>>3695I don't like to just assume what other people think because I don't like to argue in bad faith, but you're basically inviting me to state your position for you so here goes:
If I had to guess it's because you think finding any character under the "csushi rollical" age of 18 attractive is morally reprehensible. At best you think it's "gross" and should be censored, and at worst you think anyone who commits such a thoughtcrime should be shot/tortured/fed to a woodchipper/etc. (The latter end of this spectrum is concerningly common). You probably don't have a good reason for this beyond how it makes you feel but if you do I'd genuinely like to hear it instead of just smug non-replies.
The response to this argument would be that the availability of fictional, sexualized depictions of minors has been studied and everything I've seen seems to show that it causes no societal/real world harm beyond hurting your feelings, and may in fact be a positive force. In addition to that, you're ignoring basic, proven biology. The majority of adult men are going to find neotenous features and the expression of secondary sex characteristics attractive. It doesn't matter what character those features are attached to. This is just science, and you can look it up yourself if you don't believe me. The reason we have laws against sexualizing minors IRL is not just because it's gross. It's because it has the potential to victimize, cause trauma, and hurt real human beings, all of which are things that cannot happen to purely fictional characters. In conclusion please take this kind of "criticism" somewhere else.
