I saw this interesting discussion on Dannychoo's blog. I thought I should bring it over to you guys.

"Been seeing comments across the site lately suggesting that loli content leads to pedophilia or that people who like loli characters *are* pedophiles.

While I dont have a fetish for young 3D human girls, I do find the loli art style in 2D work cute. I have a few loli figures and watch what everybody seems to call "Sky Loli's" too but I don't consider myself a pedophile.
I'm presuming that those who regularly watch anime are used to the amount of loli characters that appear in many (most?) shows. Even Darker than Black had one.

There does exist rather suggestive poses/situations with loli characters - Moetan and Kodomo no Jikan are perfect examples. There are a load of doujin and eroge (like this girl from Happy Magaretto) too. Are products like this harmless or harmful to society?
Moetan is on my watch list (I'm very behind) but don't feel that it makes me want to go out and do evil.

However, some of the loli doujin stuff that I've seen at the Comiket does look rather wrong to me. I believe a few venues that sold loli doujin mags got busted recently.

What is your take on "Loli" - a huge part of the otaku culture?"

http://www.dannychoo.com/blog_entry/eng/1261/Lolita+Culture/

Every time I see a loli character in an anime, I envision the hordes of Japanese (and western) fans that like the anime specifically because they are attracted in "That way" to them. It sickens me a little bit, but I also realize that not everyone that watches anime (since alot of animes, across a lot of genres include loli's) are pedo's. Having said that, if you are physically attracted to the loli's, and not just in an "aww, that's so cute!" sort of way, then yes, that would make you a pedo. Or atleast that's my view anyway.

I agree with the above poster. I think if you enjoy lolis in a sexual way then it is a bit wrong, but if it's like 'how cute! ' then that is fine. It's just sick to be thinking of this young child a sexual object, 2d or 3d. My opinion though. Does it make you a pedo? Weeeellll... ummmm... I don't think so? Just as long as you don't stray from the 2d ._. ... ... ... ...

Nothing is wrong to fantasize sexual contact with animated characters, if you bring it to real life and started stalking elementary students, you have issues.

In before PartyVan

and / or Pedobear.

Whats a Loli?

RULE 1#&2#!

Ahahah. I agree with Omnidevil.

Loli is short for lolita.

weird thing is a lot people (watches loli anime ) refer themselves as lolicon.

I agree with Sammy. If you like loli in the "Awww! That's adorable!" way, then it's not exactly sexual and doesn't fit the definition of pedophilia, where if you find yourself thinking they are sexy... then quite frankly you would be a pedophile. I don't entirely agree with Omnidevil, I think if you're fantasizing about animated characters you probably need to get a life. It's one thing to talk about how you think such-and-such character is cute or hot even, but once you start to have fantasies about them like that... Yeah, that's pushing it a bit far and becomes more than a little awkward.

"Loli"

Loli/Lolita is just a term refering to the cute pre-pubescent (and "under-age") manga/anime girls who are usually depicted in a double-meaning/provacative way.

The Lolicon

Lolicon is a viewer of materials with Lolis/Lolitas and is attracted to such material with adolecent females.

"Pedo"-condition

Pedophilia is a condition where older individual(s) is attracted to prepubescent individual(s).

Therefore, are Lolicons Pedophiles? Yes. The art and material related to Loli-ism will create fans (lolicons) and lead to them being classified with the pedophile condition; therefore, they will be under the pedophile category. However, the term Pedophile is just a name for that type of condition of attraction... it does NOT and one SHOULD NOT judge another based on such interests.

Think Freud's The Oedipus Complex theory... neither the pedophilic or T.O.C. behaviors is something that society want to think about and talk about and "admit to" since it is "wrong" by some standard... but to me, you cannot deny such thoughts exist/will occur... to say that you have never though in such way is to me a lie.. you may not remember (or want to remember)... but I bet it has occured...

To me it is normal... we have opinions and preferences and an imagination... it is always there... in the back of our mind... you don't have to embrace it or become radical with it, but it is up to you what you wish to express and what you use as an outlet of such expression, and ultimately, your choises and consequences. To the point, I believe everyone is a little of everything... especially when it comes to our complex mind of images, ideas, and memories... In my opinion, we are all a bit racist inside, among other "disliked aspects/traits" etc. and moving to this subject, I believe we are all a bit "pedo" and we all have the "T.O.C. element" in us (and a bit broader/encompassing in term: incestuous). I am not saying whether something is RIGHT or WRONG. I will leave that to you and/or society.. to the morals, ethics, and time. But to deny that such thoughts occur- to say I NEVER thought like that or I NEVER had such thoughts (sinful, immoral, or whatever other becauses, etc.)... it is unrealistic to me. There is always that possibility... ALWAYS.

But where does it bring concern? The term Pedophile brings fear because such classfication makes us think of Child Pornography and Child Molesters. Are Lolicons and Child Molesters classified as Pedophilies? Yes... but does that mean Lolicons are Child Moleseters? No. There is an often ignored hierarchy. Those who express an attraction to minors sexually are Pedophiles, but it is when one actually commits the sexual act on minors, then you become a Child Molester. That is the continuum of the "pedophile" scale... and it is very much ignored and just balled up into a ignorant fear of the word itself of what it is at worst...

