont suppose you know any of the citation for something useful?
I know it has to be legal in california otherwise 4chan couldnt have it on the servers which is why Im looking for it because I cant find anything that says it is legal.
like i said mang, dont even get me started on it.
I know what you mean by they're relativity, and for certain things a lot of them are.
There has to be some moral truths though. I dont even want to think about this, we literally had like 2 weeks of lecture to do the proofs as to why they have to exist, oh god was it horrid. Not in like a bad way but in a like you know when you think about something too deep and your head kind of explodes?
oh btw, that image
>tfw you will never have a lolicon gf
OP here, I'll be off. Thanks /b/ros, you're the best.