/pol/ - International /Pol/itics & /Bant/er

PART 2:


<
>"It was created to intentionally start controversy"
which this is a bad faith interpretation but since it hasn't been defined how Art can harm someone I think ill take a leap of faith here. I could argue that Postal should be censored because if it was intentionally made to start controversy and made some people mad, isn't that immoral? since it is I guess you can say harming someone's emotional state. I mean when you say "Meant to hurt someone" I can really only guess that you mean some form of mental anguish caused by viewing of the art.
<
further into the video he basically states that If Postal should be allowed to exist so should LC which is kind of comparing apples to oranges. Who gets killed in prison Murderers or Pedophiles? There isn't any actual solid proof the violent video games actually cause violence, because the nature of video games are very different on the brain then that of pornography. There isn't evidence to prove the violent video games cause violence, but there is proof that porn can actually have extreme detrimental effects on people, funnily enough its literally been used in military related strategies (cite Charles carrol video) but that just might be a conspiracy.
<
4:50
>"Porn isn't real art"
Ok this is more of a personal definition that i have of art and that is
"something that is created that is beautiful and is meant to inspire"
No I do not think that porn can be art because porn is not meant to inspire but more to give into an urge, and usually the result of giving into that urge is a loss of motivation and increased dependence on it. Vice Slavery
<
5:09 "Where do we draw the line of when something becomes porn"
well i would say that something that is created with the intention of evoking arousal would be a good start and by the way this isn't as vague as saying "Something that has the intention to harm others" hell if its not safe to look at at work then i would imagine its not safe. Drawings that depict characters in a sexual position or engaging in sexual acts such as anal oral vaginal ect would be considered porn i would imagine. i could make the definition even more specific but i think most people already can determine if an image is sexual in nature or not. Thus trying to ask "Where do we draw the line" is more of a redundant question then anything and hardly subjective.
<
5:24
>"if someone finds something valuable then how can you say it should be erased"
this is kind of a really dumb point, just because i think crystal meth is valuable because it makes me feel good doesn't exactly mean its something good for you, or that we should have crystal meth be widely available in a civil society. now i know a rebuttal to this is "your falsely equivocating! porn is not nearly as bad as drugs" but im actually not porn has similar effects on the brain as cocaine, there is also evidence to prove that once again porn as detrimental effects on people!

PART 3:
<
5:31
>"paintings from 1500 could be argued to be pornographic"
well no i do not think this should be put in a public museum for its nudity, nudity doesn't inherently mean sexual, also i can assure you most people are not going to be gooning to this painting
<
5:50
>"lolita is about a pedo who is obsessed with a 12 year old girl"
thats a fairly hastey generalization of the book, it was an attempt to mock sigman Freud psychology (of which freud is basically a pedo). also the book is about how art and rhetoric can be used to manipulate perception, which is kind of ironic watching this video. it wasn't written for the purpose of glorifying pedophila how most of lolicon is. another thing is your literally looking at a image of child rather then reading words which i would imagine would make something more vivid.
<
so no it shouldn't be censored on those reasons.
<
>"should people be institutionalized for liking the book for the wrong reasons"
well if you know someone who likes lolita because they have fantasies about doing bad things to children then at the very least they should be socially ostracized maybe not "institutionalized" as that can lead down a slippery slope and loop holes that can be abused, you cannot criminalize people for their thoughts. I don't know im not completely against the idea of institutionalizing people who say they are outwardly attracted to children, but clear definitions would have to be made.
<
6:31
>"its unsubstantiated that kids would be effected or hurt by LC being legal"
<
ok i dont feel like do the rest of the video but I've seen it and the arguements for lolicon just fall apart even quicker. like for example when xe states that
>lolicon is actually helping rape rates go down in Japan
this isn't actually true, Japan has had a shady history of rape laws, fun fact: before 2023, you could only be charged with rape if you forced sexual relations via violence, this does not account for grooming children into sex, also Japan's age of consent was 13 years old up until 2023.
<
>ssooooource?
https://asiamedia.lmu.edu/2023/07/03/japan-recent-legal-revisions-eliminate-forcible-from-the-definition-of-rape/
<
also porn in general causes more sexual aggression:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jcom.12201

put it into a debooonking video and become the next chud-tuber

>>3833481
i would but im busy working on a vidoe game chud, some day some day

>>3833485
Interesting. what kind of game

>>3833486
its inspired by manhunt, stealth action psycho horror, but its semi open world

>>3833499
which engine
can u show screenshot

>>3833502
same engine as the one that refers to rule 18

>>3833504
Oh……………

>>3833509
it'll be good though current working on dynamic movements

alright well i have to sleep night

>>3833512
its a shame u cant talk about dis doe. maybe u should make it on unity o algo. Goodnight

>>3833463 (OP)
its snca because everyeone knows the video is wrong about everything,just hop on the raid thread if there still is one

aryan thread bumo

if banning drawn 'p is fascism then is xer video secretly an advert for fascism?
>soybooru filename