Also, Loli/Lolitia art.. cute, suggestive, or sexual... along with any other forms of ecchi manga/anime material to the more "hard-core" Hentai manga/anime materal... are at the end drawn images. They are always 2-d drawings or 3-d models. Such material will always be more ART than actual pornography EVER will be. In actual porn, there are people... real people... in those images. In the case of drawn/created items (in this case, hentai to loli, etc.), the only real people involved are the artists... (unless your telling me they required real people to pose but then that is a bit redundant and is only under the control of the artist(s)). Like pedophiles with Lolicons and Childmolesters, pornagraphic material wraps in hentai and real/actual porn, but they do not equal each other in terms of extent. Specifically at toward this subject, though Lolita-contents may be "child pornography" in the sense that it is a media form that depicts minor(s) in provactive themes which is mainly (if not only) to incite sexual desires, it is not the same as real child pornography where it creates a demand that actual children are used to create the products (in which case the real children are victims/harmed).

Lolicons and Child Molesters are under the Pedophile scale, but Lolicons and Child Molesters are not equal to each other.
Likewise, Hentai and real porn are under the Pornography items, but Hentai is not the same as real porn.
Should be obvious stated like that, but many out of fear link them a lot closer than it should.

Such thinking in this topic also extends to subjects like: Do violent video games lead to violent adolecents?
The thinking of the pattern is understandable...
One line of thought: more violent games ---> more voilent kids = more violent crimes/activities.
Likewise in thinking: more lolita material ---> more lolicons = more child molesters.
Such paths are POSSIBLE, but they are not definate (remember, I do not claim it is NEVER possible, but rather it is not ALWAYS the case as depicted. To cross "that line" require a loss or a giving up of self control (the self control guided by whatever morals and/or ethics, etc.). What I am saying is that a Child Molester (under the label of pedophile) does not ever have to be exposed to Lolita materials in his life... he may even hate anime or was never exposed to it. Even if that person had exposure to the material, one can not say it was the cause of his behaviors (what made him a CHILD MOLESTER). It could be that it made him pedophilic, assuming he didn't already started his child-molesting ways before seeing lolita-contents. Applying the same to the reverse path, the Lolicons and pedophiles can admit/express, understand, and/or enjoy their fetish and fantasy without ever having to want to go out and sexually assault an underage minor.

Again, this is not my argument for what is RIGHT and WRONG. What you choose to look at and do is your choise, and it will be your consquences. You do not have view such material, you do not have to support it. Lolita-contents can be just for "cutes", or become suggestive and even beyond. But to me, such "outlet", though not deemed normal by society and other reasons, is "normal". One maybe a labeled various things... but I would judge by other things, such as by intent and action, than just what society or a person label another person... do you not agree?

I have always thought in such a way... and talking to some others have made me recognize and/or (re)understand some areas better. But it is all just my half-cent at the end. Take it with a grain of salt... or with a bag full of salt, whichever you prefer. Personally, I do not consider myself a lolicon, or any other specific category/type/name of H-material's "fanbase". I do not even think I am obsessed with ero-material in the "anime genre". Definately can be "ecchi", but that should cover a lot of people too... common... you know it... confess...

I don't think that Loli means something like pedophilia. You know, you often can see this kind of characters in anime, because they are *cute*. That's all.

Wow, that's a long post o.o

Look to Hobbes. "Mankinds life is nasty, brutish, and short." Anarchy breeds violence and pain. But because we have an established society, no one can tell what we would REALLY do if given the choice. So it's not exactly our place to judge whether lolicons are that bad. So long as they don't bring their strange fantasies into the real world I don't see the harm in it.

I think u're not pedo yet.U're loli cute form hobbyist.But, if you watch your collection figure with lust, watch out, you better go to physiciatrist.Be careful, if you already read Midori no Hibi or NHK ni Yokouso manga, there's character who crazy about cute form especially loli cute figure

I'd say that most lolicon you see in animes are mostly for fanservice and humor (at least based on what I've seen in my collection of animes). And by fanservice, the producers try to force you to a "Aww, that's cute", but I don't think it makes you a hardcore pedophile.

On the post above that is TL. DR.

My only question is, where do you draw the line then?
Does insulting every Lolita fan means some pleasure to you classing them as Pedos?
I don't think so if you are any near civilized as your post may concern.

Oh, first off, Omni (and anyone else who wishes) should look up the definitions
yourself and make your own decision on how you want to define those terms. The definitions I use may not be the definitions a person choose to define those items for him/herself... but I choose to understand how the words were "literally used" and picked those definitions (which is or is closer to the "official/dictionary" defined versions). Just to clarify, I did so because personally I do not feel that the term "Lolita" is the same thing as just a "kawaii young anime girl" (or "chibi" though i would not see that relation common) due to the context that it (can/may) involve.

As for @`Omnidevil himself:
If you actually read my post, you will understand there is nothing for lolicons to feel insulted about... not by the way I personally define those terms. To be labeled a pedophile by purely it's definition (not in the context and intent an organization or government agency may do it as) is not as bad as it seems... and why was explained. Where Do I draw the line? Im not sure what exactly line your refering to, but there was a line I drew. Read my post, or at least the part about the contiuum that is ignored. I clearly drawn a line between what should be concern and what shouldnt be the concern. And no, I do not think myself civilized, nor do I care if you think me so... BUT, I do try to make posts "civilized" (especially if i choose to talk about some touchy subject) by trying not to totally "offend" one side or the other when expressing what i feel/my thoughts... which I felt my post did do... but thats just me.