Figleaf's Real Adult Sex

I want to thank you for such an honest & sincere response to this sexual abuse. Call it lolicon, pedophilia, shoticon…it’s all the same vile crime. As a victim of childhood sexual abuse, I will never be able to wrap my mind around why a grown man would have found my (or any other child’s) 4 year-old body arousing. That interaction had a profound interuption on my sexual development. Even now, as I approach the age of 30, I am still ashamed of my own desires and confused by my sexual insecurities.

I read your blog on a daily basis because I am inspired by your candor and wisdom. Your pictures certainly don’t hurt, either! Thank you for another wonderful thought on screen.

[Thanks, Nikki. In too many ways it doesn’t matter why anyone is attracted to someone so young — instead what matters is that they should be so hampered, constrained, so limited, so previously harmed themselves, so ingrown and inhibited and damaged that they could be attracted to… could feel able with… no one else. My issue with pedophilia… why I can’t feel la-di-da live-and-let-live about it is that however much someone… even all of us might wish otherwise, even just for your sakes, when grown-ups fuck around with children the children get fucked up. And if it’s wrong for one human being to use another, it’s wrong for one human to use up another human being’s lifetime of sexuality to fulfill whatever passing need arose in such circumstances. —fl]

Thank you for the instructions. I shall have to try them out—perhaps in the Curious Cabinet I shall be making soon. But I need organze roses like these.

As for this inspired Lolicon rant. I couldn’t have said it better myself. Well, perhaps with more flourish but such is the temperament of gilding the lily.

And yes, I totally caught your mock to the lameness of Details Magazine’s article and image.

As for the next, I find your statement “For all that I advocate for the end of masculinity…” quite an interesting sentiment. Is it that you are advocating an end to social sexualism as an identifier of an individual even despite their individuality. Such an Andrea Dworkin and Christine MacKinnon sentiment that many do not understand, others tought so zealously it corrupts the very good natured foundation the sentiment is based on, and still others fear for not knowing any other way of identifying themselves if not for their gender. But what I find more is that many fear such a sentiment meant to break down the barriers of communication, oddly justified social behaviors and expectation, and promote equality among the masses as sentient individuals not sexualized individuals, is somehow going to remove them from that which is a baser human instinct—sex.

As for the Lolicons. Possible reasons behind that psychosis are varied and perpetually abounding for which Gilding could go on for hours. Perhaps another time.

Till then I say it with fondness that, while my current schedule only allows me for short bursts of perusing through your blog, I am quite eager to read each nook and cranny of it. You’d be surprised how much I may agree with or except your point of view even if I do not agree with whole parts of it. But such is the way of philosophical discussion is it not.

Till the next time…
Gilding

[Oh I think whether we have an X or Y chromosome, breasts or a chest, wide hips or wide shoulders, a penis or a clitoris are all wonderfully significant to the majority of us that have a sexual preference for one set or another. I just think that piling other stuff on top of that, like “oh, you’ve got a Y, better get a codpiece and start taking stupid risks” or “you’ve got two XX’s, where’s your wonderbra and for cryin’ out loud shave your armpits” and all other unnecessary additional gender signifiers are, um, well, guilding the lily. Not to mention an enormous imposition with almost zero payout. Anyway, no, I don’t think sexes, or even genders should wither away. I just don’t see the point in pretending we’re more gendered than we need to because we’re already perfectly enjoyable just the way we are. Thanks, Gilding. —fl]

The online fandom community is FULL of scary code words. They also like to say “non-con” (nonconsensual) or even worse “dub-con” (dubiously consensual) where a human being would say “rape.”

In a way, I can understand the appeal of having a less experienced partner—even if they are a little clumsy, it’s rewarding to teach them things, and there’s a certain thrill in hearing someone say “Wow, I never did that before.” But what I’m talking about here is a pretty subtle shading of sexual relations between two adults—probably not even virgins, much less children.

The only explanation I can think of for wanting wide-eyed little girls (besides sheer sickness/brutality) is the one you named—inadequacy. I mean, you know you’ll be the best they ever had, right?

Ugh, I feel dirty just typing that.

