Skip to content

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don't like little kids

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

No, shots are fictional characters like every hand-drawn character, and people can do whatever they want with the archetype. You’re not a bad person if you like shota and not real-life children, the two are different things. It’s a good thing because you’re not harming anyone. Just don’t mix reality with fiction. If you need clarification about the answers from this website (which is understandable since some are just filled with prejudice, bias, and antis), visit a therapist who can help you understand your problem. Don’t conclude that you’re bad if you’re not harming anyone. My answer barely scratches the surface, here are some people that are better at explaining these things:

Shotacon is short for Shota Complex (Yes, Japanese easily mix n and m because they use n for m sounds in their foreign words)

If you like Shota, you are a Shotacon; if you like Shotacon, we don’t have a word for that, but it sounded much worse than Shotacon. And since people liking shota don’t have to be little kids, I don’t see a problem there, just that your fetish is a bit strange because it sounded like you are not a pedophile, but you like pedophiles.

Okay, I know what you mean, but it makes no sense because Shotacon means you like little boys(i.e., a specific type of pedophilia targetting males), so if you do not like little kids, you are not a Shotacon, period.

If you like the fictionally drawn anime or manga characters that are little boys but do not like real-life little kids, I can understand, and it makes sense because kids are annoying.

You know, shotacon is a term with a sexual implication. While its definition is just an attraction to pre-pubescent boys, it has also been interpreted as a lustful desire as well.

I’ve just found a bunch of animations by daughter (9) made in which everyone always dies or ends up seriously hurt. When I asked her why they’re all so negative, she said it’s because she finds it fun to watch. Should I be concerned?

Maybe, maybe not.

She may be acting out aggression, she knows she can’t ‘hurt’ the people who hurt her, so she is coping with it by animating. Is she having problems with a bully at school or home?

Or she is experimenting with doing something ‘bad.’’ Like when children say ‘bum’ because they think it’s a dirty word and want a reaction.

Or she is conditioned that violence isn’t as shocking as it should be. Does she regularly watch or play violent video games or videos?

I would be concerned but try to find out why rather than concentrate on the content.

Is Kenja no mago bad?

Well, let’s say the manga was a freakin masterpiece, and then the anime was quite disappointing because there are a lot of scenes in the manga not included in the anime. But the anime is still pretty good, not bad.

Doesn’t matter if you like Shotacon or are not interested in real kids. The thing is, shotacon, like lolicon, is harmful as it perpetuates the normalization of pedophilia.

It doesn’t matter if a childlike character is ageless or has an unknown age (cough VuIcannaAshFan cough). Lolicons and shotacons will use the “but they’re many, many years old” argument to defend their pedophilic desires by using the character’s age as an excuse. Just because you like lolisho material and don’t like real children still does not excuse you from being pedophilic.

If the character is an actual minor (cough Vulcanna Shep cough) but is fictional, that still does not mean they can be used in toddler material. It’s still pedophilia to sexualize minors.

It doesn’t matter if you like toddlers and whether or not you like real children, it still normalizes your pedophilic tendencies.

So I’m 14, and I LOVE shots. I have no problem with shotacons and lolicons; it’s okay not to like them, but to hate them and call them pedos is disgusting. Why do people look down on me for this, just because of my age? I’m my person.

Hey, man, I’m 13, and WTF, BRO? I watch anime too, but, tbh, this is just shit. Hentai is already bad enough as it normalizes rape, sexual violence, etc., but this is a whole other level of shit, bro. People like you get hated because most people think they’re creepy. I mean, the literal definition of a pedophile is a person who is sexually attracted to children, and I don’t say that just because it’s “drawn” doesn’t make it bad. If you look at porn art, it’s still porn, so you’re just looking at child porn, my man; it’s creepy; stop it.

Why does everyone hate Popplio?

Because some people will never stop trying to prove that Gen 1 was the best, if you show a kid without knowledge of Pokemon, he could’ve picked Popplio as his favorite water starter. The majority have Pokemon since their childhood, and due to that, they’ve associated those Pokemon with nostalgia. They had more fun playing the game then, and they think it’s because those Pokemon were better. It’s not. Popplio is my favorite Alolan starter, and people hate on him because they can. Primarina is such a beautiful Pokemon, and Poppy is cute af, according to me.

