Low Leg Pantsu for 12-Year-Olds – Ero-Fashion Magazine


    Post Comment »
    76 Comments
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Comment by Anonymous
    11:29 18/12/2008 # ! Neutral (+0.2)

    The correct term for attraction to individuals that are ages 14-17 would be "ephebophilia", not "pedophilia". Pedophilia has been colloquially used to refer to an individual who is attracted to persons who are below the age of consent.

    Admittedly I'd consider myself somewhat of an ephebophile, but I think if some concrete research would be done on the topic you'd find most people are attracted to at least one person who is 14-17 years old, no matter their age.

    Most girls you'd mistake for women yet they might only be 15-17 years old >_<. Using pedophile incorrectly is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of misuse of certain terms. Take "psychotic" for instance!

    Comment by fxc2
    13:01 13/05/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    That is pretty hot. xD

    Comment by master anon
    06:35 13/04/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    her uniform says CP, i think i know where that comes from.

    Avatar of Azure Xuchilbara
    Comment by Azure Xuchilbara
    04:34 18/06/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Giggity, giggity, giggity...*salutes*

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:28 23/06/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    lol those are just normal underwear. It is a little weird the way they show them in the magazine though... I've never seen child underwear models in catalogs in America, the underwear are usually shown not on a model at all...

    funnily enough, I still buy my underwear from the little girls section. They're so much cheaper, plus I can get things like days of the week panties XD

    Comment by Anonymous
    13:34 18/06/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Uh, this isn't anything new.... fact is, underwear like this have been available for girls 4 and up in the United States for quite a few years now, I bought some for my cousin when she was staying with me 10 years ago because her panties were so damned ratty.

    I let her pick them out, and she picked out these.... I must be awful liberal, but it didn't 'shock' me in the slightest, maybe because I am not a conservative asswipe who thinks that children looking sexy is a bad thing.

    Comment by cin
    11:32 08/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    can't wait for their girls to grow up,can't wait for their food to get cooked..sick bastards..

    Comment by Anonymous
    Comment by Anonymous
    12:21 18/12/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    The girl in question is supposedly under 14, so I guess anyone attracted to her might be considered a pedophile? Then again pre-pubescent could be 13 even, sometimes 14. Attraction to pre-pubescent persons is considered pedophilia I think.

    Avatar of tyciol
    Comment by tyciol
    15:34 12/12/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    They 'might be considered' one, but only because people are idiots who don't even know the traditional meaning of the word. These are pubescent, not prepubescent, and it needs to be an obsession, not an attraction.

    Avatar of kajunbowser
    Comment by KajunBowser
    11:37 15/02/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    They maybe fashionable, but this just makes it easier for pedos to gain access to the center of the DFC, thus making them easier targets. Just try to find a hmanga called Sho-Pa and read it, then you'll see. ^__^

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:06 21/02/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    What do you say Mr.Unicef? :D

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:37 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I sense Photoshop here.
    judging from original
    http://blog-imgs-26-origin.fc2.com/l/o/l/lolicomi3/20081116095529.jpg

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact
    Comment by Anonymous
    20:35 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    only in Japan...

    Avatar of tyciol
    Comment by tyciol
    15:33 12/12/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Why are there not magazines like this outside of Japan? WHY?

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:17 12/12/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I don't see Francesca Lucchini here.

    Avatar of tyciol
    Comment by tyciol
    15:33 12/12/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    She's at the main warehouse with a forklift anon

    Comment by Anonymous
    Comment by Anonymous
    03:33 24/10/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    FAP very very hard!

    Comment by Anonymous
    12:28 07/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    How nice of them to provide tonight's fap.

    Comment by Wandering_Youth
    17:48 19/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Wow, I'm really amazed.

    A fashion magazine for 12-13 year old girls on the latest sexy fashion trends in Japan with said 12-13 girl shown in picture exposing her underwear.

    People or companies here in U.S would get into so much trouble for showing or publishing such a thing. Japan sure is different...

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:39 12/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I'm pretty sure the girl in the pic isn't underage. In junior idol videos they lie about the model's age, so I don't see why some teen fashion mag *has* to use teen models

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:42 12/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Wait nevermind, I just skimmed the page and see nothing about panties. This is shooped

    Comment by Unseen BK-201
    07:37 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    sorry about the question in case its obvious, but what do you mean by "pedos"?

    Comment by julius
    07:46 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    they mean pedophiles or pedophilia.

    They use the term incorrectly though.

    Pedophilia refers to the mental dysfunction of a person to be sexual attracted to prepubescent children- that is Children around the age of toddlers.

    When they say pedo, they are just tapping into the social norm that anyone attracted to a person below the legal age of consensual sex is a pedophile.

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:27 14/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Indeed, pedophilia is often used incorrectly. In some studies even persons above the age of consent can be considered children (e.g. anyone to the age of 18 even if AoC is 16) and as often as not the media will still happily claim the study is on pedophilia.

    Originally, the term was actually "paedophilia erotica" (since philias are not necessarily sexual/erotic, see bibliophiles etc.) and coined by Krafft-Ebing in the late 19th century. On the whole, thought, Krafft-Ebing's work should be taken with a pinch of salt, since masturbation was considered very bad and various ways to heal masturbators were suggested.

    Comment by ETERNAL
    09:05 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Thank you for clarifying this for all of the other readers, the term is extremely misused.