[Even if I wasn’t a nerd who’s worked mainly in training and adult-education-related fields I’d probably love teaching people new things. And I’m sure I’d still adore introducing sex partners to things they’d never tried before. (Oh yeah!) I just don’t see why it would be any less exciting to show someone who’s 24 instead of 14. And if she can instead show me something too, then so much the better. (Abstractly, as a huge fan of Paulo Freire its especially better to both teach and learn. Practical experience sexual partner demonstrates it’s not just an abstraction.) Thanks, Holly. —fl]

As someone who is familiar with this subject, I’d like to add a few things. First, though it may seem counterintuitive to some, shoutacon appears mainly in yaoi (male/male sex) comics/stories written by and for heterosexual women. In the case where it’s a very young boy with a significantly older guy, it often goes into pseudo-incest territory, where the older one takes on a parent or older sibling type relationship… so, it’s not just male-oriented stuff that’s weird.

Second, part of the reason why japanese sexuality as expressed in art and the media tends to be bizarre by western tastes is due to the fact that before the 1990s, japanese censors mostly only went after depictions of pubic hair and realistic displays of sexuality. So, 9-year old girl violated by an alien tentacle beast? No pubes, not realistic, no problem! These days, they rarely censor anything anymore, but the legacy of many artists’ attempts to be “creative” has remained.

Third, there’s a category called “moe” (pronounced mo-eh, I think, meaning “to sprout”) which depicts children engaged in ordinary everyday activities, with no apparent sexuality at all – and yet it’s usually aimed at adults, and has been accused of being almost as pedophilic as lolicon and shoutacon. Fans of moe strongly disagree with that. Apparently many of the japanese are big fans of the “purity” and “innocence” of children in general. Possibly it somehow tends to get mixed into everything, sexuality included.

Fourth, for very young men in japan, they’re not likely to have sex with a girl/woman at all. Girls and young women tend to go for much older guys (even at 14, the age of consent, girls tend to go for college-age guys at the very minimum). Girls often even date each other if they can’t find an older guy (occasionally even going as far as having sex with each other, though they’re expected to “grow out of it”). Why? Because young guys are “immature” and usually not worth their time! Granted, it’s probably not quite as extreme as I’ve made it sound here, but it’s prevalent enough that for some males in their teens and early twenties, only a girl who is very young would seem like a realistic sexual prospect!

(Note: this is usually not the case with women in their late 20s onward, as by that point guys their age have “matured”.)

This is only scratching the surface. I find that the more I know overall, the less I am able to form an actual opinion on such subjects. But I hope this provides a bit more insight.

[I’m more persuaded by your weird-obscenity-standards explanation than anything else. (In 19th Century England shaved vulvas were considered “artistic” but any hint of pubic hair was grossly sexual and therefore prosecuted. Go figure.) That said with regard to whether men or women creat most of it, who’s producing in isn’t as important as who’s consuming it. Very interesting point about the plight of teenage boys in Japan though. Thanks, Nightfall. —fl]

Yuck! Thanks for the warning not to look up Waita Uziga. That puts things in perspective. So is at least some of loli/shota art kind of like Precious Moments figurines or am I misunderstanding?

[Well, precious moments figurines in highly sexualized lingerie maybe. Thanks, Mag. —fl]

Figleaf, I don’t approve of child porn or having sex with children at all, and I’m personally not attracted to the idea either. But I bet that having a sexual attraction to children is, internally, just like any other kink or sexual difference. I’m sure it feels innate and people who feel that way can only speculate about why. I doubt it’s an actively chosen stance for most people (in modern cultures).

I feel about this the way that the Catholic church does about homosexuality – the acts are unacceptable; the impulse itself is just one of those things the afflicted have to deal with.

[I agree that it might be internally indistinguishable from other fixations but unfortunately the same can be said about serial killers, with the difference being that it’s not ok to extinguish one person’s lifetime of sexuality (or lifetime, period) in order to gratify another. (Hmm. One of the reasons I don’t care much for the “traditional marriage” philosophy of women sacrificing themselves to prevent their husbands from depredating others.) Thanks, DY. —fl]

Nightfall, that is so interesting that someone would say that. Another thing I found is a facebook thing where someone was insisting that loli does not promote pedophilia. That just doesn’t add up for me. I don’t understand how that person could say that. S/he was petty adamant about it.

From comment by DevastatinglyYet:

I don’t approve of child porn or having sex with children at all, and I’m personally not attracted to the idea either. But I bet that having a sexual attraction to children is, internally, just like any other kink or sexual difference. I’m sure it feels innate and people who feel that way can only speculate about why. I doubt it’s an actively chosen stance for most people (in modern cultures).

I agree with DevastatinglyYet that some people are “wired” for sexual arousal by prepubescent girl or boy as others are wired with other forms of kink and, it is the moral responsibility of men and women with such desires not to engage in any acts that directly or indirectly cause harm to a child. This would include the purchase of any film or photograph that portrays real children, since a child’s safety, physical and psychological, would be compromised in producing such materials.

Correct me if I am wrong in my reasoning here, but the reason why some acts are classified as taboo within a culture is that there exists a strong desire among many members of that culture to engage in the forbidden act. Taboos are not created for those acts to which we have a natural aversion. The act is forbidden because the consequences of engaging in the act are perceived to cause harm not only to those who engage in the act, but the culture as a whole. The classic example here being the birth defects that can afflict a child conceived from an incestuous union, as well as the impaired psychological development of any child who is a victim of incest.

Of course, two exceptions comes to mind. First, there are many people who would readily find the thought of sexual relations with a parent repugnant. Second, there are some who could be aroused by an act simply because it is forbidden. But I am unsure at what stage in a child’s development this aversion arises. So I will let those readers with a better understanding of child psychology guide me here.

Finally, if people are indeed “wired” for this sexual attraction to the prepubescent boy or girl, could the best safety valve for them and society be perusing such comics and acting out this fantasy with consenting adults who resemble children, rather than putting real children at risk?

I have to say that I agree with you in large part on this. From what very little I’ve seen, lolicon is disgusting. My concern is that people with this affliction who may be controlling their desires without any actual children being harmed may move on to victimize children if this type of filth is not available.

[It might sound paradoxical but I’m not concerned about censoring the stuff. I am concerned about the (almost certainly small subset of) people who might find it arousing. Thanks, Fred. —fl]

Fantasies of power and control in a society where men play a stylized, ritualized role in a rigid hierarchy, where sex workers cater to paraphilias like public groping (to the point of subway cars as bordello scenery), where women are educated, empowered, part of the workforce, dominate the household if married, and face remarkably little violence (for an industrialized society), whoever would have thought it? Ephebophilia is just taking the last Japanese women who could be sexually dominated by men (the relatively youthful, but still legal adults) and pushing them towards the ultimate dominance of total control. It’s wish-fulfillment fantasy that seems much more sinister because we don’t necessarily recognize how relatively rare abuse is in Japan (compared to many other industrialized nations) and how resistant Japanese society currently (yes, I know that de jure reproductive health equality is a recent arrival) is to oppression of women. Scandinavia, it’s not, but there are no child-brides at auction as in several other nations.

[Thanks, ES. —fl]

And since the reason kids get negatively affected by Pedophilic relations is because of the societal backlash, you are the ones harming the child.

Now that is a self-serving bit of sophistry.

Your argument is easily disputed by the suffering of so many men and women in past decades who never revealed the sexual abuse they experienced as children. Why? Because they thought they were the only children who were groped or violated. They thought they did something wrong. They told no one, There was no societal backlash because society did not recognize child abuse or discuss it.

And it is not just 72 years of bad sex. It is 72 years of grappling with depression, anxiety and an array of physical illnesses.

May you reap what you sow.

Well, if kiddy porn isn’t legal, cartoon pictures are a great way to satiate my wildly imaginative libido. If you bleedin’ heart feminists don’t care for it, don’t look at it. Sex can be whatever one desires, that’s whats fun about it. If you’ve never been curious as to what it might feel like to be dressed up in a rabbit suit and fucked in the ass with a carrot, then I should let you know that I have saturday free, this could be a learning experience for both of us…but I digress.

Idealists are really annoying to others who don’t share your ideals.