1.) Because they assume everyone who likes those things is an adult, and they assume no one who is an adult would like something in cartoons that they don’t like in reality.

2.) My apologies if someone ever did that to you

3.) It should be noted that some minor Attractive adults are attracted to people who do not actually use fiction, including Loli and Shota, to safely redirect their condition to a healthy outlet that doesn’t cause harm.

The stigma against having paraphilia ends up causing people who don’t have it to get attacked. Because they think it’s okay to attack people because they might have paraphilia, they can also act abusive towards children.

Is it bad to like Shota? I’m a guy, and Shota looks so cute.

No, it is not. While many people think it will lead to you becoming a pedophile, there are no studies to prove this, and most people are just sensitive to anything to do with sexualized kids, even if it’s only drawn. I have read hundreds of different shota porn manga online, and I have never had the urge to touch a kid. If that’s what you mean anyway, if you like Chota’s in general, that’s not bad. I find them to be cute in anime as well.

Yes, it is. If you think it’s cute, it can be, but it’s bad to connect cute things to sexual things. That can lead to an attraction to kids. You don’t want to ruin your sexual attraction through perversion. It’s not fun for yourself or other people. Maybe take a break from hentai or anime and then come back and read your question. Maybe tell me if anything changed. I’ll be here.

Why do people flip out when people say “loli,” but the same people don’t bat an eye when people say “shota,” which is the male equivalent of loli?

If you asked the majority of the anime and manga fanbase what “shota” was, they would think it is a genre of manga such as Shonen.

For some reason, having young girls who are thousands of years old is popular, but having a male counterpart is very rare, so what would you expect?

If I were to ask an anime fan to name me some examples of a “loli,” they could probably give me at least a couple of examples in a minute. If you ask them to give an example of what a “shota” is, they will struggle to give some examples.

I agree that sexualizing a “loli” is disgusting, and you cannot just say she is above the legal age because, in every other way, they resemble a child, which usually includes their mentality.

And if a “shota” does exist in a manga, they would probably not be sexualized compared to a “loli.” All this sexualizing of a “loli” is weird and should stop.

So yeah, if a “shota” were also sexualized, those people would also be angry about it, assuming they knew what it was.

I wonder why the author may include one in their manga.

Why is lolicon inappropriate by Western standards?

There’s a simple answer: Most Western people need to understand that people can understand the differences between fantasy and reality.

Plain and simple.

Because let’s think about this for a minute.

Are you hurting any real people by watching it? No.

Are the characters themselves real? No.

Many people are jumping on the bandwagon of blaming something instead of dealing with the problem. People are also very judgemental. Look at how furries are treated. They tend to do things with other things too, like video games, rock music, rap music, guns, tabletop games, homosexuals, etc. the people crusading against it are the same as Jack Thompson, Anita Sarkeesian, the male feminists that got caught beating or raping women, or those anti-gay activists that later got caught with male prostitutes. I’m waiting for a few of them to get caught with real children, like the Epstein child-sex island.

Lolicon is 2D drawings of children or people with the appearance of children.

Yes, pedophiles can get their rocks off to this kind of stuff. Alternatively, they can do the same with real children. Which of these is worth putting time, energy, and resources into dealing with?

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

I don’t care about lolicon itself, nor am I attracted to it. I like women in their 20s with large boobs. My browser history and my external hard drive can attest to that. That being said, if they take that down, the Puritans will go after other things, and the lolicon people will laugh at the other people whining about that. Also, if a pedophile is whacking it to drawings instead of CP with real children or, worse, touching real children, what’s the issue? If you remove the drawings, the guy will find another way to get off, which could victimize more children.

I’m not defending pedophiles, either. If I come near any kids in my family, I get some lead for them. I’m just saying that going after 2d drawings is pointless.