    Although, that said, only in Japan could something like this ever be possible >_>

    Comment by Anonymous
    17:22 14/01/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Actually, it's not only possible in Japan, although maybe fewer people go up in arms over it there. There have been cases of some catalog store (Argos or Index or whatever) in the UK bringing out string tangas for even younger girls (8, 9 years), but after (media and parent, I assume) outrage withdrew them from their offers.

    Comment by Busy
    23:36 20/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Actually lolicon comes from "lolita complex" which describes the attraction to girls that LOOK underage, that doesn't mean they are it different do pedophile who is attracted to childs themself.

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:10 20/09/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    ...... You aren't much brighter a toddler is like what two? Puberty doesn't hit until like what 10 on average?

    So therefore it is any child who isn't a baby but hasn't started puberty. People do however keep using terms like "pedo" and "loli or lolicon" when they mean

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epepophilia

    Granted the lolicon term coined by the Japanese was probably based off the Russian book Lolita.

    That character(her name wasn't actually lolita but the guy obsessed with her called her that) was suppose to be like 13 or 15 so technically a loli COULD be an adolescent.

    Pedo keeps on being used just plain ass wrong however.

    Comment by Unseen BK-201
    09:19 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    oh i see, and thanks a lot for clarifying that, julius.

    Avatar of Gatsby
    Comment by maga
    06:56 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    I've never been more glad to be alive. Thank you Kami-Sama!!!

    Comment by Average Joe
    12:32 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Just curious... what part of the world are you all from?

    Where I live in the United States, that type of underwear (along with trousers and jeans) are described as being "low rise."

    "Low leg" for us means something else.

    Comment by Trezaquets
    13:06 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    what's low leg in yours?

    Comment by Average Joe
    13:52 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    It's a little hard to describe without pictures, but it's basically the polar opposite of the "high cut" style.

    Comment by Joe Average
    02:12 13/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Hey Trezaquets, I just realized that the picture I linked to in my reply for Quen below describes what I mean by the "opposite" of high cut. (here it is again: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ja/8/8b/Designs_of_shorts.jpg)

    See how the high cut style has the leg openings go way up the leg, all the way up near the top of the hips? The low leg style I mentioned has a much smaller leg opening that doesn't go so high up the leg. The opening stays low near the thigh. I hope that makes sense, lol.

    Comment by Quen
    13:19 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    "Low leg" is the Japanese katakana English loanword used to describe this, so you'll see it used a lot in Japan-related sites like this.

    Comment by Joe Average
    22:19 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Ugh, the comment that I made for you earlier didn't show up. Sorry.

    Anyway... "low cut," by the way, is also used in Japan. Also, check this out this nice visual to see the difference between "low cut" and "low leg": upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ja/8/8b/Designs_of_shorts.jpg

    If you read the Wikipedia article about the low leg style (at ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%AD%E3%83%BC%E3%83%AC%E3%82%B0), you'll see that the use of this term is actually incorrect. Apparently, some otaku publications called this style "low leg" when it's actually "low rise" and the unfortunate misuse spread to, among other places, Japan-related sites as you described.

    Leave it to men to screw up a description about women's clothing, lol. (Assuming, of course, that the said otaku publications were run by men, which I bet they were.) Hooray for the massacre of language. :D

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact

    Another classic wiki article. It seems it can all be blamed on 朝木貴行. Most interesting.

    I must apologise if your comment was eaten - I checked the spam filter for over enthusiasm and there was nothing, so it looks like an inexplicable disappearance.

    Longer comments may best be prepared out of the browser for this reason, on any site...

    Also, if you leave in the http your links will be properly hyperlinked (or you can use html in the post).

    Comment by Joe Average
    01:57 13/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    I just looked up 朝木貴行... I knew it, it was a man who was responsible! I am both disgusted by his misuse of vocabulary, yet aroused by the pantsu.

    Don't worry about the eaten comment. It was probably misdirected in one of the tubes that makes up the internet. I remembered what I wrote about anyway and was able to rewrite it. Thanks for being a courteous webmaster.

    Comment by Lord Byegone
    11:50 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Le voy a pedir prestada la revista a Pedobear (el seguro ya esta suscrito a ella xD )

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:30 28/03/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    yo tengo cientos de "esas revistas" por si las quieres jaja

    Avatar of AsakuraZero
    Comment by AsakuraZero
    05:26 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    where i have to sign?

    Comment by Furin Kazan
    04:26 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think this "fashion" magazine is not for teens....
    may be she need to wear stripe pantsu for market's need.......

    Avatar of TransistorGlamor
    Comment by ToastCrust
    01:12 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Maybe "NG" means "not good"?

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact

    It means "No Good".

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:29 31/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    i always thought it mean "no go"

    Avatar of Bokusatsu Tenshi
    Comment by XSportSeeker
    00:02 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Must... not... fap...

    Avatar of N-chan
    Comment by Nahata
    00:13 12/11/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    *fap fap fap* >D

    Comment by Anonymous
    07:39 07/12/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    What is "fap" suppose to mean?

    Avatar of Zippydsmlee
    Comment by ZippyDSMlee
    05:51 16/02/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    fap=exacerbation of the pants

    sorry couldn't help it...posting that is.... :P

    Comment by Anonymous
    06:12 11/12/2008 # ! Neutral (0)

    Lurk more, newfag.





    Post Comment »

Popular

Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments