I'm sad. I've been questioning its morality.*TRIGGER*

I've been worrying about this for days now, I think about it in my sleep. I said in an earlier post that I look at shota/loli images and that it depresses me to look at them. Because thoughts keep coming up on my mind like: Why in the world are these images of cute and adorable kids, regardless of what they're doing, considered more disturbing than images of people getting violently maimed and beaten? I seriously don't get it! When did cute=disturbing? And why are zoophilia and necrophilia considered less abnormal that pedophilia? Think logically about it, what sounds more nasty: A cute 10 year old girl with pigtails OR a hairy hippo with poop falling to the ground? (NO disrespect to the zoophiles, I believe we are all equal) This is proven because Wikipedia goes OUT OF THEIR WAY to say pedos have a "mental disorder" while referring to zoophilia and necrophilia as simply "paraphilias". I wish I could write a comment on the talk page of Pedophilia about this, but I read that those pages aren't for voicing your opinion or something. But anyway, why is pedophilia considered the worst of the worst? When clearly there are other attractions that SOUND (not are) more sick? And how will I be able to view these drawn shota images if I keep getting sad about it? You're supposed to fap to porn! Not have a freaking lecture about it! But when I see those children looking like they're having a good time (I don't like rape images) and happy while having sex, it makes me sad that this won't happen in real life because apparently it's 100% always abuse. This depresses me so much that I can't sleep. I wish someone would help me understand all of this.

And why are zoophilia and necrophilia considered less abnormal that pedophilia?

They are all abnormal.

But when I see those children looking like they're having a good time (I don't like rape images) and happy while having sex,

Children do not want or need sex with adults and it is NOT a 'happy' thing. Its abuse.

Pedophilia has a "special" place within paraphilias, as any physical expression of it is always a violation of a child.(and lets highlight that all adult sexual contact with a child is abuse.)
Violating children is infinity worse then hurting an animal, hence the special revulsion that pedophilia gets.

Helps to understand Japanese culture and the mindsets of the artists. Japan is much more natural-world about sex than we in the US, so having sex is as normal and natural to them as using the toilet is for US. Their society lucked out too avoding the Christianity invasion the Western nations suffered and are still suffering (note I don't have a problem with the text side of the faith as much as how some practice it and merge it with other things.) The Family Guy episode "Journey to the Multiverse" begins with Stewie and Brian visiting an alternate world where Christianity never came about and it's the same year as their's, but with technology vastly more advanced. This is kinda like Japan. Though in their case it's more about getting their butts kicked in WW2.

Aside from differences in culture, there's a pronounced 'Violence is good, sex is bad' thing going on in general. I've written about it at some length elsewhere over the years noticing it myself as a fan of porn in general. Pasting my "Moral Outrage" essay below, bit of a read, and could use a friend who's an editor probably, but related to this subject:

It seems that what we in the United States choose to care about changes over time. In decades past, you couldn't show movies with lip kissing that lasted longer than three seconds. So to get around it, filmmakers would show many kisses one after another, or cut from one to another with shots of some innocuous object like a potted plant. And of course any depiction of sex itself was strictly forbidden. But since this was what people wanted to see, they made Biblical stories that has sex and sexuality in them, however vague or metaphorical. Or sometimes not metaphorically at all. I remember one scene in particular where a wife tells her husband, "Come into me husband..." And they begin to have sex. And since it was a Bible story the religious censors of the time I guess couldn't object to it. (As an aside, why religious people are often the ones objecting to sex is beyond me as the Bible's full of sex. Ever read the Song of Solomon?)

Then the 60s came along and for a while everything changed. I guess that's to be expected when children notice the hypocrisy around them and end up rebelling against parents and authorities so obviously full of $#%^. Drugs like psychedelics obviously have something to do with this period in our history. But I suspect it's far beyond just a lot of unihibited youths experimenting with new things. In reality, old things simply forgotton by the mainstream until rediscovered or rewrapped by their own contemporaries.
The Summer of Love, love-ins, commune experiments, and other non-conventional lifestyles define the late 60s for the USA. Movies too changed noticeably insofar as content. Nov 1, 1968 marked the date the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) was born and paradoxically, movies got worse from this point on. As with the more recent ratings system imposed onto music, when you give entertainment media a ratings for content, all you achieve is giving license to producers of content to be as naughty as they wanna be. Prior to a ratings system, content may not be bought up, distributed, etc. if it contains objectionable content. But if objectionable content can simply be labelled as such then there's no longer any reason to exercise self-restraint. As soon as music got their labels, all self-restraint and good taste went out the window. And but for a few exceptions, there's no downside imposed by the industry on 'mature' content. Some chains of retailers claim they wont sell 'mature' rated content, but I"m not sure how serious they are about it.
Most recently, video/computer games have gotten ratings of their own. Predictably, games have become more violent as with the notorious Grand Theft Auto series.

What we choose to care about in the US should be of tremendous concern to everyone. Not just religious fundamentalists, parents, or politicians. Because behind the troubling trend of graphic violence in movies, games, and music lies something I think is insidious. We seem to have flipped what pisses us off enough to take action. Rather than being outraged by violence, our outrage only seems to manifest around sexual issues. Sex is the nicest, most beautiful thing people can do with each other. Far better I think than ripping one another apart, shooting someone with a shotgun, or hacking off limbs and heads. Yet while Janet Jackson's famous 'wardrobe malfunction' during a Superbowl became a national if not international news item for days, we seem to have no compunction about showing movie trailers for the latest "Saw" or "Hostel" movie. But for the "Girls Gone Wild" commercials and infomercials late at night, there's no instance of any overtly sexual media getting commercial tv ad time. Ever wonder why? I have, and I have a theory.
First, we have to ask who stands to benefit from switching moral outrage from violence to sex. Obviously, the producers and distributors of any content benefit from its' release, but it's go beyond that I think. And with greater implications and deeper reasons. Some basic first-year psychology first: Fearful people are easier to control than non-fearful people. Fearful people often feel powerless over their own fate and circumstances. In order to alleviate their fear and feeling of powerlessness they'll do whatever they can to choose their own fate again. Most commonly this manifests as eating 'comfort foods' or buying things. Without fear entities which exist solely to earn profits earn less. So by deemphasizing violence and restricting it, we allow people to view or experience it and become fearful. This benefits everyone from the sellers of the content itself, to the providers of the solutions the fearful ones will then seek out to be less fearful.
In contrast to having an entertainment system filled with explicit sex and pleasure where we view strangers as potential sex partners and relationships and have no fear of "them." If the genral public doesn't feel afraid of every bump in the night (rectified btw by any of the security systems featured in primetime commercials,) or ex-boyfriend, or potential home invader who just kicked in your front door as you were walking around your home clad only in a bathtowel; then companies offering solutions earn less profit.

The most cruel, obscene, gratuitous violent images get commercial time around the clock on every channel on our tvs. Yet almost without exception, positive, happy, consensual sexual acts do not. It's a MORAL OUTARGE that the best thing people can do with other people is effectively censored and controversial, while the absolute worst and universally illegal ones are on every channel 24/7.

Violating children is infinity worse then hurting an animal, hence the special revulsion that pedophilia gets.[/quote]
Why.
To me violation of any creature is revolting. Humans see themselves as so special. But we are not, we are greedy destroyers. Too many of us;
2 Jan 2013 -

Humans are a plague on the Earth that need to be controlled by limiting population growth, according to Sir David Attenborough.

I feel empathy for all creatures, not just humans and you should to because unless we start caring about the Earth's diversity we are going to be in big trouble.
I digress, as a conservationist I feel strongly.

There shouldn't be any differentiating between abusers of animals, children, or grown adults.

To my mind, an abuser of a defenceless animal who can't call for help and has to suffer in complete silence is the absolute lowest of the low, but I know it's not right to gauge the seriousness of abuse according to the perceived vulnerability of the victim.

Yorkshirelass wrote:

And why are zoophilia and necrophilia considered less abnormal that pedophilia?

They are all abnormal.

But when I see those children looking like they're having a good time (I don't like rape images) and happy while having sex,

Children do not want or need sex with adults and it is NOT a 'happy' thing. Its abuse.

Please define abnormal. Thanks.

-- Fri Nov 08, 2013 11:25 pm --

platonic wrote:Violating children is infinity worse then hurting an animal, hence the special revulsion that pedophilia gets.

I find those abuses equal. All kinds of abuses are disgusting, no matter if they are done to children, adults or animals.
Animals are living beings too, I consider harming an animal very sick and disturbing, by harming I don't necessarily mean having sex with it, I especially mean beating/killing, for example some people have fun shooting at cats, I hate these kinds of things as much as I hate hearing of a child or an adult who's been raped. They're all the same to me, they're all equally disturbing to me.

msclvr92 wrote:I've been worrying about this for days now, I think about it in my sleep. I said in an earlier post that I look at shota/loli images and that it depresses me to look at them. Because thoughts keep coming up on my mind like: Why in the world are these images of cute and adorable kids, regardless of what they're doing, considered more disturbing than images of people getting violently maimed and beaten?

Because Western mass medias like to instill violence into people's minds, so in the end we'll probably end up killing each other and humanity will fall into chaos, then a few powerful people will be able to control us more easily than they already do. The more we fight each other, the easier they find it to control the masses. Fortunately, I've figured it out in time so I consider myself "not brainwashed by television, news, music and medias and everything else related to this stuff".
If we're not united and we fight each other, we will never be able to fight the oppressors, the system back. The oppressors are afraid of unity, so they brainwash humanity into being divided and hating each other so we can't rebel and fight back.

Do images of violence and murders contribute to divide? Unconsciously, yes, as they teach to the most vulnerable minds that it is okay to kill and they show them how to do it, so vulnerable minds perceive it on an unconscious level.
Now, do images of cute, happy things that do not contain violence contribute to divide people? No, it's quite the opposite.

I wasn't saying abusing animals is ok (I personally find it very silly/dumb) just in the hierarchy of abuse, it's considered worse hurting humans.

I find it funny that people are doing mental gymnastics to justify themselves ie blaming the media or Christianity for destroying their lolita utopia. Nothing sadder then self deception.