Lolicon is inappropriate by most standards. In anime, a loli is a female character with a child-like appearance. Although they can technically be any age, many lolis are very young. They range from grade schoolers to women who are hundreds of years old. All that counts is appearance when identifying a loli. A lolicon is a character labeled as being a pervert towards lolis or having a fetish for them. These characters are more varying as there have been just as many female lolicons in anime as there have been males. However, icons must appear at least older than the lolis, usually teenagers. Lolicons are usually deemed inappropriate by many people and places because, on the surface, lolicons seem to be predators that target children, although, as I’ve explained, it isn’t that at all; as in anime and manga, it is usually used for comedic purposes.

We are still awkward about our bodies, desire, pleasure, and sex. We still believe in arbitrary concepts about age and sexuality. Lolicon is art and behavior. A person who identifies as a Loli can be a grown-up woman who pretends to look like a teen and can be a teen who wants to act as a grown-up. This is deliberately teasing, provocative, and sensual. One person fully mature in their sexuality should have the right to express themself. But in the Western mind, this is forbidden, one unchallenged taboo.

Why does Japan continue to allow Lolicon to thrive?

This is an incredibly complex question that requires the unpacking of a lot of culturally based assumptions.

The first issue to consider is the age of consent. The popular conception is that 18 is a universal norm, but even in the USA, the consent age varies tremendously, with a modal age of 16 and layered federal and state laws. Japan has a similar system, with a national age of consent that is normally raised by prefectural laws.

The bottom line is that assuming a universal morally or legally agreed age of consent needs to be corrected. The issue is incredibly complex.

The next assumption to unpack is regarding pornography. In many more conservative countries, pornography is viewed as evil and banned or severely restricted, such as in some US states and Muslim countries. I’ve even seen some who consider viewing pornography as equivalent to cheating. I’m not judging, but in Japan (and many other countries), pornography is quite acceptable. Walk into any convenience store in Japan, and there are pornographic magazines on sale. Pornography is normal and acceptable in Japan. No plain paper covers or hiding it behind the counter.

The final issue to consider is whether it is acceptable to depict naked children. This is unacceptable in some parts of the world, regardless of the context (again, many parts of the USA fall into this category). At the same time, in Europe, there are public statues of naked people, including naked children, and any claim that they were obscene or pornographic would be viewed as utterly ludicrous.

In Japan, there are “family onsens” (hot springs) where fully naked mixed bathing is culturally acceptable. Nakedness is viewed completely differently.

Now we come to “lolicon”. Is it “acceptable”? It is becoming less so, and reading lolicon in public would be creepy (although I have seen older men unashamedly reading porn on public transport).

However, because of the different cultural frameworks around pornography, nakedness, and the age of consent in Japan, it is difficult to make simple judgments about where the line is. The Japanese government recently passed legislation banning pornographic material involving those under 18. However, it restricted this to photography and video, meaning painting, sculpting, or drawing a nude teenager would still be okay. It may seem odd to draw the line for those from more conservative countries, but it would be a sensible place to draw the line in, for example, most of Europe.

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

Of course, this opens loopholes that allow the production of fairly explicit drawings of children in sexual positions, and there is an ongoing discussion about how to clamp down on this without accidentally banning famous artistic works such as The David.

Something worth considering is the condemnation of drawings of prepubescent figures. At the same time, in popular pornography, almost all the actors are shaved, both male and female, and the sexualization of a body type can only be characterized as pubescent (six-pack abs are not normal for anyone other than teenagers).

This issue is immensely complex and rooted in culturally based assumptions that make judgments difficult. However, saying to any Japanese person that lolicon was “thriving” in Japan would be met with utter horror.

Think it’s a matter of different perspectives. The term lolicon is a term or genre (Lolicon – Wikipedia) in manga and refers to a young girl who is sexy or looks young in a sexy way. Most Japanese girls look pretty young because of different diets, so it’s not uncommon for girls to be flattened there and look young (“lolicon”).

But yeah, then we have lolicon characters in the manga that are just characters and lolicons in hentai (manga porn). Here is a picture of a girl drawn in a lolicon way. But yeah, this is not used in a hentai; it’s just some manga artist’s way of drawing.

Lolicon drew to look like a “sexy” lolicon.

Lolicon’s art style gives the image personality and a certain feel.

Meaby is the most famous lolicon out there as she’s the main character of a pretty famous game series about the fictional teen star Hatsune Miku.

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

So, back to why they allow it and we don’t.

We don’t allow it because our child pornography law is written in this way:

“Pornographic materials that exploit or portray a minor (under the age of 18)”.

Child Pornography – FindLaw

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

Notice the word portray; this means that we don’t make a difference between a legal person and a fictional one. If it could be interpreted as a minor dressed too sexy (in a bikini, for example), we censor it.

Some companies even make every female character in every game have abnormally huge boobs not to look below 18, so they don’t need to mess with this stuff.

With the rise of more and more female gamers, what message do we send them that you are only pretty if you have massive boobs?

The girl above would likely have been censored in a computer game, for example, before we got to play it; if she were wearing a bikini, they would censor her ice cream, too; who knows.

This leads to problems as we sometimes also need to censor stuff that is part of the story, such as computer games.

On the other hand, we are usually strangely okay with violence; for example, there are tons of examples out there of 7 – 8-year-old kids that play games where this is something you can do for some reason, and we don’t seem to consider this a problem.

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

Japan doesn’t do this; they censor stuff, but their laws only apply to legal persons. In other words, if you have sex with a little girl, you go to jail, but if you draw a little girl in a bikini, you don’t.

We in the West also try to make them apply to fictional ones. Laws should be applied to legal persons; those are the ones that are important, after all, and what we should be putting resources into protecting.

For example, if stuff like this happens, who was the victim of this crime?

U.K. court convicts anime fan of possessing underage child pornography

It might also be good if laws for what we can view regarding fictional people and what can be viewed regarding legal ones are put under two different laws. There might be cases where even fictional content might be good to censor. Still, we generally destroy so much good when we just keep censoring every fictional character below 18. Arriving people to protect fictional characters is pretty messed up, so we should stop doing that.

Why do people insist lolicon is harmless when it only make things worse? Just because it’s fictional doesn’t make it right.

People insist that it’s harmless because it is.

Child pornography (aka: child sex abuse material/CSAM) is illegal because it is a form of child abuse. The material would not exist unless a child were abused in order to make it. And since a demand exists for this type of material, that in-turn creates a demand for child sex abuse. Society has a vested interest in eliminating this market for this material that, by its very nature, endangers the safety and well-being of actual, real children.

However, that justification is not in any way applicable to works of fiction, such as loli/shota anime and manga, as there is no real child involved or exploited in order to make it.
Fictional children are not ‘children’. They’re drawings, nothing more than lines on paper designed to merely ‘appear to be’ a minor.

There is no empirical evidence which would justify the censorship of, or criminal prohibition of loli/shota pornography.

Studies have been conducted into the effects of pornography, especially child pornography, and although there’s conflicting findings and conclusions for such a controversial topic, the scientific community at large has refrained from claiming a causal link between pornography consumption and sexual aggression and sexual violence.

While there are people who claim that lolicon has an indirect causal relationship with CSA, this claim is and has always been without merit and constantly conflates correlation with causation in tandem with a flagrant misunderstanding of pedophilia and how pedophiles think and act.

A causal relationship between two variables is defined as one that meets the criteria for causation in that events or effects relating to the variables are caused by one another.
(Example: Smoking cigarettes is causally related to lung disease, in that the damage caused by the act of smoking in excess causes disease.)
Pedophiles are an understandably controversial group. They’re characterized by a sexual preference for children, which is often attributed to acts of child sexual exploitation and abuse. However, the empirical consensus on pedophilia has changed, with the DSM-5 differentiating a paraphilia from a paraphilic disorder and, in turn, distinguishing pedophilia from pedophilic disorder, which is commonly associated with and attributed to acts of contact CSA or CSAM consumption.

Contrary to popular belief, pedophilia does not mean CSA/CP consumer. It’s estimated that the majority of pedophiles are non-offenders who are not likely to commit hands-on CSA offenses or consume CSAM, and CP offenders are statistically less likely to commit hands-on offenses, though many hands-on offenders may happen to consume CP.
This belief is furthered by studies done on forensic and clinical samples (prisoners and those seeking help) and non-forensic, general population samples by surveying them and their desires and how they relate to their actions, or lack thereof. Most of the studies done on clinical samples were mixed, with many suffering from methodological inconsistencies with their respective sample sizes, as well as the participants themselves, whereas the general population studies suffered from similar issues, but were considered better because of the sample sizes.
Studies were also conducted on samples of hands-on CSA offenders, who all exhibited far more concerning characteristics than CP consumption, as opposed to CP/CSAM offenders.
In conjunction with the forensic studies and the general population studies, it can be inferred that sexual desire and indulgence in fantasy material, and even CP, are not causal factors, with some studies finding correlations and others not.
This, coupled with the fact that non-offending pedophiles are known to consume legal, victimless fictional material to cope with their desires, further diminishes the possibility of a causal relationship.

As for arguments claiming it “normalizes” and “sexualizes” children in the media is also wrong. Though normalization is a legitimate sociological phenomena, the manner in which it is used here is somewhat (or wholly) inapplicable, as it makes too many negative slippery-slope/domino effect assumptions without considering

  • whether similar claims regarding violent media and violent crime had the same effects as pornography, and whether or not those effects were substantial or trivial (hint: it didn’t and there wasn’t any)
  • whether the clear, apparent distinction between reality and fantasy is applicable to sexual or pornographic matters, as in, consumers with a pedophilic sexual interest understand that what goes on in fantasy is only okay in fantasy
  • whether the concept of pedophilia is even capable of reaching “normalization” status with regard to societal stigma towards acts of CSA and CP ‘gatekeeping’ society from taking them on, and if possible, a niche genre of cartoon/comic book pornography would do that
  • whether the difference between a hypothetical, fantasy child being sexualized is different from an actual child is substantial or meaningful enough

The “normalization” fallacy is carried by the assumption that repeated exposure to this type of material and the people who consume it will ‘desensitize’ others to the serious nature of CSA and pedophilia, or even enable encouragement by breeding subcultures and groups that turn a blind eye to it.
This too is inapplicable because human beings can differentiate reality from fantasy, even with regard to sexual desires and paraphilias.
Pedophiles who consume CP are usually fully aware of their actions and the harm being done but disregard it. Others may try to justify or even excuse it with spurious reasoning or anecdotes.

What is a shota? Why do people keep calling me one? They won’t really explain the definition. Does anyone know?

“Shota” is a term that can have different meanings depending on the context, and it’s important to note that it can sometimes be used inappropriately or incorrectly. Here are a few possible interpretations:

  1. In Anime and Manga: In the context of anime and manga, “shota” refers to a genre or character archetype. It typically involves young male characters who are depicted as cute, often with childlike features. It’s important to note that “shota” content should always be non-explicit and follow legal and ethical guidelines.
  2. In Fandom and Internet Culture: Sometimes, “shota” can be used as a term in online communities to refer to someone who is perceived as having youthful or childlike qualities, even if they are not actually children. However, this usage can be derogatory or offensive, so it’s important to be cautious with this term.

If people are using the term “shota” to refer to you and you’re uncomfortable with it, it’s crucial to communicate your feelings and ask them to stop. It’s not appropriate for anyone to use a term that makes you uncomfortable or upset, especially if they refuse to explain its meaning.

Additionally, if you feel that you’re being targeted or harassed, it’s important to seek support from trusted friends, family, or authorities. They can help address the situation and provide guidance on how to handle it. Remember, it’s always okay to stand up for your own comfort and well-being.

Am I a bad person if I like Shotacon but don’t like little kids?

What does “play stupid games, win stupid prizes” mean?

How long does marijuana stay in our urine?

What are Trixie Tongue tricks?

How tall is Michael Myers on Halloween